RE: The effectiveness of Vaccines and Herd Immunity
Im on the fence on this topic at the moment, until i can do further research. Thankfully i dont have children of my own to have to make this decision myself. Im sure vaccines were initially made to improve health and reduce the incidence of disease, however nowadays there is an argument on the matter of actually being able to trust the producers/suppliers/administers of such drugs. In a world where anybody can be bought with a promise of money and power we struggle to believe science on both sides of the argument. I do feel that while we are a free species we should still be able to choose whether our kids are vaccinated and not forced to go down a particular route without appropriate understanding. If someone has fears about vaccination, then proper support and education would be useful. Knowing that your physician actually cares about the health of you and your child, rather than filling a prescription to get commision would also go a long way. Calling people stupid or 'dumbasses' for holding a different opinion only creates division.
Finally, just to play devils advocate a little bit. Arguments like this are quickly moving legislators towards mandatory vaccination. When this happens, all children would be vaccinated against their parents wishes with anything that government says is neccessary. The way the world is going at the moment, would you be happy to allow such decision to made without any thought or input from you as a parent? While we are free we have a right to say no to any process or procedure.
so what you're saying is parents should have the right to kill their children?
I havent said that anywhere in my post and that is a very flippant, simplistic way to respond. I think that people should be free to do their own research and make informed decisions for themselves. If less people are choosing to vaccinate, to me that is a sign that trust in the process is failing. Big pharma are now in the news regularly having done some new insidious deed that negatively impacts health of people, animals and/or the planet, yet we are expected to explicitly trust that vaccines are safe and untampered with. Im not arguing that vaccination is bad - it is a process we use in aquaculture to protect fish stocks effectively - however i also see in these cases that suppliers want commission and will say anything to get a sale. Even in fish, if the vaccine fails and the fish get sick, there is little fall back on the company. This is same in people vaccination. Im happy to have a conversation about this but please dont twist my words.
Its simple. Get rid of the profit motive get rid of the problems.
"I think that people should be free to do their own research and make informed decisions for themselves"
What about the christian parents who watch their children die because they think doctors are evil?
As i said above, the problem is that people do not trust doctors or pharma anymore. I dont blame these christians that you are referring to ( and to be fair i dont think using christians is a good example - there are many different religious beliefs that restrict medical procedures or intervention). Absolutely getting rid of the profit side would be a good start, but in my opinion doctors and pharmacutical companies need to work really hard to repair their damaged reputations. Using neutral scientific researchers, rather than paid for would maybe give people more confidence. Aside from vaccines, a focus on other areas of health would bolster natural immunity. Healthy people are at a lower risk of getting sick in the first place - better, nutritious food; lower stress; eliminate chemicals in the sky/water/environment. Vaccination is one tool in the toolbox, but we rely on them nowadays to stop us getting sick because everything else around is so bad for us.
" but we rely on them nowadays to stop us getting sick because everything else around is so bad for us."
remember smallpox
Yes, and i acknowledged this earlier when i said that initially vaccines were made to do good. But now the smallpox example is used to push every other damn chemical that government or pharma want us to pump into our kids. Have you read anything about the chickenpox vaccine? This one is given to children to prevent a relatively mild infection, but can cause outbreaks of the more severe adult form in immunocompromised people due to the active pathogen in the vaccine. Is this an acceptable risk? I agree that there are certain pathogens that should be protexted against, but jagging your kid with every vaccine going just because the herd mentality says you should is actually less responsible. Btw dont know if youve seen some articles circulating today but bayer vaccines have been found with hiv virus in them - big pharma cannot be trusted!
"but jagging your kid with every vaccine going just because the herd mentality says you should is actually less responsible."
oh yeah sorry I do hope they get smallpox
"but can cause outbreaks of the more severe adult form in immunocompromised people due to the active pathogen in the vaccine" #1 herd immunity, thats the type of person who doesn't get it. #2 the majority of the time it is completely dead or disabled.
"This one is given to children to prevent a relatively mild infection"
you mean one that can kill?
here you might want to watch this lmao
Well done dude, you have shown that you are very good at pulling a single line from a whole comment to try to prove an argument. Im trying to have a reasonable conversation with you and you are throwing hyperbolic one liners back, so i am bowing out. You and some of the other commenters on here should be aware that you will never win people over by calling people stupid or insinuating the fact. Im not watching your video - i understand vaccination, vaccines and immunity thanks - dont need two magicians to go over it.
I think that's the crux of the problem. Because on the one hand we're pro-freedom, right? But on the other hand, vaccination is a social responsibility. It's much like smoking, in the sense that you may tout your freedom to smoke, but your behavior will cause passive smokers to get sick.
You might be right, however where do you stop removing peoples freedom for the pursuit of social responsibility? You could say that anything we do as free humans could have an impact on the rest of society but do we take those freedoms away? For example, similar to your smoking one, people drink alcohol. Is it socially responsible to drink to excess causing trouble for other people, putting pressure on police and hospital resources? No, but we wouldnt take away that freedom. My concern is that in the course of protecting social responsibility the state is able to dictate every last thing in peoples lives for better or for worse. And we will only realise what freedom we had once the last bit of it is taken away. I do believe that vaccines are generally good, but they are made by insidious companies who sell for their own gains, recommended by doctors who gain a commission and there is no effort to give honest pro and con advice to people. To me the process of advising to vaccinate people is failing because they treat the average person like an idiot - just do it because i say its best for you. Just my thoughts though :)
Well we do, as in 'driving while intoxicated'.
But yeah I get your point, it's a tough balance to strike: freedom vs responsibility to others. I think with good education, people will naturally do what's socially responsible, so as a society we ought to put education first.