Incidence of measles, mumps and rubella all increase due to anti-vaccine campaign

lynski · 26-01-2014 3:09am

ballsymchugh wrote: »

go find the peer reviewed research before thinking horse**** like this. andrew wakefield was paid handsomely for his BOGUS research into this and has rightfully paid the price.
look at the measles epidemic that happened a couple of years ago in wales to see the damage he caused.

Paid by whom? who stood to gain from his research?

KnotABother · 26-01-2014 3:10am

lynski wrote: »

28064212 wrote: »

Name one, or stop making up ****

http://www.generationrescue.org/assets/Documents/Bailey-Banks-case.pdf
I only read that one but there are a few other court documents there on that site. I have alos heard of a case settled in Ireland but with a non-disclosure so not public.

Skip to page 27 or the finding:

All well and good saying MMR rarely cause a problem: when it does it is devastating, you want to be that one?

These cases are related more to the fact that any medication has side effects. People are allergic to penicillin etc but we still use it without saying "oh it kills kids and causes horrible rashes". You can be allergic to fabric conditioner but we all still use it.

zenno · 26-01-2014 3:10am

steddyeddy wrote: »

Making the choice no to vaccinate your child is not acceptable. Just like it's not acceptable to put your child in danger.

It's not acceptable for you, or any-one else to dictate what another person should do. You, and others, with the same suggestion have no right to interfere or look for force mandatory vaccinations, it stands with the person/parent as to decide the choice. Any-one that takes this 'right to choose' away from a person is nothing but a fascist.

steddyeddy · 26-01-2014 3:10am

lynski wrote: »

28064212 wrote: »

Name one, or stop making up ****

http://www.generationrescue.org/assets/Documents/Bailey-Banks-case.pdf
I only read that one but there are a few other court documents there on that site. I have alos heard of a case settled in Ireland but with a non-disclosure so not public.

Skip to page 27 or the finding:

All well and good saying MMR rarely cause a problem: when it does it is devastating, you want to be that one?

That court finding was panned heavily by the scientific community. What would a judge know about neurological defects relating to vaccines?

KnotABother · 26-01-2014 3:11am

lynski wrote: »

Paid by whom? who stood to gain from his research?

I believe the patent for the vaccine was given to a certain drugs company. One of their competitors paid him to fabricate the research in order to damage their profits

Podge_irl · 26-01-2014 3:11am

lynski wrote: »

Paid by whom? who stood to gain from his research?

Himself, for one.

lynski · 26-01-2014 3:12am

Podge_irl wrote: »

You want be the person whose kid dies of measles?

Also, this may come as a shock, but judges are not in fact medical scientists.

Wow thanks for clearing that up! i think that if a case is before a court with medical EXPERTS on both sides to present facts to a judge, or to a number of judges, then they can be trusted to and indeed are regularly trusted to make determinations of blame.
that is after all the purpose of the court, if they could not do it then these cases would be decided by a panel of scientists, no?

Taco Chips · 26-01-2014 3:13am

zenno wrote: »

It's not acceptable for you, or any-one else to dictate what another person should do. You, and others, with the same suggestion have no right to interfere or look for force mandatory vaccinations, it stands with the person/parent as to decide the choice. Any-one that takes this 'right to choose' away from a person is nothing but a fascist.

It's not acceptable to put the health of other children at risk because as a parent you are too pig headed and ill educated to understand the life saving science behind vaccinations. Anyone who refuses a vaccination on those grounds imo is a reckless endangerer of public health and there should be restrictions imposed on them.

KnotABother · 26-01-2014 3:14am

lynski wrote: »

Wow thanks for clearing that up! i think that if a case is before a court with medical EXPERTS on both sides to present facts to a judge, or to a number of judges, then they can be trusted to and indeed are regularly trusted to make determinations of blame.
that is after all the purpose of the court, if they could not do it then these cases would be decided by a panel of scientists, no?

You dont know much about the court system in the US do you.....?

Companies will often settle out of court even if they are innocent to avoid legal fees that often run over the amount the claimant wants.

carfiosaoorl · 26-01-2014 3:14am

Podge_irl wrote: »

Actually there are thousands.

Show me one because I have been looking a long time and haven't found one single study that says irrefutably that vaccines do not cause autism. I found plenty that said there was no evidence that they do but none saying that they definitely don't. Two completely different things.

KnotABother · 26-01-2014 3:17am

carfiosaoorl wrote: »

Show me one because I have been looking a long time and haven't found one single study that says irrefutably that vaccines do not cause autism. I found plenty that said there was no evidence that they do but none saying that they definitely don't. Two completely different things.

Are there a race of mole people living near the centre of the Earth? I think there is...can you find me a report that proves 100% there isnt??:rolleyes:

lynski · 26-01-2014 3:17am

KnotABother wrote: »

lynski wrote: »

These cases are related more to the fact that any medication has side effects. People are allergic to penicillin etc but we still use it without saying "oh it kills kids and causes horrible rashes". You can be allergic to fabric conditioner but we all still use it.

yes but we are not talking about forcing all people to use only penicillin as an anti-biotic are we? there are alternatives.
the fabiric conditioner reference is totaly moot.
I am not saying it is right to vaccinate or not, ust that you cannot judge a perosn reasons to on your limited knowlegde of them or their children.

_Redzer_ · 26-01-2014 3:19am

carfiosaoorl wrote: »

Vaccines should absolutely not be mandatory, nobody should have a right to force people into doing anything with their bodies or their children's bodies. Swine flu vaccine narcolepsy that's all.

It's only weakening our herd immunity, and with mandatory vaccination the disease can effectively be wiped out.

I don't understand how anyone wouldn't want their child to be vaccinated against diseases like this. It's only going to protect your child.

KnotABother · 26-01-2014 3:19am

lynski wrote: »

]

yes but we are not talking about forcing all people to use only penicillin as an anti-biotic are we? there are alternatives.
the fabiric conditioner reference is totaly moot.
I am not saying it is right to vaccinate or not, ust that you cannot judge a perosn reasons to on your limited knowlegde of them or their children.

I'm not saying we should steal kids in the night and stick needles in them. If a parent says no then that is their choice and their child should not be vaccinated in that case. However if their child is not vaccinated they should not be allowed in public schools where they can cause a disease outbreak.

There are some muppets out there who refuse the BCG now!

Podge_irl · 26-01-2014 3:19am

carfiosaoorl wrote: »

Show me one because I have been looking a long time and haven't found one single study that says irrefutably that vaccines do not cause autism. I found plenty that said there was no evidence that they do but none saying that they definitely don't. Two completely different things.

Not really, no. No actual scientific study will ever say the latter. A study of hundreds of thousands of children declaring that there is no link between them is about as far as you'll get.

Of course no scientific study says that cucumbers definitely don't cause brain aneurysms.

angelfire9 · 26-01-2014 3:19am

lynski wrote: »

All well and good saying MMR rarely cause a problem: when it does it is devastating, you want to be that one?

Prefer to be a grandmother comforting your pregnant daughter as she deals with the consequences of contracting Rubella would you?

Any FYI it is perfectly simple in Ireland to get individual M/M/R vaccines we opted for the 3 in one as it was two less needles! All you have to do is ask in advance and they will get them in

zenno · 26-01-2014 3:26am

Taco Chips wrote: »

It's not acceptable to put the health of other children at risk because as a parent you are too pig headed and ill educated to understand the life saving science behind vaccinations. Anyone who refuses a vaccination on those grounds imo is a reckless endangerer of public health and there should be restrictions imposed on them.

So you are saying...take the right away and freedom to choose from a parent to suit your ideals ?. You can dictate all you want to people, but you can not take their freedom to choose away. If a parent feels the need to refuse multiple vaccines for their child, then it is their right to do so, not yours.

There are reasons why some parents will refuse to vaccinate their children, so they should explain why and seek professional help in relation to this, whether to put their mind at ease regarding the latest information with these vaccines or maybe they have other reasons not to vaccinate their children.

My point is this only...Mandatory/ required by law or mandate; compulsory, is not acceptable because it infringes on a persons human rights, and the right to choose, regardless of your feelings.

whatdoicare · 26-01-2014 3:30am

CJC999 wrote: »

The other case that I know that started show weeks after the MMR, that child isn't as severe a case as the other one.

I call BS seeing as the MMR vaccine is administered long before a baby starts to speak and you wrote a baby starting words etc. Unless it was some sort of genius baby!

Autism typically shows symptoms around the age of 3 . The old thinking was symptoms coincided with the booster shot for MMR and it was easy to scaremonger. The ingredient that Walker describes in his papers used as a preservative which he linked to Autism is no longer used in vaccines.

My mom works closely with Autism Ireland, my own brother has Autism. I gave my own daughter her shots a month ago without fear of her getting Autism.

Any baby I know who showed symptoms did so years after the shot and serious studies on Autism Ireland site found babies were diagnosed with Autism with or without vaccines, if they got combined or separate and no matter when they received them . It had no effect either way.

Its all facebook scaremongering.

_Redzer_ · 26-01-2014 3:30am

zenno wrote: »

So you are saying...take the right away and freedom to choose from a parent to suit your ideals ?. You can dictate all you want to people, but you can not take their freedom to choose away. If a parent feels the need to refuse multiple vaccines for their child, then it is their right to do so, not yours.

There are reasons why some parents will refuse to vaccinate their children, so they should explain why and seek professional help in relation to this, whether to put their mind at ease regarding the latest information with these vaccines or maybe they have other reasons not to vaccinate their children.

My point is this only...Mandatory/ required by law or mandate; compulsory, is not acceptable because it infringes on a persons human rights, and the right to choose.

The reasons to oppose vaccines are moronic and irrational.

This is for all of our sake and affects the whole population, not just you thinking about your child.
Why should you be allowed to raise an incubator for disease just because you had some unproven notion that the vaccine was somehow harmful when your actions could negatively affect other children/people?

carfiosaoorl · 26-01-2014 3:34am

KnotABother wrote: »

I'm not saying we should steal kids in the night and stick needles in them. If a parent says no then that is their choice and their child should not be vaccinated in that case. However if their child is not vaccinated they should not be allowed in public schools where they can cause a disease outbreak.

There are some muppets out there who refuse the BCG now!

The BCG isn't given in the US because it was found to be ineffective. Some countries that don't give the BCG have a lower TB rate than Ireland.

http://www.medicalindependent.ie/3408/time_for_a_new_tack_on_tb

KnotABother · 26-01-2014 3:37am

carfiosaoorl wrote: »

The BCG isn't given in the US because it was found to be ineffective. Some countries that don't give the BCG have a lower TB rate than Ireland.

http://www.medicalindependent.ie/3408/time_for_a_new_tack_on_tb

That's because they had a lower TB rate in the first place

Podge_irl · 26-01-2014 3:43am

carfiosaoorl wrote: »

The BCG isn't given in the US because it was found to be ineffective. Some countries that don't give the BCG have a lower TB rate than Ireland.

There is no indication that it is harmful however, simply that the cost/benefit analysis of it does not encourage universal application. This is largely because the disease is generally non-existent in these countries. Ireland has historically had an unusually high level of TB.

There is probably little need to vacinate against polio in Ireland anymore. That's not because the vaccine doesn't work but because it is so effective.

zenno · 26-01-2014 3:46am

_Redzer_ wrote: »

The reasons to oppose vaccines are moronic and irrational.

This is for all of our sake and affects the whole population, not just you thinking about your child.
Why should you be allowed to raise an incubator for disease just because you had some unproven notion that the vaccine was somehow harmful when your actions could negatively affect other children/people?

You would swear it was the Black Death we are dealing with here.

In your opinion.

I'm a single man, I do not have children, but I believe strongly in human rights, especially when it comes to the right to choose. I was vaccinated when a child against this because my parents chose this, and to them they made the right decision. But you, and others, are not understanding what I am trying to tell you. I already said it in two comments already. Just because you feel very strongly in the mandatory vaccination of everyone, doesn't mean you have the will over the folk to do so.

Every-one that has children wants what's best for them, but I think you should look more closely as to find out why such folk don't want to vaccinate their children.

whatdoicare · 26-01-2014 3:49am

zenno wrote: »

You would swear it was the Black Death we are dealing with here.

IN your opinion.

I'm a single man, I do not have children, but I believe strongly in human rights, especially when it comes to the right to choose. I was vaccinated when a child against this because my parents chose this, and to them they made the right decision. But you, and others, are not understanding what I am trying to tell you. I already said it in two comments already. Just because you feel very strongly in the mangdatory vaccination of everyone, doesn't mean you have the will over the folk to do so.

Every-one that has children wants what's best for them, but I think you should look more closely as to find out why such folk don't want to vaccinate their children.

TB killed and maimed 1000s of children in my own parents time 1950/60s, now it's unheard of. How could you not compare it to Black Death? It's too late to apologise and explain about human rights after yr kid gets gravely Ill.

_Redzer_ · 26-01-2014 3:55am

zenno wrote: »

You would swear it was the Black Death we are dealing with here.

In your opinion.

I'm a single man, I do not have children, but I believe strongly in human rights, especially when it comes to the right to choose. I was vaccinated when a child against this because my parents chose this, and to them they made the right decision. But you, and others, are not understanding what I am trying to tell you. I already said it in two comments already. Just because you feel very strongly in the mandatory vaccination of everyone, doesn't mean you have the will over the folk to do so.

Every-one that has children wants what's best for them, but I think you should look more closely as to find out why such folk don't want to vaccinate their children.

I understand the exact processes involved in creating the vaccine, its implications and its benefits. I don't need to understand some irrational reasoning against it because it's utter nonsense.

It's for everybody's own good, there's no downside. How is that violating human rights?

If a woman is ignorant about the issue and assumes it to be dangerous when it's not, her child may then go on to develop an avoidable disease, should she be admired for protecting her "human rights"? I don't think so, it was just ignorant of her in the first place. Not to mention a needless cost on the state to treat that disease.

If a parent thinks it's right not to vaccinate their child, they are wrong. There's no two ways about it.

Muise... · 26-01-2014 3:57am

KnotABother wrote: »

I'm not saying we should steal kids in the night and stick needles in them. If a parent says no then that is their choice and their child should not be vaccinated in that case. However if their child is not vaccinated they should not be allowed in public schools where they can cause a disease outbreak.

Then you have the headache of the constitutional right to education being denied to children of idiot parents. That said, they do tend to gather in homeopathic-vegan-Steiner Waldorf-angel-healing-dreamcatchers, so perhaps they can be quarantined efficiently in their fairy forts.

Turtwig · 26-01-2014 4:12am

No it shouldn't. It is of course hoped that a population would do what it's in its best interest rather than believe sensationalised shyte. Welcome to reality. Vaccines are counter intuitive and complex. I like to think that some that day people will understand vaccines. Some day, maybe when people can resort to discussing ideas without personal attacks and smear campaigns. When people become statistically literate and scientifically skeptical, or, perhaps, as a great friend of mine once said "Once science figures out how to make vaccines obsolete" then this controversial issue will be resolved. There's no controversy. Ethically there's no dilemma. Vaccination is the best option for a population but the population consists of individuals and it is their choice ultimately that is sacrosanct. Their choice; yet, not just their fate. Oh well. We can dream. . .

Turtwig · 26-01-2014 4:17am

carfiosaoorl wrote: »

Show me one because I have been looking a long time and haven't found one single study that says irrefutably that vaccines do not cause autism. I found plenty that said there was no evidence that they do but none saying that they definitely don't. Two completely different things.

This one should be easy:
Find a scientific study that irrefutably states the earth doesn't go round the Sun. Using the exact same criterion you are using for the supposed vaccine studies.

zenno · 26-01-2014 4:22am

whatdoicare wrote: »

zenno wrote: »

You would swear it was the Black Death we are dealing with here.

IN your opinion.

I'm a single man, I do not have children, but I believe strongly in human rights, especially when it comes to the right to choose. I was vaccinated when a child against this because my parents chose this, and to them they made the right decision. But you, and others, are not understanding what I am trying to tell you. I already said it in two comments already. Just because you feel very strongly in the mangdatory vaccination of everyone, doesn't mean you have the will over the folk to do so.

Every-one that has children wants what's best for them, but I think you should look more closely as to find out why such folk don't want to vaccinate their children.

TB killed and maimed 1000s of children in my own parents time 1950/60s, now it's unheard of. How could you not compare it to Black Death? It's too late to apologise and explain about human rights after yr kid gets gravely Ill.

I'm just saying that there is a reason why some parents don't want to vaccinate their child, it needs to be looked into as to why they don't want to vaccinate their child, making it mandatory will not happen in this country. Look I'm not trying to make it out as a mickey mouse problem, I know it's very serious, but instead of assuming to make it mandatory, investigations need to be done to try and understand why some folk don't want to do it.

Maybe the child has other problems and the parents are afraid to take the chance incase the multiple vaccines cause other problems ? Ask the parents why, don't dictate to them, ask them professionally to seek professionals to find out why.

_Redzer_ · 26-01-2014 4:24am

Jernal wrote: »

No it shouldn't. It is of course hoped that a population would do what it's in its best interest rather than believe sensationalised shyte. Welcome to reality. Vaccines are counter intuitive and complex. I like to think that some that day people will understand vaccines. Some day, maybe when people can resort to discussing ideas without personal attacks and smear campaigns. When people become statistically literate and scientifically skeptical, or, perhaps, as a great friend of mine once said "Once science figures out how to make vaccines obsolete" then this controversial issue will be resolved. There's no controversy. Ethically there's no dilemma. Vaccination is the best option for a population but the population consists of individuals and it is their choice ultimately that is sacrosanct. Their choice; yet, not just their fate. Oh well. We can dream. . .

Vaccination and modifying pathogens into harmless strains for the body to then naturally build immunity to is the most efficient and straight forward process of guaranteeing immunity in a large population.

Researching other methods to gain immunity like blocking bacterial communication, or genetically modifying the human genome appears infinitely more long winded in comparison.
With vaccines we have a chance of eradicating certain diseases over time with enough backing and initiative, relatively easily. This was the case for smallpox, and if mandatory, more diseases could follow its fate.

zenno · 26-01-2014 4:26am

_Redzer_ wrote: »

I understand the exact processes involved in creating the vaccine, its implications and its benefits. I don't need to understand some irrational reasoning against it because it's utter nonsense.

It's for everybody's own good, there's no downside. How is that violating human rights?

If a woman is ignorant about the issue and assumes it to be dangerous when it's not, her child may then go on to develop an avoidable disease, should she be admired for protecting her "human rights"? I don't think so, it was just ignorant of her in the first place. Not to mention a needless cost on the state to treat that disease.

If a parent thinks it's right not to vaccinate their child, they are wrong. There's no two ways about it.

You obviously don't understand the mechanism of human rights.

_Redzer_ · 26-01-2014 4:27am

zenno wrote: »

I'm just saying that there is a reason why some parents don't want to vaccinate their child, it needs to be looked into as to why they don't want to vaccinate their child, making it mandatory will not happen in this country. Look I'm not trying to make it out as a mickey mouse problem, I know it's very serious, but instead of assuming to make it mandatory, investigations need to be done to to try and understand why some folk don't want to do it.

Maybe the child has other problems and the parents are afraid to take the chance incase the multiple vaccines cause other problems ? Ask the parents why, don't dictate to them, ask them professionally to seek professionals to find out why.

But there is no logical reason to oppose vaccination. None at all.
If they have a problem with the idea of vaccination then the problem lies with them and they need to educate themselves on the matter, because their thinking would be wrong otherwise and non-justifiable, whatever you might think.

_Redzer_ · 26-01-2014 4:30am

zenno wrote: »

You obviously don't understand the mechanism of human rights.

You obviously have no idea about the importance of immunology of the human race. Why should we pander to people who believe in false information, do not educate themselves on the issue and go on to cause potential harm for the rest of the population because of their actions?

That's not an issue of human rights, it's an idiotic decision.

Turtwig · 26-01-2014 4:38am

_Redzer_ wrote: »

You obviously have no idea about the importance of immunology of the human race. Why should we pander to people who believe in false information, do not educate themselves on the issue and go on to cause potential harm for the rest of the population because of their actions?

Because you could just as easily belief a falsity. The idea of free choice is that every individual gets the decision to decide their own truth and destiny. The complication with vaccines is that it's not just their own destiny. Healthy person takes the risk of vaccination for saving someone who can't get vaccination. That's the trade off but imagine it like a hostage scenario: Should one citizen be forced to potentially risk their livelihood and health to save 1,000 hostages? You cannot ever guarantee the citizens health. Even for the safest of medicines or surgeries there's never a 100% guarantee and the individual's quality of life is being wagered. It should always be their own choice to make the sacrifice. Or at the very least, they should have a means for opting out.

I understand the risk really well, however I couldn't in good conscience force somebody who didn't understand the risk or the purpose to take the vaccine. I'd hope that they trusted me enough to know that I was advising good. But, it's their choice. I can't make it for them.

zenno · 26-01-2014 4:41am

_Redzer_ wrote: »

You obviously have no idea about the importance of immunology of the human race. Why should we pander to people who believe in false information, do not educate themselves on the issue and go on to cause potential harm for the rest of the population because of their actions?

That's not an issue of human rights, it's an idiotic decision.

Hence my comment above.... Repeat

don't dictate to them, ask them professionally to seek professionals to find out why.

It's easy to call people idiots, but do you investigate as to why you might think a person/persons are idiots ? in your opinion?.

shruikan2553 · 26-01-2014 4:59am

Even if a vaccine killed or maimed 1% of the population while a disease would kill or maim 5% there is still good reason to use it. I think it was the smallpox vaccine that had a 1 or 2% mortality rate?

People here mention that they should have the choice and godwin the thread but we already have laws taking away the choice of things from parents. All part of the idea of doing whats best for the children, just as everyone being vaccinated would (outside of those who have a medical reason not to be)

_Redzer_ · 26-01-2014 5:05am

Jernal wrote: »

Because you could just as easily belief a falsity. The idea of free choice is that every individual gets the decision to decide their own truth and destiny. The complication with vaccines is that it's not just their own destiny. Healthy person takes the risk of vaccination for saving someone who can't get vaccination. That's the trade off but imagine it like a hostage scenario: Should one citizen be forced to potentially risk their livelihood and health to save 1,000 hostages? You cannot ever guarantee the citizens health. Even for the safest of medicines or surgeries there's never a 100% guarantee and the individual's quality of life is being wagered. It should always be their own choice to make the sacrifice. Or at the very least, they should have a means for opting out.

I understand the risk really well, however I couldn't in good conscience force somebody who didn't understand the risk or the purpose to take the vaccine. I'd hope that they trusted me enough to know that I was advising good. But, it's their choice. I can't make it for them.

If the vaccine has gone through countless trial periods, testing and scrutinous peer reviewed journals, and the fundamental GM process in its design doesn't give rise to complications, yes, I believe it should be administered to the population.

We are a herd, in regards to our health we should do what is best for it, not be selfish with individuals, because we have come to a point where the biggest risk to our survival could well be rapid, highly contagious infection due to the size of our numbers. That should be our main priority as we become more vulnerable to outbreaks.

Smallpox was eradicated through mandatory vaccination and that was a massive step for us. I see no distinction in regards to other diseases.

People should be educated about the process, be shown scientific and unbiased data and research to help their understanding. If they still do not wish to comply they would have no rational or proven reason to object so I wouldn't see why they should be pandered to if it's for the greater good of all of us together.

whatdoicare · 26-01-2014 5:07am

zenno wrote: »

whatdoicare wrote: »

I'm just saying that there is a reason why some parents don't want to vaccinate their child, it needs to be looked into as to'll 't want to vaccinate their child, making it mandatory will not happen in this country. Look I'm not trying to make any r out as a mickey mouse problem, I know it's very serious, but instead of assuming to make it mandatory, investigations need to be done to try and understand why some folk don't want to do it.

Maybe the child has other Perth ems and the parents are afraid to take the chance incase the multiple vaccines cause other problems ? Ask the parents why, don't dictate to them, ask them professionally to seek professionals to find out why.

The reason people won't do it seems obvious, hysteria based on ignorance, gossip and scaremongering. Parents are easy to scare, I being a parent, am well aware how delicate my baby is and ill try to protect her to the point of being irrational.

Parents read these stupid warning posts and without doing any research will pass it on as fact (and usually throw in a bit of Johnny next door friends kid got sick so it's proof) anything that puts doubt in a parents mind will do this. The one with walkers research has been around since the 1980s. The suspected preservative toted as the cause isn't even used anymore. Yet, every year I'll see that post up on parenting sites and Facebook frightening new parents. I even had a friend of mine post it even though she works with Autism research and knows better . she even admitted to me that it was stupid of her. That's the power of fear.

Just look at the "white van" posts. Everyone has seen those posts warning parents that so and so's kid got approached by a white van offering sweeties. Everyone knows it's a load of ****e but will pass it along anyway, just in case.

_Redzer_ · 26-01-2014 5:09am

zenno wrote: »

Hence my comment above.... Repeat

It's easy to call people idiots, but do you investigate as to why you might think a person/persons are idiots ? in your opinion?.

I don't understand your question.

Is it what would I constitute an idiot to be? Well, if someone was shown numerous research that clearly stated there was no harm in the vaccine, and this was repeated from many different sources, and this person continued to believe vaccines were harmful based on nothing but their own thought and opinion, then I would deem that person idiotic.

darkpagandeath · 26-01-2014 5:10am

no way I'm reading the whole thread sorry if it has been said before but a tiny chance you are affected by a vaccine vs the massive debilitating affect of not being immunised i will go with the vaccine

zenno · 26-01-2014 6:16am

whatdoicare wrote: »

zenno wrote: »

The reason people won't do it seems obvious, hysteria based on ignorance, gossip and scaremongering. Parents are easy to scare, I being a parent, am well aware how delicate my baby is and ill try to protect her to the point of being irrational.

Parents read these stupid warning posts and without doing any research will pass it on as fact (and usually throw in a bit of Johnny next door friends kid got sick so it's proof) anything that puts doubt in a parents mind will do this. The one with walkers research has been around since the 1980s. The suspected preservative toted as the cause isn't even used anymore. Yet, every year I'll see that post up on parenting sites and Facebook frightening new parents. I even had a friend of mine post it even though she works with Autism research and knows better . she even admitted to me that it was stupid of her. That's the power of fear.

Just look at the "white van" posts. Everyone has seen those posts warning parents that so and so's kid got approached by a white van offering sweeties. Everyone knows it's a load of ****e but will pass it along anyway, just in case.

Will you do me a favour and quote my comment as was originally posted please. You have somehow added errors to my English spelling, please fix this as you have used my comment in an error form, thank you. #89 you quoted me from is where the error is.

If you are going to Quote a person, make sure you do it correctly please.

Your error below.

@ whatdoicare I'm just saying that there is a reason why some parents don't want to vaccinate their child, it needs to be looked into as to'll 't want to vaccinate their child, making it mandatory will not happen in this country

Thanks.

Zenno.

Fred Swanson · 26-01-2014 6:26am

This post has been deleted.

dsmythy · 26-01-2014 9:29am

Don't think it should be mandatory but I would look dimly on those who don't bother and have no good reason not to vaccinate. Also regarding liberty and human rights I would take the liberty to lobby the local school not to admit unreasonably unvaccinated children to protect the rights of my own child.

MarkR · 26-01-2014 9:49am

My son is on the spectrum, and if I have another kid, they will get the vaccine. It's all causality. Most kids are diagnosed with ASD by about 4. Most kids were vaccinated with the 4 in 1 jab before that, so they added 1 and 1 and came up with 3.

Plenty of ASD kids are diagnosed before the jabs. They are saying now that by head tilts etc that they can be diagnosed at the baby stage.

Initial concerns that mercury in the jab was ruled out when they removed mercury from the formulation in the early 90's. If that had been the cause, numbers would have fallen. This isn't the case.

Have a look at a scientific website, http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Concerns/Autism/Index.html rather than someone who's famous for having a rocking rack.

My sister in law is a specialist in regards to children with ASD (coincidence). She diagnoses and works with them every day. Her kids are vaccinated.

If you want to make an informed decision, fine. But don't just adopt an opinion because of something you read on facebook.

cuckoo · 26-01-2014 10:08am

Muise... wrote: »

Then you have the headache of the constitutional right to education being denied to children of idiot parents. That said, they do tend to gather in homeopathic-vegan-Steiner Waldorf-angel-healing-dreamcatchers, so perhaps they can be quarantined efficiently in their fairy forts.

I don't think there's a constitutional right to Children's Allowance, so i'd start there by making vaccination a condition of receiving it.

(with exemption to the small number of children with immune conditions, etc that mean they shouldn't be vaccinated - certified by the hospital consultant treating that child, not the local witch doctor or homeopath).

Cee-Jay-Cee · 26-01-2014 10:21am

ballsymchugh wrote: »

go find the peer reviewed research before thinking horse**** like this. andrew wakefield was paid handsomely for his BOGUS research into this and has rightfully paid the price.
look at the measles epidemic that happened a couple of years ago in wales to see the damage he caused.

I never knew about wakefields paper until I had children of my own but I was aware of people's beliefs that the MMR and autism may be linked as two friends of mine have children who are autistic and it began shortly after their MMR shots. It may be horse**** to you but certainly not to them. Both families have had more children but refused to give them their MMR vaccines because of what happened previously. Are they wrong? Do you know what it's like to live with a severely autistic child?

Can I ask you a question. Why was the study commissioned in the first place? There is very clearly a concern linking the two, there are thousands of cases worldwide where parents believe the two are linked. This is not just some random study conducted for the sake of it. Wakefields results may be fake and so people like you say that there is no evidence to link the two but equally there is no clear evidence available which says the two are definitely not linked. I will continue to believe as I do until someone can prove beyond doubt to the contrary.

zl1whqvjs75cdy · 26-01-2014 10:24am

carfiosaoorl wrote: »

Some people would say the opposite steddyeddy. Not so long ago I was bullied in to giving my daughter the swine flu vaccine I refused and was told to expect dire consequences. I don't know a single person who got swine flu but reading stories all the time about people who developed narcolepsy.
There is not one single study that says vaccines don't cause autism in actual fact there has been s few cases recently where children were awarded compensation because courts found that vaccines did cause their autism

O this'll be good. Please link me to that.

Annasopra · 26-01-2014 10:32am

carfiosaoorl wrote: »

Vaccines should absolutely not be mandatory, nobody should have a right to force people into doing anything with their bodies or their children's bodies. Swine flu vaccine narcolepsy that's all.

I think it's a form of child abuse to refuse them.

iguana · 26-01-2014 10:40am

KnotABother wrote: »

Not true. If you are not vaccinated then you are an agar plate for disease. Diseases can mutate in your system or in the systems of many unvaccinated kids it is passed to and then be passed on to other kids who even though vaccinated are infected with the mutated strain. If you vaccinate all kids then the disease has very few places to go and is likely to die out more or less in the population like polio did.

My son will be fully vaccinated, not so much because I worry about his health but because I feel a responsibility toward other children with weakened immune systems and feel we have a responsibility as a society to take care of our weakest members. But we can't enforce mandatory vaccinations. Try look at this from another point of view. We all know that, on average, children who aren't breastfed suffer from a higher rate of illness than is the biological norm. So do we make breastfeeding (to the WHO and HSE recommendations of 6 months exclusively and then a minimum of another 18 months complimentary) mandatory? You can't do that, even though it would most likely benefit society as a whole.

The way forward is honest and open campaigns that address people's fears without making them feel dismissed but that also explain the importance of herd immunity in easy to understand ways.

Annasopra · 26-01-2014 10:50am

zenno wrote: »

You obviously don't understand the mechanism of human rights.

Here's a question for you? If as a parent you refuse to vaccinate your children; couldn't that be a violation of the childs human right to healthcare?

Incidence of measles, mumps and rubella all increase due to anti-vaccine campaign

Comments