Do you agree with mandatory vaccinations?

robinph

pgj2015 wrote: »

you asked her twice? it is none of your business, just worry about yourself and leave other people to parent the way they see fit.

It is my business if I come into contact with someone who isn't vaccinated against something that there is no reason for them not to be vaccinated against it. You don't know if I've been vaccinated, you don't know if I cannot be vaccinated, you don't know if the vaccination I might have received will work for me, you don't know if I live with someone else who is too young to be vaccinated against X or cannot be vaccinated against X.

Vaccination only works when everyone who can is, to protect those who can't.

CelticRambler

Deleted User wrote: »

I would be very reluctant to have the vaccine. Mainly because it’ll be years before possible side effects are known.

I don't think it'll be years. Out of the 100-odd vaccine trials underway at the moment, I would expect the few that provoke a "good" immune response to be stopped within a year due to an unacceptable level of Covid-19 triggered in test subjects given the vaccine.

If any of them make it through the clinical trials and into production, then I'd expect them to have an unacceptably high failure rate in the real world (because the clinical trials were rushed, and deliberately excluded the most susceptible patients) and be rapidly withdrawn from the market before any other side-effects came to light.

Contrary to the belief of most anti-vaxxers, there's very little money in vaccines for Big Pharma. The only reason they're playing the game at the moment is to get their hands on public (and celebrity) money for research - because that's money they'd usually have to stump up themselves. This is a great time to be in the laboratory upgrade and refurbishment business.

4068ac1elhodqr

Deleted User wrote: »

Or you arguing for or against Gates here?
I'm happy enough that one of the richest and smartest people in the world is plowing resources into finding a cure. Seems like a noble cause.

Am simply curious (due to various contextual matters) for his precise motivation. Yes indeed, on the face of it (the technologist), whom now is a healthcare specialist seems to be a shinning light these days.

Worth noting however that actually has numerous partnerships and interests, including previous vaccine type projects, that suggest his objectives may well be more technology driven than simple healthcare.

E.g. Is anyone aware of his recent funding for an (combined at time of vaccine) delivered "quantum dot tattoo*".

Sure, now this *QDT sounds a bit woo-woo, made up, and even spaceage.
It's however a very real, proven and capable expensive MIT based project.

In it's simplest terms, it's a "scanable data mark, by the way of an under-skin body embodiment, similar to a useful QRTag" (that's btw, may be viewed as many as the 'polite explanation').
Lash it in yer google shure for a lookie lookie.

ldy4mxonucwsq6

Don't think vaccines should be mandatory, some people choose not to get them for whatever reason others because they can't for medical reasons.

That said, all of my kids were fully vaccinated. I made that choice for them and informed myself beforehand. I weighed up the decision so that I was happy with my choice.

When they were old enough to learn about vaccines and know about protection v side effects I allowed them to have the input to make their own choice e.g HPV vaccine and boosters.

Forcing medical treatments on people is not right. You can see why people might be reluctant especially with new vaccines.

One eyed Jack

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

To decide if it will work or not I will have to wait and see HOW they plan to make it mandatory and WHO it will be mandatory for. Without that, declaring by fiat it will or will not work is just fantasy. And when it comes from someone who makes many of the same noises I hear from Anti Vaxxers, becomes even more questionable and suspect.

It’s already been suggested in the thread that it should be made mandatory contingent on those who are not vaccinated with a particular vaccine being denied public services! That’s how they intend to enforce it, and that’s why I asked the original question I did, of those people who argued for mandatory vaccination.

You appear to be attempting to have a different discussion entirely.

polesheep

I'm very pro-vaccine. I have all of the usual vaccines on board and a few more for travel purposes, but I would not take a Covid-19 vaccine until I could be certain that it has been proved safe. That takes time and no one has the right to insist that anyone be pushed into taking a vaccine until it is guaranteed safe.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

Risteard81 wrote: »

Anyone promoting mandatory vaccination is an abhorrent excuse for a human being.

Anyone who tries to vaccinate me against my will will be met with any degree of force necessary to prevent them.

polesheep

mickdw wrote: »

Question re vaccine. If there is no natural immunity in people who have got through this virus, can there be a vaccine at all.
I thought vaccines work by introducing an amount of the virus allowing us to fight that and therby build immunity.
Professor luke o neill last night seemed to be of the opinion also that if there is no immunity in those who have had the virus, a vaccine might be a complete non runner.

A vaccine that is based off a variation of Covid-19 might confer immunity to Covid-19. The immune system is incredibly complex and we are only beginning to understand it.

One eyed Jack

robinph wrote: »

It is my business if I come into contact with someone who isn't vaccinated against something that there is no reason for them not to be vaccinated against it. You don't know if I've been vaccinated, you don't know if I cannot be vaccinated, you don't know if the vaccination I might have received will work for me, you don't know if I live with someone else who is too young to be vaccinated against X or cannot be vaccinated against X.

Vaccination only works when everyone who can is, to protect those who can't.

It’s really only your business if you or your loved ones contract a viral infection which causes you some ill effect. It’s not actually any of your business whether anyone else is vaccinated or not, that’s entirely their own business and there is nothing you could do about that other than avoid them. There is nothing you could compel them to do to alleviate your paranoia.

The One Doctor

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

How do you feel about thalidomide babies?

That wasn't mandatory, you martinet.

pgj2015

robinph wrote: »

It is my business if I come into contact with someone who isn't vaccinated against something that there is no reason for them not to be vaccinated against it. You don't know if I've been vaccinated, you don't know if I cannot be vaccinated, you don't know if the vaccination I might have received will work for me, you don't know if I live with someone else who is too young to be vaccinated against X or cannot be vaccinated against X.

Vaccination only works when everyone who can is, to protect those who can't.

ah I get ya, everyone must do as you do and then everything is ok? your friend would be better off without a friend like you,you sound very domineering, if any of my friends asked me that question twice, they would be told to fcuk off and mind their own business.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

JDMC2 wrote: »

I suppose it’s each to their own. I have an acquaintance who doesn’t believe in vaccines. We’re on a group chat together. I’ve asked her twice if she will get herself and her kids vaccinated when we get one for Covid-19......I’m still awaiting a response....not sure I’ll ever know

We live in a part of the world, where we have the luxury of choosing to be an anti-vaxxer... I suspect there would be far fewer of these loonies, if we lived in some 3rd world backwater where lethal virus epidemics are commonplace!

Try being an anti-vaxxer in sub-saharan africa.... good luck with that! :rolleyes:

pgj2015

We live in a part of the world, where we have the luxury of choosing to be an anti-vaxxer. exactly we dont live in a hell hole like North Korea where you have no rights. long may it continue, they will never bring in forced vaccinations here.

anyone who wants services, jobs and education denied to anyone who wont get a vaccine are obviously not well in the head.

robinph

pgj2015 wrote: »

anyone who wants services, jobs and education denied to anyone who wont get a vaccine are obviously not well in the head.

Society denies rights to those who don't comply with the rules of living in that society all the time. If you actively chose to not be vaccinated for no good reason then the community is perfectly entitled to remove certain rights of being part of that society.

Kilboor

robinph wrote: »

Society denies rights to those who don't comply with the rules of living in that society all the time. If you actively chose to not be vaccinated for no good reason then the community is perfectly entitled to remove certain rights of being part of that society.

That's perhaps collectivisation not a democratic society ... A worrying road even if for vaccinations it's right. Surely we have a better way forward than discriminating against people who want liberty

One eyed Jack

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

We live in a part of the world, where we have the luxury of choosing to be an anti-vaxxer... I suspect there would be far fewer of these loonies, if we lived in some 3rd world backwater where lethal virus epidemics are commonplace!

Try being an anti-vaxxer in sub-saharan africa.... good luck with that! :rolleyes:

It’s a reasonable assumption to make from the perspective of someone living in a wealthy first world country, but you’d be wrong in assuming there is any less vaccine hesitancy in Africa and ME than there is in the West -

Firstly, little is known about the nature and causes of vaccine hesitancy in Africa, with most research in this area conducted in high income countries. Vaccine hesitancy is highly variable and context-specific, and thus the generalizability of findings from high income countries is unclear. Most African countries face significant barriers in the ‘access-supply side’ of vaccination, and therefore vaccine hesitancy is likely to comprise a more complex interplay of structural and psychological influences than in high income countries. A recent vaccine hesitancy model proposed by the World Health Organization and expanded by one of the authors, suggests the drivers of vaccine hesitancy include confidence, complacency, convenience, risk calculation, and collective responsibility (“5C model”). Yet these models are based on research predominantly conducted in and constrained to WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic) societies, and we lack empirical data to test, adapt and potentially apply these models to Africa. We thus need to expand understandings of the context-specific causes and implications of vaccine hesitancy within different African settings, and differentiate hesitancy from other reasons why individuals are not (completely) vaccinated in the region. This is essential for enhancing the generalizability of current causal models, and the development of more targeted and contextually-tailored interventions for Africa. Few interventions in Africa have been shown to be effective in decreasing vaccine hesitancy. This may be due, at least in part, to the paucity of knowledge on the determinants of vaccine hesitancy and thus a lack of interventions which focus specifically on causal mechanisms.


Vaccine hesitancy – a potential threat to the achievements of vaccination programmes in Africa

mickdw

The One Doctor wrote: »

That wasn't mandatory, you martinet.

Thankfully but was approved and 'perfectly safe'

pgj2015

robinph wrote: »

Society denies rights to those who don't comply with the rules of living in that society all the time. If you actively chose to not be vaccinated for no good reason then the community is perfectly entitled to remove certain rights of being part of that society.

They obviously have their own reasons. just because you dont agree with them doesnt make their reasons wrong.

timsey tiger

Kilboor wrote: »

If I don't get the vaccine and you have it then what worry is me carrying the virus to you?

Furthermore if I already had the virus and have antibodies why would I get a vaccine?

Furthermore why should I trust the long term effects of a vaccine developed quickly by a corporation (most likely J&J who have been responsible for cancer from talcum powder in babies) when it was developed within a year?

Also I'm 25 years old, statistically the chances of me getting seriously ill or even dying from Covid 19 are probably not far off the chances from the regular flu, why should I be forced to get a vaccine or treated differently for not getting one?

I'm not against vaccines especially those that have been tested over the long term amongst a large population base, especially for children. But mandatory vaccines for a flu, I'm alright thank you. I'll safeguard that ounce of liberty especially from corporations.

I get it, why should you do anything for anybody else. What would society be like if everybody was like you. Did anybody ever do you a favour, think of it like you are passing that on.

It gets tedious after a while explaining over and over again to those who will not inform themselves.

You do realise that most vaccines don't offer 100% protection and rely on a high proportion of the population being vaccinated to halt the spread of the disease and that certain groups are unable to take vaccines for various medical reasons.

titan18

Kilboor wrote:

That's perhaps collectivisation not a democratic society ... A worrying road even if for vaccinations it's right. Surely we have a better way forward than discriminating against people who want liberty

What about the people who can't take vaccinations but don't want to die. Why should the anti vaxxers take their liberty

robinph

pgj2015 wrote: »

They obviously have their own reasons. just because you dont agree with them doesnt make their reasons wrong.

Reasons that are based on the thoughts of the idiot Andrew Wakefield are wrong. There was basically no such thing as anti vax until he appeared.

Science can prove most of the reasons for refusing vaccination to be wrong. Someone having religion or veganism as a reason to object to certain vaccines I'd have more time for even if I don't follow their beliefs.

Kilboor

timsey tiger wrote: »

I get it, why should you do anything for anybody else. What would society be like if everybody was like you. Did anybody ever do you a favour, think of it like you are passing that on.

It gets tedious after a while explaining over and over again to those who will not inform themselves.

You do realise that most vaccines don't offer 100% protection and rely on a high proportion of the population being vaccinated to halt the spread of the disease and that certain groups are unable to take vaccines for various medical reasons.

Yes I had a conversation in the replies so maybe read for once instead of acting like a know it all smart ass. I'm not anti vax but we still don't have stats on this virus and real mortality rate and effects.

I won't be getting a mandatory vaccine especially one developed by a pharma corp in a short space of time. I am more selfish about my own welfare and the principle then I am of passing the flu onto someone else. We shouldn't take away the rights and liberty of the majority so hastily for untested things. That is a dangerous dangerous path and one I will not support. That's my final word on the matter.

Kilboor

titan18 wrote: »

What about the people who can't take vaccinations but don't want to die. Why should the anti vaxxers take their liberty

We should all stop eating peanuts too in case someone has a nut allergy.

When does it end? Should it be mandatory for us to take a flu vaccine every year too? And the next disease that comes along.

Posted from my smart phone made in a sweatshop where people kill themselves over lack of quality of life and work overload.

Let's cut the virtue signalling bull****. World's not fair.

One eyed Jack

robinph wrote: »

Society denies rights to those who don't comply with the rules of living in that society all the time. If you actively chose to not be vaccinated for no good reason then the community is perfectly entitled to remove certain rights of being part of that society.

Someone else said this earlier and it’s just not true. Society doesn’t deny anyone rights to which they are entitled by law. Their rights are not contingent upon whether or not they comply with prevailing social mores or not, and depriving anyone of their liberty requires compelling evidence that they have committed some wrongdoing.

Irish law doesn’t require that parents have a good reason for choosing not to vaccinate their children, and in any case no community has the authority to deprive someone of their rights to which they are entitled under Irish law solely on the basis of a condition that is not required in Irish law in the first place.

That’s why people working to reduce vaccine hesitancy prefer to use a cooperative rather than combative approach, because they’re aware that the combative approach means people who were hesitant before will become even more hesitant and resistant to any attempt to participate in vaccination.

There is of course the argument that mandatory vaccination programmes are in the interests of public health (and Cuba is evidence of same with a high rate of vaccination), but there’s a lot of argument about the ethics of mandatory vaccination programmes, not the least of which is whether it’s ethical to deny people their human rights on the basis of compelling them to do something which violates their conscience.

timsey tiger

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

We live in a part of the world, where we have the luxury of choosing to be an anti-vaxxer... I suspect there would be far fewer of these loonies, if we lived in some 3rd world backwater where lethal virus epidemics are commonplace!

Try being an anti-vaxxer in sub-saharan africa.... good luck with that! :rolleyes:

Unfortunately, the agents that spread misinformation, about science in the West are also at that in poor countries.

In addition the west have not always acted honorably, testing out things in Africa without informing the subjects of the tests that they were part of a trial and not receiving verified medication.

I would suspect the vaccination, rates might be even lower in certain poor countries due to these factors.

robinph

Kilboor wrote: »

We should all stop eating peanuts too in case someone has a nut allergy.

Nuts are banned from being put in the kids packed lunch for school. Minor inconvenience in order to protect those who are allergic at the school.

CelticRambler

robinph wrote: »

If you actively chose to not be vaccinated for no good reason then the community is perfectly entitled to remove certain rights of being part of that society.

What if the only "good reason" is because politicians have decided that they need to be seen to be doing something, even though there is no rational scientific basis for doing so?

robinph wrote: »

Science can prove most of the reasons for refusing vaccination to be wrong.

Science can prove that most of the reasons for "airport security" are wrong, but people still go along with it because of irrational fears on the part of passengers, and economic self-interest on the part of airports and airport security providers.

In any case, the likelihood of a vaccine being of any commercial interest to anyone took another step backwards today. A French multi-centre group (of proper scientists) in a proper clinical trial has found that the use of an existing and commercially available monoclonal antibody can significantly improve the treatment outcome of Covid-19 patients (so probably also Covid-21, Covid-25, Covid-35 ... )

As soon as there's almost no risk of dying from Covid-n, the likelihood of any vaccine ever being developed - never mind being made compulsory - will reduce to zero. I'd say we'll be there by the end of the year.

One eyed Jack

robinph wrote: »

Reasons that are based on the thoughts of the idiot Andrew Wakefield are wrong. There was basically no such thing as anti vax until he appeared.

Science can prove most of the reasons for refusing vaccination to be wrong. Someone having religion or veganism as a reason to object to certain vaccines I'd have more time for even if I don't follow their beliefs.

I don’t know where you get your information, but that’s simply not true. Even before Edward Jenner developed what became known as a vaccine for smallpox, there existed people who were opposed to vaccination for one reason or another -

History of Anti-vaccination Movements


Andrew Wakefield just isn’t all that relevant nowadays in the age of “attachment parenting” where ultra-liberal types promote a method of parenting which rejects vaccination -


Facts alone don't sway anti-vaxxers. So what does?

the_syco

timmy_mallet wrote: »

Hiw do you feel about know side effects, including death, for kids of certain vaccines?

Whataboutery

STB.

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

I will kick this off I will not be taken it end of story and I will not be answering to ANYBODY my body my choice.

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

The man behind the biggest funding for this stuff openly admits to wanting a reduction in world population. How stupid are people?

Risteard81 wrote: »

Anyone who tries to vaccinate me against my will will be met with any degree of force necessary to prevent them.

timmy_mallet wrote: »

I certainly will not be taking the first one or two off the manufacturing line. And anyone here advocating for that or draconian punishments for those not wanting to has a fundamental misunderstanding of vaccine research, efficacy and manufacturing, and needs serious, serious looking at.

Three conspiracy theorists walk into a bar.


You can't tell me that's just a coincidence