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.

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

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

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.

That's the thing

Parental consent should always come before intervention by the authorities other than in really extreme circumstances, surely?

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

Genital mutilation should be illegal anyway, and legally blocking a medical procedure is entirely different to legally obligating one.

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?

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

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

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

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.

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.

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

You're overreacting

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.

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.

I'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?

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

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.

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