Forced vaccinations

[knieft]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ironyak

Of course fighting the bill because you believe it'll lead to forced vaccinations and Zika infections is pretty daft, but no more so than believing the seasonal flu shot is preventing a Spanish flu pandemic, or that being "pro-science" absolves the need for critical thought or discussion.

---

You do have a way with words...!

Enjoyed that post very much.

Cheers,
Kirt

[kalakoa]

More of a states' rights issue than a medical one

Yes: State wants the right to pick and choose which Federal regulations to obey.

[pahoated]

All these anti-vaxxers, still, in 2016. What is this, 1990? Uh-oh, brought up the hysteria trigger year. It is strange to watch this gigantic group of people increasing in numbers, psychotically demanding their right to become more and more primitive, devolving over time. They want to return to 900 AD Europe, no running water, no electricity, ditches alongside the road to serve as toilets, painting crosses on doors to ward off the demons responsible for illness. Yeah, those were the good old days. Maybe it is time for World War 3 to fulfill the dreams and fantasies of this regressive movement.

The only country that now has measles transmission in the Western Hemisphere is the U.S.

"Aloha also means goodbye. Aloha!"

[kalakoa]

no running water, no electricity, ditches alongside the road to serve as toilets

How dare you describe my subdivision in this manner.

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

Seems to be much easier to choose a side and simply reject any new ideas that may contradict or threaten your position - beliefs with "herd immunity" protection.

Yes, there's plenty of that to go around, on both sides of the issue.

But what is the alternative?

Read what people write. Carefully. Follow up by checking facts, and finding out what their conclusions are based on.

Certainly tests may be conducted improperly. Double blind experiments can show false positives, or false negatives. Researchers can exaggerate the results they wish to prove, and minimize other findings. Scientific findings can also be overturned in a decade or two when new information becomes available. Do we throw it all out because occasionally some is wrong?

Does the anti-vaxx movement use any tests they can point to, which show vaccines are dangerous, with methods (double blind studies, etc) similar to tests that show vaccines are relatively safe?* If not, on what do they base their findings? Are those methods enough for a person to make a well informed decision?

*Look at a jar of any medicine, even aspirin or alcohol (antiseptic and pain relief). How long is the list of side effects? What medication could be sold if it had to be 100% safe and 100% free of side effects?


"How we spend our days is, of course, how we spend our lives." -Annie Dillard

[bystander]

quote:

---

Originally posted by TomK
I just hope that details are missing and this is not why the bill got shot down.

---

Here's links to the testimonies people gave. Many said it would be a violation of civil or human rights. This tells me they believed in the forced vaccination rumor.

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/Session201...-04-16.PDF
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/Session201...6_LATE.PDF

[ironyak]

Me - Seems to be much easier to choose a side and simply reject any new ideas that may contradict or threaten your position
HOTPE - Yes, there's plenty of that to go around, on both sides of the issue. But what is the alternative?

For the level of dialog to demonstrate some depth of thought and actually reflect the complexity of the situation? Not as entertaining as demonizing the opposition, but perhaps more honest and productive?

The simple fact is that although vaccines have very low rates of severe reactions, when administered to millions of people, some individuals can be harmed or killed. Since 1988, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) has paid ~$3.2 billion in ~4400 cases of vaccine injury. Those blindly supportive of vaccines seem to ignore the real risks and costs that some individuals bear for the greater good of society.
http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/data.html

[kalakoa]

Many said it would be a violation of civil or human rights.

Exposing the general public to disease violates nobody's rights?

[Punatic007]

quote:

---

Originally posted by kalakoa

Many said it would be a violation of civil or human rights.

Exposing the general public to disease violates nobody's rights?

---

And forcing a substance into someone's bloodstream that has been known to cause bodily damage or withholding public education is not violating rights? I think much of the oppositions argument is the methodology of creating the vaccines.

[PaulW]

I wonder if you guys are as quick to reject modern medicine when it can save your own life, instead of somebody else's.

Could you please give an example of somebody forcing a vaccine onto someone? If people don't want to participate in modern life they don't have to. Just don't spread your diseases amongst the civilized.