Law New York Ends Religious Exemptions for Vaccination

[Gregolian]

I have a few people from HS on my FB that are antivax

The only reason i don't delete them is A) never done that before and B) they are unintentionally hilarious

"I bet people that make kids toys make bank. Know who else makes a lot of money? People that build teeny tiny baby coffins cause their parents didn't want to vaccinate their kid"

 

[zebby23]

So do a lot of things. If you don't shower, you can pass skin infections over to other people like ringworm, or stuff like nits in your hair. There isn't a government law mandating personal health though.

Hell, I could never wash my hands and wipe shit all over the place and harm a bunch of people. Still no law there compelling me.

I am vaccinated (by choice), but its a different thing to force it on someone. its also quite funny to hold conflicting views regarding "my body my choice"

Not taking a shower will not get ANYONE else killed. lol, come on man. I get you are trying to prove your point but that was really lame.

Regarding your not washing your hands and wiping shit everywhere... Try that, you WILL be arrested so that is also dumb.

My body my choice is a womans issue and men should literally have nothing to say about it. Comparing abortion to vaccinations is ridiculous. Man, the more I breakdown your post the more I cringe. Don't even respond, I'm done with you

 

[Oeshon]

My body my choice is a womans issue and men should literally have nothing to say about it. Comparing abortion to vaccinations is ridiculous. Man, the more I breakdown your post the more I cringe. Don't even respond, I'm done with you

lol

 

[zebby23]

lol

Really? So old white men should be regulating womens bodies? Wow, please explain

 

[CauseImbetta]

What's ironic is that this comment applies just as aptly to the provax folks as the religious. It is a similar thinking that keeps both groups from recognizing uncomfortable truths about their respective religion...

What's the religion of the pro Vax group? Science?

Science isn't a religion because repeatable testing and observatinal method doesn't care what you believe.

 

[Judoka1532]

My main concern is lack of safety testing and the willful ignorance and brow beating used to stifle any and all criticisms. The official position is "safe and effective" yet the actual science is severely lacking and cannot actually support this claim. The fact that many vaccine proponents pretend to be scientifically minded (while insisting critics are "quacks") is another issue that worries me because legitimate problems (eg increased febrile seizures and increased epilepsy after MMR) are ignored in favor of demonization which functions to sheild manufacturers from criticism (they're already shielded from liability).

There are other issues, such as unknown risk related to our naive understanding of the human immune system, obvious use of outright falsehoods and propaganda (historically and presently) and the removing of basic human rights, but the above are my main critiques.

Here's my problem with that. I can't say you are completely wrong and that we have all the testing we need. However, the people who get vaccinated do not get the nasty diseases that can completely destroy you, thus neither do the populations. I don't think the risks are near as big as you claim, at least not for the vast majority of people. The rewards of not getting polio, measles,mumps, hepatitis, etc....are way better than adverse reactions on a small percentage of people.

So my question is, forgoing vaccination until further testing is done isn't blind and willful ignorance? When to me, the evidence is fairly clear that it's a way better option than not vaxing.

 

[PhitePhan]

Here's my problem with that. I can't say you are completely wrong and that we have all the testing we need.

I appreciate this acknowledgement, but I think you understate the gaps in research. For example, the initial clinical safety trials for the MMR consisted of around 1000 participants and lasted just ~40 days. Also none of the studies included an actual placebo and instead tested safety against older vaccine/s. From a statistical and research design point of view, this is simply weak research. And sure enough, MMR is associated with higher rates of adverse events than single vaccine... I'm not sure what the rates are against placebo, because as I stated before, the research is inadequate.
https://www.cochrane.org/CD004407/A...on-children-against-measles-mumps-and-rubella

When research is inadequate, it takes years before you figure out adverse events. For example, the MMR has significantly increased risk of seizure resulting in an estimated 300 cases of epilepsy per year.
https://www.bmj.com/content/359/bmj.j5104/rr-13

However, the people who get vaccinated do not get the nasty diseases that can completely destroy you, thus neither do the populations.

Actually, a lot of ppl have still caught measles after the MMR which ultimately led to the need for boosters. Most people aren't completely destroyed by measles, and those that are harmed overwhelmingly have underlying conditions. For example, Vit A deficiency is a huge factor.
https://www.who.int/immunization/programmes_systems/interventions/vitamin_A/en/

https://ieet.org/index.php/IEET2/more/maynard20150205

When you parse out the underlying factors related to severe mealses outcomes, the number of severe outcomes is small relative to exposing literally billions to known but largely unknown harms.

I don't think the risks are near as big as you claim, at least not for the vast majority of people.

We're talking about exposing hundreds of millions or more ppl to known and unknown potential problems, that's pretty big if you ask me. For example, one polio vaccine was associated with cancer (see: SV40) after given to nearly 100,000,000 people! Regardless, vaccines as far as I know are still not tested for cancer potential. WTF, man, isn't that just a little concerning?

What's worse is underreporting to VAERS is a major ongoing problem as well, while there are also a huge number of potential vaccine related injuries that haven't been researched at all.
http://www.nationalacademies.org/hm...fects-of-Vaccines-Evidence-and-Causality.aspx

The rewards of not getting polio, measles,mumps, hepatitis, etc....are way better than adverse reactions on a small percentage of people.

This is a statement with very limited empirical support, as I've emphasized above. My guess is you are going off of what vested interests are promoting rather than the totality of the research.

So my question is, forgoing vaccination until further testing is done isn't blind and willful ignorance?

Educating oneself about the cost/benefit of vaccination with each particular disease is the opposite of blind or ignorant, wouldn't you say?

When to me, the evidence is fairly clear that it's a way better option than not vaxing.

Can you please cite a few research/ primary sources that give you this confidence?

Are you confident enough that you would force every child in the world to be exposed to these risks ( known and unknown )?

 

[PhitePhan]

What's the religion of the pro Vax group? Science?

Science isn't a religion because repeatable testing and observatinal method doesn't care what you believe.

See my post above.

In short, vaccine science is very flawed and incomplete. The conclusions put forth by vax proponents cannot be adequately supported by the actual evidence, and the vitriolic and irrational reactions to ANY challenge of the vaccine narrative is extremely cultish relying on appeals to authority, benevolence, and trust, unwillingness to entertain skeptical ideas, demonization, etc.).

 

[flashNsmash]

I wouldn't have to rob you if you just gave me your money.

i've never seen the case for reparations laid out so concisely before

 

[flashNsmash]

How about you do some math.

Population in 1963: 189M

3M/189M = .01%

Again, why do we need to give up sovereignty over our bodies to ensure the safety of .01% of the population?

your math is off by two orders of magnitude

 

[ShinkanPo]

Tell then why after the smallpox vaccine was developed did the modern world eradicate it? Why is it only NOW coming back with more and more people with Web MD med degrees from Jenny McCarthy deeming it not necessary to vaccinate for that?

That's concrete enough for me that kids should be vaccinated.

Small Pox? Comming back

Please tell they are not.. its one of the most brutal diseases known to man its horible your skin will blister and like peal off.

 

[ShinkanPo]

This is an aside, can you link to a source saying smallpox is coming back? If people are currently getting smallpox, which was eradicated in the late 1970s, that is a major catastrophe.

Can we leave this planet? Damm small Pox comming back in 1st werld cities if you first werlders get destroyed by dumbos what chance us 3rd worlders have?

I just have to take a bath and shit in the street today because our local sanitation and water utility is so inept and has no foresight.

 

[CauseImbetta]

See my post above.

In short, vaccine science is very flawed and incomplete. The conclusions put forth by vax proponents cannot be adequately supported by the actual evidence, and the vitriolic and irrational reactions to ANY challenge of the vaccine narrative is extremely cultish relying on appeals to authority, benevolence, and trust, unwillingness to entertain skeptical ideas, demonization, etc.).

You're crazy.

 

[PhitePhan]

You're crazy.

 

[Gregolian]

Small Pox? Comming back

Please tell they are not.. its one of the most brutal diseases known to man its horible your skin will blister and like peal off.

That was me making a mistake. Apologies.

 

[all caps]

Some children cannot be vaccinated because of legitimate reasons.

Dont pretend like you care about anyone elses kids. You cant be for mandatory vaccination and also pretend like you give a shit about people.

 

[Arashikage4Life]

Dont pretend like you care about anyone elses kids. You cant be for mandatory vaccination and also pretend like you give a shit about people.

That doesn't even make sense.

 

[AngryPorto]

See my post above.

In short, vaccine science is very flawed and incomplete. The conclusions put forth by vax proponents cannot be adequately supported by the actual evidence, and the vitriolic and irrational reactions to ANY challenge of the vaccine narrative is extremely cultish relying on appeals to authority, benevolence, and trust, unwillingness to entertain skeptical ideas, demonization, etc.).

How do you explain the eradication of numerous diseases over the past 200 years that just happens to correlate with increased access and use of various vaccines? And I assume given your stance on the subject you are of course a medical profession with years of either practice or research, warranting you lending your expertise to this subject.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eradication_of_infectious_diseases

 

[JoeyJoeJoeJr]

Mandatory vaccinations is complete idiocy. History will not look back fondly at the vaccine era.

Certain very dangerous and deadly diseases that spread fast and kill many may require a vaccine, in the most dire of situations, but beyond that, no. Vaccinations should only be used in the most severe situations, if no other solutions are available.

I know vaccines are causing effects on people, from cancer to neurological disorders. The question is what percentage.

Just as a cigarette may give one person cancer, and not another, the same is true for vaccines. Chemicals interact with everyone differently.

How do you prove a link? It's hard.

Vaccines don't cause immediate symptoms in most cases (not all), so you don't see the damage. Out of sight, out of mind. It's not until years later the damage can manifest in the form of cancer or other symptoms.

The problem is the symptoms can vary from person to person, so unless they are all acquiring the same illness, how do you prove the connection.

I'm sure these preservatives and chemicals in vaccines are hurting some people, who have bodies that can't deal with it.


A chemical may have a similar atomic structure to something else that the body uses, and might be sent in high concentrations to that area, mistakenly.

Now stewing in that region, it can cause cellular damage and damage to the dna, which in turn may cause mutations leading to cancer.

I believe that this is happening with vaccines

 

[PhitePhan]

How do you explain the eradication of numerous diseases over the past 200 years that just happens to correlate with increased access and use of various vaccines?

From your source: "So far, two diseases have been successfully eradicated—one specifically affecting humans(smallpox), and one affecting a wide range of ruminants (rinderpest)."

Not exactly "numerous" diseases... I assume you meant reduction? For that, I would credit vaccination for the reduction of some diseases (e.g. Measles) and others not so much (e.g. Polio). Really, you need to look at each vaccine and disease in a case by case basis as each vaccine has shown to have differing efficacy.

And I assume given your stance on the subject you are of course a medical profession with years of either practice or research, warranting you lending your expertise to this subject.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eradication_of_infectious_diseases

You assume incorrectly. I'm a parent who took a keen interest in the subject after my oldest child was likely harmed by the MMR (febrile seizure leading to chronic epilepsy). I do have a background in scientific research and study design and evaluation which has helped me parse through much of the research, but I don't consider myself an authority and I don't recommend one way or the other (unlike most vax proponents). There are, however, numerous medical doctors and scientists in the US and other countries who question all, or parts, of our vaccine schedule... most other countries have a significany reduced schedule as well.