Vaccinations... "Your children should be safe" argument

"If your children are vaccinated, my non-vaccinated children cannot harm them"

This has nothing to do with being for vaccinations, get it through your head.

Certain children aren't vaccinated for reasons other than having ignorant parents. A person with a compromised immune system, for instance, would not be a person you would vaccinate until it was deemed safe. ( For the record, this only proves the science behind vaccines further - If it was only a conspiracy and something forced, there would be no exceptions - Everyone would be vaccinated, and the minor rise in percentages of deaths would be deemed as reasonable based on the benefits )

These people that cannot be vaccinated for reasons outside their control are still reasonably safe, if within a population of people where the vast majority are vaccinated. These people are not picking up these diseases and spreading them at the rate that those whom are not resistant to these diseases are.

This argument that "The vaccinated children should be safe if it really works " holds no water at all, yet is constantly used by the anti-vaccination crowd. They are not talking about vaccinated children getting these illnesses - They are talking about children getting these illnesses when they are not vaccinated due to circumstances that cause them to not be able to receive them. Not to mention the fact that these diseases could be basically extinct if we wouldn't allow it to be around anymore..

Your child, whom is not vaccinated because of your ignorance, is a threat to other children, whom are not vaccinated because of circumstances not within their control

That is all.

a reply to: deadlyhope

worth noting is that vaccines make the receiver contagious for a month sometims longer,
so the vaccinated are a dangerous threat to the unvaccinated in far greater numbers

a reply to: deadlyhope

Do you want the government to mandate vaccinations?

Well, some people have natural resistance to the flu. Some people have never had the flu make them sick other than a minor one or two day episode. These people usually do not give the flu to other people. They could react very severely to the flu vaccine since it's identifying trigger is injected into the body.

Some people actually need the flu vaccines, others it does not make a difference, and to others it has negative effects.

I have been told by doctors that I should not take the flu shot again. This could change when I get really old, but for now it has effects that could kill me. I do not want to be forced to take it. If I worked in the hospital and they required it, I would quit my job, even if I was the most highly needed doctor there. Why? What good would a dead healthcare worker do for the people they are caring for?

I also have genetic traits where I do not transmit flu well, because I have FUT2 genetic snips that make it hard for the virus to thrive in my mucus. There are some bad effects to having this genetic trait though, I have more susceptibility to getting candida problems and problems in the colon, none of which are catchy.

This FUT 2 gene trait is actually not that rare in some northern Europeans. It also gives us the ability to eat on cruise ships and buffets without getting some of the viruses that cause a bad digestive issue. The virus can't replicate too much because of less H antigen in the mucus, so this is a plus, our body does not have to worry about getting it growing in our nose or guts. This is a life long mutation, so age does not diminish our protection but Candida can cause us problems all our lives. People focus too much on negative effects of things and do not look at the good things. When your body learns how to fight viruses naturally, it actually has better protection than the flu shot, the innate system actually gets more trained to sense the viruses if you do not get vaccines.

originally posted by: pryingopen3rdeye
a reply to: deadlyhope

worth noting is that vaccines make the receiver contagious for a month sometims longer,
so the vaccinated are a dangerous threat to the unvaccinated in far greater numbers

The dead viruses leave off a tell tale chemistry that informs the body that a virus is present, this is antigen chemistry. The live viruses are the only ones that can cause a person to infect someone else. Those weakened viruses spread can trigger a bad reaction is someone else, the symptoms of the flu are actually an immune response by our own body. Those weakened viruses probably can not cause that much real direct damage but could kill someone if their bodies think they are regular viruses and cause a cytokine storm in the person.

So yes and no, they cannot cause much viral damage but the immune response can still be severe.

I have studied the hell out of viruses and the vaccines. The hard to find official informations on vaccines does not match what people are parrotting around. The doctors do not usually have weeks to research what I research either on this subject.

Some people do need vaccines, others don't. Vaccines are far from a panacea of medicine. Someday they may figure out a better system of vaccines but right now they are like a dog chasing it's tail on this, a dog shouldn't be chasing it's tail.

yet they can't just pour out the extra vaccines that weren't used. They have a very strict way of disposing of these vaccines, because they will poison the Earth.

But yeah continue shooting up your kids with them, that won't do any harm.

Contact with the unwashed, brain washed, TV watching masses is a danger to society.

Unfortunately, those masses now make up society, so screw it. I'll be backing away slowly while society ensures it's own destruction with uncontrolled population growth, encouraged breeding of defectives, and intentional infection of the young!

a reply to: deadlyhope

I really hope they develop a cure for Autism, that is a vaccine.

Anti-Vaxers are a crazy bunch.

~Tenth

The other issue with Herd Immunity, which has come up a few times on ATS lately, is that if the level of immunised people falls dangerously low, it opens up the possibility of viruses mutating into versions that might start to infect people who have been vaccinated.


So anti-vaxxers are doubly (triply?) dangerous.

They're a danger to their own children.

They're a danger to other peoples children who haven't been vaccinated for legitimate medical reasons.

And they're a danger to everybody, because in an outbreak, a virus may mutate.


TLR Quit believing pseudo-science and get your kids vaccinated.

a reply to: deadlyhope

The pro-vaxxine folk will say that you have to get your children vaxxinated due to "herd immunity".

Even though in every real life outbreak, the vaxxinated kids are always infected.

The reason?

Its the non-vaxxinated kids' fault! The non-vaxxers have screwed up herd immunity!

In reality, the vaxxines simply dont work. If they do work, they are not nearly as effective as we're being led to believe.

a reply to: deadlyhope

I have a child who cannot be vaccinated due to a serious seizure disorder, I do not however believe parents should vaccinate their children if they choose not to. I have watched my son die twice, watched the light go out in his eyes. You soon realise that death is an inevitable side effect of life.

Also there are risks with vaccinations, and I personally believe that those risks are changing as our environment becomes more polluted with pesticides and chemicals. Glyphosate being one such offender.

That is all

a reply to: deadlyhope

My child was vaccinated, however, I will die defending the right of others to control what goes into their body. Government should never be allowed to choose through force or coercion what one does with their own body. I thought this was already settled during the abortion arguments?

a reply to: tothetenthpower

and you are ignorant and poorly informed.

originally posted by: Charlyboy
a reply to: tothetenthpower

and you are ignorant and poorly informed.

I don't always agree with Tenth, but he is NOT ignorant nor poorly informed.

Certainly you would be aware of this if you were well informed.

a reply to: Painterz

Your "force everyone to do what I want" way of thinking is a clear and present danger to me, and my freedom to not have biological hazards injected into my body.

And I'll fight to the death for my freedom!

a reply to: rickymouse

you bring a critical element into the vaccine debate: genetic profiling, something mainstream medicine refuses to do even though its not that expensive and could potentially mitigate many of the worst side effects for those with genetic mutations that make them susceptible to vaccine injury.

GENOMIC MEDICINE.

a reply to: Painterz

herd immunity cannot work and doesnt work in a "herd" with a highly mobile population or sub group. Do most first world nations qualify as highly mobile? You better believe it.


go ahead and war game it. Take a 100 people, your herd, and put them in any area where there is likely to be members of other "herds" making incursions into the first herd. Now imagine those other herd members are unvaccinated, incompletely vaccinated, or have impaired antibody production response to the vaccines they were given. What ive just described is the entire United States which has tens of millions of FOREIGNERS coming from all over the world with questionable and completely unproven vaccine records and they are continually making incursions into your various "herds". Think about that good long and hard.

Now imagine, say your "herd" has 100 percent vaccination and nearly 100 percent conferred immunity (impossible because even the vax manufacturers admit efficacy rates vary wildly). Now introduce the wild card of someone not even from the US (the biggest herd) who isnt vaccinated. Now your herd immunity model just got toasted by your foreign visitor.

Now do you understand why herd immunity is a fairy tale feel good model that doesnt work and isnt even a very good quasi scientific attempt to convince reasonable, logical people that it could work? Its junk science.

originally posted by: pryingopen3rdeye
a reply to: deadlyhope

worth noting is that vaccines make the receiver contagious for a month sometims longer,
so the vaccinated are a dangerous threat to the unvaccinated in far greater numbers

Please, for the love of all things good, cite some legitimate sources.


Edit:

That goes for all of you who are posting ignorant tripe like this.

originally posted by: tribal
a reply to: rickymouse

you bring a critical element into the vaccine debate: genetic profiling, something mainstream medicine refuses to do even though its not that expensive and could potentially mitigate many of the worst side effects for those with genetic mutations that make them susceptible to vaccine injury.

GENOMIC MEDICINE.

It is more than just the danger part. Some people are not succeptable to different diseases because of their genetics. Some people cannot get AIDS, should they force everyone to get vaccinated against AIDS when half of all people have some pretty good immunity to it? Should they force everyone to get vaccinated for AIDS when there is no risk because they are not promiscuous?

I do not have a problem getting vaccinated for some of the more dangerous diseases, but not for one where you get a little sick then get lifelong immunity. There was an article I read that was written by a professional who was researching the measles and it stated that getting the measles actually altered our immune system so it was better at identifying viruses and even some bacterial threats. According to his research, the immune system of people who did not get the measles or who got vaccinated did not develop the same, they were more susceptible to getting sick. He explained what changes occurred and how it benefited the one who got the measles in the longrun. The article also stated that this change might actually cause some autoimmune issues even though he could not find any evidence of it. He was trying to say there could possibly be some bad points to this too.

how convenient..you did not post a link to back up your claim...here is MY link www.immunizeusa.org... first measles and mumps vaccines don't shed at all..now if someone get a chicken pox rash after getting the vaccine..it is recommended that they stay away until goes away

here is the pertinent part "Shedding" is nothing more or less than the way any contagious disease is spread, through pathogen-filled sneezes, coughs and the like. And because certain vaccines use weakened versions of the live virus, the philosophy goes, those diseases are just as contagious among the vaccinated.

That’s not really how things work, said Wootton.

Only three vaccines in the routinely recommended childhood vaccination schedule are made using weakened, but live, viruses. In some instances, the virus can be detected for a short period of time in the vaccinated patient and that can sometimes lead to others being infected with the vaccine version of the virus. But those instances are extraordinarily rare.

originally posted by: pryingopen3rdeye
a reply to: deadlyhope

worth noting is that vaccines make the receiver contagious for a month sometims longer,
so the vaccinated are a dangerous threat to the unvaccinated in far greater numbers