(December 18, 2017 at 3:40 pm)The Gentleman Bastard Wrote:

(December 18, 2017 at 2:21 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: How much potential though? No parent declines vaccinating their kid while knowing there's a big risk they might die from it. Instead they think the risk of the vaccine itself is greater than the risk of the child catching a deadly disease and dying from it.

Plain and simple. You're more likely to die of small pox than suffer an adverse reaction to the vaccine. If people are to stupid to figure than out, they need to be educated, and if necessary, required by law to protect their kids.

I've heard them argue the exact opposite actually. Because small pox is so rare now, they think the chances of contracting it and dying from it is less than an adverse reaction to the vax.

Not saying they are right or that I agree, just presenting their view point and why I don't think they should be held criminally responsible for passing it up.

(December 18, 2017 at 3:48 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(December 18, 2017 at 3:40 pm)The Gentleman Bastard Wrote: Plain and simple. You're more likely to die of small pox than suffer an adverse reaction to the vaccine. If people are to stupid to figure than out, they need to be educated, and if necessary, required by law to protect their kids.

I've heard them argue the exact opposite actually. Because small pox is so rare now, they think the chances of contracting it and dying from it is less than an adverse reaction to the vax.

Not saying they are right or that I agree, just presenting their view point and why I don't think they should be held criminally responsible for passing it up.

With the numbers that are skipping the immunization, small pox is once again a threat. Leaving your kid unprotected from that threat should be just as much child neglect as leaving them in a hot car on a summer afternoon without water.

(December 18, 2017 at 2:21 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(December 18, 2017 at 1:35 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: Even if it means the potential death of that person's child?

How much potential though? No parent declines vaccinating their kid while knowing there's a big risk they might die from it. Instead they think the risk of the vaccine itself is greater than the risk of the child catching a deadly disease and dying from it.

The information is there and is provided to them repeatedly in their life. The only reason their kid isn't likely to get sick is because enough other people vaccinate that diseases are spread around. Enough people don't vaccinate and we have a real problem. They are putting lots of kids at risk.

I also find it offensive on a historical level. These are diseases that wiped out millions of people and caused untold suffering, but privileged white housewives think they know more about it and yet never look at the opposing argument.

I also just find it so morally outrageous, because so many people around the world would love to be able to vaccinate their kids. So I have no sympathy for them, even as somewhat of a libertarian, this is a no brainer. If your kid dies, or another kid does because of your stupidity, you go to prison.

---

(December 18, 2017 at 7:22 pm)The Gentleman Bastard Wrote:

(December 18, 2017 at 3:48 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I've heard them argue the exact opposite actually. Because small pox is so rare now, they think the chances of contracting it and dying from it is less than an adverse reaction to the vax.

Not saying they are right or that I agree, just presenting their view point and why I don't think they should be held criminally responsible for passing it up.

With the numbers that are skipping the immunization, small pox is once again a threat. Leaving your kid unprotected from that threat should be just as much child neglect as leaving them in a hot car on a summer afternoon without water.

You guys are both wrong about smallpox. It only exists anymore in a laboratory. Nobody gets the smallpox vaccine, not since the late 70s and there are 0 cases of smallpox in the world. It's not "so rare" nor is it "once again a threat"

https://www.niaid.nih.gov/diseases-conditions/smallpox

Quote: The last naturally occurring case of smallpox was reported in 1977. In 1980, the World Health Organization declared that smallpox had been eradicated. Currently, there is no evidence of naturally occurring smallpox transmission anywhere in the world. Although a worldwide immunization program eradicated smallpox disease decades ago, small quantities of smallpox virus officially still exist in two research laboratories in Atlanta, Georgia, and in Russia.

We wiped it from the face of the planet because of forced vaccinations.

(December 18, 2017 at 7:38 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote:

(December 18, 2017 at 2:21 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: How much potential though? No parent declines vaccinating their kid while knowing there's a big risk they might die from it. Instead they think the risk of the vaccine itself is greater than the risk of the child catching a deadly disease and dying from it.

The information is there and is provided to them repeatedly in their life. The only reason their kid isn't likely to get sick is because enough other people vaccinate that diseases are spread around. Enough people don't vaccinate and we have a real problem. They are putting lots of kids at risk.

I also find it offensive on a historical level. These are diseases that wiped out millions of people and caused untold suffering, but privileged white housewives think they know more about it and yet never look at the opposing argument.

I also just find it so morally outrageous, because so many people around the world would love to be able to vaccinate their kids. So I have no sympathy for them, even as somewhat of a libertarian, this is a no brainer. If your kid dies, or another kid does because of your stupidity, you go to prison.

---

(December 18, 2017 at 7:22 pm)The Gentleman Bastard Wrote: With the numbers that are skipping the immunization, small pox is once again a threat. Leaving your kid unprotected from that threat should be just as much child neglect as leaving them in a hot car on a summer afternoon without water.

You guys are both wrong about smallpox. It only exists anymore in a laboratory. Nobody gets the smallpox vaccine, not since the late 70s and there are 0 cases of smallpox in the world. It's not "so rare" nor is it "once again a threat"

https://www.niaid.nih.gov/diseases-conditions/smallpox

Quote: The last naturally occurring case of smallpox was reported in 1977. In 1980, the World Health Organization declared that smallpox had been eradicated. Currently, there is no evidence of naturally occurring smallpox transmission anywhere in the world. Although a worldwide immunization program eradicated smallpox disease decades ago, small quantities of smallpox virus officially still exist in two research laboratories in Atlanta, Georgia, and in Russia.

We wiped it from the face of the planet because of forced vaccinations.

You're right about small pox. That was a bad example. Polio, measles, mumps, rubella, etc... on the other hand...

(December 18, 2017 at 3:35 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(December 18, 2017 at 2:45 pm)Abaddon_ire Wrote: On what basis? And before you answer, parents have killed their children on the basis of religiously inspired medical neglect, do not even attempt to pretend that they have not.

Not sure why/where religion got brought into this since I didn't mention it at all.

All the arguments ive heard personally from anti vaxxers has nothing to do with religion. They think vaccines may cause some sort of neurological reaction, autism, etc. They think it's risky, no longer necessary, and unhealthy. I dont know of any religion that forbids vaccines. Not saying they dont exist, just saying im pretry sure most anti vaxxers are concerned about health reasons, not influenced by religion.

I'm pretty sure there's a major overlap.  A lot of Christians are suspicious of science / scientists in general, and of the government.  I think it's pretty clear that the avenues of information by which parents make their "health" decisions are clouded by their politics and religion.  If you're going to Fox News for information about vaccine safety, rather than to Mayo Clinic website, wikipedia, various health agencies around the world, and so on, then your "health" decision is really a decision to embrace ignorance

It's crystal clear at this point that there isn't a causal relationship between vaccines and autism-- i.e. that no causal link can be demonstrated with actual observation of evidence.  But dumb people multiply false information to the point that it is more populous than good information-- and then say "Well, everybody knows that. . . "

Religion is part of the problem because it requires people to suspend disbelief and to distrust factual evidence.  So yeah. . . anti-vax IS a religious position, even though someone making their decision might not see it that way.

(December 18, 2017 at 3:35 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(December 18, 2017 at 2:45 pm)Abaddon_ire Wrote: On what basis? And before you answer, parents have killed their children on the basis of religiously inspired medical neglect, do not even attempt to pretend that they have not.

Not sure why/where religion got brought into this since I didn't mention it at all.

All the arguments ive heard personally from anti vaxxers has nothing to do with religion. They think vaccines may cause some sort of neurological reaction, autism, etc. They think it's risky, no longer necessary, and unhealthy. I dont know of any religion that forbids vaccines. Not saying they dont exist, just saying im pretry sure most anti vaxxers are concerned about health reasons, not influenced by religion.

Oh, really. Explain the Schaible family please.

http://time.com/8750/faith-healing-paren...lds-death/
Good luck.

I do have a problem with the idea behind vaccines. Clearly vaccines save lives, numerically speaking.

My worry is that a uniform process, when spread across an entire population, makes any mistakes or unknowns that could be harmful almost infinitely magnified. What, for example, if a particular treatment was found to increase risk of early infertility or something? If say 10% of the population takes such a medication, this is trivial. If 100% are forced to, then it seems to me that eventually, no matter how good the science, some missed factor might nuke an entire generation.

(December 18, 2017 at 11:20 pm)Abaddon_ire Wrote:

(December 18, 2017 at 3:35 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Not sure why/where religion got brought into this since I didn't mention it at all.

All the arguments ive heard personally from anti vaxxers has nothing to do with religion. They think vaccines may cause some sort of neurological reaction, autism, etc. They think it's risky, no longer necessary, and unhealthy. I dont know of any religion that forbids vaccines. Not saying they dont exist, just saying im pretry sure most anti vaxxers are concerned about health reasons, not influenced by religion.

Oh, really. Explain the Schaible family please.

http://time.com/8750/faith-healing-paren...lds-death/
Good luck.

(December 18, 2017 at 3:35 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Not saying they dont exist,, just saying im pretry sure most anti vaxxers are concerned about health reasons, not influenced by religion.

(December 18, 2017 at 11:41 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(December 18, 2017 at 11:20 pm)Abaddon_ire Wrote: Oh, really. Explain the Schaible family please.

http://time.com/8750/faith-healing-paren...lds-death/
Good luck.

(December 18, 2017 at 3:35 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Not saying they dont exist,, just saying im pretry sure most anti vaxxers are concerned about health reasons, not influenced by religion.

Wow, so for the record, you endorse infanticide. OK then. As an atheist I find that position morally repulsive and it has changed my perception of you forever.

(December 18, 2017 at 11:53 pm)Abaddon_ire Wrote: Wow, so for the record, you endorse infanticide. OK then. As an atheist I find that position morally repulsive and it has changed my perception of you forever.

dafuq?