Advertisement
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards
Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

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

145791016

Comments



  • _Redzer_ wrote: »
    You said it would cause greater problems than it would mend so I think you should explain that first.

    I didn't say that, so please don't twist my words.

    I asked the following
    So, is anyone going to put forward a plan on how it could be implemented and enforced without causing greater problems than it mends




  • Well, we could be lax about vaccination programes, but the cost in terms of liberty and freedom will ony come further down the line. I have an uncle that spent the guts of a year in a TB ward in a Dublin hospital and without vaccination those days could return. You can vaccinate your kids now, or you can see them quarantined later, and this was a pretty common occurance in the 50's, many families at the time would have had a child end up in an TB hospital for very extended periods of time.




  • steddyeddy wrote: »
    To prevent someone from having children is to deny a persons human rights. Giving a child a vaccine isn't.

    I'd argue that to force an individual to receive a vaccination against his will is a violation of his human rights. The reasoning behind the scenario I've given and that of mandatory vaccinations is, on a fundamental level, practically synonymous, so you can understand my objection to mandatory vaccines by probing your own objection to the above.




  • I didn't say that, so please don't twist my words.

    I asked the following

    Force the parents to have their kids vaccinated, if they don't remove the kids, vaccinate them, then order the parents to attend classes about vaccinations.

    Also, fine people that spread misinformation about vaccinations online...

    Part of the punishement should be an audit to see if you're conning people as part of your online scheme to trash vaccinations.

    Tell everyone via the media that this is going to happen, well before it happens.




  • gvn wrote: »
    I'd argue that to force an individual to receive a vaccination against his will is a violation of his human rights. The reasoning behind the scenario I've given and that of mandatory vaccinations is, on a fundamental level, practically synonymous, so you can understand my objection to mandatory vaccines by probing your own objection to the above.

    It's obviously not.

    Forcing you to not endanger your neighbours is an established role of society.


  • Advertisement


  • How would it be implemented and enforced from a legal standpoint?

    Presumably the same way mandatory education, for example, is implemented and inforced from a legal standpoint.

    I don't really see where you see an issue.




  • MilanPan!c wrote: »
    Force the parents to have their kids vaccinated, if they don't remove the kids, vaccinate them, then order the parents to attend classes about vaccinations.

    Also, fine people that spread misinformation about vaccinations online...

    Part of the punishement should be an audit to see if you're conning people as part of your online scheme to trash vaccinations.

    Tell everyone via the media that this is going to happen, well before it happens.

    That's a bit back to front I might say...

    The proper way would be send, 'not order' the parents to attend classes about vaccinations.




  • steddyeddy wrote: »
    People denying the kids vaccines are denying their kids human rights to be healthy and free from illness.


    These people don't believe they are though. They believe that what they are doing is giving their children the best chance to be healthy and free from illness.

    Are they leaving their children at risk? Certainly.

    Are they enough in number to be a risk to the human race as a whole? No.

    We can agree that certainly what they are doing is ill informed, etc, but that is their right as parents of these children. If you try and force people to vaccinate their children when they don't believe it is the right thing for their children, where does your interference in their parenting stop?

    As soon as you're satisfied that they're not a danger to society?

    MilanPan!c wrote: »
    If they are actually endangering society as a whole then they to should be stopped.


    There was once a fellow with a funny moustache who thought that way too, big into eugenics, wanted to create a master race and eliminate diversity. Fortunately for society his ideas never really caught on.

    We aren't all little kingdoms unto ourself; we're members of a collective called society.


    Actually we are all little kingdoms unto ourselves, and we graduate towards those who share our beliefs, values, goals, in order to form a collective which furthers the common good. The more members there are in that collective, the stronger it becomes, but, Human Rights legislation in it's most basic interpretation says no collective is allowed ride roughshod over another just because they're in the majority.

    Well, that's the theory anyway; So, what happens when your collective does something you don't agree with? Suddenly you're now in the minority. Does that mean you now have to eliminate yourself because you disagree with one single principle of the collective?

    Something very "Borg-like" about that philosophy which would be best summed up (almost quite apt too in the context of this thread!) in their mantra -

    "We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile."


    "Resistance is futile"...

    I wonder have they developed a vaccine for individual freedom of thought yet.




  • zenno wrote: »
    10 years in the future, the government beats to death it's citizens with mandatory vaccinations.

    Yes, killing us with vaccines, because that's what vaccines do.

    I had measles because I was born before MMR was widely available. All I remember is feeling rotten and listening to all the other children play while I was stuck in bed. Of course, the other children all had their turn in bed with measles that summer too.

    A friend's brother, the healthiest, most athletic, sunny-faced child of his family, got measles and seemed to recover quickly. But the virus stayed in his system and came back in a sudden attack later, rendering him all but brain dead. He survived a few more years, till his body could not cope with growing up immobile and unconscious. His parents cared for him so lovingly and they spoke to him all the time and noted his responses - which to me looked just like a flower responding to light, but even as a child I understood what it meant to them - so when I hear people go around the houses to argue against the only tool we have to stop this happening again, I lose a little piece of sympathy.




  • I didn't say that, so please don't twist my words.

    I asked the following

    And again, what greater problems could it cause?

    Mandatory vaccination wipes out disease. Moaning about "human rights" delays this and gives the disease more potential to mutate into a new strain that could infect those who were previously immune to it causing a pandemic. That's fact, and it's already happened when some viruses that were once relatively harmless evolved into deadlier strains.

    Some parents who have no idea what they're talking about are the only ones to "lose out", and they're not losing out on anything. They could see a disease eradicated in their child's generation just from the actions of government.

    And I talked about the smallpox vaccination being mandatory, and time and time again it's being ignored. I guess nobody here has an issue with that when the WHO set out to eradicate it through rigorous and aggressive vaccination methods -and that was achieved officially in 1980, with the last case occurring in Somalia in 1977.
    So why is this an issue now all of a sudden?


  • Advertisement


  • zenno wrote: »
    That's a bit back to front I might say...

    The proper way would be send, 'not order' the parents to attend classes about vaccinations.

    yeah - once you decide to put the rest of us at risk I'm done with asking nicely...




  • MilanPan!c wrote: »
    It's obviously not.

    Forcing you to not endanger your neighbours is an established role of society.

    You could look at it all the other way for the sake of chat

    - it'll kill off the weak ones and "thin the herd"

    - it won't really matter after a few hundred years, bit like the bubonic plague




  • MilanPan!c wrote: »
    Force the parents to have their kids vaccinated, if they don't remove the kids, vaccinate them, then order the parents to attend classes about vaccinations.

    Also, fine people that spread misinformation about vaccinations online...

    Part of the punishement should be an audit to see if you're conning people as part of your online scheme to trash vaccinations.

    Tell everyone via the media that this is going to happen, well before it happens.

    That all seems rather drastic and draconian. Not really in the spirit of progressivism at all, not that I expected any 'solution' here to be progressive. I don't think any of the above would go towards changing attitudes, and would most likely further erode trust for the medical profession.

    Why not incentivise rather than punish?

    And what's your take on the likes of the BMA being opposed to compulsory vaccination? Are they wrong or ill-informed?




  • Czarcasm wrote: »
    These people don't believe they are though. They believe that what they are doing is giving their children the best chance to be healthy and free from illness.

    Are they leaving their children at risk? Certainly.

    Are they enough in number to be a risk to the human race as a whole? No.

    We can agree that certainly what they are doing is ill informed, etc, but that is their right as parents of these children. If you try and force people to vaccinate their children when they don't believe it is the right thing for their children, where does your interference in their parenting stop?

    As soon as you're satisfied that they're not a danger to society?


    There was once a fellow with a funny moustache who thought that way too, big into eugenics, wanted to create a master race and eliminate diversity. Fortunately for society his ideas never really caught on.

    Actually we are all little kingdoms unto ourselves, and we graduate towards those who share our beliefs, values, goals, in order to form a collective which furthers the common good. The more members there are in that collective, the stronger it becomes, but, Human Rights legislation in it's most basic interpretation says no collective is allowed ride roughshod over another just because they're in the majority.

    Well, that's the theory anyway; So, what happens when your collective does something you don't agree with? Suddenly you're now in the minority. Does that mean you now have to eliminate yourself because you disagree with one single principle of the collective?

    Something very "Borg-like" about that philosophy which would be best summed up (almost quite apt too in the context of this thread!) in their mantra -

    "We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile."


    "Resistance is futile"...

    I wonder have they developed a vaccine for individual freedom of thought yet.

    Sorry, but your hyperbolic nonsense doesn't persuade me.

    We AREN'T all little kingdoms at all. We thrive because we're part of society.

    We form associations naturally and always have and will.

    Once you associate yourself with others you lose the absolute right to be unconcerned with anyone but yourself... no matter what Ayn Rand or the Ron Paul messageboard might tell you.

    You argue "where will it stop," but society HAS shown that it can self-regulate. Abortion has been legal in the US for deacdes and yet there's not forced Abortions; children are still being born and parents aren't allowed to kill their children once their born.

    There's a middle ground with many rules that isn't ever pushed beyond what's responsible and reasonable.

    You not ever going to convince me that individual liberty is more important than society as a whole. No reasonable person has ever taken that nonsense seriously.




  • That all seems rather drastic and draconian. Not really in the spirit of progressivism at all, not that I expected any 'solution' here to be progressive. I don't think any of the above would go towards changing attitudes, and would most likely further erode trust for the medical profession.

    Why not incentivise rather than punish?

    And what's your take on the likes of the BMA being opposed to compulsory vaccination? Are they wrong or ill-informed?

    You can TRY to use incentives to convince people not to be paranoid nuts, but... you'd think healthy children would be enough of an incentive and it doesn't work for lots of people.

    There's plenty that can't be trusted to make wise decisions for others, which is why we have most of the laws we have.




  • Here's two of the scumbag companies that produces your vaccines, do you trust this corrupt shower ?

    Oh, how about baxter International Inc pharma as well ? ah sure I trust them to infect the vaccine with the bird flu virus on a major contaminant holiday ? ah sure who cares, we are making money by infecting the population.

    Time for golf my good man, here's a 2.5 billion turnover, sure the death-toll was only 678 thousand, great profits Humphrey I must say, keep up the good work selling your contaminated baxter vaccines.

    Honestly, how can any-one trust this crowd, and people wonder why other folk are weary about vaccines... http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?sid=aTo3LbhcA75I&pid=newsarchive

    GlaxoSmithKline... http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0703/327575-glaxosmithkline-fined-3b-in-us/




  • zenno wrote: »
    Here's one of the scumbag companies that produces your vaccines, do you trust this corrupt shower ?

    Oh, how about baxter International Inc pharma as well ? ah sure I trust them to infect the vaccine with the bird flu virus on a major contaminant holiday ? ah sure who cares, we are making money by infecting the population.

    Time for golf my good man, here's a 2.5 billion turnover, sure the death-toll was only 678 thousand, great profits Humphrey I must say, keep up the good work selling your contaminated baxter vaccines.

    Honestly, how can any-one trust this crowd, and people wonder why other folk are weary about vaccines... http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?sid=aTo3LbhcA75I&pid=newsarchive

    OMG!

    I guess I should avoid all doctors, mechanics, teachers, police, builders, artists, judges, etc., because some of them are corrupt.

    Or maybe, I shouldn't assume because one vaccination experience was a nightmare, all are.

    Talk about poor logic zenno

    You must ALSO realise then that the ONLY study to find evidence for a connection between MMR and Autism was fiddled by a corrupt doctor, to make money for a law firm.

    Do I trust the one corrupted study, which has been withdrawn and which was faked to make some lawyers rich?

    Or do I trust a completely unrelated vaccination company, all of medical science, all doctors and paediatricians, and dozens of other studies...?

    Oh right... I trust the one corrupt doctor and his made up study, because an unrelated company did something crooked at one point.

    This is the kind of insanity that helps me prove my point: nutters can't be trusted to do what's right for society.




  • zenno wrote: »
    Here's two of the scumbag companies that produces your vaccines, do you trust this corrupt shower ?

    Oh, how about baxter International Inc pharma as well ? ah sure I trust them to infect the vaccine with the bird flu virus on a major contaminant holiday ? ah sure who cares, we are making money by infecting the population.

    Time for golf my good man, here's a 2.5 billion turnover, sure the death-toll was only 678 thousand, great profits Humphrey I must say, keep up the good work selling your contaminated baxter vaccines.

    Honestly, how can any-one trust this crowd, and people wonder why other folk are weary about vaccines... http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?sid=aTo3LbhcA75I&pid=newsarchive

    GlaxoSmithKline... http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0703/327575-glaxosmithkline-fined-3b-in-us/
    Now you've shown your colours. You're a conspiracist. Yes, all of the pharmaceutical industry is evil.

    You're right, don't trust them. Don't vaccinate yourself. We'll see how long you'll survive against disease just banking on your own immune system.

    Sure Jesus, why did we vaccinate against smallpox or TB at all lads? It's all a scam! We never needed it!




  • zenno wrote: »
    Here's two of the scumbag companies that produces your vaccines, do you trust this corrupt shower ?

    Oh, how about baxter International Inc pharma as well ? ah sure I trust them to infect the vaccine with the bird flu virus on a major contaminant holiday ? ah sure who cares, we are making money by infecting the population.

    Time for golf my good man, here's a 2.5 billion turnover, sure the death-toll was only 678 thousand, great profits Humphrey I must say, keep up the good work selling your contaminated baxter vaccines.

    Honestly, how can any-one trust this crowd, and people wonder why other folk are weary about vaccines... http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?sid=aTo3LbhcA75I&pid=newsarchive

    GlaxoSmithKline... http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0703/327575-glaxosmithkline-fined-3b-in-us/

    And how are your sisters Jim?. I hear Andrea is pregnant again.




  • _Redzer_ wrote: »
    Now you've shown your colours. You're a conspiracist. Yes, all of the pharmaceutical industry is evil.

    You're right, don't trust them. Don't vaccinate yourself. We'll see how long you'll survive against disease just banking on your own immune system.

    Sure Jesus, why did we vaccinate against smallpox or TB at all lads? It's all a scam! We never needed it!

    A nettle poultice with some honey and cinnamon tea cures most things. Big Pharma don't want you to know this........or something.....


  • Advertisement


  • MilanPan!c wrote: »
    OMG!

    I guess I should avoid all doctors, mechanics, teachers, police, builders, artists, judges, etc., because some of them are corrupt.

    Or maybe, I shouldn't assume because one vaccination experience was a nightmare, all are.

    Talk about poor logic zenno

    You must ALSO realise then that the ONLY study to find evidence for a connection between MMR and Autism was fiddled by a corrupt doctor, to make money for a law firm.

    Do I trust the one corrupted study, which has been withdrawn and which was faked to make some lawyers rich?

    Or do I trust a completely unrelated vaccination company, all of medical science, all doctors and paediatricians, and dozens of other studies...?

    Oh right... I trust the one corrupt doctor and his made up study, because an unrelated company did something crooked at one point.

    This is the kind of insanity that helps me prove my point: nutters can't be trusted to do what's right for society.
    And it would appear nutters support nutters, I mean "human rights"...




  • _Redzer_ wrote: »
    And it would appear nutters support nutters, I mean "human rights"...

    Sure, by human rights these guys just mean "I have the freedom to do whatever I want no matter how it affects other people"... which I believe was the motto of Andrew Wakefield.

    And we're through the looking glass.




  • MilanPan!c wrote: »
    OMG!

    I guess I should avoid all doctors, mechanics, teachers, police, builders, artists, judges, etc., because some of them are corrupt.

    Or maybe, I shouldn't assume because one vaccination experience was a nightmare, all are.

    Talk about poor logic zenno

    Not at all my friend. The big pharma saved the life of my mother of which recently had a major heart attack and of which their drugs keep her in check, and also the insulin my father has to take as a type 1 diabetic including the tablets.

    but what I have pointed out above in the previous comment in a slightly comedic form, is that the pharmaceutical companies have infected their own vaccines of which was extremely dangerous, but they tried to hide it but couldn't until a few scientists revealed it to the public.

    These companies are the reason why people have doubts about them, they are corrupt and dangerous in the reality of incompetence as to contaminate their own product ready for human injection, that's my point as to why some folk will be weary of vaccines.




  • _Redzer_ wrote: »
    They could see a disease eradicated in their child's generation just from the actions of government.

    Maybe the government should make it illegal for men to have sex with men, too. Since they are 40 times more likely to develop and pass on HIV than men who only sleep with women.

    For the greater good and all that. Society needs protecting from itself :rolleyes:

    Someone mentioned the mental gymnastics of those opposed to compulsory vaccination, but I'm seeing a lot more of both it and cognitive dissonance being displayed by the pro side.




  • Maybe the government should make it illegal for men to have sex with men, too. Since they are 40 times more likely to develop and pass on HIV than men who only sleep with women.

    For the greater good and all that. Society needs protecting from itself :rolleyes:

    Someone mentioned the mental gymnastics of those opposed to compulsory vaccination, but I'm seeing a lot more of both it and cognitive dissonance being displayed by the pro side.

    It's not an apt comparison at all.

    HIV can't be spread just by sitting down next to somone. It's only a threat to people that engage in sexual activity, who should be making that decision for themselves.

    Spreading measles to strangers on a bus, because you want to be "free" couldn't be more different.




  • zenno wrote: »
    Not at all my friend. The big pharma :(:(:(:(:( That phrase makes me sad.....saved the life of my mother of which recently had a major heart attack and of which their drugs keep her in check, and also the insulin my father has to take as a type 1 diabetic including the tablets.

    but what I have pointed out above in the previous comment in a slightly comedic form, is that the pharmaceutical companies have infected their own vaccines of which was extremely dangerous, but they tried to hide it but couldn't until a few scientists revealed it to the public.

    These companies are the reason why people have doubts about them, they are corrupt and dangerous in the reality of incompetence as to contaminate their own product ready for human injection, that's my point as to why some folk will be weary of vaccines.
    :(:(




  • I work as a pharmacist. I don't think it should be mandatory for people to have their children vaccinated. It is a bit totalitarian. There would circumstances where a vaccine is not suitable. Some vaccines are only available with egg in them. If a child is allergic to egg, I don't think it would be fair to make them have the vaccine

    However, I believe that vaccines are very worthwhile. It's people like "the girl against fluoride" and others with their rabble rousing and false information that endanger the public with their propaganda.




  • And how are your sisters Jim?. I hear Andrea is pregnant again.

    Not again, she was only pregnant last week ffs, I need the orions to help me. on channel yyyyiio9998ijhnhedjrj

    There must be some aliens out there to help me ?

    Sarcasm, my dear friend Humphrey.




  • I work as a pharmacist. I don't think it should be mandatory for people to have their children vaccinated. It is a bit totalitarian. There would circumstances where a vaccine is not suitable. Some vaccines are only available with egg in them. If a child is allergic to egg, I don't think it would be fair to make them have the vaccine

    However, I believe that vaccines are very worthwhile. It's people like "the girl against fluoride" and others with their rabble rousing and false information that endanger the public with their propaganda.

    OBVIOUSLY you shouldn't vaccinate people in a high risk group...

    No sane person would think that's responsible.


  • Advertisement


  • Maybe the government should make it illegal for men to have sex with men, too. Since they are 40 times more likely to develop and pass on HIV than men who only sleep with women.

    For the greater good and all that. Society needs protecting from itself :rolleyes:

    Someone mentioned the mental gymnastics of those opposed to compulsory vaccination, but I'm seeing a lot more of both it and cognitive dissonance being displayed by the pro side.

    That's why blood from MSM is banned. And should we ban men and women from having sex since they have an even higher rate of HIV transfer than lesbians? Obviously not. You're completely going off topic with this.

    Please address my smallpox point. The lot defending choice seem to go out of their way to pretend it's not there.

    Society needs to stop protecting itself? Such nonsense. Better tell the lads in drug research to stop everything, we need to toughen up apparently.


Advertisement