Herd immunity

[jovian]

Herd immunity as a result of vaccination get much focus in media these days. Almost every day I find various media-articles posted on Facebook about this, and especially the dangers of not using vaccines. The rethoric is very often "Those anti-vaccines-people, they should be forced to take these vaccines as it put all of us in danger.."

 

I clearly see the importance of vaccines, and there are clear risks/dangers in not being vaccinated. Still,today there is also a "danger" in being named "anti-vaccine-idiot", conspiracy-theorist

 

In my mind it is absolutely horrible to force people to get vaccinated. Though, I'm having trouble discussing this with people.

Thoughts about this?  

 

I think Stefan should do a show about this. Call-in show, maybe ask to get some doctors online. This is a very hot topic right now, if i understand media correct.

[dazed and confused]

http://www.fhfn.org/vaccines-exposed-herd-immunity-is-just-another-word-for-cash-cow/

[hannahbanana]

 

 

I clearly see the importance of vaccines, and there are clear risks/dangers in not being vaccinated. Still,today there is also a "danger" in being named "anti-vaccine-idiot", conspiracy-theorist

 

In my mind it is absolutely horrible to force people to get vaccinated. Though, I'm having trouble discussing this with people.

Thoughts about this?  

 

 

 

Although I wouldn't say that you should FORCE someone to get vaccinated (not to mention the fact that some people can't take the vaccinations due to allergies), that's not really the main issue, I think. It's more about people disseminating false information, using scare tactics, and making false and uneducated conclusions about vaccination data. To me, it seems obvious that forcing people to be vaccinated wouldn't really be solving the problem, since people would still be believing false information about vaccination. But unfortunately that's how a lot of issues are handled these days. 

[Wuzzums]

I have nothing against forcing the only person non-imunized against smallpox to get vaccinated. They're literally threatening the lives of everyone around them. If they do choose however not to get vaccinated (for any disease) then they should tell every person they come in contact with about it. Any less and it's criminal neglect, like having sex without telling your partner(s) that you're HIV+.

[Wesley]

I have nothing against forcing the only person non-imunized against smallpox to get vaccinated. They're literally threatening the lives of everyone around them. If they do choose however not to get vaccinated (for any disease) then they should tell every person they come in contact with about it. Any less and it's criminal neglect, like having sex without telling your partner(s) that you're HIV+.

I am pretty sure that smallpox has been eradicated, so an individual not being vaccinated might be the norm for the future.

[Brentb]

You don't need to force anything. If a vaccine truly will make people healthier or less likely to get sick, then health insurance companies will charge lower premiums for those who get that vaccine, and higher premiums for those that refuse. 

[Wuzzums]

I am pretty sure that smallpox has been eradicated, so an individual not being vaccinated might be the norm for the future.

I know. Argument I was trying to make was that smallpox could still exist if some guy decided to exert his right to choose and we just all went along with it.

[square4]

Forcibly injecting people with vaccines against their will is a violation of their rights. We have the right that our body is not invaded.

 

There is indeed a legitimate concerns about the safety (or danger) of vaccines. If people call you a conspiracy-theorist or an idiot, that's ridicule, not an argument. We should not force someone to take the risk of vaccination. Probably less known, but there are also legitimate concerns about the origin of vaccines. A large percentage of vaccines are based on abortion, in the sense that tissue was taken from an aborted child, for example from the lungs or from an eye, and based on this, a cell culture was created, which was used during the creation of the vaccine. This is a reason to oppose this type of practice, in the same way that we would oppose stolen organs.

 

If these arguments are not convincing, I hope at least that that we, who do not forcibly inoculate each other, could then have a separate society in anarchy where we are left alone.

[st434u]

First off I would like to point out that in many if not all cases, the labs who manufacture the vaccines are in bed with the State (or some State at least). The labs develop a vaccine, then the State buys a ton of them and gives them out for free or subsidizes them. In many cases actually forcibly injecting people who don't want it. This should give us pause.

 

In any case, I have the following questions:

 

-Where is the evidence that vaccines are effective at preventing disease? Why is it that proper, independent, long-term double-blind studies are not conducted on this matter? Why is it that populations that shun the use of vaccines, such as the amish, don't seem to experience more cases of the diseases the vaccines supposedly prevent, but often exhibit less?

 

-Where is the evidence that disease can spread and only spread from someone who is not immune to someone else who is also not immune? In other words, where is the evidence that supports the idea of "herd immunity" carrying any merit?

 

-Why is it that vaccines in the past supposedly worked with only one dosage, and now they require frequent boosters?

 

-Even if vaccines do work exactly like the labs say they do, where are the studies done to compare pros and cons? Can vaccines overwhelm the immune system, and could it be that being "immunized" against one disease makes you more likely to get other diseases? Why is it that nobody talks about how it has been shown time and again that vaccines can create all sorts of negative reactions including paralysis and death, and that these effects are under-reported, under-diagnosed and minimized?

 

-Even if you agree with everything the labs say about the vaccines they manufactured, how could it ever be justified to force people to take them? Or "force them to tell to anyone they come in contact with", like Wuzzum said. Shouldn't it be up to each individual to scan or question the others they come in contact with for potential dangers? And if there was a way to scan and figure out who the people are who the vaccine doesn't work on (they don't get immunization from the vaccine), shouldn't it be justified to apply all the same requirements and restrictions to them, as to those who didn't take the vaccine?

[WizWom]

The prevalence of every disease being vaccinated against was on a downward trend LONG before the vaccines were created and vaccination was started.The reduction of disease is because of germ awareness and public sanitation. This includes Polio and Smallpox, the two big poster children for vaccination.For the less dangerous diseases, like mumps, the deaths from vaccine side effects are MANY, MANY more than the possible deaths from the disease. Similarly for the flu shots touted every fall.

[Ahren]

It is a bit obvious to state that people should not be forced to be vaccinated. But for people that are not experts in the field to come out and tell others to not get something that could prevent a serious illness in child is highly ignorant and reckless.

 

Anti-vaxers are basically just anti-science. They do not have the capacity to discern the mounds of evidence that has settled this issue long, long ago.

 

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/vaccines-work-period/

 

http://www.immunizationinfo.org/parents/why-immunize

[ribuck]

Obviously we shouldn't force people to be vaccinated. In cases where the benefit is not necessarily to the individual, but to everyone else ("the herd"), then everyone else can offer to pay the holdouts for the benefit that would arise from their vaccination.

 

But if the holdouts still don't want to get vaccinated, that's absolutely fine. The herd can find other ways to protect themselves from transmission of the disease.

[Sal9000]

-Where is the evidence that vaccines are effective at preventing disease? Why is it that proper, independent, long-term double-blind studies are not conducted on this matter?

 

 

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=double+blind+tests+vaccines 

Why is it that populations that shun the use of vaccines, such as the amish, don't seem to experience more cases of the diseases the vaccines supposedly prevent, but often exhibit less?

 

 

Because the Amish do get vaccinated. http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2013/08/10/the-amish-may-not-be-a-great-population-for-a-vaccinatedunvaccinated-study/ There are many more links that point out that Amish are undervaccinated.  

-Where is the evidence that disease can spread and only spread from someone who is not immune to someone else who is also not immune? In other words, where is the evidence that supports the idea of "herd immunity" carrying any merit?

 

Here is an article dedicated to the subject http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity 

-Why is it that vaccines in the past supposedly worked with only one dosage, and now they require frequent boosters?

 

 

Science has come a long way, especially our understanding of the immune system. 

-Even if vaccines do work exactly like the labs say they do, where are the studies done to compare pros and cons? Can vaccines overwhelm the immune system, and could it be that being "immunized" against one disease makes you more likely to get other diseases? Why is it that nobody talks about how it has been shown time and again that vaccines can create all sorts of negative reactions including paralysis and death, and that these effects are under-reported, under-diagnosed and minimized?

 

Vaccines work because they activate antibodies, T-cells and Memory cells specific against the disease. There are damages when you get vaccinated and you have a weak immune system already.I have yet to meet an anti-vaxer who can explain how smallpox had been eradicated. Until then I dismiss their arguments as quack. 

[ribuck]

Thank you for saying what needs to be said, Sal9000.

 

... how smallpox had been eradicated ...

 

Smallpox has only been eradicated in the wild. It is still deliberately cultivated in the US and Russia. This is supposedly in case it is needed for vaccine research, but many think it's being retained for military purposes.