Slashdot Mirror


Time To Remove 'Philosophical' Exemption From Vaccine Requirements?

An anonymous reader writes: Michigan has a problem. Over the past decade, the number of unvaccinated kindergartners has spiked. "Nearly half of the state's population lives in counties with kindergarten vaccination rates below the level needed for "herd immunity," the public health concept that when at least 93 percent of people are vaccinated, their immunity protects the vulnerable and prevents the most contagious diseases from spreading." Surprise, surprise, the state is now in the midst of a whooping cough outbreak. How do these kids get into public schools without being vaccinated? Well, Michigan is among the 19 U.S. states that allow "philosophical" objections to the vaccine requirements for schoolchildren. (And one of the 46 states allowing religious exemption.) A new editorial is now calling for an end to the "philosophical" exemption.

The article says, "Those who choose not to be vaccinated and who choose not to vaccinate their children allow a breeding ground for diseases to grow and spread to others. They put healthy, vaccinated adults at risk because no vaccine is 100 percent effective. They especially put the most vulnerable at risk — infants too young to be vaccinated, the elderly, people with medical conditions that prevent vaccination, and those undergoing cancer treatments or whose immune systems have been weakened." They also encourage tightening the restrictions on religious and medical waivers so that people don't just check a different box on the exemption form to get the same result. "They are free to continue believing vaccines are harmful, even as the entire medical and scientific communities try in vain to tell them otherwise. But they should not be free to endanger the lives of everyone else with their views."

78 of 1,051 comments (clear)

  1. There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by stevez67 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Stupidity and fear.

    1. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Stupidity and fear.

      Education and being skeptical.

      But unfortunately, humans evolved to jump to conclusions and see connections when there isn't any: gee my son was vaccinated and he is autistic - vaccinations cause autism! Or the homeopathy people: I took this remedy and my cold went away in 5 days! It works! They never consider that their cold would have went away in 5 days anyway.

    2. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by ArcadeMan · · Score: 5, Funny

      My cold would have went away in 5 days but I'd still have that twenty in my wallet. So clearly the homeopathic treatment did something!

    3. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by Bazman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Anyone who has bad reactions to vaccines should be *promoting* the use of vaccines (alongside research into how to predict/prevent bad reactions). Then if you can't be vaccinated because of bad reactions, you benefit from herd immunity and the decreased amount of disease floating around that might kill you because you can't be vaccinated.

    4. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by houstonbofh · · Score: 4, Informative

      The pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine nearly killed me when I was a child.

      So you should want everyone else to get it. While hypersensitivity to a vaccine is rare, it does happen and is a valid reason to get get vaccines. But if everyone else does, you are still protected. (Herd immunity) Or, keep your tinfoil hat on and continue denigrating people who have 12 years more training than you do in exactly this. Darwin works, and you will solve yourself soon enough.

    5. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Stupidity and fear.

      As aptly demonstrated around this top thread. People who actually have had severe reactions to vaccines are being modded down, even when their fear is fact-backed and entirely rational. Sure, damage has been done by the media, but people are still trying to do what's right. But they have concerns, and feel those concerns aren't being addressed by those administering the vaccines.

      Vaccines work, that's a fact. A low percentage of people have adverse reactions to them - that's also a fact. That is, there is a risk. The risk is perceived as far higher than it really is, but that's human nature so it will have to be dealt with in a human manner. If you want higher vaccination rates, the risk factor shouldn't be swept under the carpet, but addressed:

      - by educating people about how big the risks really are;
      - by informing them about those risks, BEFORE their jab, rather than merely by handing out a flyer afterwards;
      - by doing whatever necessary to ensure jabs aren't administered to people who might have an adverse reaction - don't just shoot up people, but have the necessary bloodwork done in advance;
      - by making vaccines ever safer - this is already being done (mercury has been eliminated as preservant, for example) and needs to continue;
      - by providing an alternative vaccination schedule for those who worry about the regular one, e.g. by permitting individual M,M,R vaccinations as opposed to one big cocktail (right now people can't, even if they're willing to foot the bill for it).

      (Posting as AC because I'm too lazy to log in after writing up this post)

    6. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I could be wrong, but I believe that if you're taught things which are totally wrong and contrary to what actual learned people teach, that doesn't count as "education".

    7. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by Shortguy881 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fact Check: Are you a chemical engineer?

      Those chemicals listed are not pure elements (like aluminum and mercury). They are mercury and aluminum based compounds, designed to be inert but posses specific traits to do things like block binding sites on the viruses and bacteria. Come back when you have a better understanding of chemistry and micro biology.

      --
      Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
    8. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by xaotikdesigns · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I had a bad reaction to X, therefore X is bad for everybody!

      --
      XDInd
    9. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by UnknowingFool · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fact Check: Any medication has side effects. No medication whether it is a vaccine or aspirin works on 100.0% of the population. Vaccines are generally safe for majority of the population. Sorry if you are in the small percentage who has a bad reaction, spreading fear mongering does not help your cause.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    10. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by UnknowingFool · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well by your logic then we should not use aspirin or penicillin because there is a small minority of people who are allergic to them.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    11. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you've ever consumed a single glass of tap water in the US, then you've taken in far more hazardous -- some outright poisonous -- materials, at far greater concentrations, than you will ever be subjected to over a lifetime of proper vaccination. One of my jobs as a teenager was to skim out the rat carcasses from those water towers you see all over the landscape. Live rats aren't a problem, because arsenic is added to the water supply to kill them off. Don't worry, though... any contaminants from their rotting remains is taken care of by all the chlorine they add. And that bottled water you get? It's just repackaged tap water.

      But, yeah, you keep worrying about the microscopic amounts of formaldehyde that can be found in a vaccine you take once every couple of years. That makes perfect sense.

      And yes, I still drink tap water, because if it was really dangerous, everybody would be dead. Protip: same thing goes for vaccines.

    12. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by kwiecmmm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine nearly killed me when I was a child.

      Take a look at vaccine adjuvants. Doctors are not scientists, they are business people, and use a lot of hocus-pocus for financial and other reasons. For a large part doctors and biologists have no clue what they are really doing.

      No holistic/philosopical objections here, just pure science.

      Vaccine adjuvants encourage the immune system to attack the virus cells, thus creating the immunity for the future.

      People saying things like this are the problem. Some people cannot get vaccinations due to their own medical conditions (i.e. allergies to components of the vaccine). If you choose not to give your kid vaccines you are leaving them open to diseases that have been mostly eradicated in the last 50 - 100 years and you are thinning the number of vaccinated people, which makes it easier for people who can't get vaccinated to get the disease. Diseases like polio, measles, and mumps, don't exist in first world countries because of these vaccines. But these diseases do still exists in small sections of the third world, because of religious, transportation and other issues.

      And the longer diseases hang around and infect people the more likely they are going to mutate and could eventually become a problem for the greater population again. If you really think a vaccine is a terrible thing, do everyone a favor, look up the outcomes of the disease itself, before you decide not to give your kid the vaccine. I would hate for my kids to end up with polio or measles, but that is why I vaccinated them.

      I am not even going to get into the "doctors are not scientists" line, because I am sure you are beyond convincing. But every doctor that I have gone to has known what he/she was doing and has helped me with any issues or pointed me toward someone who could help.

    13. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by radio4fan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I never put salt in my food because it contains a dangerously reactive metal and a poisonous gas.

    14. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine nearly killed me when I was a child.

      Take a look at vaccine adjuvants. Doctors are not scientists, they are business people, and use a lot of hocus-pocus for financial and other reasons. For a large part doctors and biologists have no clue what they are really doing.

      No holistic/philosopical objections here, just pure science.

      I'm a pediatrician. Doctors (as a generalization) are as much scientists as "scientists" are. If you ask a businessperson, they will tell you doctors ARE NOT business people. Financial advisors will tell you that MD stands for "money dumb". I vaccinate my own children, so I'm either a heartless, money-grubbing fraud, OR.....I have gone to medical school, have a great grasp on statistics. I understand that if a vaccine causes a non-fatal, temporary hypersensitivity reaction in 1 in 1 million children (probably an overestimate), but prevents an illness that 26 in 100,000 children are getting (California 2014 statistics), that as a policy YOU WOULD HAVE TO BE REALLY STUPID not to recommend the vaccine.

      Vaccines are safer than riding in a car and swimming in a pool. Antibiotics have way more adverse events than vaccines and have not saved as many child lives (look it up). The anti-vaccine parents NEVER object to antibiotics, and often ask for them unnecessarily. Only clean water is considered more important in saving lives than vaccines.

      I understand a little bit of fear about vaccines, but there is absolutely no reason for that fear to be as great as it is. In my opinion (and this is just opinion, I don't have any data to support this) you should be way more concerned about car accidents, drowning, accidental falls, homicide, plane crashes, shark attacks, and unvaccinated children than you are about vaccines

    15. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by xaotikdesigns · · Score: 4, Insightful
      There are still online schools, private schools, and home schooling. The child can still get an education.

      We can try to educate the parent, but many people however, have decided that education just isn't for them. WHether they want to want to just blindly follow celebrity "experts" or are citing religious reasons, they will ignore anything you try to show them in favor of the memes they saw on facebook.

      That being the case, they should not have the right to put others kids at risk. If they want the privilege of public schools, then they need to get vaccinated.

      --
      XDInd
    16. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by uslurper · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Take a look at vaccine adjuvants. Doctors are not scientists, they are business people, and use a lot of hocus-pocus for financial and other reasons."

      Dumbass! If doctors were just business people, they wouldnt care at all about vaccines. They dont get paid didly squat for them. I agree that there are some docutors who are greedy, but that is not the majority of them. Nor are most of them "activists" or "community leaders". Most of them just want to make a living. They will help you with your problems the best they can -if you come to them. "Pushing" vaccenes that you take once or twice in your lifetime is not going to make them rich!

      " For a large part doctors and biologists have no clue what they are really doing."

      Are you really that fucking stupid!? Next time you have a broken leg or appendicitice, who ya gonna call? Ghost busters?

      "No holistic/philosopical objections here, just pure science."

      -Quite obviously you do have objections, and they have nothing to do with science. Few people in developed countries have witnessed things like polio or pertussis. Maybe you think they are folklore like bedbugs (which are real btw).
         

      --
      oldhack: "Security is a waste of money until shit hits the fan. 5 minutes later, it becomes waste of money again. "
    17. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by Immerman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They're not saying you shouldn't be allowed to avoid the vaccine - just that if you *don't* get vaccinated without a valid medical reason you shouldn't be allowed into public schools where you endanger everyone else. If the anti-vaxxers want to put together a charter school for unvaccinated children, go nuts, Darwin should be along shortly.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    18. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by UnknowingFool · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think your "all or nothing" viewpoint is missing the actual point. Parents should have the option to choose not to give their kids aspirin or penicillin if it appears to be destructive to the child. Its not that "nobody should be allowed to use aspirin" as much as it is that each person can choose. Same with vaccines.

      Except your viewpoint ignores the fact that a parent not giving a child penicillin or aspirin only affects that child. Not vaccinating affects everyone that child comes into contact with which by proxy also means the parents. Unless the family wants to withdraw from the entire world, there is not really a "safe" option then is there?

      This is part of the liberal progressive hypocrisy: 1) women should be able to choose to get an abortion because they have the right to control their bodies 2) people should be forced to get a vaccine because they dont have the right to control their bodies

      Again you missed the part where a woman who has an abortion is in the same room with me doesn't affect me does it? Her not getting a vaccine does affect me if we are in the same room.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    19. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by TangoMargarine · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The risk is perceived as far higher than it really is, but that's human nature so it will have to be dealt with in a human manner.

      I don't think humans are wired to intuit high-risk, high-reward probability spaces very well. There's the lottery, and then this vaccination thing, too (ignoring a few pertinent facets of it, obviously).

      Imagine the following game: you roll 2d10 to determine what happens to you. On a roll of...

      2-5) You are instantly murdered.
      6-95) You receive $100 and are free to go.
      96-100) You receive a million bucks and are free to go.

      Do you play the game?

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    20. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by Dragonslicer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ignorant people still have rights over... their children's bodies.

      Not complete control. That's why child abuse is illegal.

    21. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by OzoneLad · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My dad used to say that a treated cold goes away in 7 days, whereas an untreated cold goes away in a week.

    22. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      With political things, yes, that's definitely true. However with scientific things it's not; there's real science (which is falsifiable and evidence-based), and there's bullshit and pseudoscience and religion. Of course, it's possible to BS people with "science" by presenting false evidence, covering up key evidence, etc., but if you teach people the scientific method (instead of teaching them to believe in BS like homeopathy for instance, or in Creationism which isn't science) eventually the truth will come out and people will believe the correct things once the evidence is presented and understood.

    23. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Our reasoning is that the vacine is highly likely to actually cause a case of Chicken Pox, while it does not provide an actual immunity worth the term.

      What? ahref=http://www.cdc.gov/chickenpox/vaccination.htmlrel=url2html-1107http://www.cdc.gov/chickenpox/...> 98% immunity is pretty fucking good. From the same link: "However, the risk of getting shingles from vaccine-strain VZV after chickenpox vaccination is much lower than getting shingles after natural infection with wild-type VZV. " As far as I can tell, you're wrong on pretty much all counts.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    24. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by ceoyoyo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm a scientist who works with physicians. Physicians are not "as much scientists as scientists" are.

      A physician who has taken a particular interest in research at a good school might have a few of years of part time research experience, plus a few courses in basic stats and research methods. In order to become an independent scientist you need to have eight to ten years of pure research training, plus another two (yeah right) to ten years of additional training and experience, again in full time research. It's not the same thing at all. And it shows. Phrases like "I have a great grasp on statistics" give it away. I know I don't have anything close to "a great grasp on statistics."

      I don't feel at all qualified to prescribe drugs, diagnose patients or perform surgery, despite working and studying medical science at a postgraduate level for ten years. Why is it physicians feel they're just as good at science as a scientist?

    25. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by Immerman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No.

      Vaccines boost your resistance against diseases, they do *not* grant immunity. Think of it like letting a military (immune system) train against captured enemy war machines (weakened or deactivated viruses) - it grants a decided advantage in later battles, but there's still no guarantee of victory. And not everybody's military will train as quickly or effectively, nor are they all the same strength to begin with. With a good vaccine most people will be able to fight off a later infection easily enough that might not even realize they were infected, for others it will only give them a fighting chance, which may reduce the amount of permanent damage done if they survive. And for still others it just won't be enough, and will only let them die more slowly.

      And that doesn't even consider the percentage of the population that legitimately can't take the vaccine, most commonly because they are allergic to certain components, or have a weakened immune system that may be overwhelmed even by the vaccine.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    26. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by Chalnoth · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm skeptical that there's actual evidence of severe adverse reactions (aside from the occasional allergic reaction). "I had a vaccine and then this bad thing happened to me," is not an indication that the vaccine caused the bad thing. It might have, but the severe reactions have been so incredibly rare that there's really no evidence of a causal link, as near as I can tell.

      But what you are asking for here is a far, far higher barrier to obtaining a vaccination than is asked for for most any other medical procedure or remedy. The real information is, "This will protect your child, and the population as a whole, from serious diseases. It most likely won't cause any issues. Your child may have minor cold symptoms for a bit, which means the vaccine is working."

      The CDC's page is informative here: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/va...

      Note that under the "severe" reactions is usually the disclaimer that they can't actually be sure this reaction is caused by the vaccine. I'd be willing to bet that disclaimer should really be expanded to encompass every vaccine on the list, aside from the allergic reactions.

    27. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by mattack2 · · Score: 4, Informative

      - by making vaccines ever safer - this is already being done (mercury has been eliminated as preservant, for example) and needs to continue;

      You are spreading falsehoods also. Give evidence where the mercury-containing preservative caused any problems. You're probably going to point to the supposed evidence towards autism. There isn't any such evidence. Just because it has mercury, doesn't mean it is necessarily poisonous.

      Chlorine can be poisonous, but salt (which contains chlorine) is a necessary nutrient for us.

    28. Re:There is no vaccine for the worst diseases by smellsofbikes · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I know people in their thirties who are willing to believe that obama is going to declare martial law. Jumping to wild conclusions has no age restrictions.
      I may be reading you wrong, but one thing I think about every time I hear discussion of vaccination is how I've never met a single person who was 10 or older in 1952, who is even slightly anti-vaccine, because they all remember the terror of the polio epidemics in the early 1950's. They all knew people who died, or people who walked into hospitals and then spent the rest of their lives in iron lungs, and they all remember how the introduction of polio vaccines managed to turn 60K cases/year into ten cases/year in two years. It's people who don't remember a world full of crippled people in wheelchairs who think they can do just fine without vaccines. So in that sense, I think the anti-vax hysteria is almost entirely a stupidity of younger people.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  2. freedom 2 b a moron by airdrummer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    as a parent myself, i am sympathetic to parents' rights, but if someone refuses to vaccinate their children, schools should refuse to allow them in.

    1. Re:freedom 2 b a moron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Often, home schooling is even prohibited.

      Citation needed. You need a competent instructor (usually just high school educated or GED). Otherwise it's legal everywhere in the US.

    2. Re:freedom 2 b a moron by jythie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The part they are not saying, or at least the part the part left off in the 'home schooling is illegal!' crowd skip over is that home schooling still has some educational requirements and standards, which many homeschool proponents are explicitly trying to avoid. For every home school parent simply trying to get their kid out of a bad school, there are probably 20 who want to insure that their children are not accidently exposed to ideas counter to the religious ones they want to instill. I have actually known home school parents who ended up sending their kids back to public school when they discovered that all the resources for such schooling in their region (such as community) were exclusively religious and pretty far off the mainstream.

    3. Re:freedom 2 b a moron by morgauxo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I am a parent and I think that not vaccinating ones kids should be equated with child abuse.

    4. Re:freedom 2 b a moron by Millennium · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't believe it is controversial to consider vaccination 14 shots at 2 years old extreme.

      Why? Excluding religion, there is no reason to believe that vaccines cause any harm: literally every study attempting to find otherwise has either failed or been proven fraudulent.

    5. Re:freedom 2 b a moron by Assmasher · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So, basically, there's very little reason to think that a parent refusing to vaccinate their child would not be able to home school them
      Not much reason to allow unvaccinated (by choice) children into public schools then.

      --
      Loading...
    6. Re:freedom 2 b a moron by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Interesting

      if someone refuses to vaccinate their children, schools should refuse to allow them in.

      Many states do that. California has a "no shots, no school" policy. Kindergarten registration is in March, when parents receive a list of required shots. If the shots aren't documented by the time school starts in late August, the kid is not allowed to attend class.

      I lived in China for several years, and my kids attended public school there. They have an even better system: They provide the shots at the school. A pair of nurses shows up, all the kids line up, and take their turn. It is very efficient, very cost effective, and requires no time or effort by the parents. They also have fewer complications, since the nurses know exactly what they are doing. They go from school to school and do the same vaccine everyday to hundreds or thousands of kids. So they know the dose, the procedure, and are familiar with common side effects.

    7. Re:freedom 2 b a moron by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If a parent doesn't want to get the vaccinations required, then sorry, they get to pay for qualified private education.

      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
    8. Re:freedom 2 b a moron by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      While it is controversial to conclude that the vaccines caused the condition

      It's not controversial....its explicitly FALSE. There is no link or evidence supporting this.

      I don't believe it is controversial to consider vaccination 14 shots at 2 years old extreme.

      You know what isn't controversial? Not allowing 10s of 1000s of innocent children to die from a multitude of diseases that, until quite recently, were no longer a threat to 1st world countries over the objections of people uniformed and spouting FUD.

      We simply didn't have whooping cough or measles or mumps outbreaks for the last multiple decades. Now, after a decade or two of people not vaccinating, they are back.

      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
    9. Re:freedom 2 b a moron by Empiric · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Correction: -Including- religion, there is no reason to believe that vaccines cause any harm.

      Feel free to cite any anti-vaccine scripture. Let me save you some time. It doesn't exist.

      --
      ~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
    10. Re:freedom 2 b a moron by Jason+Levine · · Score: 4, Informative

      My son has Autism/Asperger's as do I. Please stop spreading the "vaccines cause Autism" myth as it has been proven false more times than I care to count. The only study linking them was withdrawn, the author (Wakefield) found to have essentially made the whole thing up to sell his own MMR replacement vaccines, and then the author was stripped of his medical license.

      To quote Penn and Teller, though, even if vaccines did cause Autism - WHICH THEY DON'T - not vaccinating to avoid autism would still be BS. You're possibly condemning kids to contract fatal diseases to avoid a condition that they can live with.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    11. Re:freedom 2 b a moron by MBGMorden · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sorry, but that's part of the compromise.

      I'm very much for personal freedoms. I don't believe much of anything should be required - particularly for medical treatments (that's not to say I'm anti-vaccine - on the contrary I've pretty much all of them and do a yearly flu-shot).

      HOWEVER, part of the social contract is that if you want to participate in the group's collaborate efforts, then you have to abide by some rules. Ergo, if you don't want to vaccinate your child you're free to do that, but be prepared to pay for private education. You can't have the best of both worlds - taking advantage of the publicly funded education system whilst endangering the health of the other participants.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    12. Re:freedom 2 b a moron by CauseBy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "home schooling still has some educational requirements and standards, which many homeschool proponents are explicitly trying to avoid"

      Is there any other reason parents homeschool their kids? That's the only one I've ever heard: "I want my children to be ignorant of the things you will teach them in school". Typically they don't even shy away from that reason.

  3. No by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Don't remove the exemption, just exempt the people using the exemption from being able to frequent public areas without protective clothing (protective as in protecting others from them, not protective as in protecting them from everyone else).

    Its illegal to be naked in most public places, its illegal to knowingly infect others with dangerous illnesses, so why shouldn't it be illegal to knowingly be in a public place when you are much more open to infection from dangerous illnesses and thus to infect others with them...?

    1. Re:No by MetalliQaZ · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That would never happen. How could you pass that rule? If you did, how would you ever enforce that?

      Better to simply specify that people must be vaccinated to attend school, get a government job, and receive public benefits.

      --
      "Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
    2. Re:No by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I was thinking similar. If you take the exemption and there are some cases of the target illnesses reported at a public school, all kids without vaccinations are required to stay home until the outbreak is considered to be over.

    3. Re:No by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I was thinking if you take the exemption and subsequently infect someone you have liability for medical expenses, or criminal liability in the case of death.

      If your decision only affected you, run wild. That's your choice and your right.

      If you infect someone else and make them seriously ill or cause death ... well, that's no longer just you affected by that damned decision, is it?

      This isn't a decision which is made in an vacuum.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    4. Re:No by houstonbofh · · Score: 4, Funny

      Of course not... Have a town crier walk in front of them 10 paces with a bell shouting "Unclean!"

    5. Re:No by houstonbofh · · Score: 3, Funny

      This, and create a EULA for the parents to sign whereby they agree to pay for the health needs of those who get sick by proxy.

      And? Exactly how much money do you think these people have? All you would get out of it was some herbal tea and an old VW van.

    6. Re:No by jeff4747 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, such as violating this tenant by allowing the unvaccinated to infect those too young or too ill to receive the vaccine.

      If this was a situation where only those refusing the vaccine could be harmed, I'd agree with you. But it isn't. The unvaccinated are killing other people by destroying herd immunity.

      Your right to refuse a vaccine does not give you the right to harm others.

    7. Re:No by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If what you do with your body starts to affect my body, you better believe that I'll request a say in what you do with your body.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  4. Tough call by Vermonter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While I think not getting vaccinated is incredibly stupid, I also worry about setting a standard of the government being able to force things in to your body.

  5. Re:Simple solution by MetalliQaZ · · Score: 3, Informative

    We don't have that ability.

    --
    "Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
  6. Re:Vaccines are totally safe by MetalliQaZ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah, I'm totally going to trust a naturalist with no formal training to give me advice on advanced medicine. Especially when they are selling herbal remedies at the same time.

    Don't think vaccines are safe? Try polio, rubella, whooping cough, and measles. See how safe you feel when your kid might catch one of those at school.

    --
    "Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
  7. Re:Knowledge is the solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A few children? We're talking deaths here. Fuck your illusion of personal freedom.

  8. In Massachusetts... by crow · · Score: 4, Informative

    Mass. Gen Laws ch.76, Â 15:
    "In the absence of an emergency or epidemic of disease declared by the department of public health, no child whose parent or guardian states in writing that vaccination or immunization conflicts with his sincere religious beliefs shall be required to present said physicianâ(TM)s certificate in order to be admitted to school."

    So there's broad religious exemptions such that anyone willing to claim them can skip the process, but if there is a serious outbreak, then suddenly the exemption goes away. That's not a bad compromise.

    I haven't heard of the state ever declaring such an emergency, but I hope they are ready to do so before an outbreak becomes a full epidemic.

    1. Re:In Massachusetts... by unimacs · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Except that often you need multiple doses and time for the immunizations to work. After an outbreak is too late.

  9. Slashdotters, do your part! by Rambo+Tribble · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If we all got vaccinated, at least we'd have a measure of "nerd immunity".

  10. Mississippi Is Doing Something Right? by Talderas · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I cannot hide my incredulity over the fact that Mississippi is one of one only two states that do not permit religious or philosophical exemptions. The other is West Virginia.

    --
    "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    1. Re:Mississippi Is Doing Something Right? by hendrips · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Most people who object to vaccination are either 1) wealthy and well educated or 2) members of certain non-mainstream cults/religions. Let's just say that Mississippi is not particularly well known for having a high concentration of people in either of those groups.

  11. Re:Freedom of choice by MetalliQaZ · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Free country, sure. You're free to be foolish and suffer the consequences. You aren't free to drive on the sidewalk, discharge your firearm at a Walmart for target practice, or take a shit on the president's desk.

    Similarly, we should not be free to endanger public health with disease. If you want to remain unvaccinated, do so in your own backwoods shack, away from us. Thanks.

    --
    "Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
  12. Re:Vaccines are totally safe by RatherBeAnonymous · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Here is a rebuttal article http://scienceblogs.com/insole...

  13. Re:Knowledge is the solution by Wycliffe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I agree. I'm a big supporter of vaccines but one thing I find annoying is that it's almost impossible to find good
    numbers for vaccines. Almost everyone knows the numbers for failure rates of birth control as it's pretty easy
    to find a chart listing them and their percentages alongside the 85% chance of getting pregnant with no birth
    control. Finding a chart like that for vaccines is next to impossible. Why isn't there a chart which shows all
    the vaccines, their complication rate, the chance of complication if you catch it, the number of reported cases
    in the previous year, what age the vaccine is recommended, etc... Why should we have to instinctively trust the
    doctor when I know someone has all these numbers and could easily put them in an easy to read chart?

  14. I can hear them now... by Vermonter · · Score: 5, Funny

    "I am so glad I didn't get my little Johnny vaccinated. Sure, he died of Measles when he was 3, but at least he didn't catch the autism!"

  15. Re:Freedom of choice by Falos · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Everyone else is free to bar you from THEIR offices schools stores transportation businesses hospitals etc

    Unless you want to force them, regardless of whether they want it or not.

  16. Oh, the humanity! by ArcadeMan · · Score: 5, Funny

    Let's be clear here. What we're talking about is the extermination of whole species of pathogens.

    Won't somebody think of the pathogens?

    This message brought to your by PETP.

  17. Re:Religious is better than philosophical? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Here's my Philosophical objection: if people can be exempt based on religious beliefs I can be exempt because I feel vaccines are bad.

  18. Didn't they learn from Texas? by rs1n · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A recent outbreak in Texas (last year, in fact) should have given these folks a heads up! http://www.forbes.com/sites/em...

  19. Re:Knowledge is the solution by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 5, Informative

    You do not have a personal freedom to infect others with Yellow Fever, Tuberculosis, Typhoid, or Cholera. Isolation of infectious or potentially infectious individuals has long been the duty of government pubic health programs. The fact that these and others have largely been controlled through vaccination programs and/or improved public sanitation (also a government program) has let people forget the dangers that exist. I am old enough to remember when public places like swimming pools and libraries were closed in the summer due to polio outbreaks (thank you Jonas Salk.) So, while you have a right to risk your children's lives by not vaccinating them, you do not have a right to risk my grandchildren's lives by sending them to public school.

    --
    Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
  20. Re:Knowledge is the solution by RatherBeAnonymous · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is what modern westerners fail to understand. Without childhood immunizations we would be facing hundreds of thousands of childhood deaths each year in the US and Europe from preventable diseases. Our immunization programs have been so successful that modern parents don't know what it was like to loose siblings and classmates to measles or to see friends and relatives crippled by polio and have to be placed in an iron lung.

    Yes, vaccines have problems. No, companies should not be sheltered from prosecution for producing dangerous medicines, but lets put everything in perspective. I'll gladly trade a few illnesses or deaths caused by vaccines for the mountain of dead caused by diseases.

    http://www.unicef.org/immuniza...

  21. Re:Vaccines are totally safe by Jason+Levine · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think the biggest weakness of vaccines is that they were/are so effective. Do you think the anti-vaccine movement would have the strength it has now if polio, whooping cough, measles, etc were as prevalent today as they were pre-vaccines? Of course not. If there was a big threat that your kid could get these diseases at any moment and wind up dead or seriously injured, there would be lines to get vaccinated.

    Right now, we're dealing with small outbreaks of disease thanks to the anti-vaccine movement. Sadly, I think it will take a major epidemic before some people accept that vaccines not only prevent disease but that the disease is worse than any imagined "toxins" in the vaccines. I fear that many kids will need to die before the anti-vaccine movement goes away.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  22. Re:You have your own brick wall by Bazman · · Score: 3, Informative

    Of course it "helped". Its a "theatrical placebo". The more theatrical the placebo, the stronger the effect. Trials have shown that sticking pins in the accepted "acupuncture points" is as effective as sticking them any old place. So all the mumbo-jumbo about "chi" energies is just that.

    Surely if it "helped tremendously" you wouldn't be still going after ten years. And TCM was invented by Chairman Mao anyway

  23. Re:Simple solution by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about, if you come down with something, it's your problem for not getting yourself vaccinated.

    FFS, the problem isn't the unvaccinated getting sick.
    It's the unvaccinated getting those who cannot be vaccinated, have compromised immune systems, or whose vaccination was less than100% effective sick.

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  24. Re:This is a Bad Idea (tm) by Moof123 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Good point.

    My wife got quite the little education when she bought some cough "medicine" for our toddler. She complained it didn't help and maybe that was a bad sign. So I get home and see she accidentally got some of that diluted by 10^12 crap, and educated her that she bought $8 of water in a tiny bottle.

    The labeling is done to look just like all the real medicines, and unless you are familiar with the whole dilution notation and concept the label appears to indicate it actually has ingredients.

    In the end the lesson is that these voodoo whack jobs are a major danger to more than just themselves. As such, they should be better regulated to protect us from their witchcraft.

  25. Re:Knowledge is the solution by flink · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Government forcing medical procedures on anyone is really not something we want, especially since government won't take responsibility for the (admittedly unlikely) consequences of a bad result.

    You mean take responsibility by compensating (the very few) people who are legitimately harmed by a vaccine reaction: National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program

  26. Re:you're all insane. by MetalliQaZ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People used to die from smallpox. Now they don't. That's good enough evidence for me.
    How many deformed kids did you grow up with due to polio? Zero? Oh, me too. I wonder why that is.

    --
    "Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
  27. Re:Still not buying it by houstonbofh · · Score: 5, Informative
    Well, I have not seen this is a while. A long and reasonably well written post where almost every sentence is factually wrong... Impressive.

    Logically, if the vaccine really does cure the virus, then the only people affected by an outbreak would be the unvaccinated.

    You really need a better understanding of how vaccines work. They do not cure shit. That is called a "cure." A vaccine increases resistance to a virus. This results in either not catching it, or having it pass more quickly. The amount of increase can vary with different people, and in very rare cases it does not increase resistance at all.

    But that's clearly not the case.

    Well, this statement is correct in it's assessment of your original statement.

    So we can't really know that it works as intended.

    Yes, we can and we do. On an individual level you can have a titer test to see if you have increased immunity. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medline... On a global level, we can compare places with high rates of vaccination to low rates and see whooping cough explode in Michigan.

    We may have evidence that it sometimes works, but it certainly isn't a slam dunk of a technological advancement (as so many here imply every time it comes up) -- and yet we hear calls to force it on others as if it IS a slam dunk.

    It is not digital. It is not "Once in and never again." It causes an increase in immunity in the majority of the population. This results in either immunity or shorter and less sick times. That is known and proven. Also, herd immunity is known and proven, and is a "slam dunk."

    What we also don't have is long-term data on the side effects -- only an arrogant display of superiority.

    Yes we do. A couple hundred years, actually. The smallpox vaccine was created in 1796. Pertussis in 1927.

    You people aren't using logic to support your position.

    Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

    You're using intimidation.

    Well, the facts are intimidating, but it is not us making them facts.

    What I see here is hardly a noble call for the betterment of society.

    This is probably totally true. Perhaps you should look a little more.

    What I see is an arrogant, selfish display of superiority, and an utter disrespect for the basic human right of free choice.

    You really do find what you look for. If you try hard enough you can even believe that fury porn is normal.

    Instead of demonizing the innocent, why not make an honest donation to the multi-billion dollar businesses that produce and promote these vaccines?

    And what does this have to do with the price of tea in China? Or should I just stand on a chair and shout "Strawman! Strawman!"

    Put your money where your arrogant mouth is.

    I do. I pay for vaccines that are not covered by insurance.

  28. One other 'philosophical' problem by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Right now, religions - at least, some religions - get extra legal benefits that the non-religious don't. Government employees get extra time off for relgious holidays; the non-religious get nothing. Religion is family of metaphysical worldviews, and non-religious philosophies are another branch. Why do certain philosophies get extra privileges?

    If a rule really is a good idea, then it should apply to everyone. If we can get by with some people not complying, then it doesn't need to be mandatory. Religion has nothing to do with it.

    In terms of vaccines, we just need to arrange for consequences. Your kids not vaccinated, and can't demonstrate a medical reason why not? Fine. No public school for them, sorry. Quite probably other benefits are now off-limits, too.

    --
    PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
  29. Arsenic is NOT added to the water supply! EVER by PeterM+from+Berkeley · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And certainly not to kill rats! Any level of arsenic in the water supply that would kill rats would kill every PERSON who drinks it in short order!

    In fact, the standard for "potable" water, at least in the USA, says that effort should be made to drive the concentration of arsenic in tap water to ZERO.

    --PM