Illogical jump, the parents can only do what they know, they can only love as best as they know how.
Appeal to emotion and actually irrelevant to my point. I have never said that modern medicine is not marvelous, I actually believe it was a gift to humanity from angels.
Unfortunately due to some very negative past quoting me out of context, even though I do stand by my point, I will need to refer such things to the moderator immediately in a request to stop.
I now consider it harassment.
Yes, we have a pretty good idea as to your beliefs about medical science:
While I posted on this I feel very aquatically I feel there is more on this to be said as the no-vax option is not just for the uneducated but for the educated
If you really love your children, you also wish to reduce risk for them. If herd immunity is sufficient to reduce the risk of disease to negligible and the known side effect of the vaccine is greater then the risk of the effects of the disease, would it not be the loving thing for your child not to get vaccinated?
Along the same line in a free society do we wish to force someone’s child to get a treatment that they believe to be harmful? If so wouldn’t every sniffle be blamed on that treatment, and therefore make such people all the more likely to be more outspoken? Do we want state control over our children, and do we what the people to know that the state is in control of our children (notice those are 2 different things). Have you seen the movie “Rabbit Proof Fence”?
I am asking you and I am reporting this, as this is the exact thread taking out of context I was talking about, I ask that you no longer take this out of context.
I quoted the entire post. In what possible way did I take it out of context?
Yes, vaccinations should be mandatory.
If we’re unable or unwilling to do that, these idiots should be compelled to take responsibility for their depraved indifference. In my world, if we had to allow opting out on a whim, people would be allowed to opt out of vaccination, but would be required to register as having done so.
This would include a stipulation that they understand that their action is placing other people at risk for harmful outcomes, and that they agree to accept responsibility for that harm. They would acknowledge their membership as antivaxxers in a defendant class that could be sued for damages by any victims.
There would have to be some stipulation that they will not contest any claims by requiring plaintiffs to prove that they were specifically responsible for harm to a specific person.
I’ve escalated this thread as this has been going on way too long, I want a mediator. That is the reason I reported it.
I know you objected when i took one of your posts ‘out of context’.
Looking over it further, Yes I do stand behind what I said, this does not negate medical science, as I stated I believe it is a gift from angles to us and we are suppose to use that in the spirit of love, but I still do ask that you don’t continue quoting that as it is out of context (of the whole) and brings back memories of being taunted here to the point that I am considering leaving.
Given that about 90% of mothers Love their newborns, one wonders why vaccinations are even necessary.
Why are you equating love for one’s child with the trusting others you don’t know that something that is proven that may be harmful will be best for you child.
Also counterpoint, with herd immunity and known side effects it may be statistically worse for one’s child to get vaccinated since others are willing to risk their child they have provided herd immunity to yours at their willing expense.
Please, please, please for the love of god do not cite Mercola. That dude is basically the big daddy of medical quackery, and citing him as a source is, in the eyes of many here, an quick route to the “don’t take this poster seriously” column. Why? Because he’s always wrong. Even when he’s right, he’s wrong. This is a perfect example. Anyone with the slightest understanding of how vaccination works and why immunization from vaccines doesn’t seem to last as long as immunization through getting the disease isn’t going to buy into this article.
So what’s his mistake? Well, simply put, the implication that “natural” immunity is life-long, whereas vaccines are on a timer. That’s bullshit. It’s the same antigen, it works the same way, and realistically, your immune system should react the same way. A big part of that is that eventually, your immune system will decide that this disease is no longer a priority if it is not exposed to the antigen for a long enough time, and essentially “purge the data” because it’s no longer needed. This applies both for “natural” immunity and for vaccines.
So… why did it seem like chicken pox immunity was life-long? Well, back before widespread vaccination for Chicken pox, it was a very common disease. Something like 3.7 million per year. In any given community, the likelihood of coming back into contact with the antigen one way or another was very high. But now that the disease is getting rarer, you’re likely to come into contact with the antigen once when you get the vaccine and then any time you decide to pick up a booster shot. This is why booster shots exist. This same logic applies to any infectious disease against which humans can build up immunity. So while Mercola may technicall-
…I just read the article a little further (and regretted it. For anyone with even a basic understanding of medicine, or even just basic critical thinking skills, articles by this guy make us want to tear out our brain stems and beat ourselves to death with it). Mercola apparently understands this, but then goes on to argue the same point, that he vaccine is temporary, anyways! Wow, what a dishonest shitbag! The vaccine would be just as permanent as natural immunity if there was still a lot of chicken pox going around. There isn’t. That’s a good thing. And you know what? If the alternative is either “booster shots and a shingles shot when you get old” or “an irritating, annoying disease with potential long-term health effects and which caused upwards of 100 deaths a year”… Yeah, I’m gonna go with the one that doesn’t involve being an itchy, slimy mess for three weeks. That entire article is just so filled with wrong that I don’t even know where to start.
As in “We took the vaccine then we had these reactions that can scientifically be tied to the vaccine” or “We took the vaccine and then later got sick”? I don’t mean to demean your testimony, but the degree to which vaccine injury is overreported and overblown by people who don’t understand that correlation does not imply causation (see also: every single parent who believes that vaccines caused autism in their child) is quite frankly disgusting. I just want to be sure that your stories are real.
Did you get that info from your doctor? I hadn’t heard about this, and it seems that there’s not a whole lot of evidence supporting the idea that vaccines can stimulate Guillain-Barre syndrome. Indeed, the evidence seems to point the other way. If you got that information from Mercola… Well, you probably shouldn’t have trusted Mercola. And if your doctor trusts Mercola… Time to find a better doctor.
I think that if you have legitimate health concerns, then there would be no problem demonstrating this and receiving exemption. Assuming you’re right about Guillain-Barré, showing that your family has a history of it would be enough. And here’s the nice thing - everyone else being vaccinated means that you can rely to a certain degree on the herd immunity of those around you. This is especially important for those who cannot get vaccinated themselves. In other words - you.
What risks do you think should be investigated? I mean, if there’s legitimate reason for concern, then by all means, let’s hear it. But indefinitely holding off a positive health advancement because we don’t know everything is just silly.
I’m saying that if mothers’ Love is what cures, we shouldn’t even need vaccinations. The question is moot! Next?
My favorite part is that mercola says, if you do get shingles, don’t worry, just rub honey on it! But if you go to the linked page that talks about the efficacy of honey, they specifically point out that thy’re talking only about herpes simplex and not herpes zoster. They can’t even keep their bullshit straight.
If Mother’s love can lead to chicken soup can’t mother’s love also lead to vaccination.
If God is Love, then it becomes God’s guidance if to vaccinate or not. If one is not ‘educated’ enough to realize the love thru vaccination, or perhaps over educated an realized thru herd immunity their child would be better w/o a vaccination, then perhaps love has not reached them enough to realize it is the loving choice.
Kanics opinions are largely irrelevant to the debate at hand.
Drop it, all of you.
While I find the “children with chicken pox are natural boosters” theory interesting, and a nice argument for continuing observation and watching for unintended consequences… that does not mean it’s an argument in favor of not vaccinating children for chicken pox. It is an argument, at this point, for boosters and singles vaccination. That ship has sailed. All that it’s likely to do, since there aren’t many unvaccinated kids, is to potentially make it so your kid won’t get chicken pox until he’s old enough that is really dangerous to get chicken pox. Not vaccinating your child is not doing us a public service. Promoting singles vaccination is a public service. Once enough of the population vaccinates, then vaccination is the way to go. One of the few times in life when, “everyone else is doing it” is actually a valid point. That herd immunity that protects the population also makes it difficult to contract the disease (and therefore immunity) naturally.
Did you read my ‘opinions’ as to the effect mandatory vaccinations would apply to a free society with internet access and if such attempts to make it mandatory would either serve to limit our free society or be counter productive to the cause? Any my question will the cure be worse then the disease.
Largely irrelevant, please explain? (asked on a debate context)
Well, those are also largely irrelevant, albeit for… slightly different reasons.
Your “free society” however ends when it starts to have an impact on my freedom. Your freedom to remain unvaccinated can cause harm to others. “Herd immunity” isn’t a cure-all.
For those who have health issues that prevent them from being vaccinated, your so-called “freedom” can have dire consequences. You ARE infringing on their rights.