Errr - this applies to PREMMIES you know the wee little ones born early who are monitored in any event and will stop breathing if you stand too bloody close!!
THIS is the "classic" presentation of Tetanus
So what? If a vaccines shows danger to people then it shows danger to people... there are a number of reasons why this study could be important.
I may not be the health care worker you WANT but I am the one you NEED. That is because, like the vast majority of those in my field, I will give the patient what they need rather than what they want.
Example - you probably would have wanted to remain in ignorance of the realities of many of these diseases - but what you NEEDED was knowledge about them
All I can say is...
I appreciate your faith and reliance on vaccines. Good for you. It is obviously very important to you.
I do not feel that vaccines play an important role in my own personal health. No one else would know that better than I would. I know my own body, and it's my choice.
The only reason why I'm still debating this at all is because the liberal hawks here think that it should be state privilege to force me to undergo a medical procedure that I don't want, even though I'm in sound state of mind to refuse.
You can attack me all you want or call me names (it shows how childish you are), but it won't change the fact that I am NEVER getting a vaccine while I am still cognizant to refuse one. Period. I am aware of the good vaccines have done. That does not mean I am obligated to get one. Thanks.
The problem here is that you people can't take NO for an answer. Get your ****ing hands off my body. You have NO right to it.
Incorrect. What I have been debating are people saying that vaccines should be 100% mandatory and that anybody that doesn't agree is a fear based moron endangering all of society.
Children are given 6 injections prior to forming a "fully developed immune system"... so, no... you are wrong.Diphtheria / Tetanus / Whooping Cough / Polio / Hepatitis B / Haemophilus influenzae type b 1 injection (INFANRIX®- hexa)Pneumococcal - 1 injection (Synflorix®)*I am also not saying that vaccines are more dangerous for a society than the disease. At this point I have to assume that you are either a liar, that you have serious reading issues or that you are attempting to purposefully misrepresent my argument. With any of the three though, I have to seriously question what type of ER nurse you are.Seriously... it is getting a tad ridiculous.No not "people" with fully formed immune systems and respiratory drives but Premature babies that do not have fully formed, basically anything - so the results of this study, which you are attempting to show "proves" vaccines are more dangerous than the diseases they replace, is not applicable even to neonatal population let alone child or adult populations
Originally Posted by Bodhisattva
It is a very rational decision based off of knowledge and experience and our medical history as a family is not up here 100% for everybody to see.
Think whatever you like...
Originally Posted by DrunkenAsparagus
No, it is based on a rational comparison of risks. No one has said that vaccines are 100% effective or safe. They have only stated that the alternative of not getting vaccines produces a higher risk of death or serious illness.
Originally Posted by Bodhisattva
Incorrect. What I have been debating are people saying that vaccines should be 100% mandatory and that anybody that doesn't agree is a fear based moron endangering all of society.
I said that no one said they were 100% safe. Which no one did. Also, Kandahar says that vaccines should be mandatory for those who aren't allergic precisely because some people are allergic, and others getting vaccines will protect them better.
Yes, I realize that since I have been in this debate for the entire thread of over 400 posts. I never said that anybody said that vaccines were 100% safe and my statement stands correct. I was challenging the bold portion of your statement and not the obvious part.
That is NOT what they have "only stated". I have been debating are people saying that vaccines should be 100% mandatory and that anybody that doesn't agree is a fear based moron endangering all of society.
Parents smoke around their kids give them a list of health concerns that can lead to death
Ban smoking outright. Why are you not making a statement like that anyway?
The issue is mandatory. Until you can justify the discrepancies regarding lack of 100% control over smoking then you do not have a valid argument against making vaccinations 100% mandatory.
Not 100% like you are suggesting...
Read the title of your thread. Read your initial post. :roll:
You ARE a fear-based you-know-what endangering all of society, by peddling this bull**** about autism that has no scientific basis. It only serves to make society less safe...and the most vulnerable of all are those who CANNOT be vaccinated against diseases, who essentially rely on herd immunity. You should be ashamed of yourself for deliberately making those with vaccine allergies more likely to get sick, by discouraging others from getting vaccinated.
Yep but there is no easy way for the government to stop that. If there was, then I'd probably support it.
Because the benefits to society of such a ban do not outweigh the costs (take a look at the war on drugs or Prohibition). The same cannot be said for mandatory vaccinations, where the cost is TINY and the benefits are large.
Sure I do. It's a lot easier to make vaccines mandatory than it is to ban smoking. Besides, the issue is SECONDHAND smoke rather than smoking persay, and many states have indeed taken steps toward limiting this as much as they can.
The idea is that you add up the benefits to society of outlawing something destructive (e.g. not vaccinating your kids, smoking in public places, drinking and driving, throwing bricks off the overpass at oncoming traffic, etc). Then you add up all the costs to society of outlawing it. Depending on the relative sizes of the two columns, you could either ban it outright, restrict the behavior, or just ignore it.
So for example, mandatory vaccination is pretty easy to do, and imposes few additional costs on society. Banning smoking in one's own home is not, and imposes lots of costs on society.
Whom have I discouraged from getting vaccinate again?
How does my asking a question make society less safe again?
How does posting some facts make society less safe again?
I had no idea that my words here on a debate internet site would DIRECTLY LEAD TO THE DEATH OR SICKNESS OF INNOCENT PEOPLE!!!
In the end, you have yet to answer why some children should die or face severe adverse reactions like brain damage or seizures that might have been perfectly fine
so that others might live or not face non-life threatening symptoms from a disease that might have died from the disease. We do not operate our lives under, "what is best for society" as I have pointed out with smoking and health care costs and just how we live our lives.
And then you go and post something reasonable...
... arresting parents who are found to have smoked around children would dramatically reduce the issue.
Stopping vs. Promoting. Stopping is always harder... so? We are talking about what is best for society and not about the costs.
We are spending more on the war on terror than pretty much anything else in history due to a relatively small threat. 3,000 people died.
Well, 50,000 die a year from smoking and nothing is done?
You are avoiding the issue. We are talking about what is best for society... not about what is easier.
And when it comes to mandatory vaccinations... I am arguing about what is best for the individual. As long as innocent children die as a result of vaccines then I will argue to my last breath that they should not be mandatory.
Yes, I realize that since I have been in this debate for the entire thread of over 400 posts. I never said that anybody said that vaccines were 100% safe and my statement stands correct. I was challenging the bold portion of your statement and not the obvious part.
That is NOT what they have "only stated". I have been debating are people saying that vaccines should be 100% mandatory and that anybody that doesn't agree is a fear based moron endangering all of society.
bowerbird, thank you for the education on tetanus. You might think I'm an uneducated, backward person, but I am fully educated on tetanus and what it does. You think I would be making this choice without having investigated the diseases? I am fully aware of the risk. You don't need to educate me on germ theory. I have read the history all the way back to Louis Pasteur. It was part of my readings that helped me to form the decision to not get a vaccine. He was competing with other schools of thought at the time, but his school received the most endorsement. If you look into some of the other theories, they place equal emphasis on normal physiology and supporting it. Even when sick, you can support the physiology instead of attacking the virus or bacteria directly, by strengthening the body.
That goes for the rest of you in this thread. Please stop giving me heaps of research about vaccines and how they're good. I've read stuff like that a million times over, from the most negative (like staunch anti-vaccine nuts) to the most supportive. I'm not in some camp here. I have just done a bunch of reading and have decided it's not for me.
If I am cognizant, even if I am putting myself at grave risk, I can refuse treatment. The only time you get to decide for me is when I am so out to lunch from trauma that I can't even conceptualize what is happening around me.
I call BS on your authoritarian attitude. I respect that you work in a health care environment and do a lot of work, but nobody made you God. If I'm really being a fool and my life is taken, then I can accept that. I made the wilful choice to put myself at risk.
But please understand, I do not perceive this as a severe risk. I simply don't. The germ world is not menacing to me as it is to you. I see it as just a part of our natural environment. I acknowledge you have medical training and this gives you more expertise, but did you ever stop to consider that maybe your training has made you exaggerate the risks? Most people in the outside world never encounter disease the way you do in the hospital.
Maybe for you... this is urgent, because you've seen some intense situations. My life is surrounded by health and our realities are not the same.
As I did above, I will debunk your theory on my ignorance right here. I am well-read on it. Like I said in a previous post, my main beef here is the notion of forced vaccinations and criminalizing refusal. We keep getting dragged back into the debate on should you/shouldn't you get a vaccine. For me that issue has been settled for a long time. My issue here right now started with Kandahar, and the implications of some who followed... which is that 1) everyone should be forcibly vaccinated against their will and beliefs, and 2) it should be criminal neglect to not vaccinate your children.
Which side of that do you fall on, bowerbird?
When you create a thread called "Deal of death" and you immediately launch into a tirade about how vaccines cause all sorts of horrible things (which isn't even accurate), you are discouraging people from getting vaccinations.
Because your "question" is actually a statement, and a false one at that. Like if I went around asking if wearing seatbelts might cause AIDS, demanded further study into the issue, and sought to spread these lies among the general public in order to get people to stop wearing their seatbelts.
Because your "facts" are actually not true.
Well, now you do. Too bad people don't think of the consequences of their actions before they run their mouth.
If you know ahead of time that a child is likely to face an allergic reaction to a vaccine, that is a special case and I already mentioned that they should be exempted. If you have no particular reason to believe that a specific child is likely to face an allergic reaction to a vaccine, then they are far more likely to get the disease than the allergic reaction, so you go with the odds and vaccinate them.
Actually we do. Those silly examples you pointed out just crystallized my point that the government DOES often limit your ability to harm other people for the sake of your own selfishness.
What I said is completely correct. Vaccines are not 100% safe. Choosing to not get vaccines is not 100% safe either. This has been the entire point of all of my posts in this thread.
No, they have said some people are allergic. They cannot get vaccines or they will get sick. They rely on the herd immunity of others. It is because of this that they say others should be I'm not saying that this necessitates forcing everyone else to be vaccinated.
And I do challenge that you "know" about these diseases. Until you have nursed someone with Tetanus you have no idea how horrible the disease is. NO amount of reading on the internet will prepare you for
I didn't say that you were incorrect in making this statement... did I? Do you have something new to add because tangent is next to pointless.
They have also said that vaccines should be mandatory and that anybody that doesn't agree is a fear based moron endangering all of society. They have ALSO said what you have said... but the primary messages have been what I stated, that they should be mandatory and that if you are a fear based moron endangering all of society.
Look man, why are you even bringing this up? Your entire point is nothing but nit-picking over... pretty much nothing important at all.
Dude, do what you want, all I am saying is that you need to accept the consequences of your decision, and keep in mind the fact that you are endangering the lives of others.
I clearly stated more than once that the title was meant as an "Attention Grabber"...
Perhaps you could show the tirade... I seemed to have missed it. It is evident that the tirade was done by you. All you are doing is projecting...
...and vaccines do cause brain damage and death. Nothing inaccurate about that. Sorry you don't like the truth. Not my issue nor my concern.
Also:- Between 1992 and 1998, the proportion of infants placed to sleep on their stomachs declined from about 70 percent to about 17 percent.
- Between 1992 and 1998, the SIDS rate declined by about 40 percent, from 1.2 per 1,000 live births to 0.72 per 1,000 live births.
CDC - Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) and Vaccines - Vaccine Safety
The percentages do not parallel. There is a 13% gap that has to logically be attributed to something...
The first three words of my OP were... "good or bad?" That is NOTHING like a statement.
The CDC lists adverse reactions up to and including death... that is not an issue to take lightly.
Well, to open and inquisitive people not wanting to see children die anyway...
"Any vaccine can cause side effects. "
Severe Problems (Very Rare)
Vaccines: Vac-Gen/Side Effects
- Serious allergic reaction (less than 1 out of a million doses)
- Several other severe problems have been known to occur after a child gets MMR vaccine. But this happens so rarely, experts cannot be sure whether they are caused by the vaccine or not. These include:
- Deafness
- Long-term seizures, coma, or lowered consciousness
- Permanent brain damage
First off - your reply reminds me of the old adage that "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing" which most people take as a reason for complete ignorance. It is not, it is a warning that partial knowledge of a field is dangerous and can and will lead to misinformation and mistakes. You have stated you are not a health professional and I would gather by your replies that you have garnered a lot of information from anti-vaccine disinformation sites. I am simply laying out the further knowledge from what I consider to be better and more valid sources
And that brings me to the second point - I at least am not spending my time on this for YOU.
All of these threads are linked by google. Type in Tetanus and vaccination and somewhere, it might be on page four of google, you will hit THIS thread and other people will read it. I cannot do anything about the claptrap and disinformation out there in these dangerous and self-serving anti-vaccine sites (even the blogs will remove posts that go contrary to their posited ideas) but I CAN spread as much truth as I am able, wherever I can.
I come down on the side of "it is better to have fire alarms than end up with 90% burns."
And I do challenge that you "know" about these diseases. Until you have nursed someone with Tetanus you have no idea how horrible the disease is. NO amount of reading on the internet will prepare you for having to stand next to a patient and watch them spasm uncontrollably while you try and crank up the paralysing agents. Standing there watching the BP swing from dangerously low to stroke out any second high and not being able to do a bloody thing about it (autonomic nervous system involvement - it is the main cause of death in Tetanus cases) Unless you have heard the "whoop" of Pertussis thinking "thank god this patient is an adult" and knowing the death rate in children then you do NOT "know all about the diseases". Much of this has to be experienced to be believed
Your assumption would be incorrect but my guess is that you don't care and will keep thinking what you think about me.
It's perfectly possible that someone has read up on this from many different angles and come down with an opinion that is different than yours.
Also, I don't have to be a health professional to know my own body. In fact, I know way more about it than you do. I've lived with it for more than 30 years now. I know what works and what doesn't; and what is likely to work and what isn't. I do not believe a vaccine is necessary as part of my healthy lifestyle. This is my educated decision. Take it or leave, IDC.
I only read peer reviewed sources or sources that are through trusted institutions. People like you can't seem to stand that there is counter-information out there to the hubris of your practice. You act like your medicine is foolproof when it's not. No medicine is without side effects, and sometimes they are not known until years later. The government was spraying children daily with 100% deet in the 50's because it was deemed safe by doctors, and now we wouldn't dream of doing that.
I do not think that your field is so infallible that I should hand over all my power and personal responsibility to you. Even if you think you are doing something good, it may not be in my best interest to do it. Why is this so difficult for you to accept?
I encourage google searchers to come to this page. I'm representing a perfectly valid side of this argument.
You're dodging the question.
Are you in favor of forced, mandatory vaccination? It's a yes or no question.
No matter how our experiences differ, you do not have the right to force me to get vaccinated against my will.
Bolded and underlined for emphasis, since it seems to continually fall on deaf ears. Are you even aware of the limits of your powers and privileges as a nurse? You act like you're in control of public health when you're just one human being on planet earth with one view. I can just see the hubris coming off your posts. You think because you went to med school that you get to make the call? I don't ****ing think so.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?