Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

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

1246710

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭zenno


    _Redzer_ wrote: »
    It still doesn't seem to shift some conspiracist's views who don't trust any data to the contrary of their views, no matter what, so these people should be overruled. In an ideal world if their choices didn't affect anyone else besides their children then they can do what they like to them, but that's not the case so they shouldn't be pandered to.

    My views in this might seem harsh, but if we want to eradicate disease an active and aggressive approach will see it done effectively, not a passive one. Polio could've been eliminated had it gone through such vigorous initiatives as smallpox did.

    The way I see it from many different forums outside Boards.ie, is that there are many many sites and forums that do eject nonsensical's in relation to vaccines and they do try to force-frighten people to steer clear.
    But this is a problem indeed. Folk need to go to professionals in the field and have a talk to talk with them even though it might cost a few quid, it will be worth it for piece of mind, and then the person can make their mind up. If they are still not personally secured in belief of the vaccines, then they still have the choice to look further into it and educate themselves further to come to the conclusion on what they should do.

    Yes Redzer you are a harsh man indeed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    zenno wrote: »
    That is irrelevant to the topic at hand. This is not about the educational system.

    The government dictators force you to make sure your children get an education to their standards.
    They tell you how you can discipline and treat your children.

    Why? For their safety. Im sure you would much prefer to live in a country with actual dictators like north korea. None of these have stupid laws to protect children, it's my right to have children and raise them how I want. Damn them for telling us we have a responsibility to them too.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,069 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    Even the British Medical Association are opposed to compulsory vaccinations, for pretty obvious reasons
    “We have looked very carefully at the issue of compulsory vaccination and it is true that some countries do operate immunisation programmes where there is some degree of compulsion. However, the BMA does not think this would be right for the United Kingdom.”

    “We think it is far preferable for doctors to inform and educate parents about the overwhelming benefits of vaccination, not only for their children but for society in general. The doctor-patient relationship is based on trust, choice and openness and we think introducing compulsory vaccination may be harmful to this.”

    http://web.bma.org.uk/pressrel.nsf/wlu/STRE-5NVJVY?OpenDocument&vw=wfmms

    I guess posters here know better than them, though :pac:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    bluewolf wrote: »
    I'm pretty sure anyone on this thread against mandatory vacc is equally in favour of actually vacc in the first place and would think it stupid not to
    Doesn't mean it needs to be a law

    There are is an unacceptable amount of people who don't get their kids vaccinated. One poster here said 90% vaccinate their kids so that leaves 10% who don't. 10% in Ireland could be ~450-500,000. That's the guts of half a million people purposely withhold protection of some of the most damaging diseases from their kids. Just because most people do something right does not mean that we don't need a law for the people who don't.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,951 ✭✭✭B0jangles


    There are people out there who are so committed to their own beliefs that no evidence that does not align with what they already "know" will shift them. Sometimes those beliefs are harmless, sometimes they are not. When those beliefs are inflicted on a child, then that child's needs and rights need to be protected.

    See here for what can happen when children become the victim of their own parents' bad treatment choices:

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/sep/28/homeopathy-baby-death-couple-jailed

    Edit: On the other hand, see the case of Mary Mallon AKA "Typhoid Mary" - incarcerated without trial for decades because she was unintentionally the cause of multiple outbreaks of typhoid because she insisted on repeatedly returning to her old job as a cook: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typhoid_Mary


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,056 ✭✭✭_Redzer_


    zenno wrote: »
    The way I see it from many different forums outside Boards.ie, is that there are many many sites and forums that do eject nonsensical's in relation to vaccines and they do try to force-frighten people to steer clear.
    But this is a problem indeed. Folk need to go to professionals in the field and have a talk to talk with them even though it might cost a few quid, it will be worth it for piece of mind, and then the person can make their mind up. If they are still not personally secured in belief of the vaccines, then they still have the choice to look further into it and educate themselves further to come to the conclusion on what they should do.

    Yes Redzer you are a harsh man indeed.

    I'm not harsh, you're just being weak willed and looking at individuals in the wrong as the victims when their actions are harmful to others. The line should be toed with them.

    For everyone who has opposed my views nearly all have dodged my points about smallpox. Do you think if smallpox was still around today should parents have a choice to have their children vaccinated against it? Do you think it wouldn't be around if it weren't for highly aggressive initiatives to eradicate it, which involved mandatory vaccination? Now look, smallpox has been wiped out because of that.
    The "breach of human rights" lead to such a significant breakthrough the history of our species.

    That could be the case again is measles and other diseases. It's those who cry about the misplaced human rights of individuals, while ignoring the well being of the collective population who slow that progress.

    I'll reiterate that our interest is the protection of the health of our species, not to pander to some individual humans too ignorant to do what is right for the sake of the population.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,076 ✭✭✭✭Czarcasm


    _Redzer_ wrote: »
    Ensuring the health of the human race>>>> some ignorant parent.

    The issue of human rights here is nonexistent if they're a breach of safety to everyone because of their actions.


    I'm not sure that's a road I'd like to see society going down again Redzer tbh. If you apply that same train of thought to other members of society you could easily deny many minorities in society their human rights on the basis that "they're a breach of safety to everyone because of their actions"...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    People denying the kids vaccines are denying their kids human rights to be healthy and free from illness.


  • Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    zenno wrote: »
    The way I see it from many different forums outside Boards.ie, is that there are many many sites and forums that do eject nonsensical's in relation to vaccines and they do try to force-frighten people to steer clear.
    But this is a problem indeed. Folk need to go to professionals in the field and have a talk to talk with them even though it might cost a few quid, it will be worth it for piece of mind, and then the person can make their mind up. If they are still not personally secured in belief of the vaccines, then they still have the choice to look further into it and educate themselves further to come to the conclusion on what they should do.

    Yes Redzer you are a harsh man indeed.

    You should have discussions with these people. They feel THEY are the educated one and you're the sheep being manipulated by big pharma.

    This attitude is one of, "everyone I agree with it a hero," and, "and everyone else is brain dead idiot that believes whatever big brother tells them."

    At the same time they're potentially hurting society and their children.

    Some things we all agree aren't on. One of those is endangering the majority.

    This is a prime example of the majority's rights trumping the individual's.


  • Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    Czarcasm wrote: »
    I'm not sure that's a road I'd like to see society going down again Redzer tbh. If you apply that same train of thought to other members of society you could easily deny many minorities in society their human rights on the basis that "they're a breach of safety to everyone because of their actions"...

    If they are actually endangering society as a whole then they to should be stopped.

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


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    There's some remarkable mental gymnastics going on here. "If definitely will vaccinate my kid with MMR but don't pass a law against not vaccinating my kids with it".


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,069 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


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

    They're literally worse than Hitler :rolleyes:

    So, is anyone going to put forward a plan on how it could be implemented and enforced without causing greater problems than it mends.. or are you all just happy enough to circlejerk and preach about how terrible and evil some parents are.. and how they're destroying humanity as we know it?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,398 ✭✭✭whatdoicare


    CJC999 wrote: »
    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.

    I don't believe for a minute you have friends who have children with autism who went on to not vaccinate.
    Autism Ireland's official stance is that there is no link to the vaccine and Autism. If they didn't vaccinate it means they didn't even do something as basic as sign up to an organisation there to help them and provide support and then they didn't even bother to speak to anyone in that organisation to help with their informed research.
    There's no way they got a diagnosis and then went home and never tried to help their children with therapy/education/available extra help in school? No way.

    My brother has Autism, I spend a hell of a lot of time working with people with Autism and not one, NOT ONE, parent blames the vaccine or went on to not vaccinate their other children. Do you know why? They went and did some research and spoke to those in the know.

    They didn't base their decision on old debunked research. That's for sure.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,056 ✭✭✭_Redzer_


    Czarcasm wrote: »
    I'm not sure that's a road I'd like to see society going down again Redzer tbh. If you apply that same train of thought to other members of society you could easily deny many minorities in society their human rights on the basis that "they're a breach of safety to everyone because of their actions"...

    No, this is talking in regards to health only, where what I am saying is factual. I'm not talking about human rights like gay marriage or any of that stuff. That's irrelevant to this discussion and is only throwing it off topic. I'm just talking about black and white facts about the health of our species in that in no way is giving choice in this situation beneficial to the individuals or the population as a while.

    Both issues can be easily distinguished.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,056 ✭✭✭_Redzer_


    They're literally worse than Hitler :rolleyes:

    So, is anyone going to put forward a plan on how it could be implemented and enforced without causing greater problems than it mends.. or are you all just happy enough to circlejerk and preach about how terrible and evil some parents are.. and how they're destroying humanity as we know it?

    What greater problems will it cause? Potential to wipe out disease for good, or some parents will get hysterical for no good reason?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,567 ✭✭✭Red Pepper


    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.

    The swine flu vaccine was a disgrace. Big pharma made huge money from untested vaccines because our stupid government were spooked into rushing it out. We did not get it and I am so so glad.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,069 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    _Redzer_ wrote: »
    What greater problems will it cause? Potential to wipe out disease for good, or some parents will get hysterical for no good reason?

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


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭zenno


    The government dictators force you to make sure your children get an education to their standards.
    They tell you how you can discipline and treat your children.

    Why? For their safety. Im sure you would much prefer to live in a country with actual dictators like north korea. None of these have stupid laws to protect children, it's my right to have children and raise them how I want. Damn them for telling us we have a responsibility to them too.

    How is the weather there in north Korea ? I hope it's not too hot for you, 99% humidity I heard, is the heat affecting your judgement ???.

    Twist your words around to the east as much as you like to fit your private non-reality laws. Enjoy the weather kid. :)


  • Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    _Redzer_ wrote: »
    No, this is talking in regards to health only, where what I am saying is factual. I'm not talking about human rights like gay marriage or any of that stuff. That's irrelevant to this discussion and is only throwing it off topic. I'm just talking about black and white facts about the health of our species in that in no way is giving choice in this situation beneficial to the individuals or the population as a while.

    Both issues can be easily distinguished.

    How about those with genetic disorders? Should they be prevented from breeding because of the possible detrimental effect it might have on society? The reasoning behind "vaccines ought to be compulsory as they're beneficial to society has a whole" applies exactly to this scenario.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    gvn wrote: »
    How about those with genetic disorders? Should they be prevented from breeding because of the possible detrimental effect it might have on society? The reasoning behind "vaccines ought to be compulsory as they're beneficial to society has a whole" applies exactly to this scenario.

    They already have clinical geneticists who advise couples on the likelyhood of producing a child with genetic defects.


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    They already have clinical geneticists who advise couples on the likelyhood of producing a child with genetic defects.

    I didn't ask whether individuals should be advised; I asked whether individuals should be prevented.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,567 ✭✭✭Red Pepper


    I agree however If you want your kids enrolled a public school and mixing with other kids then they should have the vaccines.

    TESTED VACCINES YES! But the swine flu vaccine was not adequately tested. Money trumped side effects in that instance. People were way too obedient.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    How about the heel prick test that's performed on every baby born in Ireland. Do people have a problem with that? Phenlyketonuria was a problem in Ireland before this was introduced. Now the test can catch people early and prevent the nuerological symptoms that occur with the illness.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,951 ✭✭✭B0jangles


    What I find frustrating is how incredibly easy it is to make up some "common-sense" -sounding bullshít and throw it up on Facebook, but establishing actual facts can take years of work.

    Person A can say "I think there's a link between vaccines and autism because some children show the first signs of autism in the 6 months after they were vaccinated."

    Person B says "But if children all get their vaccines at that age, and that is also the age when the first signs of autism become apparent how can you assume that there is a connection? That makes no sense!"

    Person A "I just think there must be a connection - prove to me that there isn't!"

    Person B - Goes off and applies for a grant to carry out a large-scale study on the possible causes of autism. Receives funding a year later. Starts the study which goes on for 15 years and includes 10,000 children from birth to the age of 10. Finds no link between vaccines and autism. Returns to their amazingly patient anti-vax friend with the final report and the conclusions. "There!"

    Person A: Scans the results for a couple of minutes "So you didn't find a connection? That doesn't prove that there isn't one, does it?"

    Person B: Beats person A to death with a copy of the study data


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,512 ✭✭✭Muise...


    B0jangles wrote: »
    What I find frustrating is how incredibly easy it is to make up some "common-sense" -sounding bullshít and throw it up on Facebook, but establishing actual facts can take years of work.

    Person A can say "I think there's a link between vaccines and autism because some children show the first signs of autism in the 6 months after they were vaccinated."

    Person B says "But if children all get their vaccines at that age, and that is also the age when the first signs of autism become apparent how can you assume that there is a connection? That makes no sense!"

    Person A "I just think there must be a connection - prove to me that there isn't!"

    Person B - Goes off and applies for a grant to carry out a large-scale study on the possible causes of autism. Receives funding a year later. Starts the study which goes on for 15 years and includes 10,000 children from birth to the age of 10. Finds no link between vaccines and autism. Returns to their amazingly patient anti-vax friend with the final report and the conclusions. "There!"

    Person A: Scans the results for a couple of minutes "So you didn't find a connection? That doesn't prove that there isn't one, does it?"

    Person B: Beats person A to death with a copy of the study data

    Hysteria spreads just like a virus. There is no vaccine.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    gvn wrote: »
    I didn't ask whether individuals should be advised; I asked whether individuals should be prevented.

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


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,056 ✭✭✭_Redzer_


    gvn wrote: »
    How about those with genetic disorders? Should they be prevented from breeding because of the possible detrimental effect it might have on society? The reasoning behind "vaccines ought to be compulsory as they're beneficial to society has a whole" applies exactly to this scenario.

    Not exactly, no. Genetic disorders aren't contagious. They're confined to the individual.

    I already stated if a parent who refused to vaccinate their child, and then developed an illness, and that illness was self contained to that child, I wouldn't see it as an issue. It would be the parent's fault in that circumstance, but the illness wouldn't affect the health of others.

    In reality it does, and we have the potential to eradicate the disease. Unless aggressive initiatives are taken, that won't happen.

    So why beat around the bush and let something that we could wipe out in under 50 years be allowed to circumvent the population? The logical thing to do is to just kill it off and we won't have to deal with it again.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Should the Heel prick test not be mandatory for Irish newborns?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,056 ✭✭✭_Redzer_


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

    You said it would cause greater problems than it would mend so I think you should explain that first.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭zenno


    B0jangles wrote: »
    What I find frustrating is how incredibly easy it is to make up some "common-sense" -sounding bullshít and throw it up on Facebook, but establishing actual facts can take years of work.

    Person A can say "I think there's a link between vaccines and autism because some children show the first signs of autism in the 6 months after they were vaccinated."

    Person B says "But if children all get their vaccines at that age, and that is also the age when the first signs of autism become apparent how can you assume that there is a connection? That makes no sense!"

    Person A "I just think there must be a connection - prove to me that there isn't!"

    Person B - Goes off and applies for a grant to carry out a large-scale study on the possible causes of autism. Receives funding a year later. Starts the study which goes on for 15 years and includes 10,000 children from birth to the age of 10. Finds no link between vaccines and autism. Returns to their amazingly patient anti-vax friend with the final report and the conclusions. "There!"

    Person A: Scans the results for a couple of minutes "So you didn't find a connection? That doesn't prove that there isn't one, does it?"

    Person B: Beats person A to death with a copy of the study data

    10 years in the future, the government beats to death it's citizens with mandatory vaccinations.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,069 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    _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


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,004 ✭✭✭conorhal


    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.


  • Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    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.


  • Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    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.


  • Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    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
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭zenno


    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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,076 ✭✭✭✭Czarcasm


    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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,512 ✭✭✭Muise...


    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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,056 ✭✭✭_Redzer_


    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
  • Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    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...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,605 ✭✭✭gctest50


    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


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,069 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    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?


  • Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    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.


  • Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭zenno


    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/


  • Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,056 ✭✭✭_Redzer_


    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!


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,172 ✭✭✭Ghost Buster


    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.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,172 ✭✭✭Ghost Buster


    _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
Advertisement