California Bill Would Ban Vaccination Opt Out Based on Personal Belief

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

More children died before vaccines, so by that your logic is faulty. We enjoy those low child death rate by having everyone vaccinated and therefor in the civilized parts of the world we rooted out those deadly diseases we previously feared.

You do not get to chose to suddenly not vaccinated based on some personal believe reason, because if enough people follow that simpleton mindset it would take a small decade for diseases to become wide spread and that would not just hurt those foolish enough to not vaccinate but also those incapable to vaccinate and we would also import those diseases more to parts of the world that don't have medical care on call which we worked hard to remove them.


If we have to follow the extremes those simple folk of the anti-vax group believe, we could make a pro-vax group and as your kind associates vaccinating with rape, we can associate it with genocide. Have a good day.

Dude...you're arguing with the wrong person.

I'm making a case for vaccines...not against them.

[buck008]

For some diseases there's certainly more money in treatment than prevention or cure, but not in others.

Influenza, for example.

Two things.

Influenza isn't one virus. It's like the cold. There are thousands of mutations and strains out there. It's like saying we haven't cured cancer. It shows a remarkable lack of understanding of what the disease is and how it works.

Second, I don't get your endgame here. You keep saying that you think vaccines are mostly a good thing but you don't think that we should be forced to get them. That's good because, and I'm stressing this point because you seem to have missed it, no one is forcing anyone to get vaccinated. There are no compulsory vaccinations even being suggested. However, if you choose not to vaccinate your children, then you have to realize that there are children who can not be vaccinated due to allergies or compromised immune systems. Your choice not to vaccinate could have a drastic effect on those kids. Your kid may never even get sick himself, but be a carrier for something that would be vaccinated against. The kid with the already compromised immune system was at greater risk already, now he gets sick. No one is telling you what to put in your body, we're just telling you that your choices can not put others at risk. The end.

[Daerio]

Two things.

Influenza isn't one virus. It's like the cold. There are thousands of mutations and strains out there. It's like saying we haven't cured cancer. It shows a remarkable lack of understanding of what the disease is and how it works.

That literally has nothing to do with my post or the point I was responding to, which I was responding to the idea that big pharma would make more money by not having vaccines, which is patently false.

[Sooba]

That literally has nothing to do with my post or the point I was responding to, which I was responding to the idea that big pharma would make more money by not having vaccines, which is patently false.

Except it's not. Oops.

[breadisfunny]

That literally has nothing to do with my post or the point I was responding to, which I was responding to the idea that big pharma would make more money by not having vaccines, which is patently false.

can we not go into conspiracy theory territory? if you want to be taken seriously that is.

[Daerio]

can we not go into conspiracy theory territory? if you want to be taken seriously that is.

It's not a conspiracy theory that money drives capitalist medicine. Sorry.

[GodlyBob]

can we not go into conspiracy theory territory? if you want to be taken seriously that is.

Conspiracy is about all you have left after the science is completely contradictory to your position. If the facts aren't in your favor, then claim that there's an elaborate conspiracy suppressing the truth.

[kreationkin]

http://progress.umb.edu.pl/sites/pro...ienkiewicz.pdf

http://www.progressiveconvergence.co...01997-2002.pdf (I linked this one earlier, it was dismissed as small sample size while in the same breath claiming less than 100 sample size of a study 'proving' Thiomersal safe is fine)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9756729
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/1...2240701806501#

Alright, Let's discuss your "sources".

1) "Neurologic adverse events following vaccination"
Your first one pretends that it is a reputable scientific paper but to be perfectly blunt, it isn't. This is an opinion piece dressed up with medical clothing. It is a discussion of the authors opinions based on sources that they chose (and I certainly don't have time to go through all of them to validate each claim). The correct and truthful thing to do if they wanted to summarize the available information on the subject would be to do what is known as a systematic review with clear explanations of which articles they were including and why and then presenting the cumulative evidence from those articles to make a recommendation. This is NOT that.

2) "HEPATITIS B VACCINATION OF MALE NEONATES AND AUTISM DIAGNOSIS, NHIS 1997–2002"
Here we can see some really poor science. This one has problems with study design and likely with some uhh.. statistical liberties ... that are being taken. Study design issues: looking for a comparison of the effect of neonatal administration of Hep B Vaccine (HBV) between children with or without autism who were born BEFORE the Hep B Vaccine was introduced is shady at best. Statistical Analysis: Before you do whatever behind the scenes adjustment they've done, there is no statistically significant difference between the two groups. After whatever they've done they find that being white is statistically a benefit for risk of autism... despite all existing evidence to the contrary.

3) "Serological association of measles virus and human herpesvirus-6 with brain autoantibodies in autism."
This paper is from 1998 and the results have not been replicated. Dr Singh who wrote the study is a member of the Autism Autoimmunity Project. That group aims to prove that autism is an autoimmune disease despite a large amount of evidence that it isn't and the complete lack of any evidence that it is (except his own un-reproducible research.) This study in particular has been criticized because the children with autism didn't show any actual evidence of nerve cell damage nor did the test that Singh used to detect measles antibodies actually detect any.

4) "Hepatitis B triple series vaccine and developmental disability in US children aged 1–9 years"
I can't be as thorough as I'd like to debunking this one, you've linked to an abstract. You can not, I repeat for emphasis CAN NOT, make claims based on an abstract and be taken seriously by any scientifically literate person. However, a quick search did find someone who had access to the data, they've debunked a portion of the claims pretty thoroughly; feel free to read. Long story short though; There isn't any difference in vaccine administration rate between autistic and non-autistic children. "http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/201...ccine-no-link/"

So hopefully you're not just trolling and you'll stop and think this time. My mind isn't "made up". I'll readily accept any evidence that is reproducible, valid, etc. No one is claiming vaccines don't have side effects (even serious ones). We are saying that a) there is no credible evidence that autism is in any way linked to vaccines; b) there exists a large body of evidence that shows that disease rates are significantly impacted by vaccination. The benefit to society granted by vaccines is enormous; it's not exaggeration to say that they are one of the top medical breakthroughs we have ever made.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

It's not a conspiracy theory that money drives capitalist medicine. Sorry.

Vaccines account for less than 2% of What "Big Pharma" makes every year. The real money is in Cholesterol Medication and Boner Pills.

Currently there are no "Give your children Viagra or they cannot attend public school" Bills being discussed.

[Acidbaron]

My bad, mistook you for someone else then.

Also you know what other business would do well if people stopped vaccinating en masse with this to quote a TV show, Baby coffins.

[Deleted]

While not debating the pros and cons of vaccines I'll have to go with bad. Forcing a parent to vaccinate is no different than forcing someone to carry a child to term.

YOU and only you should decide what goes in your body or your child's. While the study of vaccines causing autism was "disproven" and I say that lightly since vaccines are big money and it would surprise me if the debunking was falsified - money makes people do terrible things. There are studies showing a link between too many vaccines at once causing genetically predisposed children to become autistic. Several lawsuits were won as a result.

Anywho - the focus should be on educating parents and offering alternative vaccine schedules that limit the number of vaccines given at one time and eliminate unnecessary ones like HepB for newborns and chickenpox. The idea that the CP vaccine prevents shingles later in life has no evidence to back it up. The first children given the CP vaccine are nowhere near old enough yet to be at risk of shingles. More study and time is needed but natural immunity is better in that case and it was always considered a harmless illness until the the media scare tactics took hold. Suddenly overnight it became super deadly.

I'm all for vaccines but forcing it I'm not and spreading them out is best. And giving a newborn HepB is just insane. How many one day olds are shooting up drugs?

Incorrect. So incorrect I think you made everyone else feel stupider from reading your shit.

[Orbitus]

For some diseases there's certainly more money in treatment than prevention or cure, but not in others.

Influenza, for example.

- - - Updated - - -



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_court

With the commencement of hearings in the case of Cedillo v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (Case #98-916V), the battle over vaccine injuries moved into the courts. A panel of three special masters began hearing the first cases of the historic Omnibus Autism Proceedings in June 2007. The lead petitioners, the parents of Michelle Cedillo, claimed that Michelle's autism was caused by a vaccine. Theresa and Michael Cedillo contended that thiomersal seriously weakened Michelle's immune system and prevented her body from clearing the measles virus after her vaccination at the age of fifteen months. At the outset Special Master George Hastings, Jr. said "Clearly the story of Michelle's life is a tragic one,"[16] while pledging to listen carefully to the evidence. On February 12, 2009, the court ruled in three test cases that the combination of the MMR vaccine and thiomersal-containing vaccines were not to blame for autism. Hastings concluded in his decision, "Unfortunately, the Cedillos have been misled by physicians who are guilty, in my view, of gross medical misjudgment."[17] The ruling was appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals,[18] and upheld.]

That is from your link. So there have been ZERO cases that have held up appeal that autism is linked to MMR or Thiomersal containing vaccines.

[Daerio]

That is from your link. So there have been ZERO cases that have held up appeal that autism is linked to MMR or Thiomersal containing vaccines.

A fairly specific distinction to make, but whatever makes you feel better.

In 2008 the federal government agreed to award damages to the family of Hannah Poling, a girl who developed autistic-like symptoms after receiving a series of vaccines in a single day.[12] The vaccines given were DTaP, Hib, MMR, varicella, and inactivated polio.

A petitioner seeking to establish causation-in-fact must show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that but for her vaccination she would not have been injured, and that the vaccination was a substantial factor in bringing about her injury... The preponderance of evidence standard under the Vaccine Act requires proof that a vaccine more likely than not caused the vaccinee’s injury.

That's not scientific proof of anything, and I certainly didn't claim it was, but I don't think they're just handing out free judgments either.

[buck008]

That literally has nothing to do with my post or the point I was responding to, which I was responding to the idea that big pharma would make more money by not having vaccines, which is patently false.

So you're just going to ignore the part of my response that points out that you don't have a point? Ok then.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

That literally has nothing to do with my post or the point I was responding to, which I was responding to the idea that big pharma would make more money by not having vaccines, which is patently false.

There is more money to be had in treating sickness than there is in preventing it.

[GodlyBob]

There is more money to be had in treating sickness than there is in preventing it.

Unless, the "diseases" you're preventing don't actually exist =0

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

So you're just going to ignore the part of my response that points out that you don't have a point? Ok then.

Cognitive Dissonance. The more evidence that piles up against Anti-Vaxxers...the more hardline they become.

“My mind’s made up; don’t confuse me with the facts.”

[Deleted]

That's not scientific proof of anything, and I certainly didn't claim it was, but I don't think they're just handing out free judgments either.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/31/op...+poling&st=nyt

I suggest you read it all but in particular

The system worked fine until a few years ago, when vaccine court judges turned their back on science by dropping preponderance of evidence as a standard. Now, petitioners need merely propose a biologically plausible mechanism by which a vaccine might cause harm — even if their explanation contradicts published studies. In 2006, for example, Dorothy Werderitsh claimed in the vaccine court that a hepatitis B vaccine had triggered an autoimmune response in her brain that led to multiple sclerosis. Two large studies had clearly shown that hepatitis B vaccine could neither cause nor exacerbate multiple sclerosis, but the court ruled in favor of Ms. Werderitsh, elevating a hypothesis above epidemiological evidence.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Unless, the "diseases" you're preventing don't actually exist =0

I made this for you

[GodlyBob]

I made this for you

This hat will protect me from many things! Were you aware that jet fuel cannot melt tin foil if it has been folded at least twice?