mantisman51
Active Member
And if you don't think people get sick with measles and mumps after getting the vaccine-yes years later-do I start linking the studies now or wait for another paranoid, leftist rant?
Forced vaccines...
- Thread starter renogaw
- Start date
uneverno
Active Member
How is medicine (science) right or left?
Those of you who favor the vaccine, ask yourselves why? What scientific evidence weighs in that favor.
Those who oppose the vaccine, ask yourselves why? What scientific evidence weighs against it?
How politics factors into the equation is a mystery to me. Truth either is or isn't.
Those of you who favor the vaccine, ask yourselves why? What scientific evidence weighs in that favor.
Those who oppose the vaccine, ask yourselves why? What scientific evidence weighs against it?
How politics factors into the equation is a mystery to me. Truth either is or isn't.
bionicarm
Active Member
Originally Posted by mantisman51
http:///forum/post/3159817
Ah, the voice of medical facism. You vill take ze shot und you vill not upset the social orders. Since the flu kills far more than the three mentioned, do we jail all those who contract it? Oh, and how about all those MD's and phd's who say the danger of vaccinations outweigh the benefit? I guess to the gulag with them, as well? I mean after all their dissension is endangering public health and order, right? Oh hey, what about the pharmaceutical companies that have been proven to have killed people with their bad vaccinations? Oh yeah, their protected by Federal law. Their victims, er patients, got what they deserved, right?
So I take it you're a homeopath, and don't believe in standard medicinal remedies to cure the ills you've apparently never had? Ever step on a rusty nail? If so, I guess you're immune to tetanus, since that's another useless vaccination. Or is that disease an overrated myth as well?
You actually need to go be a scientific lab rat. You and your family are medical marvels. You sound like you jave the magic immunity the rest of us are dying to have.
http:///forum/post/3159817
Ah, the voice of medical facism. You vill take ze shot und you vill not upset the social orders. Since the flu kills far more than the three mentioned, do we jail all those who contract it? Oh, and how about all those MD's and phd's who say the danger of vaccinations outweigh the benefit? I guess to the gulag with them, as well? I mean after all their dissension is endangering public health and order, right? Oh hey, what about the pharmaceutical companies that have been proven to have killed people with their bad vaccinations? Oh yeah, their protected by Federal law. Their victims, er patients, got what they deserved, right?
So I take it you're a homeopath, and don't believe in standard medicinal remedies to cure the ills you've apparently never had? Ever step on a rusty nail? If so, I guess you're immune to tetanus, since that's another useless vaccination. Or is that disease an overrated myth as well?
You actually need to go be a scientific lab rat. You and your family are medical marvels. You sound like you jave the magic immunity the rest of us are dying to have.
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by mantisman51
http:///forum/post/3159817
Ah, the voice of medical facism. You vill take ze shot und you vill not upset the social orders. Since the flu kills far more than the three mentioned, do we jail all those who contract it? Oh, and how about all those MD's and phd's who say the danger of vaccinations outweigh the benefit? I guess to the gulag with them, as well? I mean after all their dissension is endangering public health and order, right? Oh hey, what about the pharmaceutical companies that have been proven to have killed people with their bad vaccinations? Oh yeah, their protected by Federal law. Their victims, er patients, got what they deserved, right?
What is an interesting question, is where is the line between privacy, and harming other's when it comes to mandating vaccinations.
Most conservatives will accept the premise that constitutionally the government's job is to ensure that you have the ability to do what you want as long as it doesn't harm a fellow citizen (it is a concept thoroughly explored by Tocqueville.)
If you are not vaccinated for easily communicable diseases, then you infect other's then that would be harming another person, albeit inadvertently.
(this is my completely serious no salacious or tweeking comment included.) And a great argument coming from a right wing point of view for government mandating vaccinations.
http:///forum/post/3159817
Ah, the voice of medical facism. You vill take ze shot und you vill not upset the social orders. Since the flu kills far more than the three mentioned, do we jail all those who contract it? Oh, and how about all those MD's and phd's who say the danger of vaccinations outweigh the benefit? I guess to the gulag with them, as well? I mean after all their dissension is endangering public health and order, right? Oh hey, what about the pharmaceutical companies that have been proven to have killed people with their bad vaccinations? Oh yeah, their protected by Federal law. Their victims, er patients, got what they deserved, right?
What is an interesting question, is where is the line between privacy, and harming other's when it comes to mandating vaccinations.
Most conservatives will accept the premise that constitutionally the government's job is to ensure that you have the ability to do what you want as long as it doesn't harm a fellow citizen (it is a concept thoroughly explored by Tocqueville.)
If you are not vaccinated for easily communicable diseases, then you infect other's then that would be harming another person, albeit inadvertently.
(this is my completely serious no salacious or tweeking comment included.) And a great argument coming from a right wing point of view for government mandating vaccinations.
geridoc
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure how this became a left-right issue. In earlier times, mainly prior to the emergence of HIV/AIDS, there wasn't much of a question that the government had the right (duty?) to isolate infectious individuals. This was routine for tuberculosis, typhoid, even measles. This was at a time when there were no treatments for these diseases, but things have changed. Again - will the measles vaccine harm some recipients? Sure, but in unimmunized populations elsewhere there are several hundred thousand measles-related deaths, mostly in children under age 5. Deaths from measles are extraordinarily rare in the United States because we have all (or almost all) agreed that the risk of harm to a small number of children is less than the risk of death to thousands of children if they are not immunized.
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by GeriDoc
http:///forum/post/3159995
I'm not sure how this became a left-right issue. In earlier times, mainly prior to the emergence of HIV/AIDS, there wasn't much of a question that the government had the right (duty?) to isolate infectious individuals. This was routine for tuberculosis, typhoid, even measles. This was at a time when there were no treatments for these diseases, but things have changed. Again - will the measles vaccine harm some recipients? Sure, but in unimmunized populations elsewhere there are several hundred thousand measles-related deaths, mostly in children under age 5. Deaths from measles are extraordinarily rare in the United States because we have all (or almost all) agreed that the risk of harm to a small number of children is less than the risk of death to thousands of children if they are not immunized.
The problem is when you get a buncha people dying from complications of a vaccine. Like they had in the 60's or 70's.
http:///forum/post/3159995
I'm not sure how this became a left-right issue. In earlier times, mainly prior to the emergence of HIV/AIDS, there wasn't much of a question that the government had the right (duty?) to isolate infectious individuals. This was routine for tuberculosis, typhoid, even measles. This was at a time when there were no treatments for these diseases, but things have changed. Again - will the measles vaccine harm some recipients? Sure, but in unimmunized populations elsewhere there are several hundred thousand measles-related deaths, mostly in children under age 5. Deaths from measles are extraordinarily rare in the United States because we have all (or almost all) agreed that the risk of harm to a small number of children is less than the risk of death to thousands of children if they are not immunized.
The problem is when you get a buncha people dying from complications of a vaccine. Like they had in the 60's or 70's.
geridoc
Well-Known Member
BTW, the Lone Star State, which has earned a reputation for independence in thought and action has had this for many years. It turns out that you can tie down and immunize children in some states, but not, apparently, in Massachusetts (at least not according to anything I found in the proposed modification to the Mass. public health law that started this thread). Like I said, and it isn't a right vs. left thing - public health is a legitimate governmental function.
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by GeriDoc
http:///forum/post/3160025
BTW, the Lone Star State, which has earned a reputation for independence in thought and action has had this for many years. It turns out that you can tie down and immunize children in some states, but not, apparently, in Massachusetts (at least not according to anything I found in the proposed modification to the Mass. public health law that started this thread). Like I said, and it isn't a right vs. left thing - public health is a legitimate governmental function.
Out of fairness, Texas was a democrat state till basically W. Albeit in Texas McCain would be a democrat.
But I don't think you'll get that argument from me. What I'll argue is where is the line.
When we have a seasonal flu that kills what tens of thousands. And we are flipping out about something that has killed what 100 people? I'll argue that too.
http:///forum/post/3160025
BTW, the Lone Star State, which has earned a reputation for independence in thought and action has had this for many years. It turns out that you can tie down and immunize children in some states, but not, apparently, in Massachusetts (at least not according to anything I found in the proposed modification to the Mass. public health law that started this thread). Like I said, and it isn't a right vs. left thing - public health is a legitimate governmental function.
Out of fairness, Texas was a democrat state till basically W. Albeit in Texas McCain would be a democrat.
But I don't think you'll get that argument from me. What I'll argue is where is the line.
When we have a seasonal flu that kills what tens of thousands. And we are flipping out about something that has killed what 100 people? I'll argue that too.
geridoc
Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3160034
Out of fairness, Texas was a democrat state till basically W. Albeit in Texas McCain would be a democrat.
But I don't think you'll get that argument from me. What I'll argue is where is the line.
When we have a seasonal flu that kills what tens of thousands. And we are flipping out about something that has killed what 100 people? I'll argue that too.
We shouldn't flip out about h1n1, but we should voluntarily take the vaccine if we are in a high risk group. Neither Texas nor Massachusetts has mandated vaccination (NY has, but for health care workers only). I only argue that government needs to have the tools available to respond to a true public health emergency. I'm not sure about TX, but in Mass the governor can declare an exigent public health emergency, but eventually it has to be reviewed by a superior court.
I think the NY solution is not necessarily the best - I wouldn't go to a physician or health care worker who has not been immunized against h1n1. If enough people took that approach you wouldn't need to require immunization - the economic pressures would be sufficient.
http:///forum/post/3160034
Out of fairness, Texas was a democrat state till basically W. Albeit in Texas McCain would be a democrat.
But I don't think you'll get that argument from me. What I'll argue is where is the line.
When we have a seasonal flu that kills what tens of thousands. And we are flipping out about something that has killed what 100 people? I'll argue that too.
We shouldn't flip out about h1n1, but we should voluntarily take the vaccine if we are in a high risk group. Neither Texas nor Massachusetts has mandated vaccination (NY has, but for health care workers only). I only argue that government needs to have the tools available to respond to a true public health emergency. I'm not sure about TX, but in Mass the governor can declare an exigent public health emergency, but eventually it has to be reviewed by a superior court.
I think the NY solution is not necessarily the best - I wouldn't go to a physician or health care worker who has not been immunized against h1n1. If enough people took that approach you wouldn't need to require immunization - the economic pressures would be sufficient.
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by GeriDoc
http:///forum/post/3160041
We shouldn't flip out about h1n1, but we should voluntarily take the vaccine if we are in a high risk group. Neither Texas nor Massachusetts has mandated vaccination (NY has, but for health care workers only). I only argue that government needs to have the tools available to respond to a true public health emergency. I'm not sure about TX, but in Mass the governor can declare an exigent public health emergency, but eventually it has to be reviewed by a superior court.
I think the NY solution is not necessarily the best - I wouldn't go to a physician or health care worker who has not been immunized against h1n1. If enough people took that approach you wouldn't need to require immunization - the economic pressures would be sufficient.
There is plenty of precedent for suspension of civil liberties in times of war, or major duress. But imo even though it may be needed, people need to raise hell about it, to ensure it is ONLY done in the most EXTREEM of circumstances.
http:///forum/post/3160041
We shouldn't flip out about h1n1, but we should voluntarily take the vaccine if we are in a high risk group. Neither Texas nor Massachusetts has mandated vaccination (NY has, but for health care workers only). I only argue that government needs to have the tools available to respond to a true public health emergency. I'm not sure about TX, but in Mass the governor can declare an exigent public health emergency, but eventually it has to be reviewed by a superior court.
I think the NY solution is not necessarily the best - I wouldn't go to a physician or health care worker who has not been immunized against h1n1. If enough people took that approach you wouldn't need to require immunization - the economic pressures would be sufficient.
There is plenty of precedent for suspension of civil liberties in times of war, or major duress. But imo even though it may be needed, people need to raise hell about it, to ensure it is ONLY done in the most EXTREEM of circumstances.
geridoc
Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3160052
There is plenty of precedent for suspension of civil liberties in times of war, or major duress. But imo even though it may be needed, people need to raise hell about it, to ensure it is ONLY done in the most EXTREEM of circumstances.
Can't argue with that! The only difficulty is that the political extremes at both ends of the spectrum tend to think that mundane things constitute suspension of civil liberties, as they define them. But that's just noise in the system, imo.
http:///forum/post/3160052
There is plenty of precedent for suspension of civil liberties in times of war, or major duress. But imo even though it may be needed, people need to raise hell about it, to ensure it is ONLY done in the most EXTREEM of circumstances.
Can't argue with that! The only difficulty is that the political extremes at both ends of the spectrum tend to think that mundane things constitute suspension of civil liberties, as they define them. But that's just noise in the system, imo.
Originally Posted by mantisman51
http:///forum/post/3159817
Ah, the voice of medical facism. You vill take ze shot und you vill not upset the social orders. Since the flu kills far more than the three mentioned, do we jail all those who contract it? Oh, and how about all those MD's and phd's who say the danger of vaccinations outweigh the benefit? I guess to the gulag with them, as well? I mean after all their dissension is endangering public health and order, right? Oh hey, what about the pharmaceutical companies that have been proven to have killed people with their bad vaccinations? Oh yeah, their protected by Federal law. Their victims, er patients, got what they deserved, right?
Great, can't wait to see what happens if your unvaccinated child infects a child that is too young to receive the vaccination... And you get charged with reckless endangerment or murder if that infected child dies from an illness that they only contracted because they were in contact with your unvaccinated kid.
http:///forum/post/3159817
Ah, the voice of medical facism. You vill take ze shot und you vill not upset the social orders. Since the flu kills far more than the three mentioned, do we jail all those who contract it? Oh, and how about all those MD's and phd's who say the danger of vaccinations outweigh the benefit? I guess to the gulag with them, as well? I mean after all their dissension is endangering public health and order, right? Oh hey, what about the pharmaceutical companies that have been proven to have killed people with their bad vaccinations? Oh yeah, their protected by Federal law. Their victims, er patients, got what they deserved, right?
Great, can't wait to see what happens if your unvaccinated child infects a child that is too young to receive the vaccination... And you get charged with reckless endangerment or murder if that infected child dies from an illness that they only contracted because they were in contact with your unvaccinated kid.
cranberry
Active Member
I will be ticked if they mandate I get the vaccine. I am a nurse. I work in a hospital. That doesn't make me society's guinea pig. I should have the same right to refuse.
I am the cleanest kid on the block... it's the snotty nosed 10 year old down the street you have to worry about.
People with the flu don't inoculate us, we inoculate ourselves by not washing our hands before touching portals of entry. I worked with someone in close quarters for 12 hours who had swine flu. I did not get it. Now, if someone coughs or sneezes just as you suck in a breath, or it lands on your eyeballs, of course that's unavoidable for the receiver. But no nurse in my unit would be caught dead doing that.... now that 10 year old I was talking about, that's another story.
I am the cleanest kid on the block... it's the snotty nosed 10 year old down the street you have to worry about.
People with the flu don't inoculate us, we inoculate ourselves by not washing our hands before touching portals of entry. I worked with someone in close quarters for 12 hours who had swine flu. I did not get it. Now, if someone coughs or sneezes just as you suck in a breath, or it lands on your eyeballs, of course that's unavoidable for the receiver. But no nurse in my unit would be caught dead doing that.... now that 10 year old I was talking about, that's another story.
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by GeriDoc
http:///forum/post/3160076
Can't argue with that! The only difficulty is that the political extremes at both ends of the spectrum tend to think that mundane things constitute suspension of civil liberties, as they define them. But that's just noise in the system, imo.
well, to some, mandating something that could result in paralysis, death, or other incurable ailment. won't be mundane to the handful of people who do experience those side effects.
http:///forum/post/3160076
Can't argue with that! The only difficulty is that the political extremes at both ends of the spectrum tend to think that mundane things constitute suspension of civil liberties, as they define them. But that's just noise in the system, imo.
well, to some, mandating something that could result in paralysis, death, or other incurable ailment. won't be mundane to the handful of people who do experience those side effects.
geridoc
Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3160138
well, to some, mandating something that could result in paralysis, death, or other incurable ailment. won't be mundane to the handful of people who do experience those side effects.
Of course, that's the problem with all medical statistics. I had coronary bypass 5 years ago - a very risky procedure, but less risky than waiting for my coronary arteries to completely close and kill me. However, I would have been poed if I was one of the small percentage who died on the table. If it kills you it is bad, regardless of the statistics.
http:///forum/post/3160138
well, to some, mandating something that could result in paralysis, death, or other incurable ailment. won't be mundane to the handful of people who do experience those side effects.
Of course, that's the problem with all medical statistics. I had coronary bypass 5 years ago - a very risky procedure, but less risky than waiting for my coronary arteries to completely close and kill me. However, I would have been poed if I was one of the small percentage who died on the table. If it kills you it is bad, regardless of the statistics.
cranberry
Active Member
It seems they are going to label us here at work... somehow visually identify who has gotten it and who hasn't. I don't know the full details yet.... figure it must involve a big red "A" being worn on the front of my scrubs. Maybe they'll parade us down the hallways of the hospital pounding on a big ole drum.
nina&noah
Member
Originally Posted by mantisman51
http:///forum/post/3159747
I didn't immunize my children and they have been far healthier than the other children at their schools(Idaho/Arizona). They don't have allergies. They don't/haven't had asthma. They have had measles, mumps and chicken pocks, but so did all our friends children who WERE vaccinated and their children were far more sick, far longer. Besides, since vaccinations are the medical wonder that they are, everyone else's children are perfectly safe, right? My children have never been hospitalized and never needed it. Never had to run them to the ER every other month. I guess we got REAL lucky. According the the AMA and pharmaceutical companies, they are statistically dead.
Oh how I wish I had seen this thread earlier!!!! I support you and want you to know that you are not alone. There is PLENTY of scientific research to back up both sides of this arguement. The problem is the pharmaceutical companies are obviously going to make sure that what we hear is pro-vaccine. We as parents have to make the decision for our children. My son has received some vaccines, but will not receive the MMR, varicella (chicken pox), or any of the flu shots. I did however choose to provide my son with the best immunity possible by nursing him until he self-weaned at 14 months. People who say that we are wrong for not vaccinating our children simply has not done the research that we have done.
As for the arguement that our children will make other children sick. I've never gotten that one. If your child is vaccinated then what do you care? How is my child going to give yours the measles if your precious vaccine is so effective?
http:///forum/post/3159747
I didn't immunize my children and they have been far healthier than the other children at their schools(Idaho/Arizona). They don't have allergies. They don't/haven't had asthma. They have had measles, mumps and chicken pocks, but so did all our friends children who WERE vaccinated and their children were far more sick, far longer. Besides, since vaccinations are the medical wonder that they are, everyone else's children are perfectly safe, right? My children have never been hospitalized and never needed it. Never had to run them to the ER every other month. I guess we got REAL lucky. According the the AMA and pharmaceutical companies, they are statistically dead.
Oh how I wish I had seen this thread earlier!!!! I support you and want you to know that you are not alone. There is PLENTY of scientific research to back up both sides of this arguement. The problem is the pharmaceutical companies are obviously going to make sure that what we hear is pro-vaccine. We as parents have to make the decision for our children. My son has received some vaccines, but will not receive the MMR, varicella (chicken pox), or any of the flu shots. I did however choose to provide my son with the best immunity possible by nursing him until he self-weaned at 14 months. People who say that we are wrong for not vaccinating our children simply has not done the research that we have done.
As for the arguement that our children will make other children sick. I've never gotten that one. If your child is vaccinated then what do you care? How is my child going to give yours the measles if your precious vaccine is so effective?