Vaccines and Compelled Altruism

17,109 Views | 173 Replies | Last: 4 yr ago by ramblin_ag02
chimpanzee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AstroAg17 said:

I don't know that I buy into the whole social contract thing, but it seems relevant here. There are many instances where our society has said that simply by living in America, you have volunteered for some action, whether that's taxes or the draft or jury duty. It seems to me that these requirements violate individual autonomy, with the draft being the worst offender.

So what's the difference? If society can compel an individual to die for an idea he may not want to die for, why can't they compel him to produce mumps antibodies? One seems like a greater breach.

A tenant of the social contract is that if you don't like it you can leave. So why can't we say, "if you don't want to get vaccinated don't live here" if we already make that type of demand?

People conflate liberty with personal sovereignty all the time. There are always tradeoffs. If I can't earn a buck without the IRS at the door or take air without getting a vaccine, it's really not that different.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/03/anti-vax-parents-sue-to-keep-unvaccinated-kids-in-school-during-outbreak/

Quote:

As New York's Rockland County grapples with a large and lengthy outbreak of measles, a group of anti-vaccine parents sued officials for temporarily barring their unvaccinated children from schooland the county is not having it.

Just when you think things can't get any more idiotic. These parents are suing to put their kids in harm's way
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
wbt5845
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Here here
Phat32
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The hysteria on both sides for this is counterproductive.

We asked questions of our doctors when the vaccine regimen was proposed for our first kid. That caused us to refrain from vaccines that were frankly very unnecessary. We gave the essential ones.

In general, vaccines are awesome. They completely eliminate very harmful diseases. However, it is not great to mandate a regimen for kids that does not represent the actual threat. We had a big problem with some of the ingredients and the actual threat to the kid from the pathogen being prevented. The statistics are hard to consistently evaluate because of misinformation from pro/anti vaxxers.

But this battle over mindlessly doing 0% of vaccines or 100% of them is silly. People should work with their doctors to come up with the best scenario for their kid based on the risks.

Name calling someone who honestly believes they're working to help their children is very counterproductive to the overall conversation.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
What ingredients did you have a big problem with?
Post removed:
by user
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

But this battle over mindlessly doing 0% of vaccines or 100% of them is silly. People should work with their doctors to come up with the best scenario for their kid based on the risks.

Name calling someone who honestly believes they're working to help their children is very counterproductive to the overall conversation.
One of the weaknesses of our society is the thought that there must be at least 2 equally valid viewpoints regarding any particular issue. I blame our 2 party political system, and our prosecutor/defense style judicial system. Each system sets up an ideological dichotomy and tries to get people to choose their "side", whether it's voters or a jury.

Life doesn't always work that way. There is no possibility of reasoned and respectful disagreement in all cases. Sometimes there is only one reasoned viewpoint. Just look at the flat earther thread. When persuasion and evidence fails, the only appropriate responses to such impassioned ignorance are pity or mockery. I feel no obligation whatsoever to respect the honest but incredibly mistaken belief of such people, nor do I feel the need to engage them in a "constructive dialogue" with the goal of some mutually acceptable "compromise". I'd feel the same way about a group of people who argued in favor of global nuclear devastation. I'd sleep easy taking a firm stance against that as well.

The vaccine argument is the same way. There is only one reasoned viewpoint. Every generally recommended vaccine effectively prevents a disease that could otherwise kill or maim. There is an almost 0 risk of serious side effects from the vaccines. Everyone who gets vaccinated not only protects themselves, they also protect everyone who can't get the vaccine and the 5% of people for whom the vaccine is not effective. Getting vaccinated is beneficial to yourself and beneficial to others. Not getting vaccinated is harmful to yourself and harmful to others. There is no chance of mutually acceptable middle ground here. There are no legitimate anti-vaxxer arguments. Just because a group of irrational people are more scared of the prevention than the disease doesn't lend any credibility to their irrational fear.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Phat32
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Aluminum.

So if I told you there was a vaccine you had to take tomorrow, and here are the conditions:

- you will never encounter this pathogen due to your environment and behavior
- if you did encounter it, it is likely a minor inconvenience
- the vaccine ingredients have proven to cause massive side effects and are very troublesome

You think that because it's labeled a vaccine, you must take it immediately?

We drive cars every day. Under the same logic, anyone who misses a scheduled maintenance for any reason or maintains their own car is an absolute monster.

Vaccines are not all bad by any means. One of man's greatest achievements. But man is not infallible. Saying there are 0% risk of side effects from vaccines is incredibly ignorant.
wbt5845
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
yukmonkey said:

Aluminum.

So if I told you there was a vaccine you had to take tomorrow, and here are the conditions:

- you will never encounter this pathogen due to your environment and behavior
- if you did encounter it, it is likely a minor inconvenience
- the vaccine ingredients have proven to cause massive side effects and are very troublesome

You think that because it's labeled a vaccine, you must take it immediately?

Yes.

Because you can't say you'll "never encounter this pathogen". The more people don't vaccinate, the more likely you'll encounter it.

And it may be a minor inconvenience or it may kill you.

And an abundance of tests and trials have shown there are no "massive" side effects.

Anyone who does not follow the prescribed vaccination schedule is an idiot at best, a child abuser at worst.
Post removed:
by user
Repeat the Line
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Phat32
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ramblin ag stated above there were 0 percent chance of side effects, so take that up with him. Everything else was a hypothetical to provoke conversation.

Anyone who possibly asks questions about the prescribed vaccine schedule is an idiot or a child abuser. Got it.

Should we just wrap the thread then or would you PhD's like to continue with hyperbole/*****ing?
Post removed:
by user
Phat32
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ramblin_ag02 said:

Quote:

There is an almost 0 risk of serious side effects from the vaccines. Everyone who gets vaccinated not only protects themselves, they also protect everyone who can't get the vaccine and the 5% of people for whom the vaccine is not effective. Getting vaccinated is beneficial to yourself and beneficial to others. Not getting vaccinated is harmful to yourself and harmful to others. There are no legitimate anti-vaxxer arguments. Just because a group of irrational people are more scared of the prevention than the disease doesn't lend any credibility to their irrational fear.

Here you go. Why even have the thread if there is not room for discussion? Just delete it.
Post removed:
by user
Phat32
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I believe I said serious side effects. Pain from injection is a side effect, but not a serious one. Same with a low grade fever of less than 24 hours duration or redness and swelling at the injection site. The rate of serious reaction is about one in a million for most vaccines, or 0.00001% of cases. Thats pretty close to 0
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://www.npr.org/2019/11/18/780576486/samoa-closes-schools-and-mandates-vaccinations-amid-deadly-measles-epidemic

Anyone else following the Samoa measles crisis? Vaccination rates in the 60% range. Over 700 cases with 15 dead so far and it looks like just the beginning. Maybe this will be enough evidence to get people off the anti-vax doom train
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Texaggie7nine
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anti-vaxers are the type of people that kept Kevin "What your doctors don't want you to know" Trudeau in business.
7nine
craigernaught
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
No amount of evidence will convince anti-vaxxers.

A huge outbreak that threatened them might, but one on the other side of the world will not, sadly.
MidTnAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AstroAg17 said:

How do y'all feel about mandatory vaccination? Should we compel people to save lives even if they incorrectly believe they're being harmed?

Texas is one of the worst states as far as vaccination is concerned, but I think the argument for personal choice is pretty strong. Still, we make loons take their kids to the doctor even if they believe doctors are evil. What's the difference between the two situations?
Manditory vaccination are not only about saving that particular person's life and / or prevent their severe suffering, they are also to save other people's lives and their suffering.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Samoa up to 1800 infected and now 22 dead. Vaccinations are now mandatory and spreading anti-vax misinformation is now a criminal offense.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-50506743

Democratic Republic of Congo has over 200,000 cases and over 5,000 dead in 2019.

It's all fun and good to peddle conspiracy theories like a flat Earth until people start dying. Now neither Samoa nor Congo has a ton of anti-vaxxers, those are just remote and underdeveloped places. But we know for sure the Samoan outbreak was brought there from New Zealand, and their outbreak was due to anti-vaxxers


No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Thats actually Samoa. And I'm on the fence. I'm a big proponent of free speech, but in this case misinformation is directly leading to suffering and death. It's nearly the same as the classic "yelling fire in a crowded theater" exception
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I have only so much consideration for sincerity when willful ignorance is involved and people's lives are at stake.

Going back to the prior metaphor, I'm imagining someone seeing smoke from a vape and thinking it's from a fire. They're wrong for thinking it and wrong for yelling fire without properly investigating and verifying.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://www.npr.org/2019/12/02/784179707/samoan-government-to-close-its-offices-amid-measles-crisis-that-has-left-53-dead

3728 infected and 53 dead so far in Samoa. Government completely shut down so that every available person can help with the crisis.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-50682881

Not theoretical anymore. One person arrested for spreading antivax messages in Samoa. Cases confirmed where children have died from measles and parents say they avoided vaccinating those children due to antivax messages
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Texaggie7nine
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Arresting him will probably make people believe the conspiracy more.
7nine
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think there is a big difference in the "need" for vaccines when comparing America vs third world countries. You can't ignore the overall health infrastructure of a region. A little context never hurts.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You mean like the context that the deadly measles epidemic in Samoa was brought there by New Zealand anti-vaxxers that live a short distance away? It's a small world
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm saying when an island 3rd world country has low vaccine rates they are extremely vulnerable, much more so than a country that has the medical technology and hygiene like America does. So to try and draw correlating lines from Samoa to try and fear monger here in the U.S. it leaves out a lot of context.

Prior to the outbreak, Samoa had notoriously low vaccination rates, with data from the WHO and UNICEF estimating that the country's national immunization coverage fell from 74% to 34% between 2017 and 2018.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Not sure where the "fear-mongering" accusation is coming from. Pretty sure I'm just posting articles and having an interesting discussion about the possible limits of free speech.

You're right that Samoa is worse than a typical outbreak. Their death rate is running about 1 in 100. Historically, the death rate from measles is 1:1000, and seems to be a little lower than that in modern countries. The largest outbreak in a developed nation right now is in Ukraine. They had 56,000 cases Jan-Aug with 18 fatalities, so more like 1 in 3000 with modern medical care. The articles didn't mention permanent disability, which is also a big concern with measles.

Now I've met plenty of anti-vaxxers that think measles isn't going to come back, isn't that contagious, or isn't that dangerous. They are wrong on all accounts. If pointing that out makes me a "fear-monger" then I guess I have to own that title
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/12/samoa-ends-measles-state-emergency-infection-rate-slows-191229021559134.html

Samoa hits 95% vaccination after coordinated cross country effort and looks like their epidemic is over. 81 dead so far, and hopefully that's all. Somewhat maddening when the solution is the same as it was decades ago.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.