Slashdot Mirror


In Australia, Immunize Or Lose Benefits

An anonymous reader writes with news of a plan from the Australian government to cut down on the number of kids who aren't vaccinated. The new scheme will deny family tax benefits to parents whose children don't pass immunization checks. Quoting: "The FTB supplement, worth $726 per child each year, will now only be paid once a child is fully immunized at these checks. Families are already required to have their child fully immunized to receive Child Care Benefit and the Child Care Rebate. Children will also be required for the first time to be vaccinated against meningococcal C, pneumococcal and chicken pox. Children will also be immunized against measles, mumps and rubella earlier, at 18 months instead of the current four years of age."

6 of 680 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Hurray! by nosfucious · · Score: 5, Informative

    Like the right of my child to be school/raised an as risk free environment as possible? Your kid doesn't get to go to my kids school unless you prove he/she is safe. I will do likewise and will provide certificates of immunization, will you match that?

    Nos, you have the right to have your kid immunized, your choice. You DON'T get the privileges and benefits that are bestowed on others that have fulfilled their social obligations.

    Additionally, in Australia, one contributes to publicly available health care via a taxation levy. Those on benefits get virtually free health care. Immunization is a way to ensure that the taxpayer isn't forking out extra to treat a kid for some preventable disease. Which means more money for things such as schools, roads, etc.

    --
    Q:I was listening to a CD in Grip and it sounded horrible! What's up? A:Perhaps you are listening to country music
  2. Re:Seems fair... by mhotchin · · Score: 5, Informative

    Some people (immune compromized) *can't* get vaccinated, so rely on the 'herd immunity'. Infants 'not yet vaccinated' rely on herd immunity. Also some people who do get immunized simply don't 'take', and thus are unknowingly still at risk.

    The higher the number of non-immunized people, the higher the risk of collateral damage.

  3. Re:So by AF_Cheddar_Head · · Score: 5, Informative

    No such thing as vaccine resistant. The vaccine actually attacks the body stimulating it to produce anti-bodies, you might argue that this produces anti-body resistant bacteria but that has always been the case, if a bacteria could attack faster than the body reacted it survived, also if the body could not produce effective anti-bodies the bacteria lived. This has been going on since bacteria attacked other living things, not just since humans were around. If the anti-body to bacteria battle could produce a super-germ we would have seen one by now.

  4. Re:So by Local+ID10T · · Score: 5, Informative

    What happens here is antiviral, antibiotic, or vaccination doesn't kill off 100% of the virus. Some cells tend to survive. If some of the cells are resistant to the 'cure', then the survivors tend to be those particular cells that live to continue manufacturing virions that are less susceptible to the vaccine.

    You may not have a vaccine-resistant virus today, but vaccination creates selective pressures that tend to make ones that are vaccine-resistant survive and reproduce more.... resulting that in the future newer viruses that occur are more likely to resemble the more vaccine-resistant ones, and eventually, as the trend repeats with enough iterations, the resistance becomes stronger and stronger......

    That is not how vaccines work. Vaccines don't kill anything. They train your body to recognize and respond effectively to the infection.

    Some very basic info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine

    --
    "You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin
  5. Re:Yep, go on welfare, lose your rights by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 5, Informative

    The rich will immunize because its a smart move. The poor will immunize because its a smart move.

    Interestingly, here in Canada, the 'poor' actually have a higher immunization rate for their children than the rich, because the poor trust their doctors and don't have the time/energy/wherewithall to spend their time with 'herbalists' and other rubbish. A note comes from school saying 'we're immunizing against rubella tomorrow' and the poor sign the permission slip because to them it sounds like a good idea. And they're right.

  6. Re:Seems fair... by J.+J.+Ramsey · · Score: 5, Informative

    Oh, sure, because Mercola is such a reliable source. Oh wait ...