I'm not one of those "OMG, vaccines give muh children autism" types, but I have noticed that the pro-vaxxers have become somewhat of a cult lately. You can't question any vaccine without having holy hell fury unleashed on you. You can't question dosage, application, or the overall necessity at all. And, in my experience, it's usually when we forgo the scientific process of questioning things that everything goes horribly wrong.
Fair point. And I agree there should be adult discussion, not ranting or attempts to silence the other side. I am also cautious in the sense that just because something has generally worked out in the past doesn't mean that every new one that comes out will be equally as effective and/or safe.
Having said that, I have little patience for most of the anti-vaxxer crowd. IMO, it's selfish, ignorant, and dangerous to not vaccinate for at least the proven and common stuff. You're not only putting your own kids at risk, you're putting other people at risk.
"I have never known anybody with whooping cough in my life. It's just not a concern anymore." I have heard this type of statement many times and this attitude pisses me off. Think about it. Whooping cough <and other illnesses> used to be common, and are now almost non-existent, and became almost non-existent BECAUSE people got vaccinated. Whooping cough didn't go away, just less people now get it. The person who makes a statement like that is only looking at the result, not the *how* it came to be. Connect the dots.
I keep thinking thinking about this...
From the originally linked article:
It means that all of the risks of vaccination are carried by the people who are participating. In the end, the perception for people who are forgoing vaccination is that they’re having the best of both worlds. The child is protected [because it’s surrounded by immunized children], but the child does not have to be exposed to any of the risks of vaccination. The problem with that thinking is that it’s only true as long as [community-wide] immunity holds. In some areas immunity has been eroded so much that the child who’s not vaccinated is now actually more vulnerable to the complications of infectious diseases.
If that is true, and that is how people who don't vaccinate their kids think, then IMO they are criminally negligent by putting other people at risk unnecessarily.
I am torn by this situation. My 2 children are in their 30's, and both were completely vaccinated. There were no perceived reactions to the vaccine.
That said, for certain individuals there must be a reaction to the vaccine.
As the world becomes more populated, epidemics of one sort or the other seem likely. Do public health concerns override individual choice? I don't know.
I do not take the flu vaccine. Only took it once in my life, in the Army, and never again because it made me so sick.
Some people do have adverse reaction to vaccine, yes. It's unfortunate, but it is. It's a fool's errand, though, to think anything can be absolutely perfect. I think it's a testament to how good (soft?) we have it in today's world that some think 'perfect' is even possible. There is a very small chance percentage-wise that someone will have an adverse reaction, BUT if they don't vaccinate the chances of getting whooping cough or measles or mumps or whatever is many times higher. It's a gamble, yes, and with no crystal to help make a decision, but the odds are greatly in favor of getting the vaccine. It should be noted also that, for at least the older vaccines, science has been pretty much proven regarding the safety and benefit.
As far as world population and potential for epidemics, does individual choice have the right to endanger others?
I was fully vaccinated as a kid, per the requirements at the time. My kids were fully vaccinated, per the requirements of the era of their childhood. No adverse effects. I have never received a flu shot (that I recall).