Moejoe, he messed up the nested quote, that’s all.
Yes, but those young people are prolific agents for distrubution.
“You gotta get 'em dip-tet boosters yearly or else they’ll develop lockjaw and night vision!”
You’re really arguing that it’s better to get measles or mumps than to get a shot to prevent them?
:dubious:
You realize the MMR shot lasts your whole life?
Pertussis can be cyclical. The current outbreak in California is estimated to be the worst in 50 years.
Your point?
I have no idea where you live but there are signs everywhere urging you to get one around here in the northeastern US. I’m personally planning to get one this week as I am pregnant and at high risk according to my OB.
Again, your point?
The reason we don’t vaccinate everyone for the flu every year is because it’s not a simple thing to produce 300 million flu shots in the few months between when we figure out what this year’s big flu is going to be and when it would be possible to vaccinate people so that it would do any good. I mean, just think about how difficult and expensive that would be.
With something like pertussis and measles, you only have to vaccinate a small proportion of the population each year, and you only ever have to do it once.
So the best course of action with the flu vaccine is to give the vaccine to the people that are most likely to be affected by the flu.
moejoe - this is the thread that I think people are remembering http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=438124&highlight=vaccine (from 2007) I don’t think it had anything to do with you, since the person involved was on another board, and did not have a medical reason for non-vaccination (which your child does have - an allergy to the vaccine is a valid reason for non-vaccination).
[quote=“LavenderBlue, post:104, topic:544312”]
You’re really arguing that it’s better to get measles or mumps than to get a shot to prevent them?
:dubious:
Not at all. I’m arguing that far more people die from the flu than would die if there was no MMR vaccine.
Ah gee, you mean I’m not the center of the whole dang universe? Crud 
Thanks for posting the link Andy, although I do wonder how anyone manages to stay so worked up for so long over this issue. Isn’t it just exhausting?
Uh, so what? We can’t get 100% flu vaccinations, so let’s not bother with vaccinations at all? What exactly is your point here?
Where do you do your research? Have you published? Or did you just walk up to people in the street, and, after ascertaining they were neither an anti-vaxer nor someone who knows what they’re talking about, ask their opinion?
Where’d you get this idea from? Is it the belief that vaccines make us all weak and namby-pamby, whereas in the golden days of yore, everyone was exposed to them killer germs, dealt with 'em like red-blooded Americuns, and then were immune for life?
Yep, I pine for the good ol’ days too. Smallpox, diphtheria, polio, measles, hell don’t forget cholera and yellow fever too. You dodged them bullets, you was set for life.
It was a pretty big deal with H1N1 flu, which in contrast to typical seasonal flu was hard on previously healthy people in a much younger age group.
*"A disproportionate number of patients who died from H1N1 were young and relatively healthy. According to (a) Reuters article, 90 percent of the seriously ill victims in Mexico were less than 50 years old and most of those patients were previously healthy. In addition, 87% of those who died were aged 5 to 59 — compared to a usual average of 32% for seasonal flu. All of the patients who died had “multiple organ failure.”…
Why are young healthy patients the ones dying from H1N1?
One theory is that the patients’ own immune systems are killing them. In younger children, the immune system hasn’t fully developed. In older patients, the immune system loses some of its effectiveness. The theory is that immune systems in young healthy people are “too good” and go out of control. Scientists call the theory “cytokine storm.”*
This effect is postulated as being the reason that so many young healthy people died in the killer influenza outbreak of 1918.
There are left wing crazies and there are right wing crazies. The difference is that the left wing loons have no traction in Congress. Among Republicans, Ron Paul is an anti-vax apologist and Dan Burton (R-IN) is anti-vax period. He (falsely or highly dubiously) rails about the rising tide of autism and said on the floor or Congress that he believes his grandson became autistic because of vaccination. Conservatives in general and Republicans in particular are simply more tolerant of crazy and less tolerant of science than liberals.
Disclaimer:
I believe that vaccinations are a good thing, and my doctors have answered all of my questions about it to my satisfaction and they really broke it down for me.
That said; I completely understand where WhyNot is coming from. I’m not speaking for her now, but for myself; it seems sometimes there are issues one may want to do some digging into a bit before just jumping on board because everyone tells them they are an idiot if they don’t jump on board.
It gets to the point where people who do respect certain groups or scientists or messageboard members or whatever, are scared to ask questions about topics they may not feel confident about. One should NEVER be made to feel like an idiot just for asking questions. But that is how it feels sometimes. “You have questions about vax? You Oprah worshipping MORON!”
I remember once on the streets of Harlem, someone was passing out information on President Mugabe, and I accepted a pamphlet. I knew nothing about him except what I had heard from the mainstream media, and these folks were offering an alternative point of view. My husband’s family was enraged that I even dared to question that maybe there may be another side to the story. I don’t like that feeling of not being able to question things, just because certain people, no matter how respected, have already made up their minds about it.
There is no harm in questioning things, or trying to learn more about topics, even if ultimately we decide to defer to those that we trust and know are knowledgable. We don’t need to smirk and mock someone for saying they are researching something, when we know they mean they are just trying to learn more about a topic.
Uh, I think your second statement (with which I agree) directly contradicts your first. The 5 deaths would possibly not have occurred, if enough people around had been vaccinated that the babies couldn’t have caught the disease.
BTW - being devil’s advocate here: my kids are fully vaccinated, but on a much slower schedule because I do worry about dumping so much stuff into their system in a short period of time (like the time they wanted to give my daughter 3 injections in a single visit… a friend’s baby got FOUR in one visit… the fact that said baby died of SIDS a few days later may be unconnected). I know the reasoning behind multiple shots/visit (increases overall compliance) but for any responsible parent, this is a non-issue. I brought my daughter back for the rest of her shots a few weeks later.
Now that is bizarre to the point of being criminally stupid.
Not that they wanted you to be tested… but that they waited until AFTER delivery. Knowing your HIV status prior to delivery would have made a lot more sense - allowing the doctor to protect himself/herself, and your baby, to reduce the risk of transmission.
I was tested for HIV while pregnant with my daughter (second child). Not sure why the doc didn’t test while I was pg with my son 3 years earlier - maybe because I’d had a negative test prior to minor surgery a year before that? Like you I’m in a nearly-zero-risk category.
The example of Dan Burton is a good one. But it’s not quite true that woo has no influential left-leaning supporters in Congress.
Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) has been a prominent enabler of unrestricted “dietary supplement” sales in the U.S. (along with Republican Orrin Hatch of Utah), pumping tax dollars into the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (hundreds of millions spent with virtually nothing to show for it) and trying to sneak alt med funding into health care reform. He has not, to my knowledge, been involved in antivax efforts.
For Mama Zappa: I think we both agree on “possibly”.
As for Nzinga, I agree that people making the effort to study immunization, its role in vastly reducing or even eliminating dangerous infectious diseases, its benefits and potential risks, is a fine idea. Statements that someone is going to “research” the issue can get a :dubious: because in practice when someone says they doubt medical recommendations on vaccination and are going to “research” the subject, this has often meant going to a selection of antivax sites and making one’s decisions based on deceptive and bad information. (Jenny McCarthy has proudly proclaimed her attendance at the University of Google, and it’s hard to imagine anyone more profoundly and deliberately ignorant about vaccines). So yes, self-study is good. But you do have to be careful about your sources, and consult knowledgeable professionals before making important decisions that could affect your family’s health and that of your fellow citizens.
Entirely agreed.
Whether I kill you out of spite or ignorance, you’re still dead. And when I kill you out of *willful *ignorance, that seems pretty malicious to me.
Of course it would. Some people are scared and stupid and they’ll believe anything.
*Starting *to? These people have been anti-evidence, anti-logic, and anti-sciene from the start.
1.) Evidence that the same or greater rage isn’t directed at malevolent groups?
2.) Any logic to support damage through foolishness being not as bad as damage through malevolence? Let’s say you just weren’t watching the stoplight and didn’t see it turn red, versus seeing it turn red but deciding to run it because you were late, and you struck me with your car as I crossed the street–is my leg any less broken?
How would you feel if someone handed you a pamphlet that said the Holocaust was a lie created by Jews to engender sympathy?
Just because there are two opposing viewpoints doesn’t mean that both of them deserve equal weight. I think the problem here is that anyone with a second grader’s understanding of science and evidence can tell that the anti-vaxxers are wrong–and not just wrong, but blind. So anyone who has to take more than five minutes to figure out that they’re full of shit probably isn’t paying attention to evidence or reason, either.
If someone handed me that pamphlet I would laugh in their faces and tell them to fuck right off. But there was a time in the past that someone did tell me that the Holocaust was a lie, and I asked lots of questions, and read some of the craziest shit that I ever remember reading. I have no problem asking questions. My formal education ended in middle school, (unless you count a GED and an associates at a trade school as formal education, which I don’t) so no one is ever going to shame me into not asking questions. I don’t care if they allude to me not paying attention to evidence or reason or not be able to understand logic or whatever the fuck shame they try to slide in. It is perfectly good and right to ask questions about anything one is curious or ignorant about.
The fact that you even mention two viewpoints deserving equal weight is so far out and unrelated to anything I have said that I will just assume that was not directed at me.