Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Vaccinations imposed by law

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Disclaimer: "Buyer beware!" The government should have made the market a honest place, but that caveat is still necessary. The risks that you decide to take on are solely your responsibility. Whatever advice you take from my posts here has to be treated with due diligence. I cannot guarantee that I will never make a mistake, but your health or that of your dependents is still solely your responsibility.

    Perhaps this passage should be repeated: "My intention is that the thread focus is on the rights of parents to decide for their children. Of course medical issues may be discussed, if they seem necessary."

    Anyway, the quote function of the TWeb editor does not include Tweb quotations, so I have to copy parts of Rogue06's posts http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...l=1#post201708
    to here.
    Much of the ideology and methodological underpinnings of naturopathy are in conflict with the paradigm of evidence-based medicine. Their training adds up to a very small amount of that of primary care doctors.
    For shame, rogue. "Much" as in the first sentence, which was underlined, presumably by rogue, could be "Little." But no, rogue evidently felt he had to reinforce the slant of the paragraph. The next sentence is also objectionable. While it might be true that many "naturopath doctors" are woefully undertrained as compared to other medical doctors, is it still not possible that many naturopath doctors are well trained in mainstream or conventional medicine, as Dr Stengler claims to be?

    What would rogue feel after reading this? "Many complaints have been made about the studies and trials conducted or paid for by Big Pharma companies. All too many of those studies and trials may be poorly designed, poorly conducted, and poorly reported; or they may be outright frauds. Moreover, many trials appear to have been not reported presumably because the sponsor did not like the results."


    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    Vaccinations against infectious diseases work on a concept known as the community effect (a.k.a. herd immunity). When a large portion of a community is immunized against a contagious disease, most members of the community are protected against that disease because there is little opportunity for an outbreak because chains of infection are likely to be disrupted, which stops or slows the spread of disease. This means that even those who are not eligible for certain vaccines -- such as infants and pregnant women -- receive some protection since the spread of contagious disease is contained.
    Now here is a medical issue that has to be discussed in this thread.

    Let me assume argendo that every parent is free to make health decisions for his or her offspring; we have a disease similar to measles and rubella, but is different; there is a vaccine that is 100% effective against the putative disease but has alleged bad side effects; we have almost, but not quite, herd immunity against the putative disease (hereinafter just "h.m.").

    Now what inference can we draw? As the scenario above is, we need to make more assumptions or definitions. For a few things, when do we determine the world has achieved h.m.? What is exactly h.m.? How to determine the degree of h.m.?

    Thinking about such questions, I've come to suspect h.m. is a vain concept.
    The greater number of laws . . . , the more thieves . . . there will be. ---- Lao-Tzu

    [T]he truth I’m after and the truth never harmed anyone. What harms us is to persist in self-deceit and ignorance -— Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Catholicity View Post
      Stengler isn't a good one.
      Perhaps you forgot my admonition to back your assertions with citation of the scientific literature including news. Why do you think Stengler is not a good medical practitioner? Be detailed, please. No hearsay, please.
      The greater number of laws . . . , the more thieves . . . there will be. ---- Lao-Tzu

      [T]he truth I’m after and the truth never harmed anyone. What harms us is to persist in self-deceit and ignorance -— Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        Children at school shouldn't eat peanuts because it puts those with a severe allergic reaction to them at risk just by being in their presence.

        Children at school shouldn't be unvaccinated because it puts everyone else at risk by being in their presence.

        Vaccinations against infectious diseases work on a concept known as the community effect (a.k.a. herd immunity). When a large portion of a community is immunized against a contagious disease, most members of the community are protected against that disease because there is little opportunity for an outbreak because chains of infection are likely to be disrupted, which stops or slows the spread of disease. This means that even those who are not eligible for certain vaccines -- such as infants and pregnant women -- receive some protection since the spread of contagious disease is contained.
        O.K... but I still don't see the connection to food allergies. There's no such thing as an inoculation against peanut allergies, for example, so I'm not sure why that's being held up as an example to beat the anti-vaccination crowd over the head. It's not like there's going to be a peanut allergy outbreak because a kid with peanut allergies attended class. I also find it ironic when California was hit by a measles outbreak earlier this year, even kids who had been vaccinated against measles contracted the disease.

        At any rate, I think vaccinations have their place, but I think in some ways we've gone too far. If there are diseases with a high mortality rate that are difficult to treat then perhaps we should vaccinate against them, but why vaccinate against diseases like mumps, measles, chickenpox, and other relatively innocuous illnesses that used to be a right of passage for children and helped them naturally develop strong immune systems?

        Limited vaccinations are probably a good thing. Vaccinating against every communicable disease known to man is not, nor do I believe that taking a newborn and pumping him full of chemicals is the right thing to do.
        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
        Than a fool in the eyes of God


        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
          O.K... but I still don't see the connection to food allergies. There's no such thing as an inoculation against peanut allergies, for example, so I'm not sure why that's being held up as an example to beat the anti-vaccination crowd over the head. It's not like there's going to be a peanut allergy outbreak because a kid with peanut allergies attended class. I also find it ironic when California was hit by a measles outbreak earlier this year, even kids who had been vaccinated against measles contracted the disease.

          At any rate, I think vaccinations have their place, but I think in some ways we've gone too far. If there are diseases with a high mortality rate that are difficult to treat then perhaps we should vaccinate against them, but why vaccinate against diseases like mumps, measles, chickenpox, and other relatively innocuous illnesses that used to be a right of passage for children and helped them naturally develop strong immune systems?

          Limited vaccinations are probably a good thing. Vaccinating against every communicable disease known to man is not, nor do I believe that taking a newborn and pumping him full of chemicals is the right thing to do.
          Antivaxxers have no problem with schools having rules about bringing things like peanuts to school, but if the school has a rule against allowing unvaccinated children to attend, they scream facism and conspiracy.

          get it?

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
            O.K... but I still don't see the connection to food allergies. There's no such thing as an inoculation against peanut allergies, for example, so I'm not sure why that's being held up as an example to beat the anti-vaccination crowd over the head. It's not like there's going to be a peanut allergy outbreak because a kid with peanut allergies attended class. I also find it ironic when California was hit by a measles outbreak earlier this year, even kids who had been vaccinated against measles contracted the disease.

            At any rate, I think vaccinations have their place, but I think in some ways we've gone too far. If there are diseases with a high mortality rate that are difficult to treat then perhaps we should vaccinate against them, but why vaccinate against diseases like mumps, measles, chickenpox, and other relatively innocuous illnesses that used to be a right of passage for children and helped them naturally develop strong immune systems?

            Limited vaccinations are probably a good thing. Vaccinating against every communicable disease known to man is not, nor do I believe that taking a newborn and pumping him full of chemicals is the right thing to do.

            I took a three-day trip to the emergency room last year for viral meningitis, which is caused by herpes zoster, which I carry with me forever thanks to contracting chickenpox when I was young. A friend posted an article a few weeks ago on my FB feed detailing how scientists were fuddled by the drop in various diseases correlating with the measles vaccine. Turns out that measles has a tendency to "wipe out" antibodies for other illnesses, resulting in a resurgence after a person contracted measles.

            Not things that lead to a strengthened immune system.

            And infants should absolutely be vaccinated.
            "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              Antivaxxers have no problem with schools having rules about bringing things like peanuts to school, but if the school has a rule against allowing unvaccinated children to attend, they scream facism and conspiracy.

              get it?
              No, because food allergies do not involve any sort of choice as far as I know. It's comparing apples to oranges.
              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
              Than a fool in the eyes of God


              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                No, because food allergies do not involve any sort of choice as far as I know. It's comparing apples to oranges.
                huh?

                You don't choose to get a disease either. It isn't just about an unvaxxinated child catching a disease, but spreading it. Vaccinations are not 100% effective. Nothing is.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                  huh?

                  You don't choose to get a disease either. It isn't just about an unvaxxinated child catching a disease, but spreading it. Vaccinations are not 100% effective. Nothing is.
                  Which is the purpose of mass inoculations. It keeps the disease from spreading throughout the population.

                  I'm always still in trouble again

                  "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                  "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                  "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                    huh?

                    You don't choose to get a disease either. It isn't just about an unvaxxinated child catching a disease, but spreading it. Vaccinations are not 100% effective. Nothing is.
                    Also, a direct comparison can be made between a child with peanut allergies and a child who cannot get vaccinated because of a medical reason and must rely upon herd immunity.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I fully support this initiative, though it should be done by penalizing the persons involved with an extra tax burden on their income, say 5%.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                        At any rate, I think vaccinations have their place, but I think in some ways we've gone too far. If there are diseases with a high mortality rate that are difficult to treat then perhaps we should vaccinate against them, but why vaccinate against diseases like mumps, measles, chickenpox, and other relatively innocuous illnesses that used to be a right of passage for children and helped them naturally develop strong immune systems?
                        Precisely. We cannot conflate the benefits and side-effects of each individual vaccine, just as with antibiotics, for example. But it is in the interest of Big Pharma to do so.

                        Therefore (especially given past history and basic human nature) Big Pharma will use anti-anti-vaccination outrage (eg this) to push for compulsory non-important vaccinations purely because there's money involved, and they will likely succeed because there's money in it to lobby politicians with.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Paprika View Post
                          Precisely. We cannot conflate the benefits and side-effects of each individual vaccine, just as with antibiotics, for example. But it is in the interest of Big Pharma to do so.

                          Therefore (especially given past history and basic human nature) Big Pharma will use anti-anti-vaccination outrage (eg this) to push for compulsory non-important vaccinations purely because there's money involved, and they will likely succeed because there's money in it to lobby politicians with.
                          Come on, Big Pharma? You're sounding like a conspiracy theorist here.
                          "It's evolution; every time you invent something fool-proof, the world invents a better fool."
                          -Unknown

                          "Preach the gospel, and if necessary use words." - Most likely St.Francis


                          I find that evolution is the best proof of God.
                          ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          I support the :
                          sigpic

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Irate Canadian View Post
                            Come on, Big Pharma? You're sounding like a conspiracy theorist here.
                            I HOPE he's being sarcastic.
                            If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Irate Canadian View Post
                              Come on, Big Pharma? You're sounding like a conspiracy theorist here.
                              What part of 'big corporations have done, do, and will do unethical, even illegal stuff to maximise profits' is so unbelievable? What part of 'pharmaceutical companies are likely to push useless or harmful treatments' is so unbelievable, given past history?

                              Deal with the argument; no need to break out the smelling salts every time someone uses a badphrase.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Paprika View Post
                                . . . to push for compulsory non-important vaccinations purely . . .
                                This is a complete side issue but can you tell me what some of these "non-important vaccinations" are? I do not have any point to make, I just do not know what they might be.
                                Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                127 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                328 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                112 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                197 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                361 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X