Mandatory Vaccinations (Part 2)
POSTED BY: canttakesky
UPDATED: Tuesday, March 7, 2023 21:57
VIEWED: 12509
PAGE 10 of 16
Quote:
Originally posted by Canttakesky:
If you could vote on it, would you 1) vote against mandatory vaccination ...
Quote:Hence the phrase, IF YOU COULD VOTE ON IT....
Originally posted by citizen:
I don't get to vote in America...
Quote:I'm glad to know you like the system in Britain. The question remains, do you like the mandatory vaccination system in the USA? Or would you like to see it repealed and changed to a voluntary system like the British?
I'll reiterate I like the system in Britian fine, vaccinations aren't mandatory...
Quote:I DID quote, and I explained I interpreted those quotes. I already said I'll apologize when I see you favoring choice in America, where choice is prohibited by law.
No retraction I see. No quote either.
It is not my fault if you don't read what I quote or what I write.
Can't Take My Gorram Sky
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:The point is the question is rather useless because I don't know. You can ask what president I'd vote for, but I don't know that either, probably not Bush, but then I can only really look at foriegn policy, ajnd they've all been pretty bad at that. I might as well ask you "If you could vote in the next general election who would you vote for?"
Originally posted by canttakesky:
Hence the phrase, IF YOU COULD VOTE ON IT....
Quote:I thought that would be implied by saying I liked the British system? I think you'd do well to adopt a more British health care system full stop, not just vaccines. Does that help? Though I thought it was implied by constantly saying that your profit before care system sucked in the previous thread.
I'm glad to know you like the system in Britain. The question remains, do you like the mandatory vaccination system in the USA? Or would you like to see it repealed and changed to a voluntary system like the British?
I got pulled over coals because I apparently didn't let you guys speak from a position of experience in respect to your countries of origin. Isn't it a might hipocritical to then expect me to speak from a position of experience in respect to your country of origin?
Quote:You never said anything about America, plus see the preceeding paragraph. I have to play everything your way or I'm entirely a Nazi, is that it? Good take.
I DID quote, and I explained I interpreted those quotes. I already said I'll apologize when I see you favoring choice in America, where choice is prohibited by law.
It is not my fault if you don't read what I quote or what I write.
However I apologise that that quote was grossely ambiguous, I was talking about your insinuation that I insulted you, which I'd like you to quote because I don't remember doing.
As to your accusation of not reading what you've posted, well given you've ignored most of what I've said prefering to pigeon hole me because I don't agree that vaccines are more dangerous than disease, because they're not perfect nor one vaccine combats all (I refrence the idea that the smallpox vaccine hasn't worked because it hasn't erradicated monkeypox, a wholly different disease) I find it hard to believe you've read what I quote or what I write and that is hardly my fault.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Well, not really. The issue here is not really health care, but whether children should be prohibited from attending school by law unless they have been vaccinated. Do you support this prohibition, which currently exists in the USA, or do you oppose it?
Originally posted by citizen:
Erm, I think you'd do well to adopt a more British health care system full stop, not just vaccines. Does that help?
I have tried several attempts at asking this question, but I feel you still haven't given me a straight answer. Maybe you're only prochoice in Britain, and anti-choice in the States. I don't know.
As far as the insults go,
Quote:I cannot find any instance where you flat out said you are NOT anti-choice. You imply you are prochoice (preferably with restrictions on choice), but stop short of saying it outright. I am still not sure I was completely wrong to say you are anti-choice. Then you called me a "knee jerk reactionary" who pulls out a crucifix.
So you tell me, is saying my position is something I've flatout said it is not ...
I saw a quote being misrepresented, and I said so, and you bunch of knee jerk reactionaries pulled out the crucifix, then imply I'm a facist, bravo.
Quote:Many of the insults were actually directed at Frem and whoever else you meant. Even if not directed at me, I lose interest in arguments that attack people rather than argue a position. There are more quotes, but that gives you an idea.
Oh good, you decided to be a hypocrite. Hows it up there on your high horse with the rest of the idiot hypocrites?
Can't Take My Gorram Sky
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Because you won't settle for answer from me, you'll only settle for an answer from an American, which is what I can't give you. And why should I? You and frem went off at me for saying your system wasn't the only one because you were talking about your system, then when I talk about our system you go off at me for not talking in reference to yours. Does this not strike you as at least a bit hypocritical? You seem unprepared to look at things from another perspective yet unprepared to let others look at things from their own perspective.
Originally posted by canttakesky:
Well, not really. The issue here is not really health care, but whether children should be prohibited from attending school by law unless they have been vaccinated. Do you support this prohibition, which currently exists in the USA, or do you oppose it?
I have tried several attempts at asking this question, but I feel you still haven't given me a straight answer. Maybe you're only prochoice in Britain, and anti-choice in the States. I don't know.
But to verbosely reiterate what I have already said, four or five times now:
In Britain Vaccines are not mandatory.
In Britain un-vaccinated children can attend school.
I think the British Healthcare system is vastly superior in both practice and ideology to the American system.
In fact I rather think I did answer your later question, which I remind you was:
Quote:Which sounds to me like "Do you think the American system should be more like the British?"
do you like the mandatory vaccination system in the USA? Or would you like to see it repealed and changed to a voluntary system like the British?
To which I replied:
Quote:Which sounds to me like "Yes".
I think you'd do well to adopt a more British health care system full stop, not just vaccines.
Paraphrasing:
You: "Do you think the American system should be more like the British?"
Me: "Yes"
Where's the problem?
Quote:It seems nothing short of saying 'CTS is always right about everything' would suffice.
As far as the insults go,
...
I cannot find any instance where you flat out said you are NOT anti-choice. You imply you are prochoice (preferably with restrictions on choice), but stop short of saying it outright. I am still not sure I was completely wrong to say you are anti-choice. Then you called me a "knee jerk reactionary" who pulls out a crucifix.
I was replying to the accusation that I was a fascist, so it's okay to call me a fascist as long as I say nothing back is it? Please look at some of the things I was replying to before accusing me of being overly insulting.
Quote:Replying to insults directed at me, you conveniently fail to notice. It's good to see you'll give frem, and 'whoever else' a free pass because they are 'on your side'.
Many of the insults were actually directed at Frem and whoever else you meant. Even if not directed at me, I lose interest in type of insult. There are more quotes, but that gives you an idea.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Agreed. However, in a democracy, the minority leadership who knows better try to persuade the public, not force the public. When the majority is forced against its will, even for its own protection, the system becomes a dictatorship. Obviously, such force is a system of rule that I disapprove of.
Originally posted by SignyM:
CTS- Unfortunately, I don't think that populations always come to the most rational decisions.
Quote:It is such correlations that persuade me that vaccines have some effectiveness. Just how much effectiveness is unknown from such observations. Also, the whole subclinical disease effect needs to always be considered a confounder in such correlations. It is very possible for pertussis infection to be underdiagnosed while the vaccine was in use, because no one had symptoms. Then when the vaccine is withdrawn, symptoms reappear, looking like a huge resurgence of infection, when it might have only been a huge resurgence of symptoms. We just don't know, because no one does good research.
Sweden suspended vaccination against whooping cough from 1979 to 1996 while testing a new vaccine. In a study of the moratorium period that was published in 1993, Swedish physicians found that 60 percent of the country's children got whooping cough before they were ten.
Quote:These are beliefs and statements of angry people who find it easy to blame unvaccinated people. But is the blame accurate? Who knows? There are no controls and no systematic study of other cities. This is what is called "anecdotal" evidence. It can be persuasive, but it is not enough to base legislation on. If one found a correlation between the city with the highest vaccine coverage and a high autism rate, one would not legislate a ban on vaccines to prevent autism based on that correlation alone.
From its reservoir in the under-vaccinated population of Boulder pertussis has branched out: neighboring Jefferson and Denver Counties had more cases in 2000 than Boulder did. Some of the people who live near Boulder are angry. "There is a constant presence of whooping cough here, and it's because of Boulder Valley;" says Kathy Keffeler, the chief school nurse for Longmont, a growing city just north of Boulder...
Quote:That is a tragic story. I am sure unvaccinated kids do die from disease. I am likewise sure that vaccinated kids also die from disease they were vaccinated against, or die from a vaccine itself, and that is just as tragic. But what does that mean? Again, without controls and systematic study, it is anecdotal evidence, and people tend to interpret that kind of evidence based on one's existing beliefs.
The family had chosen not to immunize, and the week she was born, her siblings both had whooping cough. When they're real little, the babies don't whoop--they just stop breathing. This little girl was septic by the time they got her here."
Quote:She is entitled to her opinion. But where is the very definite proof? Again, one needs to consider that it is easy to point the finger at unvaccinated kids who have very apparent symptoms for the spread of disease as opposed to others with subclinical disease. How did they find out who is actually spreading what? (BTW, the link didn't work.)
But she gently points out that they're fooling themselves if they think no one else is affected by their decisions. "We've been able to show very definitely that whooping cough spreads from these pockets in small communities.
Quote:First, they don't say how they calculated these risks. After reading many such studies, I have found they never explain how they "adjust" for confounders, which means you just have to trust the authors that those numbers are valid. Second, there is no mention of statistical significance. You can massage ratios in whatever direction
After adjusting for confounders, the frequency of exemptors in a county was associated with the incidence rate of measles [1.6 times greater risk] and pertussis [1.9 times greater risk] in vaccinated children,
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:These are yes or no questions. But you won't answer yes or no.
Originally posted by citizen:
Where's the problem?
I asked about a mandatory vaccination system, and you answered about a health care system. Maybe those two things are the same in your mind, but maybe they are not. I don't know. I frankly do not know how to interpret your answers. For all I know, you may believe in the principle behind mandatory vaccinations, but you are willing to compromise and allow vaccination choice in exchange for nationalized health care. I don't know.
This is what I know. 1) You are prochoice in Britain. 2) You favor Americans having a health care system more like the British.
This is what I don't know. 1) Do you oppose mandatory vaccinations in the USA as a requirement for school entry? 2) Would you support having nonmedical exemptions in order for unvaccinated kids to attend school in all 50 states?
Again, these are yes or no questions. If you actually answered yes or no, I'd have a much better idea where you stood. Or you could qualify, "Yes, but..." or "No, but..." That would help too.
Can't Take My Gorram Sky
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:That's just the point, they aren't yes or no questions, in fact in real life there are very few yes or no answers. Your questions are analogous to me asking you "do you think less people should/would get vaccinated" and demanding a yes or no answer, with the caveat that if you answer yes you're defiantly anti-vaccine.
Originally posted by canttakesky:
These are yes or no questions. But you won't answer yes or no.
I'm not entirely sure why accepting un-vaccinated children being barred entry to state school would automatically make me anti-choice just because you say so and it's a consequence you don't want to bear.
Quote:No I answered that the vaccination system as part of an overarching health care system, I feel this was very clear. Given that most of the problems people have had so far with vaccines stem directly from the American profit before care big pharma model I'd say that my answer which includes an opinion on health care (rather than excluding vaccines which I did not do) is actually more pertinent.
I asked about a mandatory vaccination system, and you answered about a health care system.
Quote:Evidently, but I did paraphrase one quite succinctly.
I frankly do not know how to interpret your answers.
Quote:Or maybe I'm pro-choice but I realise that when living in society one can't always get one's own way.
or all I know, you may believe in the principle behind mandatory vaccinations, but you are willing to compromise and allow vaccination choice in exchange for nationalized health care. I don't know.
Quote:Which logically concludes with pro-choice in America no?
This is what I know. 1) You are prochoice in Britain. 2) You favor Americans having a health care system more like the British.
Quote:Well this isn't actually a yes or no question, it depends on a great many things. In the situation you describe within the US I'd have to say yes, because stopping all access to any schooling on vaccination grounds and to then make having no access illegal is ridiculous.
This is what I don't know. 1) Do you oppose mandatory vaccinations in the USA as a requirement for school entry?
Quote:Well yes, but whether those would stretch to "I think the saucer people use it to control peoples minds" is doubtful. What I mean is that not everything you can invent should be a valid non medical excuse.
2) Would you support having nonmedical exemptions in order for unvaccinated kids to attend school in all 50 states?
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, Citizen, thanks for finally answering my questions. "Yes, but..." is good enough for me.
If I understand your position correctly, you are anti-unvaccination, pro-universal-vaccination, and yet prochoice in that you object to forcing vaccination by legally withholding public or private schooling. To use the abortion analogy, that would be like someone who is anti-abortion for everyone (in objecting to the use of abortion in general), but is prochoice in not wanting to legally prohibit abortion. I mistook the anti- position for an anti-choice position.
So, I humbly apologize for mischaracterizing your position as anti-choice. I further concede the point that I made the same mistake I accused you guys of making, which is to confuse a personal position for a political/legal one. So I extend apologies to Rue and Sig as well for being so harsh with you when you mistook my position as anti-vaccine.
Since you clarified your position and corrected me, I will no longer characterize you as anti-choice. I hope you, Rue, and Sig can extend me the same courtesy and no longer characterize me as anti-vaccine, after I likewise clarified my position. (I do not even hold an anti-vaccine position for everyone or in general, only for myself and my family.)
I actually commend you, Cit, for feeling so strongly about this issue, and yet still respect the right of individual choice. That's actually remarkable.
Can't Take My Gorram Sky
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I agree. I think I respect Citizen's stance on this issue much more now.
My only argument is that if I don't want vaccinations because the Flying Spagetti Monster told me they were evil, that should be good enough to get out of them. This is my body and it's none of their damn business why I would choose not to put any of their concoctions (that I must pay for) in it.
The responsibility to convince me to get vaccinations without resorting to cohersion lies with the dealers.
------------------------------
I live in Wisconsin now and they do not have laws here, as they do in Illinois, stating that it is mandatory to have liability car insurance if you drive. The end result, obviously, is that liability insurance in Wisconsin is much cheaper than it is in Illinois where they made it mandatory. When government does not meddle, free trade is allowed to take place and the market then decides the going rate for things.
When does it stop? Who's to say if this passed that the drug companies could one day find a way to make mood/behavioral altering drugs mandatory by law? One such as Phillip K. Dick might have imagined a world in the future where laws such as mandatory vaccines and mandatory schooling lead to a future where drug companies would be well within their ability to effectively charge the populace into debt for these mandatory vaccinations and drugs so no man could ever hope to create his own business and get out from under the debt, thereby enslaving mankind to the system.
"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
CTS- You're overlooking facts that don't fit in with your mind-set. The facts are that populations near highly unvaccinated ones tend to get those communicable diseases at higher rates that populations that aren't near unvaccinated ones. The factors that aren't controlled such as income and education actually tend to work in vaccination favor, because it is generally the affluent who do NOT vaccinate and the poorer who do. The poor simply don't have the time, resources, or energy to fight the system.
As far as "the system" being a dictatorship: We are "forced" not to murder. We are "forced" not to run red lights. There is a system of punishment and control that "makes" us do things we don't want to do like paying taxes and working at crappy jobs with no security and having to deal with unresponsive insuracne companies. "The system" just allowed continued massive mercury pollution from cement kilns and coal-fired power plants. Why aren't you protesting these other things? Why stick at vaccination?
When you run a red light, you deprive someone of the choice to drive safely through a green. If you kill someone, you deprive them of the choice to have a life. Don't you think that your "choice" takes away from the ability of others to make a choice? That last paper that I looked up just made me think that mandatory vaccination for school attendance is a good thing, and that's probably where I will land.
BTW- there have been countless statistical studies looking for a correlation between vaccines and autism, and they haven't found one yet. But they HAVE found correlations between autism and mercury. (Also autism and VIP, autism and father's age, etc.) Since vaccines are such a small source of mercury (fish is the big one) we prolly should be aiming at reducing mercury pollution.
However, I agree that "the system" needs fixing. The first problem is that we have a miserable failure of a health system. I think that part of the reason why the USA pushes vaccinations so hard is not because the pharmas makes such a big profit off it (they don't) but because it's seen as the CHEAPEST way to obtain lower disease rates. If we didn't vaccinate, we'd need a health surveillance system. We'd need universal medical coverage to treat the ill, whether they were rich or poor, so that nobody would die of pertussis. We'd need for insurance companies not to take a 30% whack out of our health-care dollars every time they pass thru the system. In other words, we'd need a well-funded governmental single-payer system.
We need a research system that is not funded by the pharmas. We need a good reporting system for vaccination after-effects. One of the simplest ways to do this is simply to have the vaccine administrator sign a statement that the recipient was in good health and neurologically normal at the time of vaccination... that would require an exam to rule out obvious illnesses. We need citizen involvement in the rule-making.
I acknowledge that there are many things wrong with the heatlh-care system in general and the vaccination system in particular. But even with that, most vaccines work. (The flu vaccine? Prolly not) If effort is to be expended in fighting the system, I think it should head in a more fundamental direction.
---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME