The Glade 4.0
https://gladerebooted.net/

Mandate vaccines?
https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=10966
Page 1 of 4

Author:  RangerDave [ Fri May 30, 2014 2:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Mandate vaccines?

The parenthetical caveat is meant as an out for people with medical conditions that would make a vaccination unsafe for them - e.g., compromised immune systems, allergic reactions, etc.

Author:  Lex Luthor [ Fri May 30, 2014 2:04 pm ]
Post subject: 

No, because a free country means you don't have to be stuck with needles if you don't want to.

Author:  Müs [ Fri May 30, 2014 2:16 pm ]
Post subject: 

Yes, because anti vaxxers are tantamount to child abusers.

Author:  Corolinth [ Fri May 30, 2014 2:18 pm ]
Post subject: 

If someone is stupid enough to seriously believe that vaccinations lead to autism, I don't want their children surviving to reproduce. It's best that deleterious genes die out as quickly as possible.

Author:  Lenas [ Fri May 30, 2014 2:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Mandate vaccines?

I don't like the idea of creating a law to mandate vaccines. I would prefer to have negative ramifications for people that decide to decline. Like maybe your unvaccinated child shouldn't be allowed to attend public schools.

Author:  Hopwin [ Fri May 30, 2014 2:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:

Corolinth wrote:
If someone is stupid enough to seriously believe that vaccinations lead to autism, I don't want their children surviving to reproduce. It's best that deleterious genes die out as quickly as possible.

I would agree with this except those unvaccinated toolsacks then become vectors and breeding grounds for disease and serve as petri-dishes for them to mutate in.

Author:  Taskiss [ Fri May 30, 2014 2:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Mandate vaccines?

Lex Luthor wrote:
No, because a free country means you don't have to be stuck with needles if you don't want to.
^pretty much this, as uncomfortable as it makes me to agree with Lex :lol:

Not a fan of those who don't vaccinate their kids, but, you know, "free country" and all.

I'd go civil disobedient about the government forcing parents to drug a healthy kid.

Author:  Xequecal [ Fri May 30, 2014 3:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:

Corolinth wrote:
If someone is stupid enough to seriously believe that vaccinations lead to autism, I don't want their children surviving to reproduce. It's best that deleterious genes die out as quickly as possible.


You know, before Andrew Wakefield got definitively exposed as a fraud, there were quite a few posters on the last board that bought the vaccines = autism angle, using it as an "example" of the horrible things that public health care will do.

Author:  Elmarnieh [ Fri May 30, 2014 3:03 pm ]
Post subject: 

No, such a law violates basic liberty.

Author:  TheRiov [ Fri May 30, 2014 3:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:

Hopwin wrote:
Corolinth wrote:
If someone is stupid enough to seriously believe that vaccinations lead to autism, I don't want their children surviving to reproduce. It's best that deleterious genes die out as quickly as possible.

I would agree with this except those unvaccinated toolsacks then become vectors and breeding grounds for disease and serve as petri-dishes for them to mutate in.

This. Unvaccinated children pose a health risk to everyone.

Author:  Lex Luthor [ Fri May 30, 2014 3:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:

TheRiov wrote:
Hopwin wrote:
Corolinth wrote:
If someone is stupid enough to seriously believe that vaccinations lead to autism, I don't want their children surviving to reproduce. It's best that deleterious genes die out as quickly as possible.

I would agree with this except those unvaccinated toolsacks then become vectors and breeding grounds for disease and serve as petri-dishes for them to mutate in.

This. Unvaccinated children pose a health risk to everyone.


Freedom is more important than minor health risks. Should people with a cough be banned from public transportation?

Author:  Müs [ Fri May 30, 2014 3:12 pm ]
Post subject: 

Some of the health risks are more than minor. Smallpox can be fatal.

Author:  Elmarnieh [ Fri May 30, 2014 3:14 pm ]
Post subject: 

Life is fatal.

Author:  Lenas [ Fri May 30, 2014 3:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Mandate vaccines?

Things that we vaccinate against generally aren't minor health risks, and your freedom is not as important as my health. Of course, that's just a matter of perspective.

Author:  Müs [ Fri May 30, 2014 3:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:

Elmarnieh wrote:
Life is fatal.


Perhaps, but I'd prefer to not have a bout of smallpox because some ignorant bint listened to Jenny McCarthy and her unvaxxed crumb catcher allowed it to fester and mutate just enough that my vax against it is no longer useful.

Author:  Lex Luthor [ Fri May 30, 2014 3:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:

Müs wrote:
Elmarnieh wrote:
Life is fatal.


Perhaps, but I'd prefer to not have a bout of smallpox because some ignorant bint listened to Jenny McCarthy and her unvaxxed crumb catcher allowed it to fester and mutate just enough that my vax against it is no longer useful.


I shouldn't have to say this, but it's common knowledge that smallpox has been eradicated since the 70s.

Author:  Elmarnieh [ Fri May 30, 2014 3:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:

Müs wrote:
Elmarnieh wrote:
Life is fatal.


Perhaps, but I'd prefer to not have a bout of smallpox because some ignorant bint listened to Jenny McCarthy and her unvaxxed crumb catcher allowed it to fester and mutate just enough that my vax against it is no longer useful.



Then don't worry about it and get vaccinated.

Author:  RangerDave [ Fri May 30, 2014 3:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:

Lex Luthor wrote:
I shouldn't have to say this, but it's common knowledge that smallpox has been eradicated since the 70s.

Yes, through mandatory vaccination programs. Also, it's been eradicated in the wild (as far as we know), but it still exists in a few laboratories around the world.

Author:  Müs [ Fri May 30, 2014 3:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:

Lex Luthor wrote:
Müs wrote:
Elmarnieh wrote:
Life is fatal.


Perhaps, but I'd prefer to not have a bout of smallpox because some ignorant bint listened to Jenny McCarthy and her unvaxxed crumb catcher allowed it to fester and mutate just enough that my vax against it is no longer useful.


I shouldn't have to say this, but it's common knowledge that smallpox has been eradicated since the 70s.


80's, but the point still stands. Sub polio, measles, mumps, etc for smallpox.

Author:  Elmarnieh [ Fri May 30, 2014 3:59 pm ]
Post subject: 

My reply remains, if you don't want to worry about it then get vaccinated yourself.

Author:  Müs [ Fri May 30, 2014 4:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:

Elmarnieh wrote:
My reply remains, if you don't want to worry about it then get vaccinated yourself.


And what is that going to accomplish against new strains that have been allowed to mutate by ignorant people that don't vaccinate?

Author:  RangerDave [ Fri May 30, 2014 4:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:

Müs wrote:
Elmarnieh wrote:
My reply remains, if you don't want to worry about it then get vaccinated yourself.

And what is that going to accomplish against new strains that have been allowed to mutate by ignorant people that don't vaccinate?

Or for kids too young to be vaccinated? Or for people who can't get vaccinated because of compromised immune systems? Or in the case of vaccines that aren't 100%?

If you want to argue that "freedom" requires that we all accept the increased risks that result from allowing people to just forego being vaccinated, that's fine. But don't dodge the issue by just pretending such increased risks don't exist.

Author:  TheRiov [ Fri May 30, 2014 4:33 pm ]
Post subject: 

http://www.skepticnorth.com/2012/02/the ... -answered/
Quote:
Viruses mutate as they replicate, but fortunately, by definition, viruses require the machinery of living organisms to do so. To do this, viruses must enter the cells and hijack their function to produce more viruses. If the body is prepared to identify the pathogen, it can respond immediately to the pathogen in a matter of hours instead of days. Given that viruses can replicate at phenomenal rates, the faster the body responds, the less replication will happen, the less likely a beneficial (to the virus) mutation will occur. Furthermore, even if a mutation does happen, if individuals around the infected patient are all immunized, the mutation will not be carried on. The nice thing about adaptive (post-exposure) immunity is that it identifies a bunch of different parts of the pathogen as foreign, so even if little bits of it change, one antibody might be useless but all of the others will still work!


We know Elmo thinks its ok for private individuals own biological weapons. I just didn't realize he was advocating producing them in your children.

Author:  Corolinth [ Fri May 30, 2014 5:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Mandate vaccines?

Mus is correct in that vaccines do not necessarily protect against future mutated strains that may arise because the disease persists in the wild.

If you mandate the vaccine for Jenny McCarthy cultist children, they will grow up listening to their parents rant and rave about Big Pharma and the government in a grand conspiracy to spread autism. You then need to fund a government brainwashing program an educational outreach program to combat that, on top of the funding for the vaccination. That's a lot of time and money to spend on the children of useless hippies.

Author:  Rorinthas [ Fri May 30, 2014 8:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Mandate vaccines?

It's a sticky wicket. Public health is one of those areas where its hard to strike the proper balance between individual liberty and societal necessity.

We may have to err on the side of liberty on this one. Most people understand the importance of the vaccination process. The anti-vaccination folks process are a pretty small minority.

Page 1 of 4 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/