One of my friends went to Poland without proper vaccinations and brought back pulmonary tuberculosis. It infected half the school.

I was sitting right next to her. I was fine. Woo for vaccination.

I don't expect this to alter the argument, but just because there's a policy it doesn't mean people always follow it. Even well-intentioned people can fall through the administrative cracks.

I'm not fear mongering. Everything I have said has already happened and is happening now. And people do go abroad without their recommended inoculations, most of which are for specific tropical diseases and not the basic childhood set. I know they do, because most of the outbreaks I read about are exactly that.

That a policy might exist in a fascist society does itself make that policy fascist or bad. I expect motoring speed limits would be implemented in a fascist society as well, viciously trampling on our rights to use our own property as we see fit for no good reason. Other than for the protection of ourselves and others.

And any human right that actually harms humanity instead of actually protecting it is not worth the page it is written on. As it is, it appears to be the other way around. From the Convention on the Rights of the Child:

And in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

I've never had a vaccination.

Depends on the sort of vaccination. I'm not having myself injected with something that was developed in a lab less than a year ago and I downright refused to get the vaccination against the swine flu a few years back.

Speaking of which: http://www.vancouversun.com/health/V...609/story.html

Leaving aside the fact that it was uneccessary because swine flu wasn't actually that dangerous to a healthy, non-pregnant adult, why did you refuse it? It was no different to any other flu vaccine.

Because like with all flu shots, they are made without being properly tested, especially the swine flu ones that had to be rushed everywhere because of the proclaimed pandemic. Long term effects are unknown, stuff like that. For all you know people could start dropping dead in a few years because of that.

Medication is a good thing, but only when it has been proven to work without side effects over a lot of years. And even then I try to be as independent on medication as I possibly can be. I tend to have faith in my immune system.

In the end I do believe I got that flu during my vacation to Las Vegas because I was horribly sick when I got home and even passed out at some point. But I'll take that above taking an untested drug any day.

Oh, you absolutely are fear mongering. You start by making the problem sound more wide spread than it is. Acting like there are tens of thousands of people in each individual country that refuse to have their children or themselves vaccinated simply out of ignorance. And then you started trotting out doomsday scenarios. "The science is in!" What fucking science? The science that says that diseases are bad? Wow. Holy shit, genius. Diseases are bad. Who would of thunk of it. So let's replace a biological disease with a societal disease. Let's replace it with fascism. And don't give me your faggotry about how it doesn't make the policy fascist just because fascists would institute it. Okay, if fascists instituted a law stating that you can't set people on fire it would certainly not make the law a "fascist" law. But the law you want instituted is the kind of law that would only be instituted by a fascist state.

You are saying that personal freedom must be given up for the betterment of the state. We don't have the right to keep ourselves, or our children from receiving injections that may harm them because to do so would harm the biological health of the state. But why stop there? Why stop with biological health? The Jews are harming the economic health of the state by controlling all the banks, and driving us, the good indigenous people into financial ruin. This is what I'm told by some of our greatest minds, and most eloquent speakers. Let's purge them for the good of the state. Oh, and we as people need more land if we are going to thrive. Let's fucking take it.

Slippery slope arguments are bullshit, but what you are talking about skips the slope, and dives directly into authoritarian fascism. I won't have it. I'd rather get typhoid. I'd also rather you get typhoid.

I do. I haven't managed to be persuaded otherwise yet.

Remember: I'm pro-choice and pro-responsibility. That's my point here.

On the foetus point, I like BM's idea that it is down to the woman. But there's still the debate you could have where the woman could terminate the baby until the umbilical cord is detached. I thin that for perhaps the last ten weeks before pregnancy or something, the baby is developed enough to be classed as a baby, not a foetus. That being said my understanding of birth and related human biology is limited and if someone can provide substantial evidence for or against I would take it on board.

On the inoculation subject, unless you have an allergic reaction to the drug, you should have to be vaccinated, you are putting yourself, your child and others that aren't vaccinated at risk. I think BM said earlier that diseases that were almost extinct 20 yeats ago are rampaging once again because the vaccinated population is decreasing or at least plateauing. That's just stupid for a first world country.

But there's no abortion argument here. I was simply stating that responsibility doesn't exist without choice and advancement doesn't exist without responsibility.

For the record I agree with oanst's solution to all this. His suggestion of forcing people that havent been vaccinated out from social activities, keeping the personal rights intact while also giving people a choice, is a lot more humane.

No matter how little risk vaccines pose, if they pose a risk, forcing people to take them is horrible. It literally means that you are ok with a small percentage of people getting sick or possibly worse from vaccines for the greater good. And that train of thought is scary.

But what do I know. I'm not a scientist...


And I don't advocate refusal of vaccines either, but I also don't think people should be forced into them.

I guess you could make vaccination a mandatory part of national healthcare. People would be pretty eager to get their shots if you couldn't get into a hospital without one. Obviously A&E would be an exception, but since the risk of transmission in hospitals is massive it seems sensible enough.

Vaccinations don't give you autism.

This also seems fair to me. People need to be given incentive to comply with the norm. Also, the idea I put forward earlier about not allowing children into public schools with out vaccines is not really a hypothetical. In America you cannot attend school with out showing that you have received certain shots. They just won't let you attend.

No, they don't; you were born like that.

Seriously, though. A lot of people don't give their kids vaccinations because they think it gives you autism, it doesn't.

The science is in!

Actually some inoculations have shown to correlate to autism levels where parents have given them to their children too early. My mother works with children with special needs and attends quite a number of courses, I think she was taught this if I remember correctly.

The science is out!

Yes, that's why people think it gives them autism. It's bollocks. You know why?
Because when the vaccines are due, I think it's like 6 or 7 or something, that's the same age autism starts to show, you can't tell when they're younger than that if they have autism.

Because it only shows when they've had vaccines, people think it's the vaccines. It isn't they were already like, that, you just can't spot it until that age.

The science is fun!

The science is back in!

There is too much science in this thread, I say its my divine right to refuse vaccinations.

Did you know, they supposedly give you autism?

My horrible half sister has some stupid ignorant problem with getting vaccinated/innoculated. I need to add "Virulent sack of chunky disease ooze" to the list of things I'm going to say to her next time we meet.

I get my shots every year. They used to make me a little sick for a day or two, but I don't any more and avoiding them isn't worth the risk.

I finally took a time to actually read the whole thread... and I feel good with the fact I said I agree with BM. Most of his points overlaps with the one I made a 'while ago'.

I don't really think that's even possible to just keep them out like that...




I feel offended

Most of that doesn't even count as an argument, so I will ignore it.

Also, I'm inoculated.

I'm not interested in the "health of the state," I'm interested in the health of people. People people people people! You know, those entities that catch diseases, suffer and occasionally die? The state could not interest me less. I care about people. I want to save as many as possible.

The fact is that people aren't afraid of these diseases enough, so perhaps a little fear mongering is fucking well due. They are killers. Prior to vaccination they killed millions, and they are killing again. Fortunately medicine is better and the death rates are lower that they were. But one preventable death is too many.

The science I am talking about is the science of vaccination efficacy and immunity and the absolute necessity that as many people are vaccinated as medically possible. Tens of thousands of people not vaccinated? That is exactly right. If anything it is an underestimate.

Okay, I had thought that this was painfully obvious to everyone. I had thought that the frequency of which it shows up in the news would have made it common knowledge to everyone. That's on me.

Increase in preventable diseases linked to refused vaccinations.

More.

Vaccine-preventable diseases are on the rise.

Where we went wrong.

Childhood diseases making a comeback.

Whooping cough on the rise. This is the referenced paper

Graph of Pertussis cases in Washington 2011 compared to 2012 so far.

http://mylocalhealthguide.com/wp-con...ph-600x442.jpg

Yeah, you just keep saying the same shit over, and over again which prompts me to repeat the same shit over and over again. Bottom line: You can't legally force me, or anyone else, to be vaccinated. You can try to change that, but I think your luck will not be in.

And the state is the people. Don't be obtuse.

Edit: Are there tens of thousands of people who aren't vaccinated? Yes. Absolutely. My objection is your couching this like there are tens of thousands who are refusing vaccinations out of ignorance. Most of those who haven't been vaccinated do so because of inadequate access to health care, and information. Let's concentrate on solving that problem maybe.

I agree with that.

Not as offended as I am by Poland.

Don't be silly. Flu shots are a proved, tested vaccine. The changes in the vaccine from year to year are so minor that they don't need to be re-tested; nothing has been added that can possibly be harmful.

Uhhh... Babies have survived (albeit physically disabled) after 22 weeks of pregnancy (that's with 18 weeks left to go). Most western countries do not allow abortions after 20-24 weeks. I personally think that those timelines are far too late, but I don't pretend to be an expert on the issue.



Yes, vaccines have a miniscule risk. Not of autism, because that's bunk, but of allergic reaction. And generally parents are encouraged to keep their kids in the doctor's office for a little while after the first vaccinations, so that if there's any reaction the doctor can deal with it.

Now, take in to account the risk of not having the vaccines. Even taking in to account herd immunity, the probabilities of contracting whooping cough or mumps are far higher than the probability of a negative effect from the vaccine. And the effects of contracting those diseases are far, far worse than the (actual and fictional) reactions to the vaccine.

Proof? I have only ever heard of one study that linked vaccinations to autism, and that has been roundly debunked.

Basically, there were some shitty parents who (wrongly) blamed their negligence for their kid's development of autism. So they hired a medical lawyer to forge some test results so it looked like the vaccinations did it.

I know.. but my point wasn't that people should avoid vaccines because they pose a tiny risks. Like I said, I don't advocate avoiding them, because the risks ARE small.
But I also feel that forcing a vaccine into someone is disgustingly immoral. If everything was done like that, because it's better on a wider scale... The world would be a very scary place and I would want no part of it.
It's better to just encourage people through means other than forcing them. There are plenty of studies done on how to motivate people to do things, and it's a lot better than holding down people and forcing a needle into them. It's just inhumane.
But let me just repeat again: I don't advocate avoiding vaccines! x_x Just because I don't want people to be forced into them, it doesn't mean I'm against them.

I pretty much feel the same as you. I've avoided posting my opinions on vaccinations thus far, because I've struggled to work out how to express them in the context of this discussion.

This is going to sounds a bit dithery, but here goes: I feel as strongly as BM that vaccinations are vital and that not vaccinating children is tantamount to child abuse. I agree with OANST (but not quite as strongly) that forcing someone to have a vaccination against their will is wrong. What's the answer? Fucked if I know!

My guess to the answer is to make it extremely inconvenient for people not to be vaccinated(as oanst suggested too). Also to educate people on social responsibility. There's nothing worse than seeing a guy with a flu in public(ok maybe a few things but still). I mean fuck him if he wants to risk his own health. but the flu is potentially deadly, and going out in public when sick, you could potentially kill others by spreading the disease.
But that has nothing to do with vaccines. It's to do with being a sensible person.

At least that's my take on the whole thing.

And going back to the OP, the problem with the story that BM linked to is that the doctor is a real dick. Much worse than the mother, who is just ignorant. Calm and non-threatening explanations would get through to almost all worried parents.

The problem with that story was that it was satire.

The problem with this thread is that OANST has been arguing about it on a literal level. And you've been responding to him on that literal level.

At first I thought that was a really good point until I remembered that my original argument was that it was a shitty article written by a smarmy asshole, and that I was completely shocked when BM started arguing about it on a literal level.

Yeah, I think I had my argument the wrong way around actually. I have a hard time remembering things sometimes. My bad.