Why do you care what she/he puts in their body?!

a reply to: imnotanother

This argument would only make sense if you lived in a vacuum and never interacted with the general population. If you're sending your unvaccinated children to public school, however, you've involved the entire community in that decision.

originally posted by: hearows
a reply to: imnotanother

I believe the information you've gotten there was grossly incorrect. I'd highly recommend further research before you add fire to a potentially deadly misguided movement.

Flame me for the source if you must but take a look here: vaxtruth.org...

originally posted by: hearows
a reply to: imnotanother

This argument would only make sense if you lived in a vacuum and never interacted with the general population. If you're sending your unvaccinated children to public school, however, you've involved the entire community in that decision.

No you don't. It is our private decision. Worry about yourself. If my child comes down with an illness. Then, it is my responsibility to protect them and others around them. Until then, back off me and my children.

Whenever someone starts preaching to me about what I choose to consume I ask them what they like to consume. Then I berate, belittle, lecture and humiliate them over whatever they choose to consume.

People are nosy busybodies who feel the need to rule and dictate other people to justify their existence, intelligence, superior logic, power, attitude, a million other things.

Ask the politicians to pee in a cup like the rest of us, they'll refuse. They have that right, we don't. Imo if you determine what another person can and can't do with their body, you should be subject to the same rules and denied privileges.

I do things many people don't agree with, many do things I don't agree with. That's life, what matters in the end is whether or not you became a tyrant

a reply to: imnotanother

People are concerned because there are those who CANNOT vaccinate and the small population that WILL NOT BE PROTECTED even after vaccination. This is not a failure of the vaccine itself, but a biological anomaly. They are concerned because a host could allow the disease to mutate and put everyone, even the vaccinated, at risk. This is a simple lack of knowledge of biology. Look at how a virus works.

Condoms are less effective then the MMR vaccine.

We have the right to eat what we want or to take whatever medicine we want. I just try to inform people of the properties of food and the possible negative side effects of medicines. I try to teach people that certain foods have properties that can adjust anything from ability to think or reason to fixing or creating health problems.

Don't eat too many raw green beans.

a reply to: imnotanother

Yes, that source is known to be built on a profit motivated hoax. Dig deeper and look for a reliable source.

a reply to: imnotanother

You wouldn't know until it would already be possible to transmit to others and if you attempted to treat a case of measles on your own your child could die. Would you really forego medical treatment to make this logically sound?

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: imnotanother

And I would except, your kids get sick and could infect my kids who aren't able to get vaccinated for one reason or another or who may be immune-compromised.

And let me clear, we find a way to safeguard against this, and you can take whatever chances you want. Right now, as it happens, I could care less because I have no one in my family who has any of the issues that would make your unvaccinated family a danger.

If you choice to not vaccinate truly did happen in a vacuum ... fine. I could care less. I do actually have some vaccines I choose not to get but there are quite a few I also do get for me and mine.

You know I care a lot about the injustices of the world too. That is why my wife wears a natural diamond mined from Canada. I don't want to support killings in Africa. Would I be justified saying everyone must prove where their diamond came from?
Would I be justified to stop you from posting your opinion because someone might take it as fact and harm people?

No.

You act like the choice not to vaccinate is like pushing the button to detonate a nuclear bomb. Vaccines, for the most part haven't even been around for 125 years. There is so much world history before that. I will take my chances. Sorry if your family's immunity is in the garbage so badly that you must rely on drug companies to keep you safe. Good luck.

a reply to: imnotanother

I don't believe natural immunity is worth the potential for preventable death and/or maiming. The real concern here ought to be for the children too young to be vaccinated, who have no inherited natural immunity. Stopping immunizations would obviously hurt a lot of people before it could ever get better. Why is that a better idea then a vaccine with relatively low risks to the disease itself. Nobody would use a vaccine if it were just as safe to get the disease.

originally posted by: hearows
a reply to: imnotanother

Yes, that source is known to be built on a profit motivated hoax. Dig deeper and look for a reliable source.

Feel free to do so yourself. This thread is a rant. Sorry, you will not convince me with your opinions. You are asking for proofs but not backing up your claims, which is fine, this in a thread in the RANT section. I am not here to have discussions beyond with what I said about people being able to choose what they put in their body.

And please, put your post together in one post with paragraphs instead of a bunch of different replies.

The answer is easy, people think themselves important and that they need to share how they feel about everything. I personnaly love it its instant comedy.

a reply to: imnotanother

The sources my opinion is based on are available in the NLBS thread but also it is largely considered common knowledge. It would appear you're not open to replicable facts either, and the only support for your argument so far is based in faulty science and the logic that somehow an unvaccinated population doesn't effect others. The foundational elements in your position are in direct controversy with prevailing scientific fact and most direct interpretations of the constitution. I'm a big fan of both.

a reply to: hearows

Please research the downward trend in measles deaths prior to the vaccination. Sure, the vaccination made a sudden drop in the number of cases, and therefore the overall number of deaths, but if you compare the percentage of deaths to reported measles cases in the United States prior to the vaccination, you may be surprised at how low the percentage of people who died from the illness actually is. If the low percentage of deaths was because of vaccines, the percentage would still be the same, even if both overall numbers were reduced. But the reality is that the percentage of measles-related deaths was already shrinking away prior to the vaccination.

It's all on the CDC website and other places for you to do some math and figure out. It doesn't take long. I posted all the numbers and percentages on a different post--I'll see if I can locate it and link to it.

ETA: Phew! I finally found it after searching for a while.Here is the post I put together that spells out the numbers as to why dying from Measels, at least in the U.S., is basically a non-issue and should be treated as such during honest debates on the topic. And there is no proof that the 0% death statistic is attributable to the vaccine, because there are still cases of the disease rearing its ugly head, so like I said, it's something other than the vaccine that is reducing the ratio of death to contractions of the virus...maybe better, faster and more efficient health care?

originally posted by: hearows
a reply to: imnotanother

The sources my opinion is based on are available in the NLBS thread but also it is largely considered common knowledge.

Well, quit being so lazy and post them if you really want to make your point for others. Some people, like myself, do not touch the vile NLBS threads because they are just here for money making/viewers and are a waste of time to a rational human. Plus shame on ATS for breaking their own T&C, but maybe that have changed the "writing on the wall." Look to the left and right of these post. Look which thread is on the top of the main page all week. NLBS is BS in itself.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Yes, that trend is absolutely something worth looking at. However, it could be argued that stopping the vaccination process in favor of allowing folks to create more inherited resistance and natural immunity might not be worth the preventable deaths. Unfortunately at the present most people don't have natural immunity or inherited immunity so the cases of measles could be more severe now. It was weighed at the time to be more beneficial then potentially dangerous to implement the vaccine in perpetuity, starting from such a small population of naturally immune and stopping vaccinations would cause a lot of suffering for a vague hope that most would create a natural immunity. But the young sick and infirm would still be at risk unless the disease died out entirely. Vaccines are the best hope of killing off the measles virus.

a reply to: imnotanother

"Asking why you care if I eat a bean burger or why I don't take aspirin when I have a headache is not the same as to questioning if the media is fake or not. "

"I think a lot of people vaccinate out of fear campaigns that are ran on the major media. How many people in your community with measles?"

And now you've just questioned the media...

originally posted by: DodgyDawg
a reply to: imnotanother

"Asking why you care if I eat a bean burger or why I don't take aspirin when I have a headache is not the same as to questioning if the media is fake or not. "

"I think a lot of people vaccinate out of fear campaigns that are ran on the major media. How many people in your community with measles?"

And now you've just questioned the media...

tou che, but it was on point atleast.

And, FYI, I question the media all the time.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

That was a really good post in my opinion, I had read it in the initial thread. My confusion here is if the anti vaccine movement led to a sharp drop in immunizations within a population where natural immunity is low, what would the medical costs end up being and would it be worth the potential risks and possible monetary effort? Is it a viable course of action to stop vaccinations altogether?

originally posted by: hearows
a reply to: SlapMonkey

That was a really good post in my opinion, I had read it in the initial thread. My confusion here is if the anti vaccine movement led to a sharp drop in immunizations within a population where natural immunity is low, what would the medical costs end up being and would it be worth the potential risks and possible monetary effort? Is it a viable course of action to stop vaccinations altogether?

I know these questions were not addressed to me but I felt it important to add another question(s): Is the risk of a known side effect from vaccination worth it compared to fatality rate of whatever disease?