Yuck. There should be no way out religious or otherwise for vaccines unless medically unable. just gives people power to wriggle free of commitments they don’t want to keep.
My friend’s son has a more gradual vaccine schedule because he’s autistic and needles are very hard for him. Understandable, but they still make sure he gets them all.
I’m actually pretty proud to say that everybody in my extended family got vaccinated with only one exception, and she was an 18-year-old who thought she was invincible. That probably has something to do with the fact that my dad and all of his older (remaining) siblings still remember having to get the polio vaccine, and all of my cousins and myself have heard all about it even years before this nonsense happened. It pays to get a basic education, who’d’ve thunk it.
The only person I think didn’t get it that I know was an old coworker who seems to have gotten fired for it, she vanished from work emails and was posting convoy shit on Instagram so I assume she was fired as per policy. If you hang around educated people they tend to believe in science!
Yep that convoy. I sent her a message saying that I hoped she understood she was signing up to be part of a group of white supremacists, and even though she saw my message she didn’t answer, so I blocked her.
Honestly, that would be preferable to the reality. Unvaccinated children, by and large, aren’t the people who suffer from their parents’ shitty choices. I wouldn’t want anyone to suffer, but if it were the unvaccinated children who suffer most, it would be easier to make the case to ignorant and selfish people who don’t want to vaccinate.
No vaccine is completely effective, and each infection is an opportunity for mutation and spread. Not everyone who gets infected will get sick. Not everyone who gets sick will have severe illness or even the same symptoms. The people who suffer the most are the very young, the immunocompromised, the elderly, and the poor. If you’re talking to someone who thinks their internet googling is as valid as actual medical doctors doing actual scientific research, it’s going to be harder to convince them to do something for the greater good.
Yah, props for mentioning, all to often it’s a question that goes unanswered in these discussions. I completely agree the pros outweigh the cons and it’s better to eradicate some of these diseases. I fear that a big reason some who choose to not vaccinate do so is because of the lack of transparency about vaccine injury. They have a family member or close acquaintance that experienced it firsthand and the public discussion around it is often toxic to the point it feels conspiratorial with people only pointing to the Wakefield study (which was garbage so doesn’t help either side). Researching it without a great understanding of it can return a lot of confirmation bias too.
It is true that vaccines can have rare adverse effects. That’s why we have clinical trials and experts evaluate if the benefits massively outweigh the risks. Vaccines are never really 100% safe, but always pretty damn close.
And ultimately, the disease the vaccine prevents is much more dangerous than the side effects. Rare reactions can kill you, but measles is much more likely to.
It’s like the people who refuse to wear seatbelts because they have the potential to harm you in an accident.
Back in the beginning of vaccines, there was 1 in 100 chance of dying of the vaccine. Of course, smallpox killed you 1 out of 3. People are pretending we’re still at that 1/100 rate for modern vaccines.
Assuming you’re talking about the Polio vaccine, that 1-in-100 stat is way off. It was never that bad.
The rollout for the Salk vaccine (the original polio vaccine) in the 1950’s was for 1.3 million children. It was probably the worst vaccine incident of all time because Cutter Laboratories, who produced roughly 200,000 of the doses, made defective batches that contained still living polio virus (and because of how vaccines are made now this is no longer an issue). Several thousand reported cases of polio, 200 permanent injured, and 10 dead.
Even if you were one of the unlucky people to specifically receive a defective vaccine, you still only had a 1/20000 chance of dying. If you look at the entire rollout then it was only 1/130000.
You’re right about the 1-in-3 chance of dying from polio though, so even with it being one of the least effective and most dangerous vaccines ever mass produced it was still hailed as a massive success and won numerous people Nobel prizes.
Farthest thing from an anti-vaxer so please me out. There is a small select group of people who have legitimate reasons why they can’t get vaccinated.
Unless you are being told by your doctor you can not get vaccinated, you should get vaccinated. End of story. Heard immunity helps protect those in our society who have serious health issues and can’t get vaccinated.
Vaccination should be considered a required civic duty, but I do believe allowances should be made with individuals with certain health conditions.
Any vaccine mandate would have exceptions, and a process for applying for an exception, along with mandatory alternative treatment plans like directions to isolate during periods of higher risk.
Unfortunately, I’ve heard of people getting rejected from places for being unvaccinated because their particular condition, often in the case of rare ones, is one that doesn’t qualify for “vaccine exemption” despite there being legitimate reasons for it.
Everyone who’s able to should definitely get vaxxed, but the way the system currently works can be a problem for certain people who have actual reasons for medical exemption.
How does being a psychologist constitute a reasonable qualification to have any weight on the matter? Vaccinations belong to the field of pharmacology, on which psychologists have no training whatsoever (possibly aside from psychiatric drugs) and if they do, they’re most likely a psychiatrist, in which case they’re doctor first and psychologist second.
The author has no qualifications whatsoever to talk about vaccines, aside from her doctoral dissertation, which I would consider questionable at best.
She’s a psychologist who works primarily with special education/special needs kids, and believes that a lot of developmental disabilities are the result of vaccinations.
This just seems like a shitpost. “I’m _____ and that’s OK!” with that style, arms up “hooray” and that mouth agape smile, it’s just such a trope I’d only ever thought was reversed for farce.
Are these people so fucking stupid they think looking like a farce is a good thing? Wait, unfortunately I already have the answer…
Ah well, society is fucked and we’re all fucked anyway.
First time I’m hearing about “vaccine injured” meaning they think a vaccine caused autism or something. When I read the post, with the context, I thought it meant like a physical injury that someone with special needs might suffer if they moved around during a vaccine. It’s actually disgusting that this person wrote a story likely about a kid with some form of neurodivergence and called toted them as a “vaccine injured child”.
It actually just doesn’t stay in the blood for as long and the toxicological effects of ethyl mercury haven’t really been studied very well. A paper looking at ethyl (the kind from thimerosal breakdown) and methyl mercury poisoning in baby monkeys found much greater inorganic mercury buildup in the brain from ethyl mercury during the sacrificial autopsies, both in absolute and relative terms. There’s not been a longitudinal study about ethyl mercury in humans, so I really don’t know how you can be so sure about this. The vaccination schedule undergone by infants regularly exceeded the EPA’s blood-mercury limits by up to 10x until as recently as 1999. Nobody has ever been investigated, nor have damages been allowed to be sought in court. If this was any other medicine we’d be able to have a level headed conversation about it, but because it’s vaccines everybody gets really fucking hyper abt it. BTW I’m fully vaccinated and recommend vaccination for evrybody who is physically able. Not a doctor by any means, and would be very interested in learning more about the scientific literature on this subject as I’ll be the first to admit my knowledge is shallow.
Very likely that’s the one. I know someone who used to believe it had a significant link to Autism when injected to the mother during pregnancy.
They now acknowledge this is not the case, but have implied that they still suspect a link might exist to some medicine that military hospitals were administering to mothers around the year 2000.
I’ve no evidence for or against. But there is undeniably a link to military service of one or both parents. That’s the only definitive I have about ASD. That, and of course that anyone who self-diagnoses themselves with it is mentally unwell in a whole different way.
There is a link between car exhaust during pregnancy and autism. For some reason nobody wants to bother with pollution, but keep doubling down on vaccines causing autism. It doesn’t seem like autism is actually the issue for them.
I agree. And this recent wave of vaccine denial is simply about just that, the denial and this absurd fear that one needs to be “unadulterated” by whatever is supposedly going on.
I say it smells like Kremlin successfully fooling right wing idiots in an attempt to dwindle the number of able-bodied constituents to make their goals easier to achieve. But I’ve no evidence for this, just like right wing idiots have no evidence vaccines cause anything like what they claim.
Autism though, I simply mention when vaccines come up as that speculation predates the current anti-vaccine mass hysteria, because even if debunked I would still feel its arguments were more plausible than anything the Non-Equine Ivermectin Ingestors could come up with.
And honestly, Autism could be linked to so many things. Radiation, microplastics, magnetic fields, fish, exercise, the number of licks it takes to get to the center of a tootsie pop, you name it. The fact of the matter is that modern science still knows jack shit about Autism as it does a frightening number of prevalent mental conditions, because it’s only in modernity that we’ve even realized the general shape and scope of them. And the most expertise we have in treatment is behavioral therapies and dietary restrictions/supplements.
What’s scary though is hearing people with power say they yearn for the day we can eradicate ASD through gene editing, without a solid understanding of what ASD even is. And yes, that is something I have heard from someone with sway, in complete and unwavering sincerety…
It looks suspiciously like a pay-for-award company that gives out awards to just about any product for parents/educators/related to children or parenting, as long as you pay the “application fee” (although they specifically say an award isn’t guaranteed).
I mean looking at their website they seem to give out an awful lot of awards, and they mention that for $500, you’ll get to use their award seal on your product and receive 100 award stickers, and for $1,500 you get more stickers, plus they’ll post about your product on their website.
Call me crazy, but I’d think that if an award isn’t guaranteed, they’d make you pay for the initial application to start with, and then (assuming you “win” an award) they’d offer to promote your product for an additional payment, once they’ve decided that you’re eligible. The fact that they talk so openly about how paying a larger application fee gets you promoted on their site (and some other stuff) makes it seem suspiciously like a pay-for-award scheme to me.
For Level Two applications that don’t meet the criteria for an award, a refund is issued for the licensing portion of the application fee less any applied discounts. An award is not guaranteed. Marketing and publicty benefits are only extended to applicants who meet the criteria for the award.
Apparently they’ll only feature you if you’re eligible for an award and refund you the enhanced part of the application if you’re product is ineligible. They do have the criteria for eligibility further down the page and it seems pretty open to interpretation.
Add comment