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
Anti-vaxxers
Options
Comments
-
What the Italians are doing is an excellent step forward in tackling the sheer stupidity of these people. The sooner we have something like that here the better.
My wife has a childhood friend who’s not welcome in this house as she doesn’t have her kids vaccinated. She’s one of these nuts banging a drum about fluoride and 5G, proper looney.
It’s actually ironic that she had been shopping around trying to get her kids diagnosed with something, one to explain why one of her kids talks like a baby even though he’s 6, mainly due to being raised by a television, and to get some extra money. She eventually succeeded in getting them both something by bullying some poor doctor but I’d say it’s killing her that she can’t blame it on the vaccines.
You’d have to wonder about people who are more afraid of the water in the tap than the cigarette smoke choking up their living room.“It is not blood that makes you Irish but a willingness to be part of the Irish nation” - Thomas Davis
0 -
The latest tactic from virulent(ironically) AntiVaxxers!
To harass and attack bereaved parents and treat them as if they are "crisis actors"!
This is the same type of BS that conspiracy theorists tried to peddle about Sandy Hook and other mass shootings!
The angle now is that the bereaved are lying to support the Big Pharma and Government vaccine conspiracies!
Absolute and utter fúcking scumbags!!!
https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/19/health/anti-vax-harassment-eprise/index.html
That's just part of it. Definitely worth watching that clip. The anti-vax terrorists threaten those they disagree with. Prominent physicians needing security details. Harassment at CDC meetings. Death threats. Doxxing threats. One of the slimier leader-types for this mob of course decries this behavior and claims it happens to them (uhuh...them being truth-tellers after all), yet his (his claim) facebook page has anti-vaxxers meeting up to discuss strategy for harassing people, and on, and on.
Sickening, yet so American, first and foremost certain of their rightness.0 -
There was quire a good article by Frank Bruni in the New York Times and reproduced in the Irish Times today on the anti-vaxers. Some extracts:
By Frank Bruni
"How many studies do you have to throw at the vaccine hysterics before they quit? How much of a scientific consensus, how many unimpeachable experts and how exquisitely rational an argument must you present?
That’s a trick question, of course.
There’s no magic number. There’s no number, period. And that’s because the anti-vaccine crowd (or anti-vaxxers) aren’t trafficking in anything as concrete, mundane and quaint as facts. They’re not really engaged in a debate about medicine. They’re immersed in a world of conspiracies, in the dark shadows where no data can be trusted, nothing is what it seems and those who buy the party line are pitiable sheep...................
Again and again, until blue in the face, medical authorities have debunked the renegade assertion that there’s a link between the MMR vaccine, so named because it inoculates against measles, mumps and rubella, and autism.................
Humans aren’t rationalists. We’re romantics, and the world is wondrous when you believe that you belong to some brave and special tribe and have experienced enlightenment – about the assassination of John F Kennedy, about the existence of extraterrestrials, about the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center, about vaccines – that all the less perceptive, more gullible conformists out there simply can’t comprehend................
They turn to the internet, which is both a hall of mirrors and an overstuffed bazaar. It lets them customize their input and thus tailor their reality, which is reinforced by the like-minded company they keep online. They become surer that climate change is a hoax, that the deep state plots against the bold warriors who threaten it...........
And they open the floodgates to so much fiction that fact is swept away.
Where’s the vaccine against that?"
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/09/opinion/sunday/the-real-horror-of-the-anti-vaxxers.html
Also, a previous editorial:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/19/opinion/vaccines-public-health.html0 -
There was quire a good article by Frank Bruni in the New York Times and reproduced in the Irish Times today on the anti-vaxers. Some extracts:
By Frank Bruni
"How many studies do you have to throw at the vaccine hysterics before they quit? How much of a scientific consensus, how many unimpeachable experts and how exquisitely rational an argument must you present?
That’s a trick question, of course.
There’s no magic number. There’s no number, period. And that’s because the anti-vaccine crowd (or anti-vaxxers) aren’t trafficking in anything as concrete, mundane and quaint as facts. They’re not really engaged in a debate about medicine. They’re immersed in a world of conspiracies, in the dark shadows where no data can be trusted, nothing is what it seems and those who buy the party line are pitiable sheep...................
Again and again, until blue in the face, medical authorities have debunked the renegade assertion that there’s a link between the MMR vaccine, so named because it inoculates against measles, mumps and rubella, and autism.................
Humans aren’t rationalists. We’re romantics, and the world is wondrous when you believe that you belong to some brave and special tribe and have experienced enlightenment – about the assassination of John F Kennedy, about the existence of extraterrestrials, about the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center, about vaccines – that all the less perceptive, more gullible conformists out there simply can’t comprehend................
They turn to the internet, which is both a hall of mirrors and an overstuffed bazaar. It lets them customize their input and thus tailor their reality, which is reinforced by the like-minded company they keep online. They become surer that climate change is a hoax, that the deep state plots against the bold warriors who threaten it...........
And they open the floodgates to so much fiction that fact is swept away.
Where’s the vaccine against that?"
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/09/opinion/sunday/the-real-horror-of-the-anti-vaxxers.html
Also, a previous editorial:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/19/opinion/vaccines-public-health.html
But, what do you do? I've taken to being pretty aggressive in personal interactions with anti-vaxxers, like "Sorry, but your kids can't visit here." "That's a terrible thing to have done, not vaccinate your children." "It's too risky to be around children that aren't vaccinated." and so forth.0 -
EmmetSpiceland wrote: »She’s one of these nuts banging a drum about fluoride and 5G, proper looney.
I'm going out with someone who's always ranting and raving about that stuff. Completely anti vaccination because of pharma companies and the government.
Those figures that were in the news today are pretty bad. Sooner they do something about this whole anti vaccination nonsense the better.0 -
Advertisement
-
But, what do you do? I've taken to being pretty aggressive in personal interactions with anti-vaxxers, like "Sorry, but your kids can't visit here." "That's a terrible thing to have done, not vaccinate your children." "It's too risky to be around children that aren't vaccinated." and so forth.
While better information and education should persuade many of the merely confused, I certainly think the Government needs to get much tougher legally with the hard-core element - as in something like the California and Italian approaches. These narcissists need to be pushed to find some way to indulge their self-importance other than endangering public health.0 -
While better information and education should persuade many of the merely confused, I certainly think the Government needs to get much tougher legally with the hard-core element - as in something like the California and Italian approaches. These narcissists need to be pushed to find some way to indulge their self-importance other than endangering public health.
Do you think the influenza vaccine should be mandatory for all adults(apart from immune supressed etc)?0 -
Karma's a bitch.
Anti-vaxxer wingut Italian politician, now sickened with chicken pox. Hopefully this'll lead to shingles, in an adult it definitely can.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/italy-vaccination-chickenpox-anti-vax-massimiliano-fedriga-salvini-a8829926.html
FD: Claims he vaccinates his children, just was opposed to the Italian government mandating vaccination. Color me skeptical.0 -
Do you think the influenza vaccine should be mandatory for all adults(apart from immune supressed etc)?
As the Flu vacine needs to be updated annually it is a bit different. Having said that, I think there is a very strong case for it to be mandatory for all staff in health care settings for a start.0 -
As the Flu vacine needs to be updated annually it is a bit different. Having said that, I think there is a very strong case for it to be mandatory for all staff in health care settings for a start.
Why is it different,just get the new influenza shot every year. Why not all adults other than healthcare.?0 -
Advertisement
-
If the quality of evidence impacts the identification of adverse events then it is very significant. As quoted on ‘lack of good-quality evidence’.The quality of the evidence would only be signifcant if there were adverse events and a figure with a good degree of confidence was needed. "Good" is not meant in the normal way it's a grading term for trials.
The lead author of this review Dr. Tom Jefferson has more recently expressed concern on deficiencies in industry sponsored trials (Tamiflu) and associated reviews (Cochrane HPV review). In the latter the safety of aluminium adjuvants and the methodology of trials is questioned.Overall, the methodological quality of included studies was low. Few reports gave details of the randomisation process, allocation concealment, reasons for withdrawals, or strategies to deal with them in analysis. Inconsistencies in reporting, lack of clarity on numerators and denominators, variability of outcome definitions, and lack of outcome definitions led to much loss of data.
This would appear to be an industry acceptance of dose response adverse effect for aluminium adjuvant which invalidates its use as a placebo and makes the case for clinical trials for adjuvants. He also had this to say about live attenuated flu vaccines.Adjuvants are not regulated separately from their vaccine antigens. According to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), adjuvants are unreliable comparators.7 One HPV vaccine manufacturer (GlaxoSmithKline that produces Cervarix) states that its aluminium-based comparator induces harms: ‘higher incidences of myalgia might namely be attributable to the higher content of aluminium in the HPV vaccine (450 μg Al[OH]3) than the content of aluminium in the HAV [hepatitis A] vaccine (225 μg Al[OH]3)’.8 The comparator hepatitis vaccines also used the HPV vaccines’ aluminium-based adjuvant. http://fsk.it/attach/Content/News/6649/o/1chocrane_bmjebm2018111012.full.pdf“Influenza vaccines are about marketing and not science,” he says. “We have few trials, and masses of very poor quality observational evidence. We have presented evidence of considerable reporting bias, which governments continue to ignore. The science is missing and so making an informed decision is very difficult.” https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/oct/05/government-wrong-nasal-spray-vaccine
Not judged to be related, but they were closely associated after vaccination and there were none in the saline arm which is unusual coincidence on two levels.I have bolded the appropriate line. Those adverse experiences were not vaccine related. So there is nothing to worry about there.
For most the main source of information is media in which universal safety is claimed. The attempt at coercion is the campaign, which has been successful in some areas, to make medications with accepted potential to cause harm mandatory.Who is being coerced, though? Health care providers do advise of any potential risks, minuscule as they are. Efforts have always been made to identify where there might be a risk, and the oodles of clinical trials and studies that have been carried out attest to that. The one thing you will always hear, when the question arises, is that vaccines, like everything else, are not 100% safe. Everybody knows this. Everybody accepts this. On websites for vaccinations they also mention the possible side effects, so it is not a case of it being brushed under the carpet. It's out there in the open.
There is a widespread attempt to categorise and ridicule with even those damaged by vaccines being targeted. Along with oversimplification, these are old tactics with parallels in many industry generated campaigns.I also do not believe that those same people are being stigmatised or penalised. They are, however, being asked to view their decision through a more objective lens. The media has now copped on and stopped giving equal airtime to the anti-vaxx campaigners, ditto social media. This is only fair because the weight of evidence is against them.0 -
If the quality of evidence impacts the identification of adverse events then it is very significant. As quoted on ‘lack of good-quality evidence’. The lead author of this review Dr. Tom Jefferson has more recently expressed concern on deficiencies in industry sponsored trials (Tamiflu) and associated reviews (Cochrane HPV review). In the latter the safety of aluminium adjuvants and the methodology of trials is questioned.
This would appear to be an industry acceptance of dose response adverse effect for aluminium adjuvant which invalidates its use as a placebo and makes the case for clinical trials for adjuvants. He also had this to say about live attenuated flu vaccines.
Not judged to be related, but they were closely associated after vaccination and there were none in the saline arm which is unusual coincidence on two levels.
For most the main source of information is media in which universal safety is claimed. The attempt at coercion is the campaign, which has been successful in some areas, to make medications with accepted potential to cause harm mandatory.
There is a widespread attempt to categorise and ridicule with even those damaged by vaccines being targeted. Along with oversimplification, these are old tactics with parallels in many industry generated campaigns.
Are you saying that the quality of the study design was so bad that statistically significant differences in adverse events would not be noticed? Could you be more specific on these flaws that would hide the adverse events rather than add uncertainity to any observed?Your talking about some margin of error to go from zero evidence.0 -
Why is it different,just get the new influenza shot every year. Why not all adults other than healthcare.?
Cost and the fact that it's yearly, influenza is most deadly to the elderly, so that's where it's targeted, however, there's evidence that vaccinating the carriers of influenza (the school/college going) is more effective due to the frequency of contact in these age groups facilitating the spread. Politically it would be hard to tell the OAP that their vaccines were being given to someone else and not them, even if you could statistically show that it's better to spend the resources another way (OAP's vote in droves, and vaccinate in droves, nothing like old age for the preservation instinct to kick in).0 -
Cost and the fact that it's yearly, influenza is most deadly to the elderly, so that's where it's targeted, however, there's evidence that vaccinating the carriers of influenza (the school/college going) is more effective due to the frequency of contact in these age groups facilitating the spread. Politically it would be hard to tell the OAP that their vaccines were being given to someone else and not them, even if you could statistically show that it's better to spend the resources another way (OAP's vote in droves, and vaccinate in droves, nothing like old age for the preservation instinct to kick in).
But it's recommended for everyone over the age of 6 months to get this vaccine is it not? And also the HSE recommend on their site to get the new vaccine every year. So why not make it mandatory.0 -
mulbot wrote:Why is it different,just get the new influenza shot every year. Why not all adults other than healthcare.?
Because the flu virus mutates so much from year to year and there are usually a number of varieties in circulation. The shot any year won't have full coverage.
Because updating the shot mandatorially every year would be administratively difficult and probably an inefficient use of resources. You can't equate it to (say) polio or measles innoculation which are essentially lifelong.
I suggest staff in health care settings as a starting point because many patients using these facilities will be particularly vulnerable if infected - and because health care staff should be setting a good example. Also, healhcare staff should be protected and available for work in peak flu season and, especially, in case of an epidemic.
Extending it to other staff groups could be considered after that. I am not sure if it could be made mandatory for everyone for several reasons.0 -
Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,994 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 9697
But it's recommended for everyone over the age of 6 months to get this vaccine is it not? And also the HSE recommend on their site to get the new vaccine every year. So why not make it mandatory.
Because there are “at risk” groups for getting the flu. If someone who is normally healthy gets the flu they’re unlikely to have any nasty side effects. However if someone who has a respiratory disorder, like asthma, were to get he flu it could cause serious issues.
Hence the warning of at risk groups getting the vaccine.
Things like measles/mumps don’t discriminate. Everyone is as likely to get the nasty side effects, and the potential side effects of measles/mumps are worse than those of a bad flu.
Don’t know why I’m engaging though. You clearly have an agenda :rolleyes:0 -
Because there are “at risk” groups for getting the flu. If someone who is normally healthy gets the flu they’re unlikely to have any nasty side effects. However if someone who has a respiratory disorder, like asthma, were to get he flu it could cause serious issues.
Hence the warning of at risk groups getting the vaccine.
Things like measles/mumps don’t discriminate. Everyone is as likely to get the nasty side effects, and the potential side effects of measles/mumps are worse than those of a bad flu.
Don’t know why I’m engaging though. You clearly have an agenda :rolleyes:
No agenda, sorry. Your explanation however is very much at odds with that of my GP. She says that she agrees with the HSE recommendation that everyone who can get the flu jab, should,as its given in September before "flu season" and will be protecting all those who are at risk. Even those who are healthy, according to her, can still spread it so her advice is to have the majority receive it every year.0 -
No agenda, sorry. Your explanation however is very much at odds with that of my GP. She says that she agrees with the HSE recommendation that everyone who can get the flu jab, should,as its given in September before "flu season" and will be protecting all those who are at risk. Even those who are healthy, according to her, can still spread it so her advice is to have the majority receive it every year.
Any what's your opinion on the flu jab and vaccines in general?0 -
Because there are “at risk” groups for getting the flu. If someone who is normally healthy gets the flu they’re unlikely to have any nasty side effects. However if someone who has a respiratory disorder, like asthma, were to get he flu it could cause serious issues.
Hence the warning of at risk groups getting the vaccine.
FWIW, the CNN link posted earlier in the thread was about a mother whose infant died from the flu. In my opinion, especially in the US, the hazards of the flu are badly downplayed. "Just take a few days off." "it's not so bad."
The attitude in other countries is much more aggressive about vaccinating against and treating the flu. If you *do* contract it, get on tamiflu right away. Tell you GP to prescribe it, hours make a big difference.
My personal experience was living in NYC and not getting my vaccine in 2014, came down with the flu (103.7 temp, where 104 is very dangerous.) Did get on tamiflu and was 'only' laid up for about 2 weeks. 2 weeks later, got the jab, and then got the flu another month after that, though not as bad as the first time (as I got on Tamiflu immediately).
Spouse is asthmatic and gets the jab. The rare times it hasn't worked, she's instant bronchitis and months of illness/misery. Last year it happened but again, off to the GP, tamiflu and the bronchitis didn't set in, though she was run down for weeks.
And finally, my nephew died from the flu at the age of 27. It turns out, he had a rare genetic disorder involving having a very reduced metabolic mechanism for digesting protein. He actually gravitated towards and became full vegan in his early 20's. Seemed like a perfectly healthy young man, then one winter he was working crazy hours on his startup and failed to get his flu jab (we think, we don't know.) Ended up in the hospital with massive internal bleeding to the brain and was gone overnight. Through research, we found out about this rare condition, had a DNA test done and sure enough he had the condition. I hd my DNA screened, no problem and I'm as much a meat lover as the next person.
Basically, my nephew died of ammonia poisoning as the enzymes needed to complete the metabolism of protein were very reduced, and the flu knocked out the mechanism completely. The researcher said that all the people he knew of with the condition ended up vegan, it starts out with them feeling queasy/ill when eating protein (especially meat protein.) So, although I'm personally skeptical of 'political veganism', there are definitely medical conditions that can lead to someone rightfully becoming vegan.
Sorry for the TL;DR. Get the flu jab, you really don't want the flu nor do you want to give it to someone else.0 -
Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,994 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 9697
I’m not sure what you’re asking, tbh.No agenda, sorry. Your explanation however is very much at odds with that of my GP. She says that she agrees with the HSE recommendation that everyone who can get the flu jab, should,as its given in September before "flu season" and will be protecting all those who are at risk. Even those who are healthy, according to her, can still spread it so her advice is to have the majority receive it every year.
I get the flu vaccine every year because I am asthmatic. I didn’t get the jab one year and nearly ended up in hospital. I couldn’t even get out of bed to puke. I was off work for almost 3 weeks.
Do I think vaccines should be mandatory for those who can get them? I honestly don’t know. I believe in people’s right to body autonomy, and people’s right to choose, but I also agree with people not having to contract the measles because little Timmy doesn’t want autism.0 -
Advertisement
-
But it's recommended for everyone over the age of 6 months to get this vaccine is it not? And also the HSE recommend on their site to get the new vaccine every year. So why not make it mandatory.
The flu mutates so quickly and often as well as there being so may variants that it is impossible to generate herd immunity via vaccination. Hence flu vaccines are primarily intended for high risk individuals due either to age, other health concerns or risk of aquesition. There are also secondary consideration such as health service and the impact if manpower levels were decimated by flu.0 -
Any what's your opinion on the flu jab and vaccines in general?
Always said the theory of vaccines or any medicine that can stop a disease or eradicate it is good d, as long as its safe and effective. Flu jab, not sure about it, I don't get it. That's why I was asking opinions on making it mandatory. My GP reckons the flu vaccine should be taken by those who can.0 -
-
The flu mutates so quickly and often as well as there being so may variants that it is impossible to generate herd immunity via vaccination. Hence flu vaccines are primarily intended for high risk individuals due either to age, other health concerns or risk of aquesition. There are also secondary consideration such as health service and the impact if manpower levels were decimated by flu.
As I said earlier, my GP says it should be taken every year for those circulating strains, and she says it's important everyone gets it, as to not means that the potential to spread it to those who are high risk is severely increased,. Again, thats why I was asking opinions here on that, they seem to be different.0 -
As I said earlier, my GP says it should be taken every year for those circulating strains, and she says it's important everyone gets it, as to not means that the potential to spread it to those who are high risk is severely increased,. Again, thats why I was asking opinions here on that, they seem to be different.
Personally think if it can be shown to be cost effective then it should be mandatory and that it should be mandatory for nurses and doctors. I suspect the low uptake is more to do with sick days being used as holidays then any concern over its safety. I get it free in work every year. Can't really phone in sick with the flu now.0 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,307 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 6208
Dr. Jefferson's view of aluminium adjuvants in 2004 was that there was "no evidence" of serious or long term harm and it did not warrant further research! He certainly changed his tune (as he is entitled to do, of course).If the quality of evidence impacts the identification of adverse events then it is very significant. As quoted on ‘lack of good-quality evidence’. The lead author of this review Dr. Tom Jefferson has more recently expressed concern on deficiencies in industry sponsored trials (Tamiflu) and associated reviews (Cochrane HPV review). In the latter the safety of aluminium adjuvants and the methodology of trials is questioned.
This would appear to be an industry acceptance of dose response adverse effect for aluminium adjuvant which invalidates its use as a placebo and makes the case for clinical trials for adjuvants. He also had this to say about live attenuated flu vaccines.
Just to note that Cochrane refute Jefferson's paper and the claims made within, regarding methodology and the false claim that they missed up to half of the eligible trials.
Cochranes refutation of all those claims can be found at this link: https://www.cochrane.org/sites/default/files/public/uploads/cochrane_hpv_responCochrane wrote:On 27th July 2018, an article was published in the journal BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine relating to the
recently published Cochrane Review on prophylactic human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines. The article is
based on analyses undertaken at the Nordic Cochrane Centre, and two of the authors are experienced
Cochrane researchers: Professors Peter Gøtzsche and Tom Jefferson. It made several criticisms of the
Cochrane Review, most notable of which was that the Cochrane Review was incomplete due to missing
"nearly half of the eligible trials".
Cochrane takes all criticisms and feedback seriously, seeing this as one mechanism among many to
improve the quality of Cochrane Reviews. The organization has 10 long-standing principles that we hold
dear, and they include a commitment to quality and the minimization of bias, transparency, and a
recognition of the need for our work to be relevant to the needs of evidence users and decision makers.
Cochrane aims to create the best current evidence to guide health decisions.
We initiated an investigation in response to the criticisms, working with the review authors and editors and
with independent researchers who had not been involved in the original publication. The key findings of our
investigation are that:
• The Cochrane Review did not miss "nearly half of the eligible trials". A small number of studies were
missed due to the primary focus on peer-reviewed reports in scientific journals, but addition of these
data makes little or no difference to the results of the review for the main outcomes;
• The trials comparators were unambiguously, transparently, and accurately described;
• The selection of outcomes for benefits was appropriate and was consistent with World Health
Organization guidance;
• The review included published and unpublished data on serious harms, and the findings on
mortality were reported transparently and responsibly;
• The review was compliant with Cochrane’s current conflict of interest policy;
• Cochrane’s media coverage was cautious and balanced, but we recognize that there could be
improvements in relation to transparency where external experts are quoted;
• The BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine article substantially overstated its criticisms.
David Tovey, Editor in Chief, Cochrane
Karla Soares-Weiser, Deputy Editor in Chief, Cochrane
Do you have any proof other than you feel it was an unusual coincidence? Those that worked on the clinical trials came to that conclusion and would have factored that into their findings. Hell, even if they were caused by the vaccine, there was nothing majorly serious there. The amounts that had an event were still minuscule.Not judged to be related, but they were closely associated after vaccination and there were none in the saline arm which is unusual coincidence on two levels.
The media never make claims of universal safety. After all, who could make a claim for universal safety? Nobody can.For most the main source of information is media in which universal safety is claimed. The attempt at coercion is the campaign, which has been successful in some areas, to make medications with accepted potential to cause harm mandatory.
I haven't heard about any campaign of coercion, what exactly are you referring to there?
Where is the "widespread attempt" happening? The media in general go easy on anti-vaxxers. I have heard of anti-vaxx campaigners actively targeting the parents of children that have died (this was posted a few pages back by banie01). Link : https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/19/health/anti-vax-harassment-eprise/index.htmlThere is a widespread attempt to categorise and ridicule with even those damaged by vaccines being targeted. Along with oversimplification, these are old tactics with parallels in many industry generated campaigns.
Some people behave abominably online. I don't think there is a group that hasn't been targeted in some way on social media. Let's not make anti-vaxxers into victims.0 -
VicMackey1 wrote: »Not sure if this has been posted already but I would urge any anti-vaxxers to watch this. Facts only seem to have a negative impact on their ability to come to a sensible conclusion regarding vaccines. This video might stand a better chance at seeping through the brain barrier. I fear that is a pretty thick barrier though!
Sadly, Laura Brennan passed away earlier today. RIP
https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2019/0320/1037583-laura-brennan/0 -
Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,994 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 9697
VicMackey1 wrote: »Sadly, Laura Brennan passed away earlier today. RIP
https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2019/0320/1037583-laura-brennan/
Seems odd to "like" this post. May she RIP. Her activism will last beyond her years, and the impact she had on increasing the vaccine uptake cannot be underestimated.0 -
Personally think if it can be shown to be cost effective then it should be mandatory and that it should be mandatory for nurses and doctors. I suspect the low uptake is more to do with sick days being used as holidays then any concern over its safety. I get it free in work every year. Can't really phone in sick with the flu now.
Yes that's along the lines of what I was asking. Something like hospitals, or schools, should all teachers for instance have mandatory booster vaccines, flu vaccine etc. Is it mandatory in your workplace or is it offered?0 -
Advertisement
-
Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,994 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 9697
Yes that's along the lines of what I was asking. Something like hospitals, or schools, should all teachers for instance have mandatory booster vaccines, flu vaccine etc. Is it mandatory in your workplace or is it offered?
I'm a teacher and it's not offered or suggested to me. Some employes offer it on the basis that healthy staff are less likely to take sick days, and if a flu went thru a staff it would be carnage.
Last year in school we had a flu outbreak and 16 teachers were absent one day. Some were not flu related, but still. Lots of flu.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement