Anti-vaxxers

snowflaker

http://www.thejournal.ie/hpv-vaccine-ireland-regret-gardasil-facts-2970847-Dec2016/?utm_source=shortlink

One eyed Jack

Discodog wrote: »

No. Children should only be subjected to the religion of their parents when they are old enough to understand it & the counter argument.

This attitude is one of the reasons why parents will choose not to vaccinate their children, because they are suspicious of anyone who would try and undermine their parental authority with regard to their choices for their own children.

There are also parents who aren't in any way religious, don't subscribe to homeopathy, etc, and you could put mountains of evidence in front of them regarding the safety of vaccines, and try to shame them into vaccinating their children, and try to guilt trip them by telling their decisions regarding their own children are putting other children at risk, but none of it will make a blind bit of difference because their first and foremost priority is their own children.

I'm glad the law doesn't force parents to vaccinate their children in this country, and I don't believe that forcing parents to vaccinate their children will lead to any benefit for society, but rather create even more of a backlash and mistrust against what they see as an authoritarian State. They will of course pass this attitude on to their unvaccinated children.

In order to rectify this, then rather than dismissing their concerns, they need to be taken seriously, if there is ever to be any hope of building the trust required to encourage these parents to allow their children to be vaccinated.

mariaalice

One eyed Jack wrote: »

This attitude is one of the reasons why parents will choose not to vaccinate their children, because they are suspicious of anyone who would try and undermine their parental authority with regard to their choices for their own children.

There are also parents who aren't in any way religious, don't subscribe to homeopathy, etc, and you could put mountains of evidence in front of them regarding the safety of vaccines, and try to shame them into vaccinating their children, and try to guilt trip them by telling their decisions regarding their own children are putting other children at risk, but none of it will make a blind bit of difference because their first and foremost priority is their own children.

I'm glad the law doesn't force parents to vaccinate their children in this country, and I don't believe that forcing parents to vaccinate their children will lead to any benefit for society, but rather create even more of a backlash and mistrust against what they see as an authoritarian State. They will of course pass this attitude on to their unvaccinated children.

In order to rectify this, then rather than dismissing their concerns, they need to be taken seriously, if there is ever to be any hope of building the trust required to encourage these parents to allow their children to be vaccinated.

I don't think prosecuting parents for non vaccination is a good idea however prosecuting parents for any harm they cause because of their actions for example not taking a child to a doctor and deciding to treat with 'natural' medicine then the child dies they absolutely need to be prosecuted.

Also the attitude of its my child can be a controlling personality masquerading as concern for the child ( not in all cases )

One eyed Jack

mariaalice wrote: »

I don't think prosecuting parents for non vaccination is a good idea however prosecuting parents for any harm they cause because of their actions for example not taking a child to a doctor and deciding to treat with 'natural' medicine then the child dies they absolutist need to be prosecuted.

Parents can already be charged with child neglect, but they're given a fairly broad scope with regard to their children's welfare. I think it would depend upon the circumstances of each individual case as to whether the DPP would consider a prosecution would be in the public interest or not.

Also the attitude of its my child can be a controlling personality masquerading as concern for the child ( not in all cases )

Absolutely, as can the idea of forcing a parent to vaccinate their children against their wishes be a sign of a controlling personality masquerading as concern for the welfare of the child. Once someone decides that they know better for someone else's children, it's an attempt to enforce their will on someone else with no regard for the potential consequences of their actions such as the potential effects on the child of forcing their parents to act in a way that they didn't believe was in their children's best interests.

gar32

http://nypost.com/2015/08/31/anti-abortion-mom-wins-right-to-not-vaccinate-her-autistic-son/

Ah sure do the church in Ireland know about this? Right to life HHHMMM

“The vaccine manufacturers’ use of aborted fetal cells in its products and research means that I cannot associate with them or support them financially (by buying their products), for such support would make me complicit to their sin and answerable to God for this violation,” she said.

gar32

Samaris wrote: »

Grando, since you seem to take any medical scandal as being proof that they're all up to something, I assume you never take any sort of medication yourself.

If you do, then that above is a complete red herring.

Of course there have been dodgy medical practitioners and dodgy studies. These are major scandals when they break. There have been dodgy practitioners in every area of science, healthcare, religion and any other area of human practice.

However, the stuff you're talking about isn't amongst them. Because these have been widely tested and proven safe. Okay, just to narrow things down a bit, please give a list of which vaccines you reckon are dangerous, why, and what they treat.

I'm fed up with this generalised "vaccines are bad" "vaccines are good" malarky. Let's work with some actual details now please, because we could keep this going in circles forever.

Good vaccine is Measles without the the MR.

Also Diphtheria & Tetanus without the P.

Polio if it is not wiped out in the next 2 years Maybe.

Mumps on its own for boys only before puberty not as babies.

All the rest should be only used as needed which should be in rare cases.

pitifulgod

gar32 wrote: »

http://nypost.com/2015/08/31/anti-abortion-mom-wins-right-to-not-vaccinate-her-autistic-son/

Ah sure do the church in Ireland know about this? Right to life HHHMMM

“The vaccine manufacturers’ use of aborted fetal cells in its products and research means that I cannot associate with them or support them financially (by buying their products), for such support would make me complicit to their sin and answerable to God for this violation,” she said.

You're grabbing onto absolutely any position to justify your opposition to vaccines. You still seem to be incapable of given a coherent scientific reason that hpv vaccine is bad or the mmr vaccine.

gar32 wrote: »

Good vaccine is Measles without the the MR.

Also Diphtheria & Tetanus without the P.

Polio if it is not wiped out in the next 2 years Maybe.

Mumps on its own for boys only before puberty not as babies.

All the rest should be only used as needed which should be in rare cases.

MMR is incredibly safe and claiming otherwise is a pretty sure fire sign of a conspiracy theorist tbh...Do you believe it causes autism too?

ancapailldorcha

gar32 wrote: »

Good vaccine is Measles without the the MR.

Also Diphtheria & Tetanus without the P.

Polio if it is not wiped out in the next 2 years Maybe.

Mumps on its own for boys only before puberty not as babies.

All the rest should be only used as needed which should be in rare cases.

And what is this based on?

um7y1h83ge06nx

I thought the whole MMR thing has been absolutely done to death now at this stage by media etc etc.

njs030

gar32 wrote: »

Good vaccine is Measles without the the MR.

Also Diphtheria & Tetanus without the P.

Polio if it is not wiped out in the next 2 years Maybe.

Mumps on its own for boys only before puberty not as babies.

All the rest should be only used as needed which should be in rare cases.

How would we know when it's needed?
You realise these illnesses are rare because of vaccines right??

I'm always interested in other people's opinions and points of view but I really don't understand what yours is.

Guy:Incognito

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/mcgrath-performs-u-turn-over-opposition-to-hpv-vaccine-1.3207990

Jawgap

gar32 wrote: »

Good vaccine is Measles without the the MR.

Also Diphtheria & Tetanus without the P.

Polio if it is not wiped out in the next 2 years Maybe.

Mumps on its own for boys only before puberty not as babies.

All the rest should be only used as needed which should be in rare cases.

you understand that certain diseases are only 'rare cases' because of vaccination? And that it's almost a certainty they'll come back if we stop vaccinating and compromise herd immunity?

And btw, mumps is inflammatory......it doesn't just cause issues for boys and swollen testicles, it can lead to meningitis and in girls it can lead to inflamed ovaries (the risk is less compared to boys and their testicles)......pancreatitis, encephalitis and deafness are also caused by it.

Interested Observer

Karla Future Whirlwind wrote: »

I thought the whole MMR thing has been absolutely done to death now at this stage by media etc etc.

You're right. There is NO link between MMR and autism and there never has been. Anyone who still believes it is a dangerous idiot.

endacl

Karla Future Whirlwind wrote: »

I thought the whole MMR thing has been absolutely done to death now at this stage by media etc etc.

Unfortunately there's no vaccine for stupid.

McCrack

Samaris wrote: »

May not be the case at the moment, as there's a worldwide shortage of it at the moment (I know as I'm supposed to get the dratted thing and it's like gold dust).

Bear in mind also that the -first- dose is given within 24hrs of birth. There are two more doses, spread apart by several months. (Overall point taken, mind you.)

Twinnrix (hep a &b) is freely available in Ireland

Samaris

gar32 wrote: »

Good vaccine is Measles without the the MR.

Also Diphtheria & Tetanus without the P.

Polio if it is not wiped out in the next 2 years Maybe.

Mumps on its own for boys only before puberty not as babies.

All the rest should be only used as needed which should be in rare cases.

Okay, why those? Why is pertussis not worth it (it's worth looking up what whooping cough can actually do, despite the innocuous sounding name). Why not rubella (again, look up what contact with rubella can do to a pregnant woman's foetus).

How do you know what will be "at need"? Bear in mind that once an epidemic starts, it is too late.

McCrack wrote: »

Twinnrix (hep a &b) is freely available in Ireland

Huh, well, the GP's not been able to get any (there's a group that needs it) for about six months now.

McCrack

If the gp doesn't have it they can make a referral to any GUM clinic.

knipex

mountai wrote: »

Can You answer why the Pil is not included? Thought not.

Have you read the Pil for every single medicine you or you children have ever taken ??


I know a little about infection and infectious disease. I know a little about vaccine manufacture, I know a little about chemistry.

However I do not have an MD or an infections disease specialty. I am not a microbiologist or virologist, neither am I a chemist or drug researcher.

However I do know multiple Infectious disease doctors, microbiologists, (fewer) virologists, epidemiologists, pediatricians and MD's. I know a few drug researchers and quite a number of chemists involved in drug and vaccine research and manufacture.. People who have kids of their own, people with years of education and experience in their fields, people I trust.

Every single one of them, without exception, is vaccinated and vaccinates their kids..

I know a number of anti vaccination or anti selected vaccination or even as one describes herself "pro informed consent" activists..

I even arranged for the "pro informed consent" activist to meet with a well respected retired infectious disease physician and a drug researcher who went out of their way to a answer here questions .. After two hours she stormed off as they were "confusing" her.. She asked questions and received answers but because she didn't understand the answers or the research it was a valid enough reason to not vaccinate here kids..

She wants simple soundbites, absolutes. Which is easy for the anti crowd to supply (in any argument) but not so in reality. There are no absolutes. ALL Drugs entail some element of risk. However with vaccines the level of risk is no tiny and the level of benefit so great that every government, every health authority every specialist, every doctor and in the case of HPV ever cancer researcher is pro vaccination..

knipex

gar32 wrote: »

I know people who have had bad reactions even death from a vaccine.

I call bullsh1t....

Make a claim like that and you have better be able to back it up.

gar32 wrote: »

If you want people to get the HPV vaccine then make it safer.

If your wondering why read about what happened in Japan, Denmark or Columbia.

I actually spoke to (by e-mail and phone) to an infections disease physician in Japan about this.. There is zero evidence of any link between the vaccine and adverse affects in Japan. It was very like whats currently happening in Ireland. a small number people making unsubstantiated claims, loads of ill informed rants and public outcry. Politicians jumping on a bandwagon and a political, Not medical, decision that is now being touted as proof internationally of the dangers of the HOV vaccine..

gar32 wrote: »

Of the 16 HPV vaccine randomized trials, only two used an inert saline placebo. Ten of the sixteen compared the HPV vaccine against a neurotoxic aluminum adjuvant, and four trials used an already-approved aluminum-containing vaccine as the comparison.

I think mrkiscool2 answered that far better than i could..

knipex

gar32 wrote: »

I am not anti vax I am pro safer vaccines.

I give up.

gar32 wrote: »

A family members 4 day old baby died after vaccine and the documents went missing. (Poland 18 years ago)

Was there any evidence of a link between the vaccine and the death of the child ???

Any..

I am not saying allergic reactions don't occur, they do, but they are rare, exceedingly so and tend to happen quickly. Death as a result of a vaccine is so rare as to be an event..

[/quote

gar32 wrote: »

After years of worry and reading about vaccines I know the danger just like I know about the sicknesses the mostly prevent.

As has been shown you don't.. you think you do but you don't.. Every argument you made has been proven false, every point you made rubbish..

But you refuse to accept you could be wrong..

So you continue to preach and spread fear, misinformation and nonsense that results in fewer kids begin vaccinated and kids dieing unnecessarily..

I hope you sleep well...

pjohnson

Anti vaxers will kill themselves off through either pseudo science or an inability to understand science. Self solving problem.

tigger123

pjohnson wrote: »

Anti vaxers will kill themselves off through either pseudo science or an inability to understand science. Self solving problem.

Its not just them it affects though, that's the problem. Its like saying a drunk driver will only kill themselves, so Iet them off.

One eyed Jack

pjohnson wrote: »

Anti vaxers will kill themselves off through either pseudo science or an inability to understand science. Self solving problem.

Statistically, how many anti-vaxxers have actually died from choosing not to vaccinate their children? I would suggest that the risk of their children dying is far greater than any risk to themselves. I don't think the problem actually does solve itself by your definition.

The real problem isn't their failure to understand science, it's a failure of people who are pro-vaccination to understand why people would choose not to vaccinate their children.

whoopsadoodles

pjohnson wrote: »

Anti vaxers will kill themselves off through either pseudo science or an inability to understand science. Self solving problem.

There are children who are so sick, whose immune system is so weakened that they can't receive vaccines. These children spend their lives fighting off infections and being the biggest heroes anyone could hope to meet. Those are the children that will die as a result of other people not vaccinating their children.

Pherekydes

endacl wrote: »

Unfortunately there's no vaccine for stupid.

Education?

Jawgap

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Statistically, how many anti-vaxxers have actually died from choosing not to vaccinate their children? I would suggest that the risk of their children dying is far greater than any risk to themselves. I don't think the problem actually does solve itself by your definition.

The real problem isn't their failure to understand science, it's a failure of people who are pro-vaccination to understand why people would choose not to vaccinate their children.

Unfortunately, the anti-vax arguments, as I see them, are all irrational and emotive, whereas the the pro-vaccination arguments are rooted in science.

People can relate to the story of the child who was vaccinated and fell ill in a way they'll never relate to stats......that's why the anti-vaxxers get traction.

If it was me, I'd counter their irrational, emotional rooted anecdotes with similar anecdotes told by people who were blinded by measles, lost kids to meningitis or survived cervical cancer. Maybe then they'd see some sense.

endacl

pjohnson wrote: »

Anti vaxers will kill themselves off through either pseudo science or an inability to understand science. Self solving problem.

No they won't. They're adults who have, by and large, benefitted from having been vaccinated. Their children are the ones in danger. And more poignantly, any other immuno-compromised children, whose parents would vaccinate, but can't.

Anti vaccination is an ignorant position to take. In every sense of that word.

endacl

Pherekydes wrote: »

Education?

Doesn't appear to be completely effective...

Richard Hillman

I always get suspicious when scientists tell you not to question science. Questioning stuff is what science is all about.

VinLieger

Richard Hillman wrote: »

I always get suspicious when scientists tell you not to question science. Questioning stuff is what science is all about.

Not the same at all, but keep continuing to try to justify people so ignorantly selfish they will put other peoples vulnerable children at risk