How in the WORLD is that a personal attack? I did not say she WAS a berserker, I said her overuse of smileys (and capital letters, and exclamation points, for that matter) makes her LOOK like a berserker.
Oh and…
You missed a couple.
Asking InterestedObserver to cool it with the smileys is fine. She used plenty of them. Suggesting they makes her look crazy isn’t helpful and that kind of thing usually draws a hostile response.
I assumed that was covered by my first post.
Allow me to assist you. Some of these links to past posts in this incredibly long (2 page) thread are links to posts in which people do provide cites, or ask you questions, or explain information.
In this post, **Jackmanni **refutes some of your statements. You never respond to his refutations.
In this post, Grumman, refutes some of your statements. You never respond.
In this post, DSeid refutes some of your statements, and explains that some of your interpretations of your own cites are inaccurate. You never respond.
In this post, Jackmanni explains why MORE of your statements are not factual. You do not address this post.
You do not address any of the questions, comments, or statements in this postby yours truly:
In this post, Jackmanni asks you for some information. You do not respond.
Grumman addressessome of your claims.
More information, with cites, from Jackmanni.
That should help you get started with addressing some of the things you might have missed.
Actually, you admitted that you went into this 18-year investigation because your son had a vaccine reaction and you wanted to know why. You admitted you found information that said that vaccines are bad, and kept looking for that information. That’s sort of an admission that you went into the process with a bias, and nothing you’ve reported indicates that you were able to move out of that bias.
People have provided posts and cites. You’ve ignored them, or insisted that they don’t prove you wrong, without explaining why not. If you believe that other people’s responses to you or other people’s citations do not prove you wrong, please explain why.
You’ve never, not once in any posts on this issue that I can recall, expressed condemnation or refutation of any anti-vax BS. Your posts are consistent in their theme of “vaccines are bad.” You’ve never indicated any acceptance of any benefits of vaccines. You go so far as to downplay the importance of the development of the polio vaccine, repeating the anti-vax belief that improved hygiene was already eradicating the polio problem.
Everyone on this board is, according to their own reports. This, along with your continuous references to your “straight-A” son, are irrelevant unless you feel that they’re somehow related to your opinions on this topic. Do you believe that your son makes straight As because he was not vaccinated? Do you believe that your superior intelligence makes your understanding of the issue of vaccines the only right one, ignoring the (unestablished) intelligence of others who’ve made the study of vaccines and communicable diseases their lifes’ work?
Actually, much of your disagreement with others on this issue has been pointed out as being based on inaccurate understanding, or about being, yes, wrong in your interpretations. So, sometimes, disagreeing with people DOES mean that the person in disagreement is wrong. In this instance, a number of posters have proffered reasons why you are incorrect. You can find those reasons in the list of posts I provided above.
A broken clock is wrong 86, 398 seconds per day, and correct 2 seconds per day. That’s a failure rate of 99.99 percent. When you find yourself in agreement with someone with a failure rate that large, it’s time to sit back and ask yourself hard questions.
Of course, I do not have information on the failure rate of the anti-vax sites, but I’d be willing to bet it’s pretty high. Maybe not 99.99%, though.
Other people have done that. I’ve provided you with a list above. You can take a look at it and respond to those explanations.
Thus leading to a global pandemic of smiley overload. The horror!
Okay, I am getting a bit lost in medical jargon and rude remarks. I am not thoroughly knowledgeable in this area and have not done years of medical research. I’m just another mom trying to make good decisions for her kids and all kids.
**IO has continually said that her choice not to vaccinate doesn’t affect us or our kids who are vaccinated. ** Here’s a simple scenario and perhaps you can all correct me if/where I’m wrong here:
I live next to IO and have an infant, a 5 yo and a 7 yo and they are current on their vaccines. My kids play with and attend school with IO’s non-vaccinated kids. Being such good friends and neighbors, IO’s family comes over for my son’s birthday party. Oh, my pregnant sister comes, too.
Days later IO finds that her child has measles, rubella or some such other disease. So everyone in the child’s class, including my son, and everyone at the party were exposed. According to IO, my kids are not at risk because “that’s the whole reason they were vaccinated,” right? IO also asserts that exposing my kids to this will actually help boost their immunity. Okay, maybe that’s possible, but my infant is too young for that vaccine so she can (let’s say does) contract it, and my sister’s unborn baby is at risk as well. As are all the kids at school whose parents chose not to vaccinate.
Oh, and then we take into account the fact that vaccines are not 100% effective and my 5 yo becomes infected despite being vaccinated while the 7 yr old “benefits” from the exposure by strengthening her immunity. Which means that the other vaccinated kids at school may also come down with the disease.
So the fact is, IO’s children DO pose a risk to mine and others. The fact is, when more and more people make the same choice as IO, the more dangerous it gets for everyone – vaccinated or not.
Please correct me if I’m wrong here.
wombattver, you are correct. IO’s decision not to vaccinate her children puts her children, your children, other children, and adults at risk for a variety of reasons.
Well, alrightly then. It’s really not so complicated. Anti-vaccine parents should pay higher insurance premiums. And they should not be allowed to send their children to public school unless they have a medical reason NOT to vaccinate (such as IO’s son’s severe reaction.)
But saying your imaginary friend / magic man in the sky / spaghetti monster says “don’t vaccinate” just doesn’t cut it. Unless your religion forbids medical care of any kind, using religion as an excuse isn’t cool. Presumably, your religion WOULD allow medical help once your child contracts polio and exposes all his classmates.
My uncle spent part of his childhood in an iron lung due to polio. He was eventually able to walk again, but his legs are weak and shrunken, he could never run or play sports and was rendered sterile as well. Now past 50, his legs are giving out and getting worse and worse. It’s sad to think that so many anti-vax parents might have to watch this happen to one of their kids before they rethink their choice. It was only a few generations ago that nearly every parent would lose at least one child to disease.
If your sisters own vaccine was effective, her unborn baby would be protected by her own immunity. The risk there is the potential that her immunity isn’t 100%. (As I understand it and I’ll gladly be corrected by a medical professional).
The other guest you are missing at that birthday party is the kid that wasn’t vaccinated for medical reasons to start with. Again, I’m sure one of the MDs can spell it out, but there are cases where you DON’T vaccinate. Those people are completely dependent on herd immunity.
As are people lik InterestedObserver and her children, even though they don’t recognize it and refuse to participate in assisting in that process for the reset of society.
Which is why they make me so mad. Some babies and children cannot or should not get vaccinated. A child may be advised not to get vaccinated because of an underlying medical issue. Sometimes the vaccines simply don’t work in a given individual.
Under those circumstances the people who cannot get vaccinated rely on others to protect them. Most vaccine preventable disease are a problem at least in part because they are contagious. Measles is one of the most contagious disease on the planet. But if you vaccinate against it, you can stop it. When you have large numbers of people who are not vaccinated you will get the disease again. For example, in the aftermath of the Wakefield scandal, many Brits stopped vaccinating. The result? An epidemic of measles in the UK.
If you’re vaccinated the odds are in your favor. If you aren’t you’ll most certainly catch the disease. But the disease wouldn’t have arisen in the first place because of non-vaccination. This is largely because for the actions of people like Interested Observer and her arguments against vaccination for healthy people. Her arguments about “choice” mean that when people don’t vaccinate without good reason, people who really cannot get vaccinated face much greater risks to their health.
I generally skip flu vax, same for my kids.
Do I have to “pay” for it anyway?
Interesting point. Seeing as the flu vax is an “every year” shot, I don’t think it falls into the same category as other vaccines. My kids got the flu shot last year, we skipped it this year. I live in AZ. Most doctors here recommend it for high risk patients - the elderly, young children, teachers, nurses, etc. and don’t always have enough stock for everyone.
Also, I believe the flu vax is developed new every year to target the strains of flu they think might be most prevalent that year. Some years it’s quite effective, others not so much.
My kids are current on all their vaccines, but we don’t always do the flu shots. I hadn’t really considered it - is skipping the flu shot risking others in much the same way as skipping “regular” vaccines? Should I feel bad? 
Certainly not right now. But the spirit of the op’s link is that an insurance company may at some point offer a discount to you if you do get your family vaccinated (or more likely, raise your premium less than they’d raise the premiums of those who do not get vaccinated).
It makes sense for them to do so, especially if they have an agreement with other carriers in the market to incentivize similarly, especially trying to incentivize getting the school kids vaccinated. Those children are not all that likely to cause the payor huge direct expenses, but since influenza spreads through a community by way of the schools, achieving a high (80% plus) rate of coverage in that population would indirectly significantly cut down their expenses for the care of the higher risk members of the community, such as the elderly, the asthmatics, the diabetics, the obese adults, and the immunocompromised.
Correct. One day it may not be an every year shot or one that is based on predictions made far in advance, but that’s not going to happen any time soon.
Interestingly the nasal vaccine - the FluMist - which can only be given to those who over 2 and under 50 and who do not have asthma or an immunocompromised state - has worked well even in the years that the injectable (killed) version missed the mark.
I had the chicken pox when I was 5 and shingles (same virus) when I was 12. The chicken pox was no better and no worse than any other case of chicken pox. I itched like hell and felt lousy for a week or two, then it was over.
The shingles, on the other hand, was pure, unadulterated hell. I cannot overemphasize just how fucking painful shingles is. It felt like my skin was burning off. It hurt to wear a shirt, it hurt to shower, it hurt to have the air touch my skin. I could not go to school for about three weeks, until all of the pustules dried up and scabbed over.
Even though there was never any issue with the sprog getting the varicella vaccine – his pediatrician actually insisted on it because I’ve had the shingles – I’m still terrified that I’m going to get another case of shingles when I’m exposed to someone’s [del]little Petri dish[/del] child who is carrying the virus because his parents chose not to have him vaccinated and/or took him to a “pox party” and ended up with a subclinical case of the disease. This, by the way, is not unwarranted, irrational fear. This came from the sprog’s pediatrician, who has seen this happen in other families.
I agree with Grumman. An anti-vaxer’s right to “choose” ends with my right not to suffer from a painful, potentially recurring disease.
Bummer - my son can’t get that one due to asthma. My daughter can get the Flu-Mist, but I’m such a meanie I didn’t tell her that and made her get the shot because there was NO way I was making her 4 yo brother get a shot and not her! I brought them together to the doctor and poor little guy was melting down the minute he heard the word “shot!” She’s my brave one, so she went first to show him it wasn’t so bad.
Well, it seems like we did just that with the above scenarios. You and your children do place others at risk - FACT. Your choice may be right for you, in accordance to the reaction your son had, but your un-vaccinated kids absolutely count on us vaccinating our kids to continue to keep yours (and others like yours) safe. You really ought to be encouraging vaccination to protect your own kids rather than encouraging others to make your same choice which places greater numbers at risk.
I agree to a large extent with the rationale behind the suggestion of higher insurance premiums. I think there might be enough ambiguity in the issue to make it too difficult to administer. For instance, those people who can’t be vaccinated for medical reasons.
My biggest problem with it right now, though, is that it’s likely to provide one more talking/screaming point for anti-vaxxers, which might push more of the fence-sitters over the edge in the wrong direction. I’m afraid that for every one who would decide to vaccinate rather than pay the higher premium, there just might be one who would decide to fight the good fight against ‘oppression’. It also makes one more possible example of, “See, it’s all about the money. They don’t care how dangerous it is, they just want to force everybody to do it.” I’m a bit afraid to do anything that will push in the wrong direction what sometimes feels like a delicate balance.
There seem to be more parents who are willing to believe in their own ‘research’ or the expertise of those who tell them how smart they are to be able to suss out the true motives of the system, or that they are clever enough not to need the advice of anyone actually trained in the matter. And we’re far enough, time-wise, to have forgotten the very real effects of most of the diseases our parents or grandparents knew enough to fear.
Round here it’s quite simple. Vaccination is a legal requirment. Cannot do anything without it. Childcare, Kindergarten, School whatever - all REQUIRE vax certs.
Is an actual law on the books.
I don’t see what is the debate over there - what, American exceptionalism protects you all from Measels, Rubella and Polio?