Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Should childhood vaccines be compulsory ?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46





    Does everyone’s kid need an anthrax vaccine? 
    Click to expand…


    CDC VIS: Anthrax vaccine is also recommended for unvaccinated people of all ages who have been exposed to anthrax. The vaccine has not been studied or used in children less than 18 years of age and its use in exposed children must be under an Investigational New Drug (IND) program and requires informed consent from a parent or legal guardian.

     

    so no…
    Click to expand...


    Not if you're in the military. Then it is compulsory. Whether exposed or not. Under threat of going to jail.
    Helping those who wear the white coat get a fair shake on Wall Street since 2011

    Comment


    • #47
      I do not this this is ever going to happen.  Look we cannot even keep a law requiring that you need healthcare.  But I do agree we can actually trim out some of the loopholes practically.

      There should be no exception for public school other then medical contraindication.

      Other countries do not provide government subsidies to unvaccinated families.  Yes this does unfairly hurt the poor but rich family losing tax breaks could hurt too.  Imagine if your 401k deduction did not go through or did not grow tax free.  Oh you want to itemize too bad.  Standard deduction only applies to vaccinated families.   I realize these things are never going to happen but making it costly rather then illegal makes the revolutionary in me feel better.

      If Disney required proof of immunization I would not be against that and more likely to take my family earlier.

      Comment


      • #48


        If someone in the DOH or the DOD decides it’d be a good idea to immunize the population, all of a sudden in this proposed federal compulsory birth vaccination environment, everyone has to get it, even if the risk is nil.
        Click to expand...


        this isnt how vaccine creation, testing, recommendation, or delivery currently happens.

        vaccines are not just whilly nilly created, distributed, and used because "Pfizer" says here you go!

        we are not talking about changing the current system of creating safe and effective vaccines.

         

        so another straw man argument.

         

        Comment


        • #49


          Not if you’re in the military. Then it is compulsory. Whether exposed or not. Under threat of going to jail.
          Click to expand...


          that was per your employment. you agreed. you are also a consenting adult.

          it does seem like a low risk, but im sure your kids are happy their dad was neither exposed to Anthrax nor needed his vaccine protection.

          Comment


          • #50




            I do not this this is ever going to happen.  Look we cannot even keep a law requiring that you need healthcare.  But I do agree we can actually trim out some of the loopholes practically.

            There should be no exception for public school other then medical contraindication.

            Other countries do not provide government subsidies to unvaccinated families.  Yes this does unfairly hurt the poor but rich family losing tax breaks could hurt too.  Imagine if your 401k deduction did not go through or did not grow tax free.  Oh you want to itemize too bad.  Standard deduction only applies to vaccinated families.   I realize these things are never going to happen but making it costly rather then illegal makes the revolutionary in me feel better.

            If Disney required proof of immunization I would not be against that and more likely to take my family earlier.
            Click to expand...


            I agree there should be no exception for public schools, and possibly private schools too.

            IMO cutting off subsidies or vouchers wouldn't hurt the poor, since the poor can already get free healthcare, particularly vaccinations, in so many ways from medicaid, etc.

            I disagree that it should be taxed, in form of losing deductions or otherwise, but that's just my libertarianism oozing out.

            I agree re: Disney but they will never turn away anybody who wants to give them thousands of dollars.  :lol:

            Comment


            • #51










              Does everyone’s kid need an anthrax vaccine?
              Click to expand…


              CDC VIS: Anthrax vaccine is also recommended for unvaccinated people of all ages who have been exposed to anthrax. The vaccine has not been studied or used in children less than 18 years of age and its use in exposed children must be under an Investigational New Drug (IND) program and requires informed consent from a parent or legal guardian.

               

              so no…
              Click to expand…


              You’re missing the point.  If someone in the DOH or the DOD decides it’d be a good idea to immunize the population, all of a sudden in this proposed federal compulsory birth vaccination environment, everyone has to get it, even if the risk is nil.

              And not just anthrax vac but a myriad of other drugs on the market now or in the future.

              Edit just to elaborate with another example instead of anthrax… Heart disease is the #1 killer.  Pfizer lobbies some congressmen that everyone should be on statins.  Sure, it’ll cure everyone, insurance costs will go down, we’ll save so many lives.  Common sense politics.  We’re literally letting people die every day that we don’t pass this bill.  Or again, insert-here any widespread malady and potential “cure.”

              Instead of arguing over tax policy or corporate regulation, suddenly politics is now deciding literally what goes into your body.  It’s not that far-fetched.
              Click to expand...


              You're sounding like a wacko conspiracy theorist. Seriously, we cant even keep infectious kids away from healthy kids, let alone some kind of government mandated drug program.

              Risks are not nil. Where are you getting this? No one is proposing rando vaccinations with low risks, just perpetual high risk/morbidity things like MMR, dtap, tetanus, etc...On just your average med school pediatrics rotation I saw kids too young to be vaccinated die from pertussis. Risks are not low. Tetanus is a constant threat and everywhere in the environment.

              You know what has low risks? Vaccine related issues.

              And government mandating at birth etc...is unnecessary. Simply making it hard for people who choose this for their kids to participate in society will do the trick enough to make things not an issue.

              Comment


              • #52





                If someone in the DOH or the DOD decides it’d be a good idea to immunize the population, all of a sudden in this proposed federal compulsory birth vaccination environment, everyone has to get it, even if the risk is nil. 
                Click to expand…


                this isnt how vaccine creation, testing, recommendation, or delivery currently happens.

                vaccines are not just whilly nilly created, distributed, and used because “Pfizer” says here you go!

                we are not talking about changing the current system of creating safe and effective vaccines.

                 

                so another straw man argument.

                 
                Click to expand...


                We also don't currently have a state-imposed mandatory vaccination system.

                Right now the decision as to what is worthwhile and what is not is left to local governments, schools/school boards, communities, parents.

                Comment


                • #53










                  As a grandfather, I’m alarmed at reports of diseases like measles and whooping cough that were not a concern while my children were growing up. My daughter reports that parents get around immunization for their kids by homeschooling or applying as conscientious objectors. The resulting decline in “herd immunity” puts other children at risk.
                  Click to expand…


                  Having been subject to a mandatory vaccination program with very real medical consequences in a small percentage of those vaccinated (smallpox-heart block, cellulitis etc; anthrax too), I would have to say no. I’d probably be okay with some social consequences though like exclusion from school.

                  I think individual rights are pretty important, even if I disagree with the choices being made. Yes, my kids are all vaccinated.
                  Click to expand…


                  This guy gets it.

                  This is the land of the free, not a totalitarian state.  Individual rights matter.
                  Click to expand...


                  This is a straight up ridiculous argument.  We don't allow parents the choice whether or not to feed their kids, to hit them, to lock them in a room all day, to put them in carseats, or to give chemotherapy (http://www.nbcnews.com/id/30763438/ns/health-childrens_health/t/judge-rules-family-cant-refuse-chemo-boy/#.XIaL98lKipo).

                  Comment


                  • #54













                    Does everyone’s kid need an anthrax vaccine?
                    Click to expand…


                    CDC VIS: Anthrax vaccine is also recommended for unvaccinated people of all ages who have been exposed to anthrax. The vaccine has not been studied or used in children less than 18 years of age and its use in exposed children must be under an Investigational New Drug (IND) program and requires informed consent from a parent or legal guardian.

                     

                    so no…
                    Click to expand…


                    You’re missing the point.  If someone in the DOH or the DOD decides it’d be a good idea to immunize the population, all of a sudden in this proposed federal compulsory birth vaccination environment, everyone has to get it, even if the risk is nil.

                    And not just anthrax vac but a myriad of other drugs on the market now or in the future.

                    Edit just to elaborate with another example instead of anthrax… Heart disease is the #1 killer.  Pfizer lobbies some congressmen that everyone should be on statins.  Sure, it’ll cure everyone, insurance costs will go down, we’ll save so many lives.  Common sense politics.  We’re literally letting people die every day that we don’t pass this bill.  Or again, insert-here any widespread malady and potential “cure.”

                    Instead of arguing over tax policy or corporate regulation, suddenly politics is now deciding literally what goes into your body.  It’s not that far-fetched.
                    Click to expand…


                    You’re sounding like a wacko conspiracy theorist. Seriously, we cant even keep infectious kids away from healthy kids, let alone some kind of government mandated drug program.

                    Risks are not nil. Where are you getting this? No one is proposing rando vaccinations with low risks, just perpetual high risk/morbidity things like MMR, dtap, tetanus, etc…On just your average med school pediatrics rotation I saw kids too young to be vaccinated die from pertussis. Risks are not low. Tetanus is a constant threat and everywhere in the environment.

                    You know what has low risks? Vaccine related issues.

                    And government mandating at birth etc…is unnecessary. Simply making it hard for people who choose this for their kids to participate in society will do the trick enough to make things not an issue.
                    Click to expand...


                    Sorry I think you're misunderstanding me. 

                    I agree most/all of the current typical required vaccinations are for things that carry a real risk.  But when you put things solely in the hands of politicians that can easily change.

                    What this thread is literally discussing is the dystopian idea of a world where the state controls what goes into your body.  It's bound to get some wacko conspiracy theory ideas flowing. :lol:

                    I agree entirely with you on your last line.  We should still give the people a choice, even if the choice is very difficult (i.e. homeschooling, no public sports programs or youth activities, colleges, etc).

                    There is a very big, meaningful difference between a very inconvenient choice and something being forced upon you.

                     

                    Comment


                    • #55


                      Right now the decision as to what is worthwhile and what is not
                      Click to expand...


                      ......thats literally the whole problem right now.

                      people cannot make the right decision to the detriment of others.

                      Comment


                      • #56













                        As a grandfather, I’m alarmed at reports of diseases like measles and whooping cough that were not a concern while my children were growing up. My daughter reports that parents get around immunization for their kids by homeschooling or applying as conscientious objectors. The resulting decline in “herd immunity” puts other children at risk.
                        Click to expand…


                        Having been subject to a mandatory vaccination program with very real medical consequences in a small percentage of those vaccinated (smallpox-heart block, cellulitis etc; anthrax too), I would have to say no. I’d probably be okay with some social consequences though like exclusion from school.

                        I think individual rights are pretty important, even if I disagree with the choices being made. Yes, my kids are all vaccinated.
                        Click to expand…


                        This guy gets it.

                        This is the land of the free, not a totalitarian state.  Individual rights matter.
                        Click to expand…


                        This is a straight up ridiculous argument.  We don’t allow parents the choice whether or not to feed their kids, to hit them, to lock them in a room all day, to put them in carseats, or to give chemotherapy (http://www.nbcnews.com/id/30763438/ns/health-childrens_health/t/judge-rules-family-cant-refuse-chemo-boy/#.XIaL98lKipo).
                        Click to expand...


                        Comment


                        • #57


                          I agree most/all of the current typical required vaccinations are for things that carry a real risk.
                          Click to expand...


                          what dont you agree with?

                          what do you think doesnt carry a real risk?

                          Comment


                          • #58





                            Not if you’re in the military. Then it is compulsory. Whether exposed or not. Under threat of going to jail. 
                            Click to expand…


                            that was per your employment. you agreed. you are also a consenting adult.

                            it does seem like a low risk, but im sure your kids are happy their dad was neither exposed to Anthrax nor needed his vaccine protection.
                            Click to expand...


                            It's definitely not in the recruiting brochure.  :lol:

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              There are plenty of behavioral psychology papers and books that show that people are basically too stupid to do what’s best for them.

                              My nephew got ALL and could not get vaccinated while he was undergoing chemotherapy. There were students in his grade school class that were not immunized, and whose parents refused to get their kids immunized so he could attend school. What a joke.

                              Attendance at public school should be contingent on being vaccinated. Also, parents, like those idiots in Oregon, should be financially and legally liable for any costs incurred by their refusal to vaccinate when not medically contraindicated. Once again, most people are too stupid to do what is best for themselves.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Mississippi requires it. They have the highest vaccination compliance.

                                Here is the full article. Unfortunately PA (my state) and CO are the worst.

                                https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2015/01/30/mississippi-yes-mississippi-has-the-nations-best-child-vaccination-rate-heres-why/?utm_term=.bbd9745fd89a

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X