USA faces worst measles outbreak in nearly three decades

[arista]

This all the Facebook Freaks
and other Internet sites at Fault.

We are getting the same problem
in the UK , as well sadly



[The disgraced British former doctor
behind the anti-vaccine movement has
defended his recent communications
with the ultra-Orthodox Jewish
community in the US.
Andrew Garfield published now widely discredited
and condemned research suggesting
a possible link between the MMR vaccine and autism.
In 2010 his licence to practice was revoked
and he was struck off the medical register
in the UK after being found
guilty of dishonesty, the "abuse" of developmentally
delayed children by giving them
unnecessary and invasive
medical procedures, and acting
without ethical approval of his research.]


https://news.sky.com/story/us-faces-worst-measles-outbreak-in-nearly-three-decades-11727836

[Liam-]

It should be illegal to not vaccinate your kids imo.

If you don’t want to vaccinate your kids then like, crack on dummy, but don’t then allow their socialise with other kids, it’s unfair and incredibly irresponsible

[Tom4784]

Anti-Vaxxers should lose their kids for child endangerment of their own children and other children too young to be vaccinated. There's few things I hate more in this world than Anti-Vaxxers, their ignorance is dangerous and they are representative of everything that is wrong with the world.

[Niamh.]

An unfortunate side effect of social media I think

[user104658]

It should be illegal to not vaccinate your kids imo.

If you don’t want to vaccinate your kids then like, crack on dummy, but don’t then allow their socialise with other kids, it’s unfair and incredibly irresponsible

Anti-Vaxxers should lose their kids for child endangerment of their own children and other children too young to be vaccinated. There's few things I hate more in this world than Anti-Vaxxers, their ignorance is dangerous and they are representative of everything that is wrong with the world.

I'm not anti-vax (and I hate that I --always-- have to preface this opinion with that) but I completely 100% disagree with this dystopian nonsense :facepalm:. Social media is responsible for a lot of the anti-vax movement, yes that's probably true, but it's also responsible for the frankly bizarre levels of terror that surround vaccine-preventable illness, the majority of which are minor and self-limiting.

A child is MASSIVELY - not insignificantly but ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE - at more risk from road traffic accidents as a pedestrian or passenger and that would be true even if NO ONE vaccinated. I've yet to see hoards of people clutching their pearls and screeching about the dangers of cars existing, or suggesting that parents should be stripped of their children for taking them on the motorway :facepalm:.

There are countless other examples beyond this. The phobia (yes, phobia - irrational fear) of the risk presented by MMR-preventable illnesses would be hilarious if it wasn't infuriating. More infuriating still is the gaggle of people bleating about "ignorance" whilst in the same breath suggesting that unvaccinated children are "unlikely to reach adulthood", when if that had any knowledge at all of these diseases or of the statistics surrounding them they would realise how ludicrously over the top statements like that are.

There are some horrendous diseases in the world. They're not the ones we routinely vaccinate against.

There are some groups that are at risk from minor vaccine-preventable illness. Otherwise healthy children and adults are not one of those groups.

Other often ignored points;

1) Vaccines are far from always effective.

2) Unlike natural immunity, vaccines can often wear off and if you go today and have your immunities tested, you will probably discover that you are not immune to many of the things you were vaccinated against as a child. You're one of the unvaccinated :worry:. Better stay in your house!

3) Almost all of the social stats surrounding vaccine effectiveness fail to present control variables or adjust for other factors (sanitation, antibiotics, modern healthcare) and are thus (deliberately?) botched.

4) Vaccines do carry risks. This has been medically verified. There is no evidence of a link with autism but there are plenty of other - again, medically and scientifically verified - vaccine injuries that can and do occur. This is frequently outright lied about for fear of more people then rejecting vaccines which may be a valid fear - but it presents a huge problem for me as I believe that in a civilised society it is ESSENTIAL that any medical procedure comes with informed consent and this is being happily pissed into the wind.


Again I'll punctuate this by saying I'm not anti-vax. I'm vaccinated, my children are vaccinated, if I had more children they would be vaccinated, and I would strongly encourage any other parent to have their children vaccinated, and in fact, I would encourage adults to have their immunities checked (because as mentioned before, if you think you're immune to all of the things you were vaccinated against as a child, you're probably living in blissful ignorance).

But it is a medical procedure and should be being discussed openly and properly in a balanced way. It should ALWAYS require respectful consent and the idea that we should start legally mandating people to have needles stuck in them at the government's whim is genuinely horrifying to me.

[Tom4784]

I'm not anti-vax (and I hate that I --always-- have to preface this opinion with that) but I completely 100% disagree with this dystopian nonsense :facepalm:. Social media is responsible for a lot of the anti-vax movement, yes that's probably true, but it's also responsible for the frankly bizarre levels of terror that surround vaccine-preventable illness, the majority of which are minor and self-limiting.

A child is MASSIVELY - not insignificantly but ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE - at more risk from road traffic accidents as a pedestrian or passenger and that would be true even if NO ONE vaccinated. I've yet to see hoards of people clutching their pearls and screeching about the dangers of cars existing, or suggesting that parents should be stripped of their children for taking them on the motorway :facepalm:.

There are countless other examples beyond this. The phobia (yes, phobia - irrational fear) of the risk presented by MMR-preventable illnesses would be hilarious if it wasn't infuriating. More infuriating still is the gaggle of people bleating about "ignorance" whilst in the same breath suggesting that unvaccinated children are "unlikely to reach adulthood", when if that had any knowledge at all of these diseases or of the statistics surrounding them they would realise how ludicrously over the top statements like that are.

There are some horrendous diseases in the world. They're not the ones we routinely vaccinate against.

There are some groups that are at risk from minor vaccine-preventable illness. Otherwise healthy children and adults are not one of those groups.

Other often ignored points;

1) Vaccines are far from always effective.

2) Unlike natural immunity, vaccines can often wear off and if you go today and have your immunities tested, you will probably discover that you are not immune to many of the things you were vaccinated against as a child. You're one of the unvaccinated :worry:. Better stay in your house!

3) Almost all of the social stats surrounding vaccine effectiveness fail to present control variables or adjust for other factors (sanitation, antibiotics, modern healthcare) and are thus (deliberately?) botched.

4) Vaccines do carry risks. This has been medically verified. There is no evidence of a link with autism but there are plenty of other - again, medically and scientifically verified - vaccine injuries that can and do occur. This is frequently outright lied about for fear of more people then rejecting vaccines which may be a valid fear - but it presents a huge problem for me as I believe that in a civilised society it is ESSENTIAL that any medical procedure comes with informed consent and this is being happily pissed into the wind.


Again I'll punctuate this by saying I'm not anti-vax. I'm vaccinated, my children are vaccinated, if I had more children they would be vaccinated, and I would strongly encourage any other parent to have their children vaccinated, and in fact, I would encourage adults to have their immunities checked (because as mentioned before, if you think you're immune to all of the things you were vaccinated against as a child, you're probably living in blissful ignorance).

But it is a medical procedure and should be being discussed openly and properly in a balanced way. It should ALWAYS require respectful consent and the idea that we should start legally mandating people to have needles stuck in them at the government's whim is genuinely horrifying to me.

This is basically the anti-vaxx equivalent of 'I'm not a racist but...'

[arista]

An unfortunate side effect of social media I think


Yes but so dangerous in America.
And Now some Online Mum's in UK
are going the same way.

[user104658]

This is basically the anti-vaxx equivalent of 'I'm not a racist but...'It isn't, in simple terms all it is, is pointing out that "anti-anti-vax" is often as ridiculous and hysterical as anti-vax and calling for it to be discussed properly and without people screeching and hammering the panic button, and advocating for the government having control over medical procedures.

I think everyone should vaccinate. I will NEVER agree that anyone should be forced. Especially not when the mechanism used for doing so involves grossly exaggerating the medical facts.

But feel free to completely side-step any rational discussion of the issue by all means. The rest of the world does so what's one more.

[user104658]

Comparing it to racism as well :joker:. Really Dezzy? You've scraped right through the barrel and into the pavement.

[AnnieK]

I wasn't vaccinated as a child. My older brother suffered convulsions and was hospitialised after he had his injections so they refused to give them to me. I got them later though, after my brother was again hospitalised because of mumps.

My son was done, didn't cross my mind not to. A lot of my friends (who had kids a lot earlier than I did) paid for individual shots for their kids as they believed the link to autism hype.

[user104658]

My son was done, didn't cross my mind not to. A lot of my friends (who had kids a lot earlier than I did) paid for individual shots for their kids as they believed the link to autism hype.

Ironically, the three individual measles/mumps/rubella injections are actually riskier than the combined MMR (more injections = higher risk of an adverse reaction).

Tbh though the mumps and rubella vaccines could easily wait until age 8+.

[Mokka]

I held off vaccinating my kids till they were in school. Here in Canada they start when the babies are 3 months old. My issue at that time was they were giving babies a relatively untested HepB vaccination mixed in with everything else... in one shot. I decided it wasn't worth the risk.
When we moved provinces... the health regulations were different and it wasn't all one shot. And my kids were older. It made sense then.

[user104658]

I held off vaccinating my kids till they were in school. Here in Canada they start when the babies are 3 months old. My issue at that time was they were giving babies a relatively untested HepB vaccination mixed in with everything else... in one shot. I decided it wasn't worth the risk.
When we moved provinces... the health regulations were different and it wasn't all one shot. And my kids were older. It made sense then.I personally think a more spread out schedule is sensible and also should be just as effective. There are also a (not small) number of things that the US vaccinate against that the UK doesn't, that are unnecessary. The effectiveness of flu vaccination has also literally NEVER been demonstrated in a legitimate study.

Basically I think they would actually convince far more people to agree to the MMR and DTAP if they weren't pushing to introduce new schedules on top.

Also increasingly in the US they're pushing for the full schedule to be given to babies within the first few months - the effects of which are entirely untested, and it's totally unecessary. The "traditional" schedule that we've had in the UK for decades doesn't need changed, and there don't need to be more.

[Alf]

I can't remember if I've had measles. I'd have to ask me mam.

I do remember having chickenpox when I was younger.

[Twosugars]

TS so what are the risks?

[Tom4784]

Comparing it to racism as well :joker:. Really Dezzy? You've scraped right through the barrel and into the pavement.

I see that comment went over your head completely.

I'm not comparing it to racism, I'm comparing the old saying that racists often use when they say 'I'm not racist but *Enter racist statement here*'. You said you're not anti-vaxx but you sound very anti-vaxx.

Do you understand now? Need anything else explained to you while I'm here?

[user104658]

TS so what are the risks?Fever and seizures are the most common which don't usually have lasting effects but can obviously have the same lasting effect as any fever or seizure if there are complications. The other major one (less common) is anaphylaxis which is obviously much more severe and can result in death. Most other side effects are mild and temporary.

The important factor is of course that the risks of vaccinating are much smaller than the risks of getting the illnesses so it's still the sensible option by far. Though its also worth stating that the risks from vaccine preventable childhood illness is much (much) lower than some people seem to believe.

But the idea that it's risk free is just false. And obviously false, too - there's no such thing as a risk free medical procedure. I get that the "aim" behind pretending there's no risk is to get more people to choose to vaccinate but I think it's wrong headed and patronising, and only adds to the mistrust that already exists.

[user104658]

I see that comment went over your head completely.



I'm not comparing it to racism, I'm comparing the old saying that racists often use when they say 'I'm not racist but *Enter racist statement here*'. You said you're not anti-vaxx but you sound very anti-vaxx.



Do you understand now? Need anything else explained to you while I'm here?

I sound anti-vaxx because I don't want to play into the patronising lie that vaccinations are risk free, despite clearly explaining that I have vaccinated my children, advocate vaccination of children, and clearly have laid out that the risks that exist are smaller than the risks of not vaccinating? OK champ.

I think I'll avoid your explanations since your comprehension here is based in typical tabloid style "outrage nonsense". Not one iota of substance. Meh.

[Cherie]

I agree with everything you said TS, I believe it should be parental choice, at the moment if feels like parents are being pressured by government and other parents into putting something into their children's bodies they are not keen on. No body should be under pressure to do anything to their bodies they are not comfortable with. Like the uptake of the flu jab, we were routinely offered it at the special school I used to work at, I never took it up but some people felt pressured to do so as they felt they would be singled out if they got the flu, even though you are only vaccinated for the type that is more likely to be around that year and there are many variations of flu :skull:

[arista]

I held off vaccinating my kids till they were in school. Here in Canada they start when the babies are 3 months old. My issue at that time was they were giving babies a relatively untested HepB vaccination mixed in with everything else... in one shot. I decided it wasn't worth the risk.
When we moved provinces... the health regulations were different and it wasn't all one shot. And my kids were older. It made sense then.



That's the sensible way.

[user104658]

I agree with everything you said TS, I believe it should be parental choice, at the moment if feels like parents are being pressured by government and other parents into putting something into their children's bodies they are not keen on.

Yes, plus that doesn't even work! It just makes people even more determined to stick to their guns. If people just calmly explained the REAL risk balance between vaccinating and not vaccinating, I think more people would actually be swayed.

At the moment it's

"Vaccines are a miracle that will 100% protect your kids forever!"

vs

"If you don't vaccinate your kids they will probably die so you are guilty of child abuse".


... Both a load of balls :shrug:

[Ammi]

....hmmmm I have never heard anyone advocate vaccines as 100% miracle type thing...the risks have always been informed and it’s always being a weighing up of these things and the possibilities if the vaccine is decided against...really, no medical person would ever say if your child is not vaccinated they WILL die...

[user104658]

....hmmmm I have never heard anyone advocate vaccines as 100% miracle type thing...the risks have always been informed and it’s always being a weighing up of these things and the possibilities if the vaccine is decided against...really, no medical person would ever say if your child is not vaccinated they WILL die...The UK is still far more reasonable about the issue than the US. A lot of the online rhetoric is US-lead.

[Ammi]

...surely it’s not a thing about reasonable or not reasonable ..:laugh:..but medical facts..which medical sections are saying that children would probably die without a vaccine and indicating child abuse...?...

[user104658]

And in terms of public scare tactics... literally the first two replies on this post, Ammi...

It should be illegal to not vaccinate your kids imo.

Anti-Vaxxers should lose their kids for child endangerment of their own children and other children too young to be vaccinated. There's few things I hate more in this world than Anti-Vaxxers, their ignorance is dangerous and they are representative of everything that is wrong with the world.


This sort of talk is not uncommon.

[user104658]

...surely it’s not a thing about reasonable or not reasonable ..[emoji23]..but medical facts..which medical sections are saying that children would probably die without a vaccine and indicating child abuse...?...Not the medical professionals Ammi, the social media / forum "vaccination champions" :joker:

The point is that it SHOULD be about weighing up actual medical facts, but the debate descends into this tabloid comment section nonsense pretty much instantly and you get accused of all sorts for saying anything other than "vaccines stop illness and never cause any harm".

[Ammi]

...I mean vaccinations are parental choice ...both here and I presume in the US...

[Ammi]

Not the medical professionals Ammi, the social media / forum "vaccination champions" :joker:

...I still don’t understand why this is an issue though in terms of any type of ‘society pressure’...is that what’s being inferred...?...judgemental parents on social media is surely all it is...if it wasn’t this it would be that or that or that etc, type thing...

[user104658]

...I mean vaccinations are parental choice ...both here and I presume in the US...Not for long in a number of US states, worryingly.

[user104658]

...I still don’t understand why this is an issue though in terms of any type of ‘society pressure’...is that what’s being inferred...?...judgemental parents on social media is surely all it is...if it wasn’t this it would be that or that or that etc, type thing...Societal pressure hampers rational debate and also often influences policy.

[Ammi]

Not for long in a number of US states, worryingly.

...okay, sorry I’m behind the times with some current world issues.../...I didn’t realise it was going to be made compulsory in the US so I understand the strength of your feeling now, TS....yeah the world is in reverse gear atm I fear...

[Ammi]

Societal pressure hampers rational debate and also often influences policy.

...Lord you sound as though you’re writing part of a thesis there...:laugh:...very formal and stiff...

[user104658]

...Lord you sound as though you’re writing part of a thesis there...[emoji23]...very formal and stiff...I'm always formal and stiff in the mornings Ammi :smug:

[Vicky.]

Fever and seizures are the most common which don't usually have lasting effects but can obviously have the same lasting effect as any fever or seizure if there are complications. The other major one (less common) is anaphylaxis which is obviously much more severe and can result in death. Most other side effects are mild and temporary.

Yes, a friend of mine..her kid ended up with brain damage because of a jab. The autism thing is clearly ridiculous and Wakefield should probably be locked up for spreading mass panic, but there ARE side effects, sometimes serious ones so not sure I would be comfortable with forcing people to go through with it. Now, what happened was a huge allergic reaction, which wasn't dealt with that well by the nurse who fannied about so he ended up going a while without oxygen to his brain...so it was a few failures at once, but it did make me quite..releuctant. I knew it had to be done mind and that it would help them (and other kids) in the long run but when I got Skyes I was ****ing terrified. I also think that they should spread them out a bit more than they do, from memory there were many many different illnesses all going into her tiny body over the space of like 3 months, and she was only a few weeks old when she got the first one too! I was a bit more chilled at James', but still quite scared tbh. Also with James I was told the truth, and told there was very small (but existant) a chance of very serious consequences and that, wih Skye...I wasn't and was basically given the whole 'some people are scared of vaccinations for their kids, and theres absolutely no reason for that!' stuff which made me rage quite a lot and I ended up arguing with the nurse and they threatened to remove me from the doctors list for not being compliant enough and agreeing weith what I knew was bull****. So..not telling parents the truth doesn't help matters really, and does leave the door wide open for people to 'research' theirself..which tends to mean a 5 min google followed by lots of 'omg autism!' horror.

I tend to stay out of these conversations as I know that even bringing this up will get me labelled an 'anti-vaxxer' as say anything at all against them and..you are as bad as a flat earther. So yeah, the autism link is nonsense, and can be proven to be nonsense, but some go on as if injections are totally harmless, which is (as with near everything in life really) not the case at all. And having someone I know who had horrendous side effects from them..it makes me rage a little bit when reading all the 'people who don't vax should have their kids taken' stuff tbh.

[AnnieK]

What I don't like to see is people dictating to others. People become horrified that states are outlawing abortion as it is the woman's body and rightly should be her decision but when they are making their decisions about their children they shouldn't have that right or face losing their children?? Should we wait till kids can make their own informed choices whether to vaccinate themselves? Or should we allow the parents to choose?

[arista]

Yes, a friend of mine..her kid ended up with brain damage because of a jab. The autism thing is clearly ridiculous and Wakefield should probably be locked up for spreading mass panic, but there ARE side effects, sometimes serious ones so not sure I would be comfortable with forcing people to go through with it. Now, what happened was a huge allergic reaction, which wasn't dealt with that well by the nurse who fannied about so he ended up going a while without oxygen to his brain...so it was a few failures at once, but it did make me quite..releuctant. I knew it had to be done mind and that it would help them (and other kids) in the long run but when I got Skyes I was ****ing terrified. I also think that they should spread them out a bit more than they do, from memory there were many many different illnesses all going into her tiny body over the space of like 3 months, and she was only a few weeks old when she got the first one too! I was a bit more chilled at James', but still quite scared tbh. Also with James I was told the truth, and told there was very small (but existant) a chance of very serious consequences and that, wih Skye...I wasn't and was basically given the whole 'some people are scared of vaccinations for their kids, and theres absolutely no reason for that!' stuff which made me rage quite a lot and I ended up arguing with the nurse and they threatened to remove me from the doctors list for not being compliant enough and agreeing weith what I knew was bull****. So..not telling parents the truth doesn't help matters really, and does leave the door wide open for people to 'research' theirself..which tends to mean a 5 min google followed by lots of 'omg autism!' horror.

I tend to stay out of these conversations as I know that even bringing this up will get me labelled an 'anti-vaxxer' as say anything at all against them and..you are as bad as a flat earther. So yeah, the autism link is nonsense, and can be proven to be nonsense, but some go on as if injections are totally harmless, which is (as with near everything in life really) not the case at all. And having someone I know who had horrendous side effects from them..it makes me rage a little bit when reading all the 'people who don't vax should have their kids taken' stuff tbh.


Brain Damage
can just happen at the same time, though
I would think.
"Coincidence"

[Vicky.]

Brain Damage
can just happen at the same time, though
I would think.
"Coincidence"

Erm, well no it was not coincidence as the allergic reaction was directly caused by the injection..the brain damage did not 'just happen', it was caused by the reaction to the jab given to the kid.

Of course its true that near anything can cause such a reaction though. If that was a bit of a hamfisted way of saying that.

[Cherie]

I'm always formal and stiff in the mornings Ammi :smug:

:joker:

[Cherie]

What I don't like to see is people dictating to others. People become horrified that states are outlawing abortion as it is the woman's body and rightly should be her decision but when they are making their decisions about their children they shouldn't have that right or face losing their children?? Should we wait till kids can make their own informed choices whether to vaccinate themselves? Or should we allow the parents to choose?

Exactly Annie, I see it as the same thing, my body, my choice, kids bodies parents choice, that said my are vaccinated for everything they can be vaccinated for, I had measles as a kid and its not pleasant

[arista]

Erm, well no it was not coincidence as the allergic reaction was directly caused by the injection..the brain damage did not 'just happen', it was caused by the reaction to the jab given to the kid.

Of course its true that near anything can cause such a reaction though. If that was a bit of a hamfisted way of saying that.


Well a Rare sad occurrence

[RileyH]

http://cdn.thisisbigbrother.com/customavatars/avatar92709_9.gif

https://media1.tenor.com/images/4b794e4327a3ecc668fa30a786414f66/tenor.gif?itemid=4749468

[Tom4784]

I sound anti-vaxx because I don't want to play into the patronising lie that vaccinations are risk free, despite clearly explaining that I have vaccinated my children, advocate vaccination of children, and clearly have laid out that the risks that exist are smaller than the risks of not vaccinating? OK champ.

I think I'll avoid your explanations since your comprehension here is based in typical tabloid style "outrage nonsense". Not one iota of substance. Meh.

I thought you were better than this tbh, how disappointing.

Vaccinations hold far less risk than the illnesses they protect against and by doing what you're doing, you're giving anti-vaxxers an inch so they can take a mile. It doesn't matter if you vaccinated your kids if you are giving these people ammunition to spread their ignorance.

We shouldn't encourage people's igorance, TS.

[Tom4784]

What I don't like to see is people dictating to others. People become horrified that states are outlawing abortion as it is the woman's body and rightly should be her decision but when they are making their decisions about their children they shouldn't have that right or face losing their children?? Should we wait till kids can make their own informed choices whether to vaccinate themselves? Or should we allow the parents to choose?

Completely different things.

Banning abortions is basically restricting a woman's right to make decisions about her own body, an abortion isn't a health risk to anyone other than the woman in question. By not vaccinating a child, the parent is making a choice that can harm that child as well as younger children around them who are too young to be vaccinated. Why should someone else's child who is too young to be vaccinated get sick because of another parent's ignorance?

Anti-Vaxxer beliefs are unfounded, it was all based on the lies of a doctor who has since been struck off the register. Are vaccinations completely risk free? Nope, but are they typically more dangerous to children than the illnesses they vaccinate against? Certainly not.

Anti-vaxxers are dumb ***** that don't deserve to be parents.

[Vicky.]

Anti-Vaxxer beliefs are unfounded, it was all based on the lies of a doctor who has since been struck off the register. Are vaccinations completely risk free? Nope, but are they typically more dangerous to children than the illnesses they vaccinate against? Certainly not.


Not enough IMO. His lies will affect people for many years to come.

[Cherie]

Completely different things.

Banning abortions is basically restricting a woman's right to make decisions about her own body, an abortion isn't a health risk to anyone other than the woman in question. By not vaccinating a child, the parent is making a choice that can harm that child as well as younger children around them who are too young to be vaccinated. Why should someone else's child who is too young to be vaccinated get sick because of another parent's ignorance?

Anti-Vaxxer beliefs are unfounded, it was all based on the lies of a doctor who has since been struck off the register. Are vaccinations completely risk free? Nope, but are they typically more dangerous to children than the illnesses they vaccinate against? Certainly not.

Anti-vaxxers are dumb ***** that don't deserve to be parents.

and people who get the flu can potentially infect and kill other people with underlying conditions or elderly people etc but we don't all rush out and get the flu jab now do we?

[bots]

You play the %'s game with vaccines. You have to weigh up the chances of an issue with taking a vaccine versus chances of infection if you don't get it. In all cases that I am aware, a vaccine is far preferable to the consequences of infection. **** happens for sure, and some are badly affected by vaccines, but if i'm playing the numbers game, i prefer to go for the best odds

[Ammi]

....with measles in young children there is a high risk of complications I believe and some of those complications are life threatening...it’s not the same high risk of any complications when contracting influenza though...which is why they’re not really compatible imo and also a flu vaccination doesn’t prevent a disease, its just some protection for the more vulnerable in some cases...

.....hmmm I also agree with Dezzy that this ‘choice’ doesn’t really compare to a pregnancy either because surely pro choice in pregnancy applies to before a birth becomes viable...in many things, parents sadly do not always make choices which are best for a child...

[user104658]

I thought you were better than this tbh, how disappointing.



Vaccinations hold far less risk than the illnesses they protect against

Yes I've said that several times.

and by doing what you're doing, you're giving anti-vaxxers an inch so they can take a mile. It doesn't matter if you vaccinated your kids if you are giving these people ammunition to spread their ignorance.

No. Lying about it is patronising, counter-productive, authoritarian and draconian. It does nothing but bolster the mistrust in the establishment and cause people to dig their heels in. Proper, open, truthful weighing up of the benefits and drawbacks are all that is required, and frankly all that is acceptable.



We shouldn't encourage people's igorance, TS.

No we shouldn't and that's why I'm completely unwilling to accept your orwellian stance that unvaccinated children from secure, loving homes should be stripped for their families and placed into care. Just horrendous ignorance is all that can be said for that.

[Twosugars]

Parents are usually not medically qualified to make such decisions. My default position would be to listen to medical professionals

[Tom4784]

and people who get the flu can potentially infect and kill other people with underlying conditions or elderly people etc but we don't all rush out and get the flu jab now do we?

That's a really silly comparison tbh mainly because the people at risk from the flu are usually the first to be offered the flu jab.

It also doesn't really contradict what I'm saying at all. People don't get the flu jab so it's okay for illnesses that can be vaccinated againt to spread among children? Weird argument but k.

[user104658]

Parents are usually not medically qualified to make such decisions. My default position would be to listen to medical professionalsThere's a difference between highly encouraging people to take medical advice, and legally mandating them to undergo medical procedures. The latter is a very, very slippery slope in my opinion. Personal bodily autonomy is a cornerstone of a free society and taking that right away will never be the right path.

[Cherie]

That's a really silly comparison tbh mainly because the people at risk from the flu are usually the first to be offered the flu jab.

It also doesn't really contradict what I'm saying at all. People don't get the flu jab so it's okay for illnesses that can be vaccinated againt to spread among children? Weird argument but k.

Many people can be unaware that they have an underlying condition? My point is many healthcare workers in hospitals and clinics have the flu jab routinely offered but they don't have to take it up and no one is accusing them of being negligent by not doing so

[Niamh.]

There's a difference between highly encouraging people to take medical advice, and legally mandating them to undergo medical procedures. The latter is a very, very slippery slope in my opinion. Personal bodily autonomy is a cornerstone of a free society and taking that right away will never be the right path.Yeah but its not personal bodily autonomy though, it's either parents deciding for their kids or medical professionals

[user104658]

Speaking of ignorance and something that the general public is mostly ignorant to:

Influenza is SIGNIFICANTLY more dangerous than measles. Yet people react to news of someone having the flu like its the common cold, and react to an outbreak of measles like ebola or the plague. The general level of knowledge around basic health is abysmal.

[Twosugars]

Yeah but its not personal bodily autonomy though, it's either parents deciding for their kids or medical professionals

That's the thing

[user104658]

Yeah but its not personal bodily autonomy though, it's either parents deciding for their kids or medical professionalsParental consent should always come before intervention by the authorities other than in really extreme circumstances, surely?

[user104658]

So we're now advocating for medical professionals and the government having the final say over parents wishes?

Well. **** do I even have to respond to that?

[Twosugars]

So we're now advocating for medical professionals and the government having the final say over parents wishes?

Well. **** do I even have to respond to that?

It'd stop genital mutilation

[user104658]

It'd stop genital mutilationGenital mutilation should be illegal anyway, and legally blocking a medical procedure is entirely different to legally obligating one.

[Twosugars]

So we're now advocating for medical professionals and the government having the final say over parents wishes?

Well. **** do I even have to respond to that?

What about adding fluorine to water? Or any form of sanitary intervention?
Do you want an opt out from that too?

[user104658]

What about adding fluorine to water? Or any form of sanitary intervention?

Do you want an opt out from that too?You can opt out of that quite easily by not using tap water as drinking water. What other bodily intervention is legally mandated? Also why would you put vaccination under the heading of sanitation?

[Twosugars]

Next parents choosing to reject treated water or pasteurized food bc they read on some nutty blog that its harmful?

[Twosugars]

You can opt out of that quite easily by not using tap water as drinking water. What other bodily intervention is legally mandated? Also why would you put vaccination under the heading of sanitation?

As it's designed to stop spreading diseases then yes
Not that different from sanitation designed to stop spreading diseases

[user104658]

Next parents choosing to reject treated water or pasteurized food bc they read on some nutty blog that its harmful?So you want the government to mandate diet as well? Maybe we'll start getting soylent green deliveries. :joker:

[Twosugars]

So you want the government to mandate diet as well? Maybe we'll start getting soylent green deliveries. :joker:

Don't they intervene already? Sugar tax is inevitable in future

[user104658]

As it's designed to stop spreading diseases then yes

Not that different from sanitation designed to stop spreading diseasesIt is entirely different but I don't even know where to start in stating why, if it's not just plain obvious. Nanny state gone wild here. I find this genuinely scary :shrug:. Not sure if people realise that they are effectively advocating for universal state guardianship? It's actually BEYOND Orwell at this point.

[user104658]

Don't they intervene already? Sugar tax is inevitable in futureAgain, that's not an intervention. Sugar being made completely illegal wouldn't be an intervention.

Saying "Your child must eat Brocolli or they will be taken into care" would be your direct comparison here.

[Twosugars]

It is entirely different but I don't even know where to start in stating why, if it's not just plain obvious. Nanny state gone wild here. I find this genuinely scary :shrug:. Not sure if people realise that they are effectively advocating for universal state guardianship? It's actually BEYOND Orwell at this point.

Jabs are not only about the individual but also have epidemiological, societal importance.

Nobody is forcing anybody afaik, but robust medical recommendations should be hard to ignore

[Twosugars]

Again, that's not an intervention. Sugar being made completely illegal wouldn't be an intervention.

Saying "Your child must eat Brocolli or they will be taken into care" would be your direct comparison here.

You're overreacting

[user104658]

Nobody is forcing anybody afaik, but robust medical recommendations should be hard to ignore

I agree with that wholeheartedly and again have said that several times, but again, read the first two responses on this thread. The first is that "not vaccinating should be illegal", the second is the horrific suggestion that unvaccinated children should be removed from their parents by social services.

It IS advocating for force, quite openly. That's literally all I'm arguing against here. Again, I've pointed out several times that vaccinating is clearly the sensible option on balance of risk and should be heavily encouraged.

[Twosugars]

I'm not that arsed about it all TS as personally I decided not to breed. But I worry when science is being undermined. Anti vac movement is part of that imo.

[user104658]

You're overreactingI'm reacting appropriately to the idea of state controlled parenting, and the idea that "it would stop at vaccination" is IMO naive.

There are myriad things happening today that would have been branded "an overreaction" if suggested a couple of years ago. No?

[Twosugars]

I agree with that wholeheartedly and again have said that several times, but again, read the first two responses on this thread. The first is that "not vaccinating should be illegal", the second is the horrific suggestion that unvaccinated children should be removed from their parents by social services.

It IS advocating for force, quite openly. That's literally all I'm arguing against here. Again, I've pointed out several times that vaccinating is clearly the sensible option on balance of risk and should be heavily encouraged.

You can make an argument that unvaccinated kids help spreading diseases. As I said, a societal dimension of an individual decision

[user104658]

I'm not that arsed about it all TS as personally I decided not to breed. But I worry when science is being undermined. Anti vac movement is part of that imo.The anti-vaxx movement is indeed absolutely packed with junk "science" but the antidote to that isn't more lies, scare tactics and authoritarianism. It's doubling down on the real scientific facts.

[Twosugars]

Any chance for a naked wrestle to settle our little argument? :drool:

[user104658]

You can make an argument that unvaccinated kids help spreading diseases. As I said, a societal dimension of an individual decisionYou'd save more lives by banning all non-essential travel by vehicle so why not do that?

[user104658]

Any chance for a naked wrestle to settle our little argument? :drool:Dezzy might try to get involved, and unchecked sarcasm completely kills my buzz :bawling:

[Twosugars]

Dezzy might try to get involved, and unchecked sarcasm completely kills my buzz :bawling:

Dezzy means well. We all are really in broad agreement on this issue.

[Ammi]

...it is a very difficult one though because if people in large numbers chose to ignore medical opinion and didn’t have their children inoculated...?...then deadly infant diseases would grow more and more common in the western world...and that’s also going backwards in time surely..?...to me that would be the by far worse scenario...

[Ammi]

Dezzy might try to get involved, and unchecked sarcasm completely kills my buzz :bawling:

...and yet you have been a user of it on several occasions TS, you know you have...enough now with the personal silliness...you both just have polar opposite opinions with this is all and both feel equally strongly about it...

[Tom4784]

There's a lot of 'look over here instead of at the issue' going on here.

The current outbreaks in the US are down to the rise of anti-Vaxxers that believe what they find to be convenient over scientific fact. They disregard reality in favour of conspiracy.

Vaccines can have side effects but it's down to vaccines that many terrible diseases have been eradicated and it's because of moronic parents that care more about their facebook groups than their children that these illnesses could return. If you are willing to put your child in harm's way for your beliefs then that is child endangerment to me and should be treated as such.

Even entertaining their ignorance for a second validates it in their eyes so I can't see TS' view as anything other than encouragement of the anti-vaxxer movement even if he says he disagrees with it.

[user104658]

...it is a very difficult one though because if people in large numbers chose to ignore medical opinion and didn’t have their children inoculated...?...then deadly infant diseases would grow more and more common in the western world...and that’s also going backwards in time surely..?...to me that would be the by far worse scenario...We fundamentally disagree on where that ends though Ammi. In an ideal world we can "pick and choose" our freedoms but that's never how it's going to work. Either you fight to protect autonomy and the basic right of people to make their own decisions, or you accept that all of these decisions are ultimately in the hands of a higher authority.

I will never agree that the latter is the better option, and I think a "half way" choice with "exceptions" is naive. If you accept giving the authorities the right to make one medical decision for yourself and your family, you accept the path where the authorities make all medical decisions for all families.

Vaccinating is the right choice but no one is ever going to convince me that the choice should be taken away.

[user104658]

There's a lot of 'look over here instead of at the issue' going on here.

The current outbreaks in the US are down to the rise of anti-Vaxxers that believe what they find to be convenient over scientific fact. They disregard reality in favour of conspiracy.

Vaccines can have side effects but it's down to vaccines that many terrible diseases have been eradicated and it's because of moronic parents that care more about their facebook groups than their children that these illnesses could return. If you are willing to put your child in harm's way for your beliefs then that is child endangerment to me and should be treated as such.

Even entertaining their ignorance for a second validates it in their eyes so I can't see TS' view as anything other than encouragement of the anti-vaxxer movement even if he says he disagrees with it.I can only refer you to what I said above. Giving up the freedom of choice in terms of medical treatment goes way beyond vaccination in terms of precedent, and I think believing "it would definitely just be vaccination" is naive. Its advocating an end game of increasing state control over medical decisions and the removal of literally THE most basic right: bodily autonomy.

So I can only stand by what I said. Legal intervention is wrong and conceptually terrifying, and scare tactics that involve flat out lies ("your children will die if you don't vaccinate!!") are ineffective at best and counterproductive at worst. Because it literally takes 5 seconds of googling to reveal that that is false, and thus, the whole argument collapses and becomes irrelevant. WHY would you expect people to listen to people after they have engaged in arguments that are scientifically verifiable lies? It's madness.

[Ammi]

We fundamentally disagree on where that ends though Ammi. In an ideal world we can "pick and choose" our freedoms but that's never how it's going to work. Either you fight to protect autonomy and the basic right of people to make their own decisions, or you accept that all of these decisions are ultimately in the hands of a higher authority.

I will never agree that the latter is the better option, and I think a "half way" choice with "exceptions" is naive. If you accept giving the authorities the right to make one medical decision for yourself and your family, you accept the path where the authorities make all medical decisions for all families.

Vaccinating is the right choice but no one is ever going to convince me that the choice should be taken away.


...but then this ‘choice’ is not made about us as adults, TS...what if every parent or a majority of parents said...no!!...we won’t inoculate, it’s our child and our choice...the Western world regresses into many child deaths and we as parents felt it was our right to decide on the potential life or death of our child..?...I really do think it’s a complicated thing to consider tbh...

[user104658]

...but then this ‘choice’ is not made about us as adults, TS...what if every parent or a majority of parents said...no!!...we won’t inoculate, it’s our child and our choice...the Western world regresses into many child deaths and we as parents felt it was our right to decide on the potential life or death of our child..?...I really do think it’s a complicated thing to consider tbh...It is complicated but it's not something I haven't given significant thought or that I say flippantly. We have to protect our right to freedom and autonomy tooth and nail, the world's systems of authority - and certainly those in the US, and here in the UK - have done absolutely NOTHING that suggests we should give them such implicit trust that we hand over such fundamental decisions to them. Maybe in another, much better, world it would be safe to do that but not in this one.

[Ammi]

It is complicated but it's not something I haven't given significant thought or that I say flippantly. We have to protect our right to freedom and autonomy tooth and nail, the world's systems of authority - and certainly those in the US, and here in the UK - have done absolutely NOTHING that suggests we should give them such implicit trust that we hand over such fundamental decisions to them. Maybe in another, much better, world it would be safe to do that but not in this one.

...of course, we do have to try to protect our freedoms and our children’s freedoms...but do we ever have the right to deny them of something when in doing so could significantly increase their risks to diseases which at worst could end their life as well as possibly leaving lifetime disabilities...if a parent chose to deliberately go against medical advice with something so serious as someone else’s life....?...then should the decision really remain with them..?...this surely is when in the past, courts have intervened...

[user104658]

...of course, we do have to try to protect our freedoms and our children’s freedoms...but do we ever have the right to deny them of something when in doing so could significantly increase their risks to diseases which at worst could end their life as well as possibly leaving lifetime disabilities...if a parent chose to deliberately go against medical advice with something so serious as someone else’s life....?...then should the decision really remain with them..?...this surely is when in the past, courts have intervened...But that's over-emphasising the risks associated with childhood illness and relying on scare tactics in order to push through something mandatory when it should remain strictly voluntary. Again, this hinges on the (IMO naive) idea that it's a self-contained concession of autonomy.

The current vaccine schedule is reasonable and effective and everyone SHOULD adhere to it voluntarily. What if we give away our right to choose, and then in a year's time some government department decides to add in 10 new vaccines for relatively low risk illnesses, and some of the research puts a question mark over how safe or effective the new ones are? What if we THEN decide "Oh I'm not sure about all of these?". Well, tough **** you gave away the right to make that assessment, and your kids will be forcibly taken from you if you fail to comply.

Its horrifying!

I don't know how anyone can believe otherwise, unless they truly believe that giving away that right would be limited to the current vaccine schedule. Or even just vaccines. That's not how it works, and that's not how guardianship works. You sign away the right to make that decision and you sign away all of your medical decisions. You sign away your right to make that decision for your children and you sign away parental guardianship in favour of state guardianship. It's not a pick'n'mix.

[Ammi]

But that's over-emphasising the risks associated with childhood illness and relying on scare tactics in order to push through something mandatory when it should remain strictly voluntary. Again, this hinges on the (IMO naive) idea that it's a self-contained concession of autonomy.

The current vaccine schedule is reasonable and effective and everyone SHOULD adhere to it voluntarily. What if we give away our right to choose, and then in a year's time some government department decides to add in 10 new vaccines for relatively low risk illnesses, and some of the research puts a question mark over how safe or effective the new ones are? What if we THEN decide "Oh I'm not sure about all of these?". Well, tough **** you gave away the right to make that assessment, and your kids will be forcibly taken from you if you fail to comply.

Its horrifying!

I don't know how anyone can believe otherwise, unless they truly believe that giving away that right would be limited to the current vaccine schedule. Or even just vaccines. That's not how it works, and that's not how guardianship works. You sign away the right to make that decision and you sign away all of your medical decisions. You sign away your right to make that decision for your children and you sign away parental guardianship in favour of state guardianship. It's not a pick'n'mix.


...with measles isn’t it something like a one in twenty ration of complications occurring in children under 5 yrs old..?...that isn’t a scare tactic TS, that’s a terrifying percentage to take a risk of a child contracting the disease through not being given an inoculation...of course, a complication won’t necessarily be life threatening, I understand that...but some of the complications like pneumonia are obviously life threatening ...and also these complications can lead to life long disabilities...I mean most parents do opt for the vaccination because the risks of not having it far outweigh the risks of having it and some there being a life endangering reaction...

...guardianship of our children surely works to safeguard them, to make decisions for them...(..until they of an age to make their own life decisions..)...which we feel will keep them safe, which will preserve and protect their lives as best we can...refusing a vaccination which counters those things...(...without very specific medical reasons, not just worries etc..).. is surely putting a child at risk...

[Ammi]

...and that’s horrifying to me...we don’t ‘own’ our children, we guard them ...we preserve and we protect them ...if all parents said NO because my choice etc then we’re participating in spreading disease which could fill hospitals/medical centres to capacities that could never be sustained...

[user104658]

All or even most parents will never say no to the main vaccines though, it's not realistic, and you can either believe in the concept of a legal guardian or not I suppose. If you do, then you trust that the legal guardian is genuinely acting in what they sincerely believe is the best interests of their ward. That's what legal guardianship is. It's not a perfect system, but it's the best and least authoritarian system we have.

If you believe that the authorities should have the right to overrule then you don't believe in parental guardianship, you believe in universal state guardianship... And that requires a level of trust in the intentions and competence of the state that I will never agree is justified. We'll have to agree to disagree.

[Ammi]

...yeah we’ll agree to disagree..(...although I did think I agreed until I thought about it more and how complicated it is )...because this seems to be the point where I came in...societal pressure../..social and media influences etc..it’s quite possible that many/far too many parents would say No and with no specific reasons other than fears or concerns ...yes I do believe that the majority of parents always try to act in the interest of their children but I also know that ‘the best interest’ will not be the same for every parent..and sometimes will go against best medical advice...

[user104658]

...yeah we’ll agree to disagree..(...although I did think I agreed until I thought about it more and how complicated it is )...because this seems to be the point where I came in...societal pressure../..social and media influences etc..it’s quite possible that many/far too many parents would say No and with no specific reasons other than fears or concerns ...yes I do believe that the majority of parents always try to act in the interest of their children but I also know that ‘the best interest’ will not be the same for every parent..and sometimes will go against best medical advice...I think Facebook / Social Media is a sociological disaster in general and "junk science" is absolutely also a huge problem, but really that's a totally separate issue, and the answer to the problems created by those things is not (in my opinion) to just "grab more control and force people to do the right thing anyway".

[bots]

education is the obvious solution. Teach people to have critical thinking

[user104658]

education is the obvious solution. Teach people to have critical thinkingI do think a big part of the problem is poor perception of risk. E.g. The major death risk of a vaccine reaction is anaphylaxis but your kid is literally at much greater risk of that very thing the first time they encounter a peanut or get stung by a wasp than the first time they get a vaccine but people don't give it a second thought.

They're also at greater risk every time we strap 'em into a car but again, parents who are terrified of vaccines do that every day with a smile.

But again IMO we don't help this poor risk perception with "scary myths" designed to force people to vaccinate, it just furthers the perception of the human body as unpredictable and fragile, and that actually is part of what puts people off vaccines in the first place, ironically.

[Vicky.]

I think Facebook / Social Media is a sociological disaster in general and "junk science" is absolutely also a huge problem, but really that's a totally separate issue, and the answer to the problems created by those things is not (in my opinion) to just "grab more control and force people to do the right thing anyway".
Agreed 100%.
I do think a big part of the problem is poor perception of risk. E.g. The major death risk of a vaccine reaction is anaphylaxis but your kid is literally at much greater risk of that very thing the first time they encounter a peanut or get stung by a wasp than the first time they get a vaccine but people don't give it a second thought.

They're also at greater risk every time we strap 'em into a car but again, parents who are terrified of vaccines do that every day with a smile.

But again IMO we don't help this poor risk perception with "scary myths" designed to force people to vaccinate, it just furthers the perception of the human body as unpredictable and fragile, and that actually is part of what puts people off vaccines in the first place, ironically.

Also agreed (even though I know one of these one in a milion kids..which DID make me a bit more hesistant). As I said, that reaction can come from anything, however, it really doesn't help matters that medical professionals apparently do not tell parents of the miniscule risk of it, and actively argue with parents who know this risk and tell them that no, it never happens!

I used to argue with anti-vaxxers all the time and honestly, its like arguing with a religious zealot. They utterly refuse to listen to any reason, think you are actively trying to hurt their kids..and honestly it reminds me a bit of a cult at times. I don't waste my time anymore, but quite how..stuck in it they are is quite scary. As I said, Wakefield has a ****ing hell of a lot to answer for and really should be in prison..though what charge, I don't really know! Being struck off really isn't enouh for someone like him, a gastroenterologist who is suddenly an expert on vaccines and spreads dangerous myths that will remain forever...