So the new anti-Vax mantra is "My body, My choice"?

[trumad]

Stupid fucking people.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. Actually, I have to agree with that slogan, up to a point.

And that point is:

It's your body and your choice, as long as it doesn't harm anyone else.

They may not get that part, or agree with it.

[dembotoz]

5. /\/\/\/\ yes/\/\/\/\

[Arkansas Granny]

14. And I have to agree with you on that.

[jwirr]

36. And that is the original meaning of the slogan.

[JDPriestly]

41. I agree. But as long as we keep unvaccinated people away from our very young and vulnerale children

and vaccinate our children when they are old enough for the vaccinations, we don't have to require vaccinations of everyone.

The measles vaccination was first developed around 1963. Those of us born before that time probably had the measles. I'm not sure, so I had a blood test this morning so that I can be a responsible grandparent. I have to admit that is my choice. I'm going to this trouble because I love my grandchildren and other children.

Measles is extremely contagious

Measles is a highly contagious virus that lives in the nose and throat mucus of an infected person. It can spread to others through coughing and sneezing. Also, measles virus can live for up to two hours on a surface or in an airspace where the infected person coughed or sneezed. If other people breathe the contaminated air or touch the infected surface, then touch their eyes, noses, or mouths, they can become infected. Measles is so contagious that if one person has it, 90% of the people close to that person who are not immune will also become infected.

Infected people can spread measles to others from four days before to four days after the rash appears.

Measles is a disease of humans; measles virus is not spread by any other animal species.

http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/transmission.html

Watch out for measles. If a member of your family gets it, don't take them out in to public because someone too young or too vulnerable to be vaccinated could get the disease very easily.

[AlbertCat]

49. If a member of your family gets it, don't take them out in to public....

Like they are only contagious when the symptoms show up......

What make anyone think that people too ridiculous and clueless to get their kids vaccinated are capable of an effective voluntary quarantine?

[jeff47]

66. You have the workload backwards.

But as long as we keep unvaccinated people away from our very young and vulnerale children

You've got the workload backwards. You are demanding the young and vulnerable bear the effort of dealing with a choice made by someone else.

If you're going to give someone the choice to not vaccinate, they have to bear the efforts of that choice.

You also seem to be ignoring the problem that you can spread measles up to 4 days before you have symptoms. So your "don't go in public" advice only works if you have a time machine.

[JDPriestly]

69. I stand corrected. Thanks.

[jeff47]

70. Just to be pedantic

Someone with measles will have flu-like symptoms by the time they can spread the disease. They won't have measles symptoms. So you could make the quarantine work as long as they are quarantined for every cold.

[JDPriestly]

71. Clear. That would mean those who get colds and cannot be vaccinated due to compromised

immune systems as well as babies too young for the measles vaccine should be self-quarantined if they get a cold.

Thanks.

[Still Sensible]

82. +1

[MrScorpio]

87. Damn Skippy! nt

[NightWatcher]

2. My problem when your choice means you become a carrier and spread it to me

and I have an auto immune disease (actually 3, but you get my drift)

[HappyMe]

3. That's exactly it.

It is their choice, but it can effect a bunch of people in terrible ways. I think that is when it is no longer their choice.

[MillennialDem]

7. What about the other side of the coin of people with conditions

I'm allergic to the oil that most injectable medications are prepared in. Should I get a pass or should I have to subject myself to something I'm allergic to?

FWIW I do think most anti vaxxers are utterly stupid and crazy - ie thinking it causes autism and a litany of other urban legends.

[Liberal Veteran]

9. I don't think anyone is suggesting you be injected something you are allergic to.

The very few people who have a legitimate medical reason for not vaccinating are not really a problem. It is the morons you reference in your second sentence that are making a mess of things.

[MillennialDem]

21. Good. I did hear about a hospital that was requiring nurses and other staff to be vaccinated for the

flu though. I wonder if I would have gotten a pass over that or be allowed to just use the nasal vaccine.

[Liberal Veteran]

25. I can't take the nasal vaccine. I'm immunocompromised.

I have to put up with the arm jab every year.

[Moonwalk]

64. Nurses and other staff are around sick people with compromised immune systems daily...

...which is why hospitals require they get the flu vaccine. Because if they get the flu they can literally kill many patients. Even so, almost all such nurses required to get the flu vaccine were those working in the ICU. One nurse who refused was allowed to refuse, but then couldn't work in the ICU.

The big to-do was that she objected to not being able to work in the ICU unvaccinated. Which, in the end, isn't the right attitude for a nurse who should care about the health of her patients first and foremost. She doesn't have to compromise her beliefs and get the vaccine, but she does have to compromise her job choices given this belief if she wants to do right by the patients.

It's rather like those Christians who work giving out marriage licenses who say they shouldn't have to give them to gays because it's against their religion. They don't have to compromise their religion, but they do need to change jobs because they're not allowed to hurt people in following their religion. Either they do the job in a way that doesn't hurt anyone, or they do a different job where they can uphold their beliefs but not risk hurting anyone by it.

"Your Liberty To Swing Your Fist Ends Just Where My Nose Begins." Ditto here.

[Iggo]

10. WE get vaccinated to protect YOU.

That's what these don't (or pretend not to) understand .

[MillennialDem]

22. And I appreciate it. I rarely get sick though as I'm still young and healthy (or is it the

vaxxers who save me? hehe).

I did get my shots when I was a kid though, so lacking boosters is probably less of a big deal for me than kids who don't get vaxxed at all.

[zeemike]

86. Well I don't understand.

I thought you get vaccinated to protect YOU from getting sick?
And you vaccinate your children so they won't get sick...no one does it so other children won't get sick.

But honestly I know nothing of this subject one way or the other, but reading this thread the feeling I get is that there is a sense that vaccinations should be mandatory...and I find that disturbing.
And don't that answer the question of whether it really IS your body your choice?...no if there is a reason given.

[Humanist_Activist]

94. Since you freely admit you know nothing...

about the subject. Perhaps you should look up herd immunity.

[zeemike]

98. Have no interest in it.

Clicked on it to learn something about what the fuss is about and now I know.
But I have no small children and am well past the age where it matters to me...but I did notice the behavior of the people in this "controversy" if that is what it is...and perked up when some seemed to suggest that the whole herd should be forced to be vaccinated...and that sounds wrong to me.

[bhikkhu]

138. Think of it like pooping in the yard

Your body, your yard, your choice?

But we know that many diseases are spread by feces, so there isn't a city in the country that would allow you to do it habitually, freedom notwithstanding.

[zeemike]

140. Well think of it as an ultrasound for a woman.

Should we mandate every woman have one even if she don't want something put in her body?
I bet someone could find a rational reason why they should.

This is not about sanitation, it is about injecting something into your body, and everyone should have the right to say no.

[jwirr]

39. I think that you would be exempt - your doctor probably would not give you the vaccination. I

know that they ask me if I am allergic to certain things before they give me mine. That is a verifiable condition that is a reason not to do it. Like you said most anti-vaxers do not have verified reasons. Just fears.

[murielm99]

76. You have good reason not be be vaccinated.

Herd immunity should protect you, unless the herd around you is filled with empty-headed fools.

[murielm99]

77. I have an auto immune disease, too,

developed later in life. I have had all my shots. I get flu shots. I have had the pneumonia shot and the shingles vaccination. I am not taking any chances.

Get the shots if you can, and stay well!

[Padiddle]

85. But how does stupidity transmit so fast?

All I can hope is that the idiots end up wiping themselves out, and that those of us intelligent enough to have gotten ourselves and/or kids vaccinated (who physically are able to) will be protected from this plague.

Not just the measles. The abject idiocy of the anti-vax paranoids.

[Liberal Veteran]

92. The Google Search Vector is leading cause of vaccine stupidity transmission.

You type something about vaccines into Google, and for every 1 decent informative site about vaccines, you get 500 or more hits about the dangers of vaccines.

[Beartracks]

139. But anti-vaxxers would just claim to be the blue guy.

Seems that anti-vaxxers would simply note that in that diagram they are the blue "susceptible" person that can count on being protected by the herd of the rest of us.

==============

[Avalux]

4. Not when it comes to kids who have no control over their lives.

The kids can't decide for themselves, and shouldn't be forced to go unprotected from infectious diseases and risk harm because their parents are idiots.

[global1]

12. That's Exactly What I Was Thinking....

It's not their body - it's their kids body.

[nichomachus]

24. But it's more than that

You're right, of course, but not vaccinating your kids endangers not only your kids, but other people in the community. It is a public health issue.

As I've said elsewhere, it's like making the "personal decision" to not put brakes on your car. yes, you endanger your own life, but you also endanger the lives of other people.

[sweetapogee]

29. I have a question about that

If you vaccinate you kids will they be protected when they come in contact with someone who is not vaccinated? Or do both parties have to be vaccinated?

[jeff47]

40. Vaccines aren't like a shield.

Vaccines train your immune system to respond very quickly to a particular disease.

(Part of) The immune system works by trying random combinations to make antibodies until one of those antibodies sticks. When it stumbles upon something that sticks, it pumps out tons of that antibody, which disrupts the disease, curing the ill person.

Your immune system has "memory cells" that remember which antibodies worked in the past. Whenever a new infection occurs, your body tries these memory cells. If one of the memory cells is a match, you short-circuit the lengthy "try random combinations" step. Which means you fight off the disease extremely quickly. So fast you do not have symptoms, and are unable to spread the disease to others.

Vaccines give your body a chance to make those memory cells from a dead or weakened version of the disease. That way you are very slightly ill from the vaccine, but when the real thing shows up you have memory cells to fight it off quickly.

So a person vaccinated against measles actually catches the measles. But their immune system responds so quickly that they have no symptoms and are unable to spread the disease to others.

But vaccines have a failure rate. For reasons we can not explain, they just don't make memory cells sometimes. For the measles part of the MMR vaccine, the failure rate is 2% of the people who get both childhood doses. These people will suffer just like they were not vaccinated. What protects them? Herd immunity.

With any disease, eventually your immune system wins or you die. In either case, you quickly stop spreading the disease. So the disease needs to move on to a new host in order to survive. When enough of the population is immunized, the disease can't do that. It keeps running into vaccinated people who kill the disease off too quickly for it to spread. So the disease dies out. That is herd immunity.

Herd immunity occurs when around 90% of the population is vaccinated. The 2% failure rate + the small number of people who can't be vaccinated for medical reasons + Christian Scientists is <90%, so we used to have herd immunity against measles. Anti-vaxxers broke that by lowering the number of vaccinated people.

If you or your children are vaccinated against measles and are exposed to it, there's a 90% chance you will get infected. There's a 2% chance you will suffer the disease, thanks to the vaccination.

[SunSeeker]

47. No vaccine is 100% effective.

A tiny percentage of people who have been vaccinated for measles can still get measles. But when you're talking a large population, a tiny percentage of a large population is thousands of people.

That is why it is so important for everyone to get vaccinated. It is necessary to protect those for whom the vaccine was not effective or those who are not able to be vaccinated due to impaired immune systems, like Chemo patients or newborns.

[jwirr]

55. If you vaccinate your kids they are safe as long as their shots are up to date. But infants have to

be a certain age before they are given shots and older people need boosters to some shots and they are not protected until that is done.

I do not know who is getting the measles right now but they are most certainly not protected. I am wondering if anyone has stats regarding the transmission of this disease. Is this a case of unvaccinated people giving the disease to other unvaccinated people?

[jeff47]

60. Some unvaccinated, some are among the 2% where the vaccine doesn't work. (nt)

[Avalux]

34. Yes you're correct. I limited my response to parents and their kids.

It's as if these people can't understand the public health issue with not vaccinating their kids, they seem to not be able to see outside their own little bubbles. They don't understand their decision to not vaccinate could not only endanger their own kids, but a lot of other people too.

[MillennialDem]

6. I don't know about legislating it. Most anti vaxxers are utterly stupid I agree who do it for

stupid reasons.

But what about me (of course, right?)

I am allergic to the oil that most injectable medications are preserved in. Should I have to subject myself to something that I am absolutely allergic to instead of most anti vaxxers who are against it because of pseudoscience, urban legends, or 1 in a million chance of something bad happening?

[HuckleB]

17. You are one of people for whom the need for a high vaccination rate is very important.

No one is talking about vaccinating people who actually can't be vaccinated, but those who can, should be, and one of the reasons is to help those who can't.

Out of curiosity, what oil do you have an allergy to?

[MillennialDem]

20. I'm not sure which oil. I've had injections of various types - I'm trans so hormones, flu shot, and

tetanus shot all caused a rash on the site along with swelling and pain.

It's a variable reaction though. Sometimes just small redness/bump, sometimes so swollen and painful I literally couldn't lift my arm above my shoulder for 2-3 weeks.

I had to stop injecting hormones because of it and go back to pills.

[enlightenment]

26. I think you need to look up what

allergic means.

If the worst reaction you have had is a painful and swollen arm, you aren't allergic. What you describe are very common side effects - including the rash - of many vaccines. It's part of the immune response.

Please don't convince yourself you are allergic to things without really knowing if that is the case.

[MillennialDem]

79. Eh, my doctor used the word allergic to describe it. And it's to any IM injection, whether it

includes a vaccine or not. Like I said hormones will do it too.

And it's more than just the common side effect.

[HappyMe]

30. That kind of reaction can be pretty common.

It does not necessarily mean you are allergic.

[Avalux]

35. If the components of a specific vaccine will make you ill, then you'd be exempt.

The decision would be made with the counsel of a healthcare professional who knows your medical history, any co-morbidities you may have, and whether or not the vaccine's risks would outweigh the benefits for you.

[HereSince1628]

8. Unfortunately it's been a lot of "my wallet, my choice"

Vaccinations for kids should be a gift.

The payback to society is HERD IMMUNITY, so really, THE HERD SHOULD PAY.

[Nye Bevan]

28. I believe vaccines are free under Obamacare,

even if you have not met your deductible.

[WDIM]

11. The flu has killed more people so far.

So i guess we need to start locking up people that refuse to get the flu vaccine.

The news sells you a little fear and all the chicken littles start running around stripping people of their civil rights.

Life is not safe and never will. Even people with the measles vax have caught the measles. Forcing pharmaceuticals on to people and erroding more freedoms never solves anything.

[Liberal Veteran]

13. "Forcing pharmaceuticals on to people and erroding more freedoms never solves anything.": Smallpox.

[HappyMe]

16. "Freedoms" also involve polio and TB.

[Liberal Veteran]

19. Mmmmm......old fashioned freedom!

Although to be honest, I'd be tempted to slap that nurse silly at that particular moment. It just seems a little too much like "Sucks to be you." for my taste.

[HappyMe]

23. Yeah, it does seem kind of mean.

Otoh, with the "freedoms" gadding around breathing on people, I hope we won't have to have a 2015+ picture like that.

"Morons Defeated! Vaccines Triumph!"

[trumad]

15. A little fear?

So are you for vaccinations or against them?

[WDIM]

43. I am for the right of the individual

To consult with their doctor and make that choice for themselves.

[trumad]

48. you didn't answer my question.

[MohRokTah]

51. It's a common anti-vaxxer dodge.

I call it the "Freedumb" argument.

[WDIM]

52. I did answer the question

And if freedom is dumb then call me dumb. But i firmly believe in the right of the individual to chose. And i would never allow media fear to take my rights away.

[MohRokTah]

56. There's this thing called society, see.

It means we are social animals.

There is nothing of freedom where herd immunity is concerned. When it comes to vaccines where herd immunity is achievable, there is no freedom. There is only compliance to eradicate the disease.

You have two choices, vaccination or complete isolation.

[HERVEPA]

80. GForget it. He's just spouting his libertarain BS. He and Ms. Rand would be happy together

[HuckleB]

18. Exposing people to diseases unnecessarily affects everyone's rights, too.

How did you miss that part of the equation?

[WDIM]

46. I didnt get a flu vaccine

So i guess i should be forced into quarantine. We already have a well established police state so i guess it would be no problem to start arresting and quarentine people with any sign of illness.

[AlbertCat]

58. So i guess i should be forced into quarantine.

Oh Please!

Got hyperbole?


But maybe they should be "forced!" to take a biology class or two.

[HuckleB]

125. +1

[jwirr]

75. This arguement is not about flu shots which everyone knows only work when they get the right

strain.

We are talking about childhood vaccinations that do work for a lot of people. I was born in 1941 and in that era almost all of us got these diseases with differing side effects. Many of us like me did not have bad side effects but when one did get them they were life threatening in that either you died or you were disabled for life. We did not have any rights to protection because there was none. We did not call that freedom.

Today it is the unvaccinated who are getting these diseases and passing them along to others - for example infants too young to get vaccinated yet. They are bringing back diseases that were virtually eradicated until recently. The anti-vaxers are using what they call their rights to take the rights of other people away. That is not freedom.

Also here is something else to think about. That couple who does not vaccinate their child when he/she is small runs the risk of having that child infected when he/she gets older when these diseases are more likely to have harmful side effects. What freedom did the child have?

[HuckleB]

126. +1

[HuckleB]

124. Nice red herring.

Boring.

[MohRokTah]

27. If people had been allowed to get away with being anti-vax a few decades ago...

smallpox would still be around.

Mandatory vaccinations with the only exceptions being medical necessity. NO OTHER EXCEPTIONS. The penalty for non-compliance on any vaccine where herd immunity can be achieved should be removal from society.

[Liberal Veteran]

31. Thank god the internet wasn't around. A lot of the anti-vax crap is directly from the web.

A person is hard pressed to separate the nonsense from fact. If a person had to go read about vaccines in a library in the 50's, they wouldn't have had to wade through 500 hits that circle around to whale.to, mercola, and naturalnews like a giant turd that just won't flush out of the bowl.

[jeff47]

33. Just like you learned to not believe every news article you read

people are learning to not believe every web page they read.

There will be some people where "I saw it on Facebook" is sufficient to believe anything. But their numbers will dwindle as more and more people grow up with widespread use of the world wide web.

[WDIM]

42. again the flu kills more people

Worldwide around 150,000 die from the measles around 250,000 to 500,000 people die from the flu. So i guess we need to start interment camps and quarantine centers for anybody with flu symptoms by your reasoning.

[MohRokTah]

45. That's a bullshit argument.

The reason so few people die from the measles IS THE EFFICACY OF THE MEASLES VACCINE!

Flu vaccines are nowhere near as effective because of the mutability of the virus. Herd immunity CANNOT BE ACHIEVED with the flu due to the lack of effectiveness.

On the other hand, polio, measles, mumps, rubella, whooping cough, and several other diseases could be eradicated like smallpox if the same effort at vaccination with the high levels of compliance would occur.

But NOOOOOO because anti-vaxxers are fucking morons who would rather see people die from preventable diseases than get jabbed in the arm.

So yeah, where herd immunity is achievable with a vaccine, they should eb mandatory and the penalty for non-compliance should be complete removal from society.

[WDIM]

59. nobody has died from the measles in the US

The death rate from the measles is 3 in every 1000. With modern medicine that we have in the US id say the odds of dying from the measles is very unlikely.

But all you sheeple can go on and believe the fear hype caused by our media.

[MohRokTah]

62. You left out the word "yet"

The anti-vaxxers are almost going to guarantee it with their idiocy.

They should be rounded up and kept completely isolated from all human contact until they comply.

End of discussion.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

81. Sheeple...

Usage of that word says a lot about you.

[HERVEPA]

84. It was alerted on and allowed to stand 5-2

[HuckleB]

123. Thanks to vaccinations.

[Liberal Veteran]

57. Actually, flu that can cause pandemic is under the guideline for quarantine and isolation.

Federal isolation and quarantine are authorized for these communicable diseases:

Cholera
Diphtheria
Infectious tuberculosis
Plague
Smallpox
Yellow fever
Viral hemorrhagic fevers
Severe acute respiratory syndromes
Flu that can cause a pandemic

Federal isolation and quarantine are authorized by Executive Order of the President. The President can revise this list by Executive Order.


So, in effect, if we get something nasty like the 1918 strain of flu around, they very well could do so.

[NuclearDem]

96. Please learn the difference between measles and influenza.

Influenza mutates very rapidly, making the vaccine only truly effective against what epidemiologists believe will be the most dominant strain in the next season.

Measles, on the other hand, does not, making the MMR vaccine extremely effective.

[jeff47]

32. The measles vaccine has a 2% failure rate.

98% of the people who get both doses in childhood are immune. The remaining 2% is small enough for herd immunity to work.

When anti-vaxxers break herd immunity, that 2% is now threatened.

But hey, measles is no big deal. It only kills someone about every 4 seconds.

[jeff47]

53. 375 people died from the measles between your post and mine.

The timestamp on our posts is 25 minutes apart. 25 minutes * 60 seconds per min / 4 seconds per death = 375.

You do all sound like a bunch of sheep.

Look it up.
Your unwillingness to understand science we figured out in the 18th century does not give you the right to kill people.

[Maedhros]

61. Please educate yourself. [n/t]

[Act_of_Reparation]

67. That's some really comprehensive research there.

Except those parts where you completely fail to understand virulence... and those other parts where you descend into fallacy... basically your entire post.

If you're scratching your head right now (and I hope you are), I'll spell it out simply: there is no "the flu vaccine". There are many flu vaccines, each targeting a specific strain of influenza.

Apples and oranges.

[HERVEPA]

78. Libertarian bullshit

[Hoppy]

37. For these asswipes, does my body, my choice extend to pregnancy and right to die?

[Sheepshank]

93. I believe it should extend to the right to die with dignity.

No one else around me will die or suffer illness, or become disabled with that decision.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

38. Got 'em all and got the same treatment for all.

Put in bed with a pile of blankets, itchy wool gloves for the measles and chickenpox, and a dose of whiskey with lemon or tea. We were poor.

[AZ Progressive]

44. Fewer people care about the public good anymore

We have an extreme version now of self-centeredness, getting to the levels of sociopathy. Heck, sociopathy is in vogue nowadays.

[closeupready]

54. So for those who seek medical training, do professors go, "you stupid fucking students!

this is why vaccinations are so important ..."

I don't imagine so. But carry on with your fun, youngsters.

[Generic Other]

63. Teach the children about vaccines

and not to trust their stupid parents.

Sue the ones who spread disease.

[Android3.14]

65. Yup

One aspect of democracy is recognizing that stupid people also deserve freedom. I know many folks dislike it, but not everything about freedom is super-duper. Still, I'll take freedom, even if it's a little messy. That's consequence of liberty.

[jeff47]

68. Your right to freedom ends when you harm others.

You do not have the right to drive drunk because of the harm you can cause to people around you. Those people did not choose to let you hit them with your car.

You do not have the right to discharge a firearm in a random direction. The person hit by your bullet did not choose to let you shoot them.

Vaccines are the same way. Your refusal of the vaccine harms others who did not choose for you to infect them.

[Android3.14]

83. I'm not refusing vaccines.

So put your indignation in your back pocket and sit on it.

The question comes down to this - should the government have the right to inject material into the body of a free human being without their consent?

[lakercub]

91. In most cases no

but think about something like small pox, a disease that could (and did) wipe-out entire villages and has an extremely large body count. If the choice is between smallpox and non-consensual injection, the non-consensual injection wins every time hands down because the alternative is too ghastly to ignore.

I would always offer three alternatives myself.
1. Get vaccinated of your own accord (which every sane individual who is able to tolerate the vaccines will do)
2. Leave the city/county/state/country/whichever that is requiring vaccination. No reentry until you are fully vaccinated.
3. If you won't leave, you will be vaccinated like it or not. You can prate about freedom all you want, but your freedom does not include the freedom to wantonly endanger the lives of others. No one is that free. Smallpox kills and has killed in large numbers. There is no amount of personal freedom that justifies allowing something like that to go unchecked...especially when there is a simple, effective solution.

I get that governments can use fear and intimidation to do many unjustifiable and terrible things. We see it all the time. The citizenry needs to be ever-vigilant about the government and its doings. But in a case like small pox, where the results of epidemics are understood, the solution is so relatively easy, and the science is so completely understood, then yes, the government needs to enforce vaccination with or without consent.

[Android3.14]

99. Unfortunately, your example is not applicable and the gain is hardly worth the precedent

If the sane people accept immunizations, then there is no danger of wiping out a village (especially one in a modern industrialized country - what do you think this is, Cambodia?). Squalling about safety in order to justify an invasion of the body as vile as the government forcing women to accept transvaginal ultrasounds in order to have an abortion is as stupid as the ticking time bomb justifying torture.

Go ahead, join the herd running around in mindless anger and panic and beg a government to invade your body in order for you to feel you "safe".

"Prate about freedom"? What an unfortunate combination of words to write. You might consider washing your hands. After typing that bit of excrement, they are covered in fear mongering shit.

My hope is that this will fade away, but if the government gains the power to inject people with foreign material against their will, then they will justify further encroachments (such as drugs to suppress anger, ultrasounds to protect unborn children, or tracking devices to find lost people) based on the same argument of safety.

[jeff47]

100. I don't care if you are. I'm explaining how your argument is crap.

should the government have the right to inject material into the body of a free human being without their consent?

Should the government have the right to restrict your movements just because you're intoxicated?

Should the government have the right to take away your guns just because you randomly fired them into the air?

Should the government have the right to stop you from killing people?

The government is the creation of the society in which we live. That society offers a great deal of benefits. If you want access to the benefits, you have to pay the costs. From taxes to limitations on your actions.

You do not have the right to kill people by infecting them with deadly diseases.

[Android3.14]

102. Actually, your argument is totalitarian nonsense

Should the government have the right to restrict your movements just because you're intoxicated? Yes

Should the government have the right to take away your guns just because you randomly fired them into the air? Yes

Should the government have the right to stop you from killing people? Yes

You do not have the right to kill people by infecting them with deadly diseases. Of course. That's why you incarcerate (isolate) people who are dangerous.

What part of this says the government can force foreign materials into your body against your will? Is it the part where you agree that the government can force women to accept transvaginal ultrasounds?

'Cause that's what sounds like your sayin', Bubby.

[NuclearDem]

106. Transvaginal ultrasounds in the context you're discussing are medically unnecessary

and serve only to shame women out of getting abortions.

Mandatory vaccination serves to eliminate deadly infectious diseases, which can only be achieved if the vast majority of the population is immunized against them, starving the diseases of viable hosts. That's how smallpox was eradicated.

[Android3.14]

108. And?

The transvag ultrasound people say that the procedure protects unborn children, just like you are saying immunizations protect children.

Funny thing about that bit. If your kids are vaccinated, then how does someone who isn't vaccinated endanger your children?

[Humanist_Activist]

111. Oh, fuck, not this argument again!

[Android3.14]

117. I understand

Still doesn't justify the government injecting people against their will, just as the safety of children is no justification for a forced transvaginal ultrasound.

[Humanist_Activist]

119. How many giraffes does it take to change a lightbulb?

That question makes about as much sense as your comparison.

A reasonable comparison would be to, for example, to mandatory seat belt laws, or helmet laws, but even those have to do with mostly personal safety. This is a question of PUBLIC health, the health and transmission of disease, along with the control of such, is a concern for society at large. We are talking about living, breathing people being put in needless danger, due to the shortsightedness of others.

[NuclearDem]

122. "How many giraffes does it take to change a lightbulb?"

A: France, because squids don't fly.

Right along with anti-vaxxer logic.

[NuclearDem]

112. You're comparing bullshit rightwing talking points and epidemiological science.

Children who haven't received the vaccine for medical reasons are protected against the disease because herd immunity starves it of sufficient vectors for it to reach them.

And not to mention that some people who get the vaccine don't develop immunity. People who stupidly don't get the vaccine have no immunity at all and definitely will spread it, endangering the former group.

[jeff47]

120. A drunk driver is less likely to injure someone

than someone with measles is likely to spread it.

Randomly shooting a gun into the air is much less likely to injure someone than refusing a vaccine.

That's why you incarcerate (isolate) people who are dangerous.

People can spread measles for up to 4 days before they show measles symptoms. Before that, they'll have basic cold and flu symptoms. You are proposing we incarcerate everyone who refuses this vaccine whenever they have a cold. And claiming that is more "free".

You know very little about this subject. You just have talking points that you are trying to apply to a subject you do not begin to understand.

[NuclearDem]

95. People don't have the right to drive drunk.

Personal freedom has to end when it comes to how those choices affect the rest of us. Driving drunk has a good chance of injuring or killing someone, and refusing to vaccinate enables the spread of deadly diseases.

[Android3.14]

97. Key phrase is "good chance"

Driving drunk is a poor example. People do have the right to have a pool in their backyard which has a higher likelihood of killing children than contracting measles has of causing death in the modern United States.

[jeff47]

101. If you have measles, you will give it to 90% of the people who come into contact with you

or places you have been. You are infectious 4 days before you show symptoms specific to measles, so you can't just wait for the rash to show up.

The chance of you passing on measles massively exceeds the chance of you injuring someone while driving drunk.

People do have the right to have a pool in their backyard which has a higher likelihood of killing children than contracting measles has of causing death in the modern United States.

Pools are required to have fences around them, or similar device that prevents children from falling in.

[Android3.14]

104. Bullshit

You might give it to 90 percent of the unvaccinated people you come in contact with, which seems like a pretty cheap way to get anti-vaxxers to self correct.

I would gently suggest that you keep your perspective in this discussion.

[NuclearDem]

109. No, you'll give it to 90% of the people you come into contact with.

The difference is that in a situation of herd immunity, there's a minimal chance that the virus will find a viable host. The person might get it, but if they've developed immunity, their body will kill the virus become they become contagious.

[Android3.14]

113. Perhaps. But the danger is still to people without immunizations

Your "protect the (already vaccinated) children" argument is meaningless.

The whole point of herd immunity is to reduce the stress on the support systems that are in place deal with an outbreak.

And it still does not justify the government invading the property that is your body.

[NuclearDem]

116. No, it exists to prevent an outbreak in the first place.

If a disease has virtually no viable hosts to spread to, it'll die out in that area. The reason outbreaks occur is because herd immunity hasn't been reached in that area.

Preventative care is absolutely in the public interest, and vaccination is one of the cornerstones of that field.

[Android3.14]

118. Totally agree with your post, but it still is not justification

Down this path lies forced transvaginal ultrasounds, forced medication to suppress violent tendencies and a host of other dehumanizing acts.

I'm done here. You militant vaxxers are as crazy as the antivaxxers, and just as disgusting.

[NuclearDem]

121. Oh, bullshit.

Forced transvaginal ultrasounds have absolutely no benefit to public health, and serve only a fundamentalist anti-choice agenda.

It's because of "militant vaxxers" that you libertarians have absolutely zero chance of catching smallpox, and it's because of anti-vaxxers that you now have a chance of catching measles when you wouldn't have fifteen years ago.

False equivalence bullshit. Goodnight.

[Android3.14]

127. Oh, and by the way. Here's proof your post is bullshit

"Measles is so contagious that if one person has it, 90% of the people close to that person who are not immune will also become infected." - Centers for Disease Control.

[NuclearDem]

128. How exactly is that "proof" that my post is bullshit?

See there? People who are immune to measles can still be infected, but their immune systems will kill the virus well before they become contagious.

The only way contagions spread is through viable hosts, and when there aren't sufficient viable hosts, they die off. You clearly have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

[Android3.14]

143. I really shouldn't have to point this out

After all, you are a nuclear dem.
You wrote - "If you have measles, you will give it to 90% of the people who come into contact with you", which is incorrect (AKA bullshit).

The reality, according to the CDC, is 90% of the people close to that person who are not immune will also become infected.

A person with true critical thinking skills (as opposed to sedentary pedantic arrogance) would acknowledge their error, apologize, and try a different approach to the debate.

And that still doesn't address the core issue of whether the government should be able to inject foreign material into a free person's body against their will. You apparently are just fine with that.

[NuclearDem]

144. Ugh.

Yes, you will give it to 90% of people you come in contact with--whether it survives the person's immune system and makes the person a transmission vector depends on the person's immunity.

You're trying to argue semantics on a subject you clearly don't understand.

[Android3.14]

145. Oh, I think we'll leave that judgement to people

Oh, I think we'll leave that judgement to people who have better comprehension skills than what you have been exhibiting lately. 90 percent of the people and 90 percent of unvaccinated people are two very different population sizes.

Even a clever person such as yourself can figure that out...eventually.

[NuclearDem]

146. Terrific, so now we know you not only have no idea how herd immunity works

you also have no idea how immunity in general works.

Fantastic.

[zappaman]

129. Wow.

You really have no idea what you are talking about.

[jeff47]

115. Nope. You'll give it to 90%. Vaccinated or not.

Vaccination is not a magic shield. It trains your immune system to fight off a disease quickly. But you will still catch the virus.

You will give it to 90%. You will only threaten the lives of the unvaccinated and the 2% of people where the vaccine does not work.

That rate, btw, is way lower than the average drunk driver's rate of injuring others. You gonna come out against that yet?

[NuclearDem]

103. No, the example was just fine.

Driving drunk is a terrible choice that directly affects other people who are driving responsibly. Not vaccinating is a terrible choice that affects people who are acting responsibly with their own health.

Unless that swimming pool subsequently creates additional swimming pools for kids to drown in, it's a terrible example.

[ehrnst]

72. My kid can't bring peanut butter to school for consumption by his body.

Because it's a danger to other kids.

[MohRokTah]

73. I think people should have a choice.

Vaccinate or isolate.

And when I say isolate, I mean ALL HUMAN CONTACT ends.

The only exception should be for medical necessity.

[Padiddle]

88. The irony is that they're so terrified of autism

...and yet they're risking quarantine for their kids, thus depriving them of contact with other people.

Thereby turning the kids socially withdrawn by default.

Also, there are plenty of unvaccinated kids who still have autism. But of course nobody talks about that, because it can't be genetics, it's those evil vaccines. Because science bad, crystal healing good.

[onecaliberal]

74. If you choose to risk the health of society by not

Vaccinating your children than keep yourself your kid and all your stupidity awaY from the general public. You are a public health risk and my healthy children do not deserve to be put at risk because of your fucking stupidity. Period!!

[Android3.14]

107. Why would your healthy children be at risk?

Your children are vaccinated.

The only conclusion is that the militant vaxxers are as mentally defective as the anti-vaxxers.

God, what a stupid discussion this has become.

[onecaliberal]

110. My child has a seizure disorder. He is healthy

On his anti convulsants but can't have some of the vaccines. Perhaps you should ask questions before you make assumption. The assholes who refuse to vaccinate have destroyed herd immunity for vulnerable but otherwise healthy children. Enjoy the dust bin.

[Act_of_Reparation]

136. Science is hard.

As it has been repeatedly stated, most vaccines are not 100% effective. Even if you have been vaccinated, you could catch the virus from a carrier. If, however, everyone is vaccinated, then there are no carriers.

And what the fuck does it matter whose children we're talking about? People who do not vaccinate are putting somebody's kids at risk. That's all that matters.

[NuclearDem]

137. Please learn to science.

Thank you.

[Android3.14]

142. We've already determined your abilities in this area

TYVM.

[hunter]

89. Maybe we should establish a few island nations for them...

... where they can live or die unvaccinated.

There's a few uninhabited arctic and antarctic islands that would be good candidates.

They could work on the internet in exchange for air-dropped food and other necessities.

But anyone who wanted to leave would have to get their shots...

[AtomicKitten]

90. k

and r

[Android3.14]

105. "Stupid fucking people"?

I sense some projection going on here.

[Humanist_Activist]

114. Why do you say that, you have confirmed that observation with your own posts...

on this very thread.

[trumad]

130. no I believe in vaccinations

I'm calling people who don't ....stupid fucking people.

Let me double up on that and say they are stupid mother Fucking morans.

[HockeyMom]

131. Do you bellieve that a person who has recovered from measles

is an unvaccinated person who can spread it to others? Do you know the difference between natural and acquired immunity?

Explain the difference between a live virus vaccination and the live virus from the disease itself. Is the vaccination better? I want to hear the science, not complications from the disease.

I really would like to see opinions on this and if you really know the science.

[Humanist_Activist]

132. "I want to hear the science, not complications from the disease." Are you fucking serious?

You just stated, straight out, that you will accept no evidence, right here in this sentence. You set up an impossible task.

Oh, and I'll make this simple, the vaccine is better because it is NOT the fucking disease and doesn't carry the complications of the disease, period. If you don't want to accept that, that's your problem.

[HockeyMom]

133. Obviously you do not KNOW the difference between antibodies

from the disease and from vaccination. Do you think that having the disease does not give antibodies. You are not ANSWERING. Do you think that ONLY vaccination gives immunity.

[Humanist_Activist]

134. NO ONE IS SAYING THAT, JESUS FUCK!

The vaccinations are fucking SAFER than the disease!

[NuclearDem]

135. ...

[MattBaggins]

141. Because you don't understand the Science of vaccines

First there is really no such thing as a live virus. Viruses do not meet the criteria to be considered alive. What is called "live virus vaccines", for the laymen, are in fact attenuated viruses that have been altered to be non virulent.