# Is there any good reason not to mandate national vaccination? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 24, 2014, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447 "2014-03-24T15:54:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/101 "2014-03-30T14:58:51Z")
> [@Doctor\_Why\_Bother](#): > > P.S. - If you’re feeling particularly brave, try making a pro-vaccine post on the next anti-vax article they publish. You’ll be called a scumbag shill for Big pHARMa by about half a dozen posters before the day is out. I guarantee it. It’s happened to me a bunch of times. Perhaps, IDK, but it does seem like your reply that it is still involving emotions - at least in part. This is my point of my argument, you (or at least I) don’t fight emotion with logic, to me this never works and never will. Emotion must be fought must be fought on a emotional level. As I equate emotion with our spiritual side, emotional battles are spiritual battles, sometimes called spiritual warfare. The hypothetical I presented above was a case where vaccinating someone who did not want to get vaccinated would result in no net benefit to society. By insisting that this person get vaccinated anyway I do see it as a emotional issue, as I stated above, perhaps self righteous, a sense of unfairness (I did it, you should too), and many times anger seems to be underlying. Why would you want to force someone against one’s will to get a vaccine that has no proven benefit? And how can you logically argue your point if they have this illogical viewpoint? In the realm of the emotional/spiritual (to me), I have to ask what would be the loving response to the above hypothetical, to me it is obvious, let them not be vaccinated in that case. And I have to question the difference from the loving emotional response to the observed emotional response. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/102 "2014-03-30T15:22:32Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > The hypothetical I presented above was a case where vaccinating someone who did not want to get vaccinated would result in no net benefit to society. By insisting that this person get vaccinated anyway I do see it as a emotional issue, as I stated above, perhaps self righteous, a sense of unfairness (I did it, you should too), and many times anger seems to be underlying. I’ve been back over all your posts in the thread, and I can’t find this hypothetical you’re talking about. I’m sorry. Old eyes and my husband’s rushing us out of the house so I’m scrolling quickly. When you get a second, would you mind linking to the post or reposting the hypothetical? ---
**Author:** ![Doctor\_Why\_Bother](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e19adc/32.png) [@Doctor\_Why\_Bother](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Doctor_Why_Bother)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/103 "2014-03-30T15:39:11Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > This is my point of my argument, you (or at least I) don’t fight emotion with logic, to me this never works and never will. Emotion must be fought must be fought on a emotional level. As I equate emotion with our spiritual side, emotional battles are spiritual battles, sometimes called spiritual warfare. Try going to Natural News and presenting a hypothetical wherein actually being vaccinated provides a net benefit to society and see how far that gets you. Whatever emotional issue you think your experience here suggests, surely being called a piece of shit baby killing Monsanto Big pHARMa whore (as you will be on Natural News, without a doubt) suggests MORE of an emotional issue. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/104 "2014-03-30T15:42:19Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > Perhaps, IDK, but it does seem like your reply that it is still involving emotions - at least in part. > > This is my point of my argument, you (or at least I) don’t fight emotion with logic, to me this never works and never will. Emotion must be fought must be fought on a emotional level. As I equate emotion with our spiritual side, emotional battles are spiritual battles, sometimes called spiritual warfare. > > The hypothetical I presented above was a case where vaccinating someone who did not want to get vaccinated would result in no net benefit to society. By insisting that this person get vaccinated anyway I do see it as a emotional issue, as I stated above, perhaps self righteous, a sense of unfairness (I did it, you should too), and many times anger seems to be underlying. > > Why would you want to force someone against one’s will to get a vaccine that has no proven benefit? And how can you logically argue your point if they have this illogical viewpoint? > > In the realm of the emotional/spiritual (to me), I have to ask what would be the loving response to the above hypothetical, to me it is obvious, let them not be vaccinated in that case. And I have to question the difference from the loving emotional response to the observed emotional response. 1. Do you not see the blinding over-the-top emotional response from the other side? 2. Do you understand the idea behind Herd Immunity? ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/105 "2014-03-30T15:57:02Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > I’ve been back over all your posts in the thread, and I can’t find this hypothetical you’re talking about. I’m sorry. Old eyes and my husband’s rushing us out of the house so I’m scrolling quickly. When you get a second, would you mind linking to the post or reposting the hypothetical? Post #62 ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/106 "2014-03-30T15:58:50Z")
> [@Doctor\_Why\_Bother](#): > > Try going to Natural News and presenting a hypothetical wherein actually being vaccinated provides a net benefit to society and see how far that gets you. Whatever emotional issue you think your experience here suggests, surely being called a piece of shit baby killing Monsanto Big pHARMa whore (as you will be on Natural News, without a doubt) suggests MORE of an emotional issue. I’m not saying that side does not have emotional issues, but that side having them dos not negate this side having them. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/107 "2014-03-30T16:01:03Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > 1. Do you not see the blinding over-the-top emotional response from the other side? See above post > [@](#): > > 1. Do you understand the idea behind Herd Immunity? Somewhat, in it’s most basic form if no one around a person can carry the disease due to immunity the risk of the person who is not immune becomes very small. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/108 "2014-03-30T16:15:41Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > To the multiple comments, this is just one of many. > > Before I accept ‘proof’ from someone should I determine if they are capable of obtaining such proof objectively? If I find that they are not capable of that then what good is the proof they submit? It would be just a illogical waste of my time and my energy. Thank you for providing the reason why debating with you is pointless. > [@](#): > > So before looking at proof, I look towards motivation, or if you prefer emotional health of the person. As one might try to judge the mental competence and make a determination if they can even have a valid point in a argument, I do the same with their emotional health, what emotions does this invoke in that person, and does that produce a rational state of mind, or are they just talking out of emotion. > > Going further in this and looking into what I see as the spiritual, the emotional state they are in I take as the’ spirit’ they are operating under. This is like a deep, dark black hole of crazy I don’t have any interest in unpacking. You have no idea how evidence works. > [@](#): > > In this I detect a strong spirit of anger, frustration and self righteousness to name a few. Hmm… Diseases considered dead which can kill or maim children are making a comeback because a bunch of scientifically illiterate parents have been scared out of making correct medical decisions by liars and idiots who by all reason should be clapped in irons for antisocial behavior (Joe Mercola, Mike Adams, lookin’ at you!). _I wonder why people are frustrated, angry, or self-righteous?_ :rolleyes: > [@](#): > > To test this I throw out a hypothetical example which logically is a argument for allowing some people not to get vaccinated if they don’t wish too. I set the parameters that would cause no harm to the population or society. Hmm. You know, that would be really interesting if it had any bearing on reality. Just like I could probably throw out a hypothetical example where it’s actually beneficial to distribute deadly toxins through the water supply; it doesn’t make it right in _reality_, and anyone who saw me advocating for that would be right to call me out on my crap, hypothetical or not. Reality. That thing that, you know, kinda matters. And your hypothetical _sucks_! Yes, herd immunity stops working below a certain threshold, but that doesn’t mean that reducing it towards that threshhold is a neutral action! In fact, it only gets _stronger_ as the immunization rates increase. So your hypothetical is _wrong_ on both a theoretical and practical level. In reality, many communities are already at the threshold where herd immunity starts to break down. > [@](#): > > Yet the emotionally invested pro-vax’ers seem not to even want to consider it. It’s crap. There, considered. > [@](#): > > This issue for some reason to produce a very strong emotional response from those who should be touting facts instead. We _do_ tout facts. In fact, we tout them loud and proud. We have, among others, the CDC, FDA, AAP, AMA, NAS, and virtually every major medical body in the western world espousing our position. The list of peer-reviewed papers and evidence stretching back over a century is overwhelming. It’s just that none of it seems to _matter_. > [@](#): > > It is very odd that the ones who seem to be touting, if not facts, at least cites, always seem to be the anti-vax’ers. If you believe this, _you are not paying attention_. Full stop. No arguing, that is an irrefutable fact. If you think that those who support vaccination and believe it is safe and effective are not touting facts, then you are _wrong_. Spend five minutes on the CDC’s website, or 5 minutes on any article on ScienceBasedMedicine or RespectfulInsolence that talks about vaccines, or just take a minute to _look_. Hell, I provided three individual reliable sources which you then promptly ignored. At the risk of repeating myself, the reason we didn’t spend a lot of time providing evidence in this thread before you showed up was because this is a discussion by rational adults, for rational adults, most of whom are well aware of the facts behind vaccinations. If I’m starting a thread about the impact of compound interest on retirement funds, I don’t spend a lot of time explaining how 2 \* (1.05)^n works. And if someone here was actually interested in a discussion on the evidence surrounding vaccination, I’d be perfectly happy to have that discussion. You don’t seem interested. > [@](#): > > So I guess I am trying to understand why this is and the emotional investment of the pro-vax’ers before I care to look at cties from either side. Why should you _care_ if I’m angry? Or can you read a whole lot of anger out of [this PDF](http://www.vaccinateyourbaby.org/pdfs/Recent%20Scientific%20Studies%20on%20Thimerosal%20and%20Autism%201%208%2008.pdf)? Are all these scientists using emotional appeals? No! They’re using _evidence_. You know, that thing which matters to people who care about actually knowing things. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/109 "2014-03-30T16:16:25Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > Somewhat, in it’s most basic form if no one around a person can carry the disease due to immunity the risk of the person who is not immune becomes very small. [Not quite.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity)As has already been mentioned, there are some that _cannot_ be immunized due to various medical reasons. For herd immunity to work, the percentage of those that must be immunized has to be fairly high-so high, in fact, that the anti-vax movement can pretty much destroy it if they are successful. From the CDC, the percentages necessary for herd immunity to work: Diphtheria Saliva- 85% Measles, Airborne- 83–94% Mumps, Airborne droplet- 75–86% Pertussis, Airborne droplet- 92–94% Polio Fecal-oral route- 80–86% Rubella, Airborne droplet- 83–85% Smallpox, Social contact- 83–85% ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/110 "2014-03-30T16:46:40Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > [Not quite.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity)As has already been mentioned, there are some that _cannot_ be immunized due to various medical reasons. For herd immunity to work, the percentage of those that must be immunized has to be fairly high-so high, in fact, that the anti-vax movement can pretty much destroy it if they are successful. > From the CDC, the percentages necessary for herd immunity to work: > > Diphtheria Saliva- 85% > Measles, Airborne- 83–94% > Mumps, Airborne droplet- 75–86% > Pertussis, Airborne droplet- 92–94% > Polio Fecal-oral route- 80–86% > Rubella, Airborne droplet- 83–85% > Smallpox, Social contact- 83–85% Well I was close enough, and looking at your link I feel I did a pretty darn good off the top of my head definition, and actually these percentages of a effective level is a lot lower then I assumed. Wow for some 15+% of the population can be unvax’ed and herd immunity would still be effective. Your claim that the anti-vax crowd can push these numbers to the point that herd immunity would not work, I accept that is a valid argument. But I also want to put forth the opposite, the case where it would not. What will likely happen to someone that strongly feels vaccination is harmful to the case of mandatory vaccinations? Will this person who was forced against their will be a bigger opponent to the cause and more destructive to it then if you allowed them to not be vaccinated? ---
**Author:** ![RivkahChaya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rivkahchaya/32/8919_2.png) [@RivkahChaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RivkahChaya)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/111 "2014-03-30T16:56:56Z")
> [@BlackKnight](#): > > Remove or reduce the tax credits for having children unless you submit up-to-date vaccination information with your return for each such dependent. I like this idea. I submit that we allow tax credits for people whose children can’t be vaccinated for medical reasons (allergies, cancer in a family member, etc.) but not for religious reasons. I really don’t understand why religious people want things both ways. They want to stand up and be counted, but then they want no consequences for doing so. It’slike people who don’t get the concept of civil disobedience: they want to break a law they think is unjust, but then are shocked that the whole idea is to submit to civil authority, and go to jail afterwards. > [@WhyNot](#): > > ^ Agreed. Also, the goalposts always move. The most head-exploding thing about them, if you ask me. > [@](#): > > the “natural immunity is stronger and lifelong” I know I’m preaching to the choir, but most people, pro or anti, don’t realize that the “lifelong” immunity of having a disease like measles or chickenpox, and recovering, gave you essentially lifelong immunity, because you were repeatedly exposed. The fact is that people in their 70s who have diseases like measles in childhood may now be vulnerable to them again, because they have not been exposed to them for 40 years. My mother started chemo (she isn’t seriously ill she had a tumor biopsy, and the doctor thought he got all the cancer cells with surgery, but she decided on a prophylactic round of chemo). Anyway, she got a full set of booster vaccines a few weeks before starting, since she would be immuno-suppressed. The only diseases she actually had were mumps and chickenpox, so she had her first ever MMR vaccine. > [@WhyNot](#): > > Except that it isn’t. It isn’t killing people in the US. A bit over 200 people have gotten measles so far this year, and that’s a lot more than 20 years ago and it’s way too many, but no one has died. Measles is fatal only 0.2% of the time. There’s always [Subacute sclerosing panencephalitis](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subacute_sclerosing_panencephalitis), which is a little like childhood disintegrative disorder, which if you’ve never seen, is a number of syndromes that manifest like a program form of autism along with a neuro-degenerative disorder like Tay Sachs, and results in death. Compared to it, ordinary autism is a day at the beach. SSPE is not the only post-measles degenerative syndrome that shows up several years after apparent full recovery, and there’s no way to know which children will develop the diseases. > [@Deeg](#): > > Do most anti-vaxers use that excuse? [religion] I have a hard time believing McCarthy does that. Ironically, her child has seizures, which is one reason a doctor might take cautions with vaccinations; in fact, she diagnosed her child herself, if I am reading her book correctly. He may not have autism at all. He may have a disease that could have been exacerbated by febrile seizures after a vaccination. I worked with a person who had that, albeit, she had a stroke at birth, and had other issues, but did develop tonic-clonic seizures after a vaccination, and a fever (and got an award from the vaccination injury fund). Her doctor erred, supposedly, in not doing an EEG before her first vaccination, and telling her parents to give her Tylenol before the shots. Afterwards, all her vaccines were given in the doctors office, where she was observed for an hour, and the same thing was done for her younger sibling-- who had no birth issues, and never developed any seizures. I don’t think she or her sib got vaccines on an alternate schedule, but I’m sure the school would have accepted that. I have a friend who had a child with cancer, and when he had chemo, his brothers couldn’t be vaccinated. The school accepted that. > [@TommyzNR](#): > > My 17 year old daughter was diagnosed with Pertussis in late December. She is up to date on her immunizations and had the Pertussis booster at age 15. Three months later she still occasionally coughs like she is going to choke to death. The department of public health does not know where she contracted Pertussis as there has not been a cluster outbreak in our area, however, there have been half a dozen cases reported in our 3 county area. There is no direct link in any of these cases. I was vaccinated for Pertussis, and then got an attenuated case. It lasted only two or three days, but the cough, for the one acute day, was nightmarish. My mother thought I might have got it from the vaccine, but I probably got a mutant strain the vaccine didn’t quite control-- in which case, I was very lucky, because without the vaccine, I would have had the full-blown disease. I was only about 3 or 4 years old. > [@panache45](#): > > The non-vaccinated kids will pass diseases around among their non-vaccinated families, friends and classmates. … > > Nobody else has anything to worry about. Nope. The more unvaccinated people there are, the more chance of the development of a mutant strain that can infect a vaccinated person. The smaller the pool of the unvaccinated, the better we are able to make sure the disease that is extant is the one we are making the vaccine for. > [@Annie-Xmas](#): > > Who is mandating vaccines for pregnant women? I had to show proof of Rubella vaccine to get a marriage license. > [@nearwildheaven](#): > > I don’t think Gardasil, the cancer vaccine, should be mandated by any population except one because it isn’t transmissible through casual contact. If I was in the age group that takes it, I would personally get it, and recommend that my children get it too if I had them, but I wouldn’t make them do it if they didn’t want to. > > That one population would be legal sex workers. Except that by the time someone is old enough to be a legal sex worker, it may be too late. There’s a reason for giving them to girls who have not had sex yet. If boys can get them when my son is 12, he is getting one. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/112 "2014-03-30T16:58:11Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > What will likely happen to someone that strongly feels vaccination is harmful to the case of mandatory vaccinations? Will this person who was forced against their will be a bigger opponent to the cause and more destructive to it then if you allowed them to not be vaccinated? Let’s do the math: Real danger \> Imaginary danger. 'Nuff said. ---
**Author:** ![RivkahChaya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rivkahchaya/32/8919_2.png) [@RivkahChaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RivkahChaya)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/113 "2014-03-30T17:03:33Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Let’s do the math: > Real danger \> Imaginary danger. > > 'Nuff said. 😃 I _wish_ we could just leave all the unvaccinated people to Darwin themselves out of the gene pool, but it just doesn’t work like that. They’re like drunk drivers who survive the accident while killing four sober people. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/114 "2014-03-30T17:12:02Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > It only falls apart if the numbers makes it fall apart, which has not been demostrated. > > Example effective herd immunity is proven at 94% of the population. As risk population = 2% that will not be vaccinated. Anti-vax crowd stands at 2%, in this hypothetical there is no compelling reason to mandate vaccinations if 96% of the population is willing and able to get vaccinated as you have achieved effective herd immunity. > > The numbers can go the other way too, but again near 100% vaccinated you get diminishing returns and at some point could become counter productive, which was my point. Oh. That’s not a hypothetical. But let me create a hypothetical out of it: imagine a population which has exceeded it’s vaccination goals for ensuring herd immunity. Would you (I) be accepting of personal choice (ie, not medical need) waivers then? My answer is yesbut… Yes, if we have exceeded our herd immunity percentage, then there’s more room for allowing personal choice waivers and not greatly raising the risk to the community. BUT, I would only do so with the caveat that a registration system were in place so that if that vaccination rate drops to a point where it looks like we’re going to be at risk, we can immediately contact people and get them in to be vaccinated. But, honestly, I don’t see that as being an easy sell. I think we’d have even more screeching about invasive government action if we tell them it’s okay not to vaccinate now and then literally round them up later. So, that’s my hypothetical and my response to it. I don’t speak for any other vaccination supporter, of course. ---
**Author:** ![RivkahChaya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rivkahchaya/32/8919_2.png) [@RivkahChaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RivkahChaya)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/115 "2014-03-30T17:15:58Z")
BTW, years ago, on the old AOL SDMD, I argued against someone who seemed to be suggesting that there never be exemptions to mandatory vaccinations, not even medical ones-- as though people with egg allergies and siblings with cancer were just out of luck. Either she was crazy, or I misunderstood. Clearly, that would never happen. But FWIW, when I talk about mandatory vaccines, I always mean “with medical exemptions.” The whole point is to keep people alive and healthy. I’m not sure how I feel about religious exemptions-- probably that they should exist, but that unvaccinated children with religious exemptions should not be allowed to go to public school. I don’t believe in “philosophical”-- whatever that means-- exemptions. Forging vaccination documents should be a serious crime, with a fine and prison time. Sending a child to school with forged papers should be a felony, which should be a pretty good deterrent in 3-strikes states. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/116 "2014-03-30T17:19:26Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > Well I was close enough, and looking at your link I feel I did a pretty darn good off the top of my head definition, and actually these percentages of a effective level is a lot lower then I assumed. Wow for some 15+% of the population can be unvax’ed and herd immunity would still be effective. > > Your claim that the anti-vax crowd can push these numbers to the point that herd immunity would not work, I accept that is a valid argument. But I also want to put forth the opposite, the case where it would not. > > What will likely happen to someone that strongly feels vaccination is harmful to the case of mandatory vaccinations? Will this person who was forced against their will be a bigger opponent to the cause and more destructive to it then if you allowed them to not be vaccinated? Did you bother to read the whole link I provided, or did you just read the part you mistakenly thought agreed with you and ignore the rest? > [@](#): > > Complications arise when widespread vaccination is not possible or when vaccines are rejected by a part of the population. As of 2009, herd immunity is compromised in some areas for some vaccine-preventable diseases, including pertussis and measles and mumps, in part because of parental refusal of vaccination You cannot say that an 85% inoculation rate for a disease means that it’s o.k. for up to 15% of the anti-vaxers to drop out of the system. A percentage of the 15% are made up of those that cannot be inoculated for various medical reasons, another percentage are those that cannot get access to inoculations for various reasons, and another percentage are those that mistakenly think they are already inoculated. Now, considering those three groups of uninoculated people, what percentage of anti-vaxers could drop out of the system and still maintain herd immunity? ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/117 "2014-03-30T17:34:34Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Did you bother to read the whole link I provided, or did you just read the part you mistakenly thought agreed with you and ignore the rest? Honestly, due to lack of time, I looked at the pictures and skimmed. > [@](#): > > You cannot say that an 85% inoculation rate for a disease means that it’s o.k. for up to 15% of the anti-vaxers to drop out of the system. A percentage of the 15% are made up of those that cannot be inoculated for various medical reasons, another percentage are those that cannot get access to inoculations for various reasons, and another percentage are those that mistakenly think they are already inoculated. Yes I fully and always agreed with this, and never mean to asy that 15% can be anti-vaxers, Anti-vaxers and their ability to chose has to do with such room being available to them given other un - vax’ed people. > [@](#): > > Now, considering those three groups of uninoculated people, what percentage of anti-vaxers could drop out of the system and still maintain herd immunity? Answered above, it would be up to 15% of the population total (for that specific disease), antivaxers included. If they fit they fit. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/118 "2014-03-30T17:38:15Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > Oh. That’s not a hypothetical. But let me create a hypothetical out of it: imagine a population which has exceeded it’s vaccination goals for ensuring herd immunity. Would you (I) be accepting of personal choice (ie, not medical need) waivers then? My answer is yesbut… Yes, if we have exceeded our herd immunity percentage, then there’s more room for allowing personal choice waivers and not greatly raising the risk to the community. BUT, I would only do so with the caveat that a registration system were in place so that if that vaccination rate drops to a point where it looks like we’re going to be at risk, we can immediately contact people and get them in to be vaccinated. But, honestly, I don’t see that as being an easy sell. I think we’d have even more screeching about invasive government action if we tell them it’s okay not to vaccinate now and then literally round them up later. > > So, that’s my hypothetical and my response to it. I don’t speak for any other vaccination supporter, of course. We have to realize we are in a free society where people can and do spout their viewpoints regardless of facts and get recognized and heard. The internet has accelerated this. Do we want to continue a free society where the voice of the people can be heard, or do we want more centralized control? Even if we win over a disease, do we lose overall if we submit to mandatory forced vaccinations by allowing it to happen? Is the cure worse the the disease? ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/119 "2014-03-30T17:56:51Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > We have to realize we are in a free society where people can and do spout their viewpoints regardless of facts and get recognized and heard. The internet has accelerated this. > > Do we want to continue a free society where the voice of the people can be heard, or do we want more centralized control? Even if we win over a disease, do we lose overall if we submit to mandatory forced vaccinations by allowing it to happen? Is the cure worse the the disease? Just out of curiosity, do you know what this sounds like? When you skip from “here’s my wrong opinion on vaccines and evidence” to “well people have a right to be wrong, do you support censorship” when the only thing that’s really happened in the meanwhile is that lot of people have pointed out how wrong you are? It’s pretty classic, and not in a good way. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447/120 "2014-03-30T18:09:45Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > We have to realize we are in a free society where people can and do spout their viewpoints regardless of facts and get recognized and heard. The internet has accelerated this. > > Do we want to continue a free society where the voice of the people can be heard, or do we want more centralized control? Even if we win over a disease, do we lose overall if we submit to mandatory forced vaccinations by allowing it to happen? Is the cure worse the the disease? This doesn’t really have anything to do with the post of mine that you quoted, but I’m going to assume that since you quoted me, you want my thoughts on it. As I said back on page one, I don’t support truly mandatory vaccination as the OP proposed it. That is, mandatory vaccination with only documented medical exceptions with criminal penalties for not vaccinating your kids. I don’t support that. I don’t support that because I agree with you that that cure would be worse than the disease - at least the disease as it stands now. While I see a few hundred cases of disease and a few dozen deaths per year as tragic and terribly unfortunate and I grieve with the families of the lost, I personally do not think that the death toll is high enough to warrant more aggressive enforcement at this time. At this time I support continuing to use \*\*education \*\*(both on a personal level, like I’ve tried to do in this thread, and on a larger level, with more television interviews with vaccination experts, TED talks, newspaper articles that do not present a false sense of “balance”, etc.) and \*\*marketing \*\*to increase vaccination rates, not law enforcement. That may change in the future as more and more people refuse to vaccinate. (Or it may not; people are inherently selfish, and if kids start dropping like flies, I bet we’ll see a rise in voluntary vaccination, at least back to the levels of the 60s when every parent remembered how awful polio is.) Where’s my limit? I don’t know. I don’t know if I can put a hard and fast number on it. But if more kids start dropping dead of vaccine preventable illness than are killed in car accidents or choke to death on hot dogs every year, then I’m pretty sure we’d be in the territory where I’d have to cede that education and marketing aren’t enough, and some more draconian measures needed to be tried. Then the “cure” would not be worse than the disease, in my humble opinion. You (and others in this thread) don’t seem to realize that\* we already have a medical system which does not allow for parental freedom to the extent of endangering their child\*. If you take a child to the hospital, you will not be able to sign them out AMA. Many people don’t realize this. If their condition is such that a medical doctor thinks it’s too dangerous to discharge them, you may not take them home. You may be able to have them transferred to another hospital, but even that is iffy. Our current medical culture views parents as agents of the state in making medical decisions for their children, not the other way around. As long as you’re making reasonable decisions mostly in line with what the state (as expressed by a Medical Doctor) wants, then you’re free to consider yourself in charge of your child’s health care. But step out of line and you’ll find out very quickly that the state will supersede your imaginary “rights” and appoint a legal guardian for healthcare who will make those decisions for your child on your behalf. Parents may not refuse blood transfusions for their children. They may not refuse cancer treatments for their children. There are lots of interventions which a parent may not refuse for their child, even though they could refuse it for themselves. We’re actually \*more \*generous in our allowance of vaccine refusal than we are other areas of parental refusal for medical care for their children. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-good-reason-not-to-mandate-national-vaccination/684447.md?page=7)