Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you have HIV and knowingly have sex with someone you have violated the law and can face both criminal and civil punishment.
There are several precedents for passing a disease along to someone else.
Didn't say we can force someone but it doesn't give you immunity to lawsuit.
Go google "Man sued for spreading herpes"
Then come back and tell us again that you can't be sued for spreading a disease if they can link it back to you and you knew you had it.
Not getting a vaccine and existing in public is not the same things as knowingly having HIV and having sex with someone without telling them. Not being vaccinated does not mean that you have the illness for which you could have been vaccinated for. Even people who are fully vaccinated can catch and spread the disease that they had been vaccinated for. People catch the illness from somewhere. The illness does not spontaneously get created in a person's body. How far back are you willing to trace it? I bet you'll find some fully vaccinated individuals in the process.
Ah yes, your past claims in other threads can't be brought up to address your credibility. I can see why you would like that rule to be followed.
If you really want to go that far you can. Dig up some old posts of mine, out of context and make this into something it's not. Steer the conversation off course. Hijack the thread.
This is the Great Debates forum. I would hope people could at least try and debate the subject in the context of the thread and try to follow the guidelines presented here for doing so. It would be much more interesting then the types of conversations that happen on other forums such as P&C where things usually devolve into one line attacks and insults.
Science is defined as "the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment". It is an ever evolving practice and is not fixed. Scientific research on the other hand utilizes science and scientists to form hypothesis, conduct experiments, gather data and come to conclusion. The field of science is not free from the influence of politics or money. Much of the scientific research in support of vaccines is industry funded. Most scientific evidence that questions vaccines fails to get funded or is often suppressed. That said, evidence exists on both sides of the issue.
There is no peer reviewed evidence that vaccines cause autism. Period. Even the anti-vaxxer funded study found this. You follow the evidence. Not all this nonsense from people who must have failed chemistry in high school who do not understand that mercury thimerosal is not the same thing as the stuff you find in an old thermometer and fail to understand what a toxin is or what a toxic dose means.
There is no peer reviewed evidence that vaccines cause autism. Period. Even the anti-vaxxer funded study found this. You follow the evidence. Not all this nonsense from people who must have failed chemistry in high school who do not understand that mercury thimerosal is not the same thing as the stuff you find in an old thermometer and fail to understand what a toxin is or what a toxic dose means.
Again, autism is not the only reason why a person might decide to forgo a vaccine.
Thimerosal is still in a few vaccines and it is a toxin. It is not the only ingredient of concern for people who are cautious about vaccines.
I think that there is a problem with people making assumptions about people who do not vaccinate for everything and assumptions made as to the reasons why.
Not getting a vaccine and existing in public is not the same things as knowingly having HIV and having sex with someone without telling them. Not being vaccinated does not mean that you have the illness for which you could have been vaccinated for. Even people who are fully vaccinated can catch and spread the disease that they had been vaccinated for. People catch the illness from somewhere. The illness does not spontaneously get created in a person's body. How far back are you willing to trace it? I bet you'll find some fully vaccinated individuals in the process.
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BEING VACCINATED OR NOT.
If you have a disease and knowingly put others at risk you can be sued whether it's herpes, HIV or measles.
So if Timmy has measles but send him to band camp anyway....you're going to get your butt sued....and you are going to lose. Doesn't matter how Timmy got measles or if he was vaccinated or not.....it's reckless action with forseeable consequences.
I've already provided the precedents in my previous post.
If you really want to go that far you can. Dig up some old posts of mine, out of context and make this into something it's not. Steer the conversation off course. Hijack the thread.
This is the Great Debates forum. I would hope people could at least try and debate the subject in the context of the thread and try to follow the guidelines presented here for doing so. It would be much more interesting then the types of conversations that happen on other forums such as P&C where things usually devolve into one line attacks and insults.
Actually it is part of the debate when people mention deaths caused by vaccines it's important to note that those claims are frequently dishonestly portrayed.
Now you might not like the fact that deaths due to snakebite have been included in arguments that vaccines cause deaths but it's reality.
So, don't make a point in a debate about vaccines causing deaths and then when someone points out how these claims from the anti-vaxx community have been shown to often be fraudulent....then you no longer want to debate it and cry foul.
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BEING VACCINATED OR NOT.
If you have a disease and knowingly put others at risk you can be sued whether it's herpes, HIV or measles.
So if Timmy has measles but send him to band camp anyway....you're going to get your butt sued....and you are going to lose. Doesn't matter how Timmy got measles or if he was vaccinated or not.....it's reckless action with forseeable consequences.
I've already provided the precedents in my previous post.
So you're saying that someone who is fully vaccinated for measles can be sued for passing the measles on to someone else? Do you have to prove that they knew they had measles and went out into public anyway in order to win your case? Is it reckless if they have no idea that they are contagious with the measles virus? Has anyone ever been sued for passing measles (or mumps, chicken pox, flu, rotavirus, etc.) onto someone else?
Actually it is part of the debate when people mention deaths caused by vaccines it's important to note that those claims are frequently dishonestly portrayed.
Now you might not like the fact that deaths due to snakebite have been included in arguments that vaccines cause deaths but it's reality.
People have died from bad reactions to vaccines. It is like any other medication. Most people will be fine with it but some will have complications, some serious and those complications can and in some case have included death.
If you are going to bring up vague things from other threads about snake bites being attributed to vaccination deaths, you might want to explain a little more about what you are talking about so others reading and participating will know what it is you are talking about. That seems to be your one and only example of cases where the deaths in another country (can't recall which one) attributed to vaccines were not truly from vaccines but from other things such as snake bites. That one example doesn't refute the fact that people have died post vaccination in other cases. It may be rare but it's not a non-existent thing.
Your example shows how manipulation can and does occur to tell a story. Sort of like how the flu death rate is grossly inflated and inaccurate. Some might say the reason is to scare people into getting their flu shots.
You mean the same doctors who are getting rich by telling you to vaccinate? The same doctors who take money from pharmaceutical companies? So it must be true then?
Do you realize how much more money Doctors would be making dealing with the massive increases in disease incidence resulting from non-vaccination of the population?
In your rush to attribute nefarious motives to anyone making money out of a health service, you make no sense whatsoever. Fundamental attribution error.
Of course you can listen to people who dispense "medical" guesswork for free. You'll get what you pay for there.
"We didn't have these levels of autism decades ago." No kidding, Einstein.
Autism wasn't diagnosed as much. But plenty of kids were diagnosed as being emotionally disturbed, retarded, etc. Kids with autism, not being diagnosed as autistic, were probably diagnosed as whatever their symptoms seemed most to suggest. The symptoms of autism vary drastically from one person to the next. So they were probably diagnosed with a large number of different conditions, depending on their particular symptoms. And a lot of kids with high functioning autism were just considered weird, and not diagnosed with anything.
There is no real evidence of more autism. Just more autism being diagnosed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
