AmIsraelHai
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 5, 2019
- Messages
- 1,224
- Reaction score
- 76
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
On the other hand, science shows why there is concern.
Why was the vaccine for Lyme disease discontinued?
On the other hand, science shows why there is concern.
Right. Scientific process. That describes anti-vaccers.
no vaccine is 100% effective. some people who get vaccinated can still get sick.
that's why anti-vaxers are so dangerous, because they lower the herd immunity for those who have been vaccinated, but may still be susceptible to diseases.
While it is true that pro-vaxxers come down hard on the anti-vaxxers, it's precisely because the anti-vaxxers completely ignore scientific method when they come up with their B.S. And when folks like Dr. Tenpenny spout their nonsense, they not only make a profit off of pseudoscience, but they endanger people's lives while doing so. So I think it is completely understandable.
Remember, the flu vaccine you take today isn't the same as the one you took in the Army. While it might affect you just as bad, it also might not affect you at all.
its called group think and it's the most dangerous force in human history
Then you understand getting a flu shot doesn't eliminate one's chances of getting the flu, but it does reduce it, depending on how well they guessed which strains will be making the rounds in a given year. Personally $25 for a shot that won't hurt me and will decrease the risk of contracting the flu is a bargain.
Nope.
The stupid put countless others at risk. This Dr knows it.
Just make it mandatory and bring charges against those who refuse. No exceptions except for a valid medical reason. Luckily the anti-vax reaction seems to be yielding a significant amount of legislation and private policy changes precisely along these lines. Roll up those sleeves!
How very totalitarian of you.
I felt like your comment was a good jumping off point for what I wanted to say. Every time an outbreak of a vaccine-preventable disease happens, anti-vaxxers cry out "but some of the infected people were vaccinated! So see, vaccines don't work that well after all!" (Not claiming you were saying this) But what they are missing are the rates of infection. Most people are vaccinated, and vaccines are usually effective somewhere above 95% of the time. So sure, you do have a small number of vaccinated people that end up infected. But compare infection rates in the following example:
Say 10,000 people visited Disneyland during the measles exposure period. The percentage of unvaccinated people in California is about 2%, so we can assume about 200 people there were unvaccinated. So say 10 people wind up with measles; 5 were vaccinated and 5 weren't. Someone might look at this and think "hey, it's the same number on both sides. WTF vaccines?!" But when you look at infection rates, you can 5/200 or a 0.025% infection rate for unvaccinated people who were at the park during that period, and 5/9,800 or 0.00051% of vaccinated people there who got sick. That's a magnitude difference of 50. 50!!!
A fun fact about measles is that without heard immunity, the infection rate is 90%. It's one of the most contagious diseases there is. As heard immunity breaks down due to lack of vaccination, the rate of measles will grow exponentially. Which sucks pretty badly for those of us being responsible and getting our shots.
Aside from his absurdity about CPS, I have no issue what so ever with the Doc's stance regarding his practice
I haven't heard of any cases where vaccinated healthy ( non compromised immune systems ) caught the measles .
So far in 2015
Measles: Causes and Risk Factors
From what I've heard, it is possible for someone who was vaccinated for a disease to still get it, however it is obviously much less likely. As far as I know measles is not the kind that a booster is needed for like tetanus, but I could be wrong.
What are the reasons why vaccination has not eradicated cholera?
How do the dynamics of infectious disease transmission explain why vaccines are not available for all infections and are not universally successful when they are available?
How can a person refusing to get vaccinated put people who are vaccinated at risk? Doesn't the vaccine protect the people who are vaccinated? So wouldn't that mean only the people not vaccinated would be at risk?
Not an absolutist = totalitarian. You won't be hearing the "Ja vole" from me any time soon. If I roll up my sleeve it will be because I say so, not because some politician needs to make points on his next election. I sorta hope your view comes to pass - it'll make a helluva lawsuit and I could get a few sheckels out of the deal.
no vaccine is 100% effective. some people who get vaccinated can still get sick.
that's why anti-vaxers are so dangerous, because they lower the herd immunity for those who have been vaccinated, but may still be susceptible to diseases.