Straight Dope Message Board

[Ramira]

Originally Posted by Jackmannii

The CIA's action, while deplorable, is not responsible for a large undercurrent of antivax superstition and religious/politically-based opposition in the Muslim world that existed well before the bin Laden operation. It didn't help matters, but it didn't create the situation either.

The *Muslim* world? You made a typo error for "war zone countries" , or have a very weird idea about what the geography of the islamic world is and think the Afghanistan and the Pakistan are the islamic world. 151

[Trinopus]

Faintly Macabre. 152

[jali]

Originally Posted by Vicsage

My last post on this subject. I've been convinced that multiple vaccinations are the way to go. As a matter a fact, Monday I'm going to get every vaccination available. They have a human vaccine for rabies, too. Polio done, Smallpox, if I can find it. The flu shot, of course. And maybe I'll see if anyone still has last years since the mix is different Repeat all my childhood ones, just to be safe. I think they have one for a form of hepatitis. Shingles done and done Since taking so many at one time may lessen their effectiveness, I'll just repeat them in 2 weeks. After all, I've learned the human body can handle dozens of pathogens at once with no problems at all. What could go wrong? Maybe a little fever and arm soreness. Everybody should do it.

If you are not yet 60 years old, the Shingles vaccine will cost you a lot of money (at least with many insurance plans). I'm 58 and I'm waiting to be eligible. 153

[Dendarii Dame]

Originally Posted by jali

If you are not yet 60 years old, the Shingles vaccine will cost you a lot of money (at least with many insurance plans). I'm 58 and I'm waiting to be eligible.

Many, but not all. Check. I got mine before I was sixty. I don't remember the price, but it was less than $100. 154

[vivalostwages]

Originally Posted by Dendarii Dame

Many, but not all. Check. I got mine before I was sixty. I don't remember the price, but it was less than $100.

I was under the impression that you couldn't even get it at all till you turned 60, but I just discovered on WebMD that you can get it after age 50.

We learn new things every day. 155

[vivalostwages]

Originally Posted by Sarahfeena

I spend a fair amount of time on a board with a lot of anti-vaxxers. There is no argument you can make that they don't have a an answer for. An answer that's wrong or illogical but that they'll cling to with a tenacity that is truly impressive.

They believe virtually every diagnosis a child ever gets is a vaccine injury...it goes way beyond autism. Autoimmune problem? Vax injury. ADHD? Vax injury. Processing disorder? Vax injury. Speech delay? Vax injury. Motor skill issue? Vax injury. Chronic ear infections? Vax injury. Fell down and broke your arm? Vax injury (not kidding).
.

This article debunks vax injury anecdotes and also mentions someone who actually thought a flu shot caused her endometriosis.
That's like saying that hemorrhoid relief creams give you dandruff.

Now I'm wondering how many anti-vaxxers are also Flat Earthers. 156

[WhyNot]

Originally Posted by vivalostwages

I was under the impression that you couldn't even get it at all till you turned 60, but I just discovered on WebMD that you can get it after age 50.

We learn new things every day.

They changed the age* a while back. Went from 60 to 50, but not all insurance companies have changed their coverage yet. So check with your provider to see if they'll pay for it. (And strongly consider paying for it out of pocket if you're high risk. Shingles suuuuuuuuuucks.

*See? That's what scientists do when new evidence is accumulated that indicates a good reason to change their mind about something. That's why they changed the age on shingles, and pulled the Lyme vaccine off the market. Because they know how to science. 157

[vivalostwages]

What I don't get, and haven't been able to find yet, is how anti-vaxxers would deal with it if their kids contracted a disease like measles, mumps, whooping cough, etc.

Do they think these diseases aren't a big deal? 158

[JRDelirious]

They blame them on vaccinated children "shedding" virus, and it's the other parents' fault.

Yes they're that ignorant. 159

[Ike Witt]

Why don't we just start printing the names of people who refuse to vaccinate their kids in the paper? Don't lots of places use that sort of public shaming for DUI and prostitution arrests? 160

[Derleth]

Originally Posted by Ike Witt

Why don't we just start printing the names of people who refuse to vaccinate their kids in the paper? Don't lots of places use that sort of public shaming for DUI and prostitution arrests?

Because broadcasting anyone's medical records like that would be a massive Federal offense. Even if that person is a child.

Besides, it wouldn't work, and it might make it worse. These things thrive on the in-group/out-group mentality, the Us Against The World Syndrome. Printing the names would reinforce in-group bonds by giving the anti-vaxxers proof that they're really and truly part of the group (and help to weed out the waverers, who talk the talk but don't actually put their kids' health in danger, assuming such people exist) and by making them feel persecuted, just like Galileo and Jesus and Andrew Wakefield.

For them, it's more important to be self-righteous than to be right. 161

[Vicsage]

That may be the first time that Galileo, Jesus, and Wakefield have been put together in a group as being alike in some way. 162

[Lok]

Originally Posted by vivalostwages

I was under the impression that you couldn't even get it at all till you turned 60, but I just discovered on WebMD that you can get it after age 50.

We learn new things every day.

Yeah, I am asking my doctor about what vaccinations would be good for me when I do my annual physical in November. Shingles is definitely on the list. I should be covered for pertussis, since I had it in 2007, but it's been 40+ years since I had measles and mumps. I don't want to get them again. At least I don't have to worry about scarlet fever any more. 163

[Jackmannii]

Originally Posted by Vicsage

That may be the first time that Galileo, Jesus, and Wakefield have been put together in a group as being alike in some way.

“To our community, Andrew Wakefield is Nelson Mandela and Jesus Christ rolled up into one” - J.B. Handley, co-founder of the antivax group Generation Rescue . 164

[kayaker]

Originally Posted by Jackmannii

“To our community, Andrew Wakefield is Nelson Mandela and Jesus Christ rolled up into one” - J.B. Handley, co-founder of the antivax group Generation Rescue .

Yeah, I also wish Wakefield would take a dirt nap already. 165

[vivalostwages]

Originally Posted by GIGObuster

This item is very interesting to me because the woo woo was mostly rare but evenly distributed among party or ideological groups; suddenly most of the Republican candidates, and the remaining one, came out strong with the woo and it is percolating hard among the rank and file Republicans.

As if there was a need to add another anti-science and stupid issue that the crank Republicans needed to add to their litmus tests.

(Besides anti-evolution, bigotry, climate change denial and others)

Yep, my right-winger niece denies climate change, says overpopulation is a lie, believes wives should be submissive and obedient to the hubbies, and so on.

She used to be pro-vax until she took an Immunology course, started reading the label inserts about vaccines and decided that the data is faulty. 166

[jayjay]

Originally Posted by kayaker

Yeah, I also wish Wakefield would take a dirt nap already.

When he eventually does, the anti-vaxers are going to claim Big Pharma assassinated him. 167

[RivkahChaya]

Originally Posted by Lok

At least I don't have to worry about scarlet fever any more.

You can get Scarlet Fever more than once. Scarlet fever is strep throat with a rash in reaction to the waste products of the strep bacteria. They are toxic to people.

My son had scarlet fever last winter.

The reason it isn't very common anymore is that usually people go to the doctor for strep right when the get the sore throat and fever, and get an antibiotic before there is much build-up of toxins. My son, for some reason, was asymtomatic, except for a runny nose, until he broke out in a terrible rash. He didn't have a sore throat until he'd already started on the antibiotics, and never had a fever. It was a very unusual presentation, but not unheard of, and actually, what frequently happens now in regard to actually getting the rash. Back before antibiotics, when you just had to wait for your body to fight off the infection, it was more common to get the rash. 168

[vivalostwages]

Originally Posted by Guinastasia

Perhaps get her to read about the effects of some of these diseases, what they do to a person, the complications that arise. Maybe ask her to talk to some older people who lost relatives to them.

At this point, that might be the only option. She could talk to her grandma, my mom, who suffered through whooping cough as a kid in the 1930s.

Niece's only source of "info" appears to be another FB page called People for Informed Consent (irony, anyone?), which seems to be just a collection of anecdotes. I clicked "About" and found nothing but a blurb about Gov. Brown in CA making vaccines mandatory for school kids.

No data, no credentials, no reliability. 169

[Waco]

Originally Posted by lilihob

My husband had polio as a child. He now, at 58, goes incandescent with rage at anti vaxxers.
It may be history to them, but calipers were his childhood.
Our daughters had all the immunizations, no debate.
So, what those Wakefield morons are saying is, better a real risk of death than a non existent risk of autism.
It will need a real epidemic to stop these selfish taints, and sadly, there will be one.

These people are literally insane. Jim Carrey , who used to be a decent comedic actor, is violently anti-vaxxer.
Conspiracy freaks are everywhere these days. 170

[ivylass]

I think I'm about to be unfriended on Facebook. One of my former co-workers went all in for the pagan/hippie lifestyle and recently refused a good job because it was at a hospital and they wanted her to get a flu vaccine.

She recently posted an article about how the Amish don't get autism. Two seconds of Google proved that crap wrong, and I couldn't help myself...I posted an article disputing that (apparently the Amish are at high risk for getting Maple Syrup Urine Disease )

We'll see. I just blocked someone who sent me an article that chemo is poison. As a breast cancer survivor, I take great umbrage at that.

I don't have time for such ill-informed medical woo. Keeping an open mind when it comes to politics is one thing. Turning one's nose up at settled medical fact is another. 171

[nearwildheaven]

Originally Posted by vivalostwages

What I don't get, and haven't been able to find yet, is how anti-vaxxers would deal with it if their kids contracted a disease like measles, mumps, whooping cough, etc.

Do they think these diseases aren't a big deal?

The late author Carla Emery, who wrote "The Encyclopedia of Country Living" in its various incarnations, was anti-vax until one of her kids (she had 7) got pertussis, and he was sick for about two months. After that, all her kids were fully vaxed. This would have been in the late 1960s or early 1970s. 172

[Jackmannii]

"Auckland parents Ian and Linda Williams thought they had made an informed choice not to vaccinate their children, but after their son ended up in intensive care with a tetanus infection they realised they had made a terrible mistake.

"The mistake that we made was that we underestimated the diseases and we totally over-estimated the adverse reactions", says father Ian Williams, who is speaking publicly of his family's ordeal in an effort to warn other parents about the dangers of not immunising their children."

http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/...06/3776327.htm 173

[eulalia]

Originally Posted by ivylass

I think I'm about to be unfriended on Facebook. One of my former co-workers went all in for the pagan/hippie lifestyle and recently refused a good job because it was at a hospital and they wanted her to get a flu vaccine.

She recently posted an article about how the Amish don't get autism. Two seconds of Google proved that crap wrong, and I couldn't help myself...I posted an article disputing that (apparently the Amish are at high risk for getting Maple Syrup Urine Disease )

We'll see. I just blocked someone who sent me an article that chemo is poison. As a breast cancer survivor, I take great umbrage at that.

I don't have time for such ill-informed medical woo. Keeping an open mind when it comes to politics is one thing. Turning one's nose up at settled medical fact is another.

As it was explained to me, chemo is poison, but the hope is that it kills the cancer without killing the patient. Do I have this wrong, or is someone trying to actually dissuade people from undergoing chemotherapy just because it has some toxic effects? 174

[WhyNot]

Originally Posted by eulalia

As it was explained to me, chemo is poison, but the hope is that it kills the cancer without killing the patient. Do I have this wrong, or is someone trying to actually dissuade people from undergoing chemotherapy just because it has some toxic effects?

Kind of. "Chemotherapy" just means "drug treatment," although it's customarily understood to mean "Drug treatment for cancer." There are 100s of chemotherapy drugs, and they don't all work the same way. Generally speaking, the largest and oldest group of chemotherapy drugs attack cells at a certain point in the cell growth cycle, by various means. Since cancer cells grow faster and divide more often than healthy cells, the chemotherapy tends to do more damage to the cancer cells, but the drug really can't tell the difference between a cancer cell and a healthy cell. If a healthy cell happens to be at the correct stage in its growth cycle, it will be killed by the chemo as well as the cancer cells. (Hair cells also grow quickly and divide rapidly, which is why so many - but not all - chemotherapy agents cause hair loss.)

But there are lots of other chemotherapy agents, some of which are more targeted to kill just cancer cells, or disrupt hormones to slow the growth of cancers that are triggered by those hormones, or activate a person's immune system to get it to recognize and attack the cancer directly. So not all chemo is "poison" to healthy cells. We've gotten a lot better at choosing chemotherapy regimens that don't come close to killing the patient, and sometimes don't even make them feel ill after the treatment. I've got patients who actually feel better for a few days after chemo, and then slowly start to feel worse again until their next treatment.

But yes, there are still lots of people whose imagination of what chemotherapy is and does has very little to do with reality, and yeah, they try to talk people out of chemo because they think it's like it's portrayed in movies.

(That being said, there are times and circumstances when I'd probably refuse chemo. Every situation and every patient deserves to be treated as an individual.) 175

[eulalia]

Originally Posted by WhyNot

Kind of. "Chemotherapy" just means "drug treatment," although it's customarily understood to mean "Drug treatment for cancer." There are 100s of chemotherapy drugs, and they don't all work the same way. Generally speaking, the largest and oldest group of chemotherapy drugs attack cells at a certain point in the cell growth cycle, by various means. Since cancer cells grow faster and divide more often than healthy cells, the chemotherapy tends to do more damage to the cancer cells, but the drug really can't tell the difference between a cancer cell and a healthy cell. If a healthy cell happens to be at the correct stage in its growth cycle, it will be killed by the chemo as well as the cancer cells. (Hair cells also grow quickly and divide rapidly, which is why so many - but not all - chemotherapy agents cause hair loss.)

But there are lots of other chemotherapy agents, some of which are more targeted to kill just cancer cells, or disrupt hormones to slow the growth of cancers that are triggered by those hormones, or activate a person's immune system to get it to recognize and attack the cancer directly. So not all chemo is "poison" to healthy cells. We've gotten a lot better at choosing chemotherapy regimens that don't come close to killing the patient, and sometimes don't even make them feel ill after the treatment. I've got patients who actually feel better for a few days after chemo, and then slowly start to feel worse again until their next treatment.

But yes, there are still lots of people whose imagination of what chemotherapy is and does has very little to do with reality, and yeah, they try to talk people out of chemo because they think it's like it's portrayed in movies.

(That being said, there are times and circumstances when I'd probably refuse chemo. Every situation and every patient deserves to be treated as an individual.)

Thanks for fighting my ignorance. I don't know much about cancer; it's rare in my family. 176

[usedtobe]

I recently asked an old acquaintance about a mutual pal from way back.

Dead.

Testicular cancer.

The chemo destroyed his liver. He didn't get a replacement.
He died in a big city home of a Medical Center run by UC system.
He died in 2013. Not exactly in Dark Ages or "Out in the Sticks".

And I get noise about not wanting prostate screening unless I have symptoms.

I'll be dead in 10 years - I'm not going to waste any time with bullshit medical stuff -I have real medical stuff to fill in the time remaining. 177

[WhyNot]

Originally Posted by usedtobe

And I get noise about not wanting prostate screening unless I have symptoms.

I'll be dead in 10 years - I'm not going to waste any time with bullshit medical stuff -I have real medical stuff to fill in the time remaining.

Prostate cancer (which is not the same as testicular cancer) comes in many different forms. For some of them, frankly I agree with you. I probably wouldn't choose to treat it at all, or I'd choose radiation without chemo, or palliative treatment to keep me as comfortable as possible without trying to "beat" the cancer. Other forms, it just makes sense to me to go in aggressively with both barrels blazing. But that's not a decision I can make for anyone else. I can't even make it for myself in 5 years; I can only make it for me today.

My mother, who is a hospital chaplain, has some really great questions she asks people with dire diagnoses, to help them to figure out exactly what their goals are, so that their doctor can help them choose the best plan. Say you have a daughter's wedding in 6 months - some people would choose an aggressive treatment to increase their chances of making it to that wedding, even if they know it won't prolong their life for years. Or maybe a person just wants to get strong enough to take a walk with their spouse one more time, in which case massive doses of steroids and some Physical Therapy might be their best bet, even though it won't help them live any longer. I'm humbled by her wisdom in this matter, and think that these are the "end of life discussions," we really need to be having more of. Doctor's goals are not always the same as patient goals, but sometimes we all need help figuring out what our actual goals are. 178

[Jackmannii]

Dunno why you people are blaming antivaxers for the reappearance of vaccine-preventable diseases, when it obviously is the CIA's fault.

"When last week the (Venezuelan) Ministry of Health finally made the announcement acknowledging the resurgence of diphtheria, Diosdado Cabello, a prominent Chavista, said Venezuela is the target of a “germ warfare orchestrated by the CIA labs.”

A few days earlier, Marisol Escalona, Coordinator of the government's Expanded Program on Immunization, came out with an odd warning to the medical community: ”You cannot report anything (about diphtheria) because it goes against the [Bolivarian] revolution.“

”Venezuela is not prepared to deal with a diphtheria outbreak because we don’t meet the immunization standard recommended by the World Health Organization, because we cannot provide medication in a timely manner and because of flaws in the information flow to the community,“ said Huniades Urbina, president of the Venezuelan Society of Pediatrics, in a video conference at the Central University of Venezuela.

In addition, the Epidemiological Bulletin has not been published since of November 2014.

Dr. Julio Castro, from the Institute of Tropical Medicine, agrees with Urbina in that containing the outbreak requires a wide vaccination effort. ”For over 20 years we had not witnessed cases of diphtheria disease in Venezuela for a simple reason: it can be prevented with the DPT vaccine (diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus),” he said. “It is possible that the government did not vaccinate the number of people necessary to create the epidemiological barrier.”" 179

[vivalostwages]

Originally Posted by GIGObuster

This item is very interesting to me because the woo woo was mostly rare but evenly distributed among party or ideological groups; suddenly most of the Republican candidates, and the remaining one, came out strong with the woo and it is percolating hard among the rank and file Republicans.

As if there was a need to add another anti-science and stupid issue that the crank Republicans needed to add to their litmus tests.

(Besides anti-evolution, bigotry, climate change denial and others)

Now she's ecstatic that Hillary won't be able to force her to vaccinate her kids. 180

[vivalostwages]

....but also freaking out over this bill in CA:

http://www.modernalternativehealth.c...l-rights-gone/

I see nothing in the text of the bill (embedded in article) saying that kids would be yanked out of their homes for not getting vaxed or whatever. 181

[Jackmannii]

Thanks in part to the efforts of antivaxers, Romania has experienced thousands of new measles cases, and 17 dead.

Italy is also seeing an upsurge in measles.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2017-...-children.html
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-measles-cases 182

[Shodan]

Originally Posted by Jackmannii

Thanks in part to the efforts of antivaxers, Romania has experienced thousands of new measles cases, and 17 dead.

Italy is also seeing an upsurge in measles.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2017-...-children.html
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-measles-cases

Shilling for Big Pharma again, aren't you?

What you are ignoring is that none of those 17 are ever going to get autism. How about that, Dr. Smartypants?

If you do respond, make sure to speak up - I have hearing loss in one ear from measles as a child, because I wasn't vaccinated (the vaccine wasn't available).

But it's wholesome, natural, organic hearing loss! And I don't have autism!

Regards,
Shodan 183

[D_Odds]

You're running up against Poe's Law there. Bet someone takes you seriously. 184

[Shodan]

As long as I don't run up against Rule 34, I'm golden.

Regards,
Shodan 185

[Patx2]

Originally Posted by Sarahfeena

I spend a fair amount of time on a board with a lot of anti-vaxxers. There is no argument you can make that they don't have a an answer for. An answer that's wrong or illogical but that they'll cling to with a tenacity that is truly impressive.

They believe virtually every diagnosis a child ever gets is a vaccine injury...it goes way beyond autism. Autoimmune problem? Vax injury. ADHD? Vax injury. Processing disorder? Vax injury. Speech delay? Vax injury. Motor skill issue? Vax injury. Chronic ear infections? Vax injury. Fell down and broke your arm? Vax injury (not kidding). They even have the mysterious "their eyes just look DULL" vax injury that I've certainly never noticed in my kids or any of their friends.

They believe that vaccines don't prevent disease, those diseases were going away anyway due to clean water and sanitation. Don't bother pointing out that some of these diseases were prevalent long after those developments, and that those same diseases are being eradicated in places that don't have reliably clean water and sanitation. They'll handwave those facts away.

They believe that herd immunity through vaccines is a myth and that herd immunity develops only with "true" immunity that people get through having the disease. Don't try to argue that herd immunity is kinda worthless if everyone has to have the disease first in order for it to exist...they think disease-induced immunity is far superior for mysterious reasons.

They believe that the smallest, worst-designed, least-robust studies are superior to all others if they show any kind of correlation between vaccines and a health problem, forget about asking about causation...that hasn't been found because no one wants to find it, and the drug companies smooth over and sidestep any data that doesn't show that vaccines are 100% safe. Don't bother arguing that if something's not statistically significant, then it's not and that studies don't look at individual cases for a reason.

Seriously, there is nothing....nothing that will convince these people. And it's difficult because many of them have their own observational data that tells them that their child was injured by a vaccine, so if you argue that it's likely not the case you just look like an unsympathetic asshole. It's an issue that thanks to Mr. Wakefield will always be with us.

I guess you cannot argue with stupid. These people piss me off. 186

[D_Odds]

Originally Posted by Shodan

As long as I don't run up against Rule 34, I'm golden.

Regards,
Shodan

And yet you did, in this post... 187

[Jackmannii]

Originally Posted by Shodan

What you are ignoring is that none of those 17 are ever going to get autism. How about that, Dr. Smartypants?

I posted the link about the Romanian measles outbreak in another online discussion, and promptly got a response from an antivaxer suggesting that many more deaths were due to vaccine-induced autism. 188

[Steve MB]

Originally Posted by Musicat

The curriculum was Acupressure, Critical Alignment Yoga Therapy, Aromatherapy, "Eating Live Foods," Art Therapy, and Integrative Biological Dentistry.

Most of it sounds silly, but the Klingon cuisine class might be entertaining. 189

[PastTense]

Anti-vaccine activists just sparked a U.S. state’s worst measles outbreak in decades
After repeated visits from discredited activists, vaccination rates among Minnesota’s Somali-American community plummeted to just 42 per cent in 2014 — far below the threshold to prevent an outbreak.

The young mother started getting advice early on from friends in the close-knit Somali immigrant community here. Don’t let your children get the vaccine for measles, mumps and rubella — it causes autism, they said.

Suaado Salah listened. And this spring, her 3-year-old boy and 18-month-old girl contracted measles in Minnesota’s largest outbreak of the highly infectious and potentially deadly disease in nearly three decades. Her daughter, who had a rash, high fever and a cough, was hospitalized for four nights and needed intravenous fluids and oxygen.

“I thought: ‘I’m in America. I thought I’m in a safe place and my kids will never get sick in that disease,’ ” said Salah, 26, who has lived in Minnesota for more than a decade. Growing up in Somalia, she’d had measles as a child. A sister died of the disease at age 3.

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2...n-decades.html 190

[RivkahChaya]

Originally Posted by Jackmannii

I posted the link about the Romanian measles outbreak in another online discussion, and promptly got a response from an antivaxer suggesting that many more deaths were due to vaccine-induced autism.

Right. We all know how deadly autism can be. 191

[Beren Erchamion]

Originally Posted by Derleth

Because broadcasting anyone's medical records like that would be a massive Federal offense.

No.

HIPAA imposes civil (and, in some cases, criminal) penalties if healthcare providers release information without consent except in a few narrowly-defined circumstances.

But if you're not covered by that prohibition, then if you are able to get your hands on that information you can more or less do what you please with it. There might be civil or criminal liability depending on the means by which you came across that information (e.g. if you hacked into the hospital to get it you'd probably be screwed), but if you obtained it via legitimate means (including if a covered health care worker illegally disclosed it to you--they're fucked, but you're in the clear since you're not covered by HIPAA) then you're completely fine. That's why, for example, Adam Schefter faced no legal liability for tweeting documents relating to Jason Pierre-Paul's hand injury a couple of years ago--the information was (probably illegally) leaked to ESPN, but while the leaker may have been covered by HIPAA and so subject to penalties, ESPN wasn't.

It's kind of like with publishing classified information: it's illegal for someone with clearance for the information to share it without authorization, but if you don't have a clearance and someone else (illegally or otherwise) shares it with you, you can publish it.

Now, whether it's a good idea to actually do so or not is, of course, a completely different matter. 192

[Beren Erchamion]

Originally Posted by vivalostwages

....but also freaking out over this bill in CA:

http://www.modernalternativehealth.c...l-rights-gone/

I see nothing in the text of the bill (embedded in article) saying that kids would be yanked out of their homes for not getting vaxed or whatever.

Frankly, they should be.

Absent a compelling medical reason, if a parent does not have their children vaccinated then they are demonstrating that they lack the judgment necessary to make good decisions about their childrens' care and well-being. 193

[Beren Erchamion]

Originally Posted by RickJay

While I do not believe children should be taken from parents, there are simple legal steps that should be taken:

1. Parents who choose not to immunize their children should not be allowed to send them to day cares, publically run camps, or schools with other children, be they public or accredited private.

Fuck that shit. Children shouldn't suffer in their social and intellectual development because they had the bad luck to be born to inept morons.

It should be required that all children be vaccinated, period, absent an individualized professional medical determination to the contrary. 194

[Beren Erchamion]

Originally Posted by Vicsage

I'll be attacked, but that's OK. I believe in getting all the needed vaccines, but I don't believe its healthy to get them all in a brief period of time. I think they should be spaces out more.

What do you base this belief on? Actual evidence? Or because it just feels right? 195

[Beren Erchamion]

Originally Posted by Vicsage

There you go. I get my kids vaccinated. It takes 2 years longer. Not good enough.

You're right, it's not good enough. Those two years are plenty of time for them to contract a deadly or debilitating disease that could have been prevented if they were vaccinated.

Your way or the highway. Got to toe the line.

Yes. You don't get to endanger children's safety and well-being just because you feel like it. You have duties to your children, including protecting them to the extent possible, and if you're not willing to do that because of shit you just made up then you really shouldn't be the one making decisions for those children. 196

[vivalostwages]

In the meantime, my aforementioned niece keeps posting more anti vax stuff on her timeline.

http://healthyfamiliesforgod.com/2017/04/5-measles/

So now it's immoral and ungodly to get the kids vaccinated, and getting measles that's a good thing because you can easily treat it with vitamins and it will build up your immunity if you get it too.

I worry about her 3 year old and one year old. 197

[Beren Erchamion]

Originally Posted by vivalostwages

In the meantime, my aforementioned niece keeps posting more anti vax stuff on her timeline.

http://healthyfamiliesforgod.com/2017/04/5-measles/

So now it's immoral and ungodly to get the kids vaccinated, and getting measles that's a good thing because you can easily treat it with vitamins and it will build up your immunity if you get it too.

I worry about her 3 year old and one year old.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ytx1P7P4XXk 198

[RivkahChaya]

Originally Posted by Dendarii Dame

Many, but not all. Check. I got mine before I was sixty. I don't remember the price, but it was less than $100.

Originally Posted by vivalostwages

I was under the impression that you couldn't even get it at all till you turned 60, but I just discovered on WebMD that you can get it after age 50.

We learn new things every day.

You can get the vaccine earlier if you have actually had shingles, because you can get shingles more than once, but the vaccine will prevent further outbreaks. I don't know how often the vaccine must be repeated. My husband had the shingles in his early 40, and he got the vaccine about six months after he recovered, and insurance paid for it.

Originally Posted by vivalostwages

In the meantime, my aforementioned niece keeps posting more anti vax stuff on her timeline.

So now it's immoral and ungodly to get the kids vaccinated, and getting measles that's a good thing because you can easily treat it with vitamins and it will build up your immunity if you get it too.

I worry about her 3 year old and one year old.

Worry more. Natural immunity is NOT better, at least when it comes to measles. There is evidence that after having measles (but not the vaccine), your immune system develops this bias, and ignores other pathogens while keeping up its vigil for measles. So having measles weakens your immune system in regard to everything but measles. This lasts a couple of years.

Worry about any one-year-old and below in a place with vaccine numbers below herd immunity, because less than one-year-olds can't have the MMR yet.

I actually had some dimbulb argue with me that measles aren't that bad, and her evidence was the episode of The Brady Bunch where all the kids got it.

Right. They're really gonna have the episode where Bobby gets encephalitis and dies. 199

[Musicat]

Originally Posted by vivalostwages

In the meantime, my aforementioned niece keeps posting more anti vax stuff on her timeline.

http://healthyfamiliesforgod.com/2017/04/5-measles/

Just...wow.

Those misleading stats (0 deaths from measles, 108 from vaccines) seem to be all the rage right now, but... that was 2004-2015.

I can cherry-pick data, too. from CDC:

In 1920, 469,924 measles cases were reported, and 7575 patients died...

I could add that in 1920, there were zero deaths from measles vaccines, too. Think about that! 200