Anti-vaxxers

One eyed Jack

Orion wrote: »

It actually is a fact. Whether you believe it or not.

The post you're referring to is this one?

pitifulgod wrote: »

A person with a low immune system is at incredible risk when another person decides to not vaccinate their children. This is a fact. So a parent not vaccinating based on conspiracy theories is endangering both their children and others.

That's nothing more than conjecture.

Orion wrote: »

Nobody is saying they should despite your spin.

Please consider the context in which that point was made. The other poster made the point that if a child required a blood transfusion, the parents wishes could be disregarded, as though the same argument could be made to vaccinate a child against the parents wishes. If that's not arguing that parents could be forced to vaccinate their children then you tell me?

Orion wrote: »

What we have said - and I strongly believe should be enforced - is that if you decide not to vaccinate your child for nonsensical reasons then fine - that's your choice. But there should be consequences and one of them is that you lose access to public interaction in schools and creches. You can make an unscientific decision all you like but that does not give you the right to put others at risk.

Why would you think I should be bothered by that? Why would you think anyone should be bothered by that? I don't think anyone is asking for the right to put others at risk only those people who are arguing that people should be threatened with being denied public services unless they vaccinate their children.

B0jangles wrote: »

Claiming that you have the right to not vaccinate but rejecting the rights of others not to want to be exposed to the unvaccinated is like defending your right to set your head on fire but rejecting my right to keep you out of my house.

Burn away, just don't expect anyone to want you to come visiting

Nobody is rejecting anyone's right not to want to be exposed to the unvaccinated? In fact it seems to be quite the opposite - posters here want the unvaccinated denied access to public services. Of course that argument assumes that parents who do not want to vaccinate their children, would want their children to have anything to do with the children of parents who would want them denied public services in the first place.

It wouldn't be any skin off my nose.

Orion

One eyed Jack wrote: »

That's nothing more than conjecture.

Thanks for the link to the definition of conjecture. I'm fully aware what it means already. I'm also aware of the fact that unvaccinated children are a danger to everyone through lack of herd immunity. Next time you insist that it's not true how about providing some evidence <--- see I can do it too

Here's some links that back up that fact - not just a definition link.

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2016/03/17/one-more-time-vaccine-refusal-endangers-everyone-not-just-the-unvaccinated/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/parents-who-refuse-to-vaccinate-their-children-are-putting-others-at-risk/2015/01/26/9c538266-a5aa-11e4-a06b-9df2002b86a0_story.html?utm_term=.b5923bc62dc2
http://labblog.uofmhealth.org/body-work/new-study-emphasizes-harm-of-vaccine-refusals
http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/one-map-sums-damage-caused-anti-vaccination-movement/

One eyed Jack

Orion wrote: »

Thanks for the link to the definition of conjecture. I'm fully aware what it means already. I'm also aware of the fact that unvaccinated children are a danger to everyone through lack of herd immunity. Next time you insist that it's not true how about providing some evidence <--- see I can do it too

Here's some links that back up that fact - not just a definition link.

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2016/03/17/one-more-time-vaccine-refusal-endangers-everyone-not-just-the-unvaccinated/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/parents-who-refuse-to-vaccinate-their-children-are-putting-others-at-risk/2015/01/26/9c538266-a5aa-11e4-a06b-9df2002b86a0_story.html?utm_term=.b5923bc62dc2
http://labblog.uofmhealth.org/body-work/new-study-emphasizes-harm-of-vaccine-refusals
http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/one-map-sums-damage-caused-anti-vaccination-movement/

Look at the post again -

pitifulgod wrote: »

A person with a low immune system is at incredible risk when another person decides to not vaccinate their children. This is a fact. So a parent not vaccinating based on conspiracy theories is endangering both their children and others.

It's the disease which presents the danger, not the child. That's a fact.

Mr. CooL ICE

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It's the disease which presents the danger, not the child. That's a fact.

Mod: Stop trying to be so deliberately obtuse. Trying to score brownie points by going into semantics won't win you this debate and makes this a frustrating read for other posters.

Orion

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It's the disease which presents the danger, not the child. That's a fact.

So if we eradicate the disease there's no danger anymore right? If only there was a way we would eradicate some of these diseases ... like a vaccine or something


[edit] Sorry NC - didn't see your warning to Jack before replying. I'll stop feeding the troll now.

One eyed Jack

Orion wrote: »

So if we eradicate the disease there's no danger anymore right? If only there was a way we would eradicate some of these diseases ... like a vaccine or something.

There's no point in suggesting vaccines when people aren't willing to trust vaccines any more and vaccine uptake is falling. If you've been following the thread you will have seen that I had already said -

One eyed Jack wrote: »

There's nothing you can do ACD is the only answer I can give you to that one. To go back to my earlier example, because it really is based on individual intuition - I've had many people try and change my beliefs regarding why I would object to blood transfusions, and all I'm thinking in my head is "What part of NO is causing you difficulty exactly?".

You really cannot use facts, observation and science to argue against intuition. It just does not work (and ironically - facts, observation and science should have told you as much!). Resorting to target these people and call them idiots only leads to people who are also questioning what is or isn't in the best interests of their children, to intuitively side with the people they can relate to, rather than recognising the value in facts, observation and science.

Sometimes, as much as it may well be a pain in the hole (actually suppositories, there's another delivery system I'd be against, and thankfully medicine has developed alternative methods of testing for prostate cancer than the finger test too!), but you really do have to try and relate to people on their level rather than expect them to come up to yours - two completely different ways of thinking, and if you want them to come round to your way of thinking, there really are no easy shortcuts. It can take decades, even centuries, for a cultural mind-shift like that to happen.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I would also suggest that it's intuition borne of ignorance and mistrust. I don't mind admitting that I haven't the fcuking foggiest about the HPV vaccine only that I know I don't know enough about it, and I sure as hell don't understand it, and the more it becomes a political point scoring match, the more I'm told if I actually cared about people I'd get my child the vaccine, the more I see people being ridiculed who have chosen not to get the vaccine, the more I see people aggressively touting vaccination - the more I'm erring on the side of caution tbh. It's entirely selfish of course, because what little I do understand, I understand the concept of herd immunity. The answer is simple then IMO - it's a challenge for the pharmaceutical and medical community to come up with a better model.

And they do have to come up with a better model, because your earlier assumptions about denying people State services will have no effect whatsoever on people who aren't actually dependent upon State services like public healthcare and education. It will only affect the people who are socioeconomically dependent upon State services -

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Eh? No chips on shoulders here Vin -

Source: Personal Belief Exemptions to Vaccination in California: A Spatial Analysis

It correlates with the rising number of parents choosing attachment parenting as part of an alternative lifestyle, which includes but is by no means limited to -

I doubt they've ever even heard of the Wakefield study, it isn't needed.

And it isn't needed, because as I said, there was an anti-vax movement long before the Wakefield study, as long as vaccines have existed, there has been a movement against their use -


Health and medical scholars have described vaccination as one of the top ten achievements of public health in the 20th century. Yet, opposition to vaccination has existed as long as vaccination itself (indeed, the pre-vaccination practice of variolation came under criticism as well: see our timeline for details). Critics of vaccination have taken a variety of positions, including opposition to the smallpox vaccine in England and the United States in the mid to late 1800s, and the resulting anti-vaccination leagues; as well as more recent vaccination controversies such as those surrounding the safety and efficacy of the diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis (DTP) immunization, the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine, and the use of a mercury-containing preservative called thimerosal.

Source: History of Anti-vaccination Movements


Which is why the medical and scientific community are now examining better ways to approach the issue than just hand-waving people away, deriding them as idiots for not trusting the science. It's not the science that's the problem, it's that people simply don't trust people -


Vaccines save millions of lives every year. They are one of the safest and most effective public health interventions in keeping populations healthy while bringing numerous social and economic benefits. Vaccines play an important role in ensuring that children, regardless of where they live, can have a healthy start to life. New financing mechanisms that allow poorer countries to gain access to vaccines faster than ever mean additional deaths and disabilities are projected to be saved during the Decade of Vaccines (2011–2020). Trust in vaccines and in the health system is an important element of public health programs that aim to deliver life-saving vaccines. Indeed, understanding the contributors and threats to trust is essential to explaining vaccine acceptance, particularly as they vary across epidemiologic conditions, specific vaccines and cultural and sociopolitical settings. Greater efforts to communicate the benefits and risks of vaccines and address issues with evidence-based information will help improve and sustain public trust in vaccines and health systems worldwide. Measuring and monitoring trust levels and focusing on deliberate efforts to build trust in vaccines are important steps to reducing vaccine confidence gaps when they occur.

Keywords: trust, confidence, uptake, acceptance, vaccine, immunization, delivery, pediatrics, policy

Public trust and vaccine acceptance-international perspectives

snowflaker

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/more-than-80-of-girls-treated-over-hpv-vaccine-had-only-transient-effects-1.3218829#.WbliC1swuIo.twitter

Guy:Incognito

Another liberal.ie article about the hpv vaccine on Facebook and a slew of vague nonsense being swallowed up by people. "It's been banned by lots of countries" , is plemty of evidence for people, but scientific studies are a load of crap. People need to be saved from themselves at times. Or in this case, their daughters need to be saved from them.

Orion

VinLieger wrote: »

Evidence to back this claim up please or admit your talking out of your arse

There is none. This is straight from the pages of sanevax

ancapailldorcha

Gar32 banned. Again.

VinLieger

Orion wrote: »

There is none. This is straight from the pages of sanevax

Oh im well aware i just was hoping they would dig their hole even deeper replying, seems they did it all by themselves though

whoopsadoodles

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Another liberal.ie article about the hpv vaccine on Facebook and a slew of vague nonsense being swallowed up by people. "It's been banned by lots of countries" , is plemty of evidence for people, but scientific studies are a load of crap. People need to be saved from themselves at times. Or in this case, their daughters need to be saved from them.

There was one yesterday saying "Lead Developer of HPV Vaccines Comes Clean, Warns Parents & Young Girls It’s All A Giant Deadly Scam".

Then you read the article and surprise surprise. It's a complete lie.

Orion

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Another liberal.ie article about the hpv vaccine

I wonder where Leo stole it from.

MrPudding

This should go down well.

MrP

Bobeagleburger

The anti vaxxers have got to be some of the most uneducated group on the planet. Some of the stuff they post on social media is cringe. It'd be funny if it wasn't a serious subject.

Orion

MrPudding wrote: »

This should go down well.

MrP

Saw that earlier alright. Urmagurd double dose aluminiums!!!111one

Sofiztikated

Orion wrote: »

Saw that earlier alright. Urmagurd double dose aluminiums!!!111one

Even worse! Polymer! That's plastic, donchaknow!!!1!1!111

Army_of_One

RoboKlopp wrote: »

The anti vaxxers have got to be some of the most uneducated group on the planet.

Pretty much why they are called vaxtards.

whoopsadoodles

Due to the time of year, the number of posts regarding the HPV vaccine showing up on my Facebook feed has increased. The amount of misinformation in the comments is so upsetting. If anyone tries to post any sort of logic or fact they are shouted and bullied down.

What I have noticed in the comments, is that people shouting the loudest tend to be from lower socio economic backgrounds with the safe sex folk thrown in for good measure. I don't know what that tells us tbh. Are our poorer and less educated the ones whose daughters will suffer the most because of their ignorance and lack of ability to decipher fact from emotion?

God I do hope it's turned around. For our children's sakes.

Guy:Incognito

I'm no longer friends with the woman on facebook ( I used to work with her, she knows family members and people I know) who's daughter is supposedly a victim of gardasil, but the missus is. I get some of her posts , either by idiot family members commenting or reposting her links. The missus was saying to me last night she ( the woman in question) put up a link to an article, but clearly didn't read it, because it pretty much debunked anything she's had to say. Just shows what youre dealing with. Bull**** headlines supporting their views is all they want.

Capt'n Midnight

Anyone who wants to wait until something is proven to their satisfaction that it's 100% safe had best give up using oxygen.

I'm not even joking.

Mutant z

They are a bunch of nutjobs which sensible people take no heed of, vaccinations have eradicated killer diseases they have been nothing but a force for good, any sensible parent will have their child vaccinated.

Mutant z

Andrew Wakefield has been totally discredited the fact that some still take him seriously makes them look even more deranged than they already are.

Mutant z

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Anyone who wants to wait until something is proven to their satisfaction that it's 100% safe had best give up using oxygen.

I'm not even joking.

Indeed its scaremongering tactics is all it is, there's no evidence linking vaccination to autism outside conspiroloon blogs none whatsoever any qualified doctor could tell you that, these loons are killing their own children by refusing to vaccinate them.

Mutant z

RoboKlopp wrote: »

The anti vaxxers have got to be some of the most uneducated group on the planet. Some of the stuff they post on social media is cringe. It'd be funny if it wasn't a serious subject.

It is indeed serious when its putting young lives at risk, hopefully one day they will all get the sense to cop on to see the very serious damage they are doing.

Wibbs

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Anyone who wants to wait until something is proven to their satisfaction that it's 100% safe had best give up using oxygen.

I'm not even joking.

Aye. O2 is very much a double edged sword for health. Hence the popularity of antioxidants and the important role the body's defences play against oxidative damage.


That would be my take on vaccinations. I have no doubt that yes some people can suffer adverse effects from vaccines. I'd personally be more wary of single dose for multiple illnesses vaccines compared to singe dose, single targeted vaccines. And maybe some of the additives in vaccines cause issues for people. Again I'd not be surprised to find that is the case. And all of the above is exaggerated beyond daft with the antivaxxers. I suppose the best mistruth and ignorance and paranoia is based on a tiny bit of fact.

However looking at the overall risk/reward assessment vaccines are a no brainer. They really are. Even if you took all the adverse effects, they pale into insignificance when compared to the adverse effects including disability and death of catching the viruses themselves. It's not even close to a trade off.

I also get the feeling that there may be some wariness among people of my generation. That is, people who got all the usual childhood viruses and "it didn't do us any harm" types. The only vaccine I received in my life was the sugar lump for polio. Don't even have the three(?) scars on my upper arm that most had of my generation*. And TBH I used to be a little like that myself regarding vaccines for the childhood illnesses of my youth. Certainly with something like mumps and measles. A few days off school, lots of comics and ice cream was about it. Of all of them I thought chicken pox the worst TBH. I can still remember the constant itch. I didn't even realise I had mumps until a nun in "high babies" had a meltdown when she saw me looking like a well stuffed chipmunk as I walked into class(the Ma had left me at the school gates looking normal and by the end of a 200 yard walk I was a biological weapon . Yeah that quickly. I remember the Ma's mortification more than the dose TBH). And I knew nobody who had chronic after effects of these illnesses, certainly no child that died.

Today I am convinced that the measles of my childhood was a far less virulent strain than what has come along since. I suppose just like the flu they can vary in intensity? All I know is that from about the mid 90's I started to hear of poor kids being very badly affected by it and two I heard of dying from it. Someone from my generation might be forgiven for having some excuse for ignorance, but people in their 20's and 30's?

So yeah, vaccines for the win. TL;DR? I've seen [EDIT]people a minority of people get a bad reaction to the flu vaccine, but no matter how bad the reaction it wasn't like getting the flu itself.



* the scratch test I got beforehand showed I had a natural immunity to TB IIRC, so didn't require the jabs. Latterly I found out I also have an increased immunity to HIV and the Plague, which are connected in an odd way, given one is a virus and the other a bacterium(appernrtly common enough as all of our ancestors were exposed to the plague and they survived... So I'm your huckleberry if you ever need to time travel to renaissance Venice.

Jawgap

Being blunt, we need to see more stories like this.......

Measles vaccine: 'I cheated my daughter'

Sarah Walton was left severely disabled when the measles infection she had as a child returned 24 years later.

Her mother Jo says she feels she cheated her daughter because she did not know more about the benefits of vaccinating her.

She had not been planning to take up the vaccine for Sarah, when her daughter contracted measles at 11 months old.

Now she says the government should consider penalties against parents who choose not to vaccinate their children.

......to counter the downright dangerous, manipulative and deranged garbage the anti-vaccination loopers circulate.

Samaris

God, those stories are tragic, the more so because it was so damned unnecessary for it to happen. How many lives have to be wasted or destroyed? How many parents have to grieve and have no-one to blame but themselves? How much of this will it take for people to see through these appalling, malevolent fearmongering lies?

And yet, you hear people arguing that "I don't believe that I should have to vaccinate my child and why should -I- care about -your- child who cannot be vaccinated? I care for my child, not yours, and this is my choice." And they are wrong and self-centred arguments. They risk both their child and other people while thinking that they're only risking other peoples' children. And that they "only" think they're risking someone else's son or daughter rather than their own is no excuse at all.

TotalReality

Have I any rights as an unmarried father,separated from their mother to get my kids vaccinated properly?
I pay maintenance and have access to my kids every weekend.

Capt'n Midnight

Wibbs wrote: »

Aye. O2 is very much a double edged sword for health. Hence the popularity of antioxidants

Sunlight is another one.
It's good for you to be outside but the sun gives you cancer.

Fruit is good for you. Potassium is radioactive. It's in bananas.
So for very low levels of radioactivity people have described it in bananas.
A long airplane flight might be the same as 400 bananas :eek:

Alcohol is a food. And the cause of and solution to all of lifes problems.
In moderation wine can improve life expectancy , in excess no so much.



The whole reason we have the medical profession is that humanity has figured out ways to keep alive that work.

And if that means the complete eradication of a biological entity we consider a health risk we've done it before, and others are on the hit list.


The most selfish thing about anti-vaxxers is that they are condemning future generations to pain and suffering and they aren't even benefiting from better health now.