Slashdot Mirror


Mississippi - the Nation's Leader In Vaccination Rates

HughPickens.com writes The NYT reports that Mississippi — which ranks as one of the worst states for smoking, obesity and physical inactivity — seldom is viewed as a leader on health issues. But it is one of two states that permit neither religious nor philosophical exemptions to its vaccination program. Only children with medical conditions that would be exacerbated by vaccines may enroll in Mississippi schools without completing the immunization schedule, which calls for five vaccines. With a vaccination rate of greater than 99.7%, Mississippi leads the national median by five percentage points and has the country's highest immunization rate among kindergarten students.

However, in recent weeks, the nearly unbending nature of Mississippi's law requiring students to be vaccinated has been in jeopardy, with two dozen lawmakers publicly supporting an exemption for "conscientious beliefs" turning Mississippi into one more battleground between medical experts who champion vaccinations and parents who fear the government's role in medical decision-making. "We have been a victim of our success, and people don't realize how bad these diseases are," said Mississippi state epidemiologist, Dr. Thomas E. Dobbs III, before lawmakers met to consider a bill that would have expanded exceptions to the vaccine requirement. Members of the education committee for the House of Representatives, in effect, endorsed the state's current approach. By a voice vote, they advanced a heavily amended version of the bill that now calls for only technical changes to Mississippi's law, which has been largely untouched since the late 1970s. The amended version of House Bill 130 puts into law the state's existing practice of granting medical waivers to children whose physicians request them, and in doing so, removes the Mississippi Department of Health's ability to deny such requests. "If a medical professional thinks it's wise not to vaccinate, then that will be the gospel," said House Education Committee Chairman John Moore, R-Brandon.

297 comments

  1. thank god for mississippi by turkeydance · · Score: 4, Funny

    well, someone had to post it.

    1. Re:thank god for mississippi by andyring · · Score: 4, Informative

      OK, let me get this straight. The dumb, uneducated, poor, largely minority backwoods state of Mississippi has the highest vaccination rate in the country. Sounds good so far.

      And, vaccines are medically proven to be effective and not harmful. Got it.

      The lowest vaccination rates are among the "educated" yuppie crowd (Prius driving, Whole Foods loving, vegetarian or vegan, politically left, etc.). OK, interesting.

      So, tell me again who "believes in science?"

      It has nothing to do with Medicaid. If cost was a factor, then the educated yuppie crowd would have the highest vaccination rates, not the lowest, as they are the most able to afford it.

    2. Re:thank god for mississippi by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 2

      Well you could knock me over with a plate of biscuits and gravy...
      seriously...
      somebody...
      damn, now I gotta drive down town for biscuits and gravy...

      I'm stunned to see a southern state that has no "religious exemption" or "retarded parent waiver"(I may have paraphrased that one) allowing a bunch of little germ factories to scamper from place to place spreading misery.

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    3. Re: thank god for mississippi by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      They still have Section 265 in their Constitution so I can't deny God and hold office in the state.

      So utterly in contravention of the US Consitution as to be laughable. If it hasn't been struck down, it'll be only because no federal court has heard a challenge to it yet; the first one made will succeed.

    4. Re:thank god for mississippi by werepants · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Most of the antivaxxers I know are more inclined towards the right. Some poster above commented with a link to a study confirming this statistically, but my anecdotal experience tells me that evangelical, organic, don't trust science OR government types are the primary culprits of this kind of thinking.

      It really comes from a mix of ignorance and arrogance - people don't even know enough about science, medicine, or history to have a clue how wrong they are about every aspect of this decision. It's basically a textbook example of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...

    5. Re:thank god for mississippi by stinerman · · Score: 1

      I'd say it has a bit more to do with the distrust of big pharma than science per se. It isn't too far to go from "there is more money in treatment than in prevention" to "vaccines are bunk".

    6. Re: thank god for mississippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sssh! I'm planning to use it to get out of jury duty.

      But actually similar clauses are in other state constitutions , and Tennessee goes a step further, and prevents ministers from taking office.

    7. Re:thank god for mississippi by werepants · · Score: 1

      Here's the correlation I see: Distrust biology, because Evolution. Distrust Astrophysicists, because Big Bang. Distrust Earth Scientists, because Global Warming.

      Then, somebody comes along going against "mainstream" medicine - chiropractors, acupuncture, holistic healers, homeopathy, natural remedies, anti-vaxxers. They all similarly attack the established consensus among the scientific and medical community, which is just a small step from the existing tendencies of the religious right. It's the perfect partnership.

    8. Re: thank god for mississippi by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      As far as I know (not being a constitutional lawyer) the first amendment provision that against establishing a state religion is not the same thing is different. You can't say that someone must be (or must not be) a Methodist, or Baptist, or Sunni or whatever. That is different from believing or not believing in a deity.

      I'm a pastafarian myself so I'm cool with that.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    9. Re:thank god for mississippi by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      And ALL the ones I know are on the left. Go to Park Slope, Brooklyn, start talking about vaccinations (especially forcing kids to be vaccinated) and see how far you go.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    10. Re:thank god for mississippi by werepants · · Score: 2

      I suppose it could be geographical - I'm in Colorado, home of evangelical strongholds but also the birthplace of the gluten free lifestyle. We've got a weird blend of vegan hippies in Boulder and church moms in Colorado Springs, I imagine embracing pseudoscience would be the one thing they could agree on.

    11. Re:thank god for mississippi by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      :-) That very well could be a point of agreement.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    12. Re:thank god for mississippi by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Nope, the last article I saw basically said it was equally divided between the left and right-leaning voters. On the left side is the Prius-driving, organic-buying, vegan, "hippie" crowd, on the right side is the evangelical, Whole Foods-loving (WF's CEO is a rightie), anti-evolution-education, anti-government crowd.

      The common thread between both of them is they're educated (but not in medicine), and they favor a lot of "alternative medicine" BS.

    13. Re:thank god for mississippi by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Nope! It's the Whole Foods, Prius driving leftists who are anti-vaccination. They don't want their one kid going autistic so they selfishly rely on herd immunity. Glad you can update your knowledge with facts, and stop repeating falsehoods in the future. Thanks! Isn't it wonderful to be on the left, where people actually care about facts and will change their opinions when confronted with them? :)

      http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2011/04/20/vaccine-denial-and-the-left/

      http://www.mediaite.com/tv/stewart-rips-paul-christie-mindful-stupidity-of-liberal-anti-vaxxers/

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/01/22/vaccine-deniers-stick-together-and-now-theyre-ruining-things-for-everyone/

      http://news.sciencemag.org/2011/01/why-prius-driving-composting-set-fears-vaccines

      Q: There's a perception that vaccine refusal is especially common among affluent, well-educated, politically liberal parents-is there any truth to that?

      S.M.: It's dangerous to make broad generalizations about a group, but anecdotally and from the overall data that's been collected it seems to be people who are very actively involved in every possible decision regarding their children's lives. I think it relates to a desire to take uncertainty out of the equation. And autism represents such an unknown. We still don't know what causes it and we still don't have good answers for how to treat it. So I think that fear really resonates.

      Also I think there's a fair amount of entitlement. Not vaccinating your child is basically saying I deserve to rely on the herd immunity that exists in a population. At the most basic level it's saying I believe vaccines are potentially harmful, and I want other people to vaccinate so I don't have to. And for people to hide under this and say, "Oh, it's just a personal decision," it's being dishonest. It's a personal decision in the way drunk driving is a personal decision. It has the potential to affect everyone around you.

      Q: But why liberals?

      S.M.: I think it taps into the organic natural movement in a lot of ways.
      I talked to a public health official and asked him what's the best way to anticipate where there might be higher than normal rates of vaccine noncompliance, and he said take a map and put a pin wherever there's a Whole Foods. I sort of laughed, and he said, "No, really, I'm not joking." It's those communities with the Prius driving, composting, organic food-eating people.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    14. Re:thank god for mississippi by werepants · · Score: 1

      Well at least we know that stupidity ignores political boundaries.

    15. Re:thank god for mississippi by werepants · · Score: 1

      Since it is apparently too onerous for you to search higher in the thread:
      http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

      FTFA:

      Respondents formed more negative assessments of the risk and benefits of childhood vaccines as they became more conservative and identified more strongly with the Republican Party.

      I think your problem might be that you think that liberals have a monopoly on shopping at Whole Foods and driving Priuses. My grandparents are the most anti-Democrat people I know, and they are Prius-driving health nuts that eat mostly vegetarian. There is an enormous population of conservative, anti-chemical evangelical church moms that are all about "natural remedies" and would be happy to ban dihydrogen monoxide based on the name alone.

      Don't let me get in the way of your black and white partisan worldview, though.

    16. Re:thank god for mississippi by d34thm0nk3y · · Score: 1

      OK, let me get this straight. The dumb, uneducated, poor, largely minority backwoods state of Mississippi has the highest vaccination rate in the country. Sounds good so far.

      Well, they are trying to loosen Measles vaccination requirements in the middle of the two biggest Measles outbreaks in the last 50 years. That doesn't scream intelligence to me....

    17. Re: thank god for mississippi by chill · · Score: 2

      Wrong section. Article VI says: ...but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    18. Re: thank god for mississippi by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      nice. good catch.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    19. Re:thank god for mississippi by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Well you could knock me over with a plate of biscuits and gravy...
      seriously...
      somebody...
      damn, now I gotta drive down town for biscuits and gravy...

      Well if it helps, I have a scone I can scone you with.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  2. OH YES THE WORLD IS USA ONLY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    srsly.

  3. Re:thank god for the poor states by rmdingler · · Score: 1
    Coming in at #2 on the list is West Virginia... Appalachia and the deep South. On another list, that of U.S. income by State, they are number 49 and 50 per Wikipedia.

    Coincidence or Medicaid?

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

  4. Children are not property. by Rei · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Parents are granted a tremendous amount of leeway over what to do with their children. But at the end of the day, children are not "things" for parents to do with as they wish. They're people. A parent may have a sincere and deeply held belief that children don't actually need to eat, that if they meditate enough they can gather the energy they need from the sun. But that doesn't mean that Child Protective Services aren't going to get involved if the parents refuse to feed their child. No, there's no easy definition for where the line between parental rights / belief dominate and where child abuse begins should be. But there must be a line.

    And ignoring the fact that the person we're talking about here is too young to make informed decisions, even if that wasn't the case, it still wouldn't be a reasonable argument. Even if we were talking about adults, while you're free to endanger yourself to your heart's content, you don't have the right to endanger others. You may feel that drunk driving is perfectly safe and it's just your personal choice and drunk driving laws are an infliction on your freedom of movement, but the law sees it differently for damned good reason, and you will be punished if caught. Want to endanger yourself? Fine, go do it. Want to endanger me? Nope, and thank $DEITY that there are laws and law enforcement to stop you. You don't have an inalienable right to put your neighbors at risk of mowing them over with your car, and you don't have an inalienable right to walk around them as a disease vector.

    --
    I would have you sign my banana, but it's on the roof.
    1. Re:Children are not property. by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I guess the only question is, how far do you take it when determining that somebody is harming their children. I definitely think that everybody except the tiny percentage of individuals who have a medical condition should be vaccinated against things like measles. But I'm not so sure about things like chicken pox or the flu vaccine. While these vaccines are good and safe, I wouldn't think that somebody choosing not to give those to their children should be charged with endangering their life or well being. Where I live, it's illegal to smoke in your car if you have kids under 16 with you. That's probably a good thing as cars are very enclosed, and kids would inhale quite a bit of second hand smoke. However, there is no similar law for now smoking in a private residence, even though kids spend a lot of time at home, and if their parent smokes inside, they are much more likely to inhale second hand smoke in the house than the short amount of time they might be in the car.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:Children are not property. by rmdingler · · Score: 0, Troll
      Indeed. Popular wisdom requires each herd member's rights to be considered when one us humans exercises an individual right.

      Ironically, opposition to science on this hot button issue is coming from the liberal, upscale, and predominantly female demographic, instead of from the poor, under educated, and religious.

      It makes sense in a way. Protecting ones own interest ahead of the many interests of others smacks of entitlement.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    3. Re:Children are not property. by geekmux · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Parents are granted a tremendous amount of leeway over what to do with their children. But at the end of the day, children are not "things" for parents to do with as they wish. They're people. A parent may have a sincere and deeply held belief that children don't actually need to eat, that if they meditate enough they can gather the energy they need from the sun. But that doesn't mean that Child Protective Services aren't going to get involved if the parents refuse to feed their child. No, there's no easy definition for where the line between parental rights / belief dominate and where child abuse begins should be. But there must be a line.

      At one point our country felt there must be a line between Church and State.

      Ironically, the dissolving of that line led to the issues we now face today.

      The problem is not that we don't feel there should be a line. The problem is enforcing the damn thing with some science and common sense.

      You're right, parents are granted a lot of leeway. The problem these days is they come armed with a lawyer to defend that leeway, and we allow it rather than override for the common good.

    4. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But at the end of the day, children are not "things" for parents to do with as they wish. They're people.

      unless they are still in the womb you mean.

    5. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like this line of reasoning.

      And I see the tremendous cost building up in this country (USA) due to most people not having the slightest idea how to take tare of themselves (diet, exercise, etc.), or at least not the slightest idea how to effectively practice what is required.

      It's high time we get to legislating and regulating this.

      Want to turn yourself or your children into obese, lethargic, screen-obsessed, socially stunted zombies? I don't think so, you're endangering all of us, bub.

    6. Re:Children are not property. by internerdj · · Score: 1

      To make a successful political party, you need to start with a platform and a normal definition of innocent life. Then you need to modify your definition of innocent life just slightly so that you are "immune" from the attacks from the opposition about your platform's cruelty while making strong emotional claims about how heartless the other party is for not protecting category X's innocent life or category Y's freedom.

    7. Re:Children are not property. by moeinvt · · Score: 0

      Gee, how did we possibly get from the 1600s to the 2000s without "Child Protective Services"?

      How do you reconcile the idea of a person not being free to infringe on the rights of others with the notion that some people should have the right to stick needles into others?

    8. Re:Children are not property. by operagost · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So parents can't treat their kids like "property", but the government can?

      Not vaccinating your kids is stupid. But forcing people to do it to send their kids to public school, then forcing them to attend said public school unless they're rich enough to pay for a private school, is class warfare. I hope these states have charter schools and/or a voucher program.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    9. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Disagreeing with your state is not a sin. Disagreeing with your god is.

      And your state ACTUALLY exists. Visibly, physically, and all other senses can prove your state exists.

      God doesn't appear with any of those senses.

      So at least two differences there for you.

      Oh, and you can vote out your state controller but you can't vote in a different god.

    10. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      " Parents have every right " No you don;t have every right and when you lean on the rest of the herd to 'protect' your child then you have obligations to the rest of the herd as well.

      The herd has a major investment in that child as well. We shoulder some of the cost \ burden of raising and educating that child so it can function within the herd.

    11. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First off, sin is not about agreement it is about obedience. It means literally to miss the mark. Secondly, sin is tied strongest to the christian religion and there are many strong statements about believers obedience to the state, it is certainly mentioned as much as homosexuality and disobedience to the state is only sanctioned when the state is clearly ordering a believer to violate religious regulations.

    12. Re:Children are not property. by alen · · Score: 1

      back in the day you would ship your extra kids to the army by age 10 or so to die in one of the european wars. or you put them to work on the farm

    13. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      http://www.vaccinationcouncil.... Your herd mentality will not protect you. You subscribe to buying immunity and forcing your will on others because you are scared. Using fear to motivate someone is called terrorism. "Buy our products and never ever get sick...er...unless your neighbors don't buy it in which case flog them in the public square! While they are tied up we can together force them to buy it! We at VaxCorp care about your immunity and not about anything else. Oh, and you can't sue us for damage caused by our products"

    14. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends.

      Is it in there ready to come out? Then it's a baby.

      Is it in there and removing it would kill it? Then it's a parasite.

      If it MAY kill the embryo to remove it and MAY kill the woman to take it to term, then you have to weigh it up between the two lives, one definitely living and productive on their own merits, the other requiring someone to look after it before it becomes able to act independently.

      "In the womb"?

      How dumb.

    15. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's just from the under educated. But nice of you to pretend to pinhole them.

    16. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gee, how did we possibly get from the 1600s to the 2000s without "Child Protective Services"?

      By having lots of kids being born because most of them would die. You might want to go look up child survival rates over that timeframe.

    17. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess that the state really is your god.

    18. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "herd" would be far better off if people were allowed to be as dumb as they can be in order to off themselves and their offspring. Just look at the third world for a prime example: before we started subsidizing them with food and technology handouts there were a few million starving people - now there are billions. If you cater to retardation you get more retards, that's all there is to it. You can't fix stupid but if you ignore it it will remove itself from the genepool.

    19. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Separation of church and state was written in a letter by Thomas Jefferson, not in the constitution.

    20. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Parents are granted a tremendous amount of leeway over what to do with their children. But at the end of the day, children are not "things" for parents to do with as they wish. They're people."

      In full agreement.

      "A parent may have a sincere and deeply held belief that children don't actually need to eat, that if they meditate enough they can gather the energy they need from the sun. But that doesn't mean that Child Protective Services aren't going to get involved if the parents refuse to feed their child."

      Slippery slope argument. This is where you begin to lose me.

      "No, there's no easy definition for where the line between parental rights / belief dominate and where child abuse begins should be. But there must be a line."

      Courts have adopted this "reasonable line" scenario into case law. See the Yoder vs. Wisconsin decision by SCOTUS.

      "And ignoring the fact that the person we're talking about here is too young to make informed decisions, even if that wasn't the case, it still wouldn't be a reasonable argument. Even if we were talking about adults, while you're free to endanger yourself to your heart's content, you don't have the right to endanger others."

      This is the very same argument used by gun-control advocates. The fact that a person is carrying a gun immediately increases the threat to the personal welfare and safety of everyone around them. This is a fact, but we recognize that there is a certain point at which we have to stop stripping others of their rights, even when the element of risk is present, and even when the dangers to those around them increase. Hence the right to bear arms.

      "You don't have an inalienable right to put your neighbors at risk of mowing them over with your car, and you don't have an inalienable right to walk around them as a disease vector."

      The main difference between gun rights and disease is that a disease is essentially a third party that can spread and lash out, even when the carrier does not will this. A gun, being an inanimate object, can really only affect others around the carrier only if the carrier is negligent, or if they intend to use the weapon to harm. This is a distinction I recognize, but I wonder how much further this idea of government involvement in parenting is yet to run.

      Most of the folks we see that are not getting their children vaccinated are not religious people at all. They are generally secular minded, irreligious persons, who hold an ignorant view of the science behind vaccines, such as believing they cause cancer or autism. Then, not wanting to get their children vaccinated, they wriggle out of it by claiming a religious exemption, which makes things harder for those who do possess an actual religious belief, because then all religious exemptions to vaccinations get blamed for the issues.

      I myself do actually believe that all children should be vaccinated, but I believe that religious exemptions need to remain intact. No party should be forcibly medicated against their will, either by a state or a private party, unless they have a valid reason for doing so, such as a medical condition, or a sincere religious belief. I seriously take issue with any person that wants to empower the state to remove any more of our individual rights from us in the name of safety.

    21. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      drunk driving laws are an infliction on your freedom of movement, but the law sees it differently for damned good reason, and you will be punished if caught

      No, I think drunk driving laws are unnecessary because:
      1) losing control of your vehicle is already illegal
      2) causing bodily injury and/or death is already illegal
      3) causing property damage is already illegal

      Drunk driving laws are stupid and unnecessary. They're the same stupid thing as the "X, but on a computer" laws, and they need to be abolished.

    22. Re:Children are not property. by JeffAtl · · Score: 1

      No, there's no easy definition for where the line between parental rights / belief dominate and where child abuse begins should be.

      There's no reason to even step into that minefield. Communicable diseases are a public health issue, not a parental rights issue.

    23. Re:Children are not property. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      Gee, how did we possibly get from the 1600s to the 2000s without "Child Protective Services"?

      By having lots of children to compensate for very high infant mortality. How did you think we did it?

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    24. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We had a daughter that had to go into the NICU after birth because she was preterm. She certainly was not ready but she was on her way to death in the womb. Sitting in the hospital, it never once crossed our minds: Screw it she was just a parasite. We can't really afford the medical bills from putting her in the NICU. We can try again later for one that makes it to the baby stage.

    25. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I agree with you about vaccines needing to be mandatory; there isn't a badge that carries enough authority with me for you to show up on my doorstep for my kids. If you come for them, you are a threat to their well-being.

    26. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parents are granted a tremendous amount of leeway over what to do with their children. But at the end of the day, children are not "things" for parents to do with as they wish. They're people.

      Don't tell that to Rand Paul, who just got done saying:

      ""The state doesn't own your children. Parents own the children, and it is an issue of freedom and public health."

      Sure, he was playing to the Anti-vaxxer crowd, but what kind of person chooses to parse that sentence that way anyhow?

      Even control would be better.

      I get it, people occasionally misspeak, but really, I'd want to question him about that.

    27. Re:Children are not property. by rossdee · · Score: 1

      I don't think that anywhere the annual flu vaccine is required by law. Even for people who work in healthcare.
      And this seasons shot wasn't worth a tin of shit.

      Still the insurance paid for it, and I got a free klondike bar at work.

    28. Re:Children are not property. by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      No, there's no easy definition for where the line between parental rights / belief dominate and where child abuse begins should be. But there must be a line.

      No, there must not be a line. Because everyone makes some bad choices and some good ones. While some choices are severe enough to outweigh any amount of good ones, the vast majority of the time the question has to be "on balance, are they a good enough parent."

      So, we have to have more discretion built into the system. Which leads to more abuse. But that's better than some stupid zero-tolerance line.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    29. Re: Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Protecting ones own interest ahead of the many interests of others smacks of entitlement."

      So then are you hoping to get your tax refund this year? Feeling like a bit of "entitlement"? Or are you going to let the gov keep it so they can use it in the many interests of others?

      Here's a tip that will help you navigate life more wisely: turn off the talk radio and other forms of talking heads, drop the buzzwords, and think for yourself.

      You're welcome.

    30. Re:Children are not property. by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      How does anyone else's exercise pattern impact you? Absent people who you care about (family, friends) harming themselves.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    31. Re:Children are not property. by budgenator · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I guess the only question is, how far do you take it when determining that somebody is harming their children. I definitely think that everybody except the tiny percentage of individuals who have a medical condition should be vaccinated against things like measles. But I'm not so sure about things like chicken pox or the flu vaccine.

      If your child is stricken with a disease that has high potential of death, significant injury, loss of function or disfigurement or the same to others, and that disease is preventable through vacination, and you failed to provide that vacination that would meet the standard of harming their children or endangering the public in my mind.

      As far as flu, people die from that, my Mother was hospitalized just last month for the flu, while my Dad was in the ICU after arresting while being treat for pneumonia that was as likely as not to have been triggered by having the flu. My Dad never came out of the hospital and was on a respirator for 6 weeks; Mom back in the Hospital because she never regained enough strength and is now refusing treatment so she'll pass away soon too.

      My attitude right now is to tell the antivaxers to STFU and get the Kids their shots, if your kid goes deaf because of a fever due to having measles, I'd throw your ass in prison.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    32. Re:Children are not property. by rwiggers · · Score: 1

      In some countries it's a crime to refuse to vaccinate the children. That's how it should be, since by not vaccinating children you're putting the children's life in danger...

    33. Re:Children are not property. by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

      Property is not a good word I agree, but absolute responsibility I think is. Rights and responsibilities go hand in hand. Empower the parents to make all choices but make it clear that there are consequences to those choices.

      In the case of vaccination, aside from the risk of disease, the consequences should be no access to public schools without a certified (reasonable) minimum vaccination record or medical exemption. I would stop at that.

      I think that's enough but I would have thought that most insurance companies would require vaccinations as a requirement for medical insurance too, which (in the US at least) makes it an employment issue. Then there's any brush with the law, any conviction could include a vaccination requirement. Any welfare recipient could be required to show vaccination credentials or bring them up-to-date within a certain time to continue receiving benefits. Need a driver's license, need a criminal background check for some reason, perhaps to coach kids, that could include a certification requirement... In short, any time an individual brushes with the commonwealth there is an opportunity to bring pressure to bear, I'm not in favor of exercising it to that degree though, the idea is to apply pressure to encourage childhood vaccinations, not to make it impossible to live in society at all.

      Religion is not really a problem because it is also a choice, there is a right to chose your religion; did I mention that with that come responsibilities ? It applies to non-spider people too.

      --
      Nullius in verba
    34. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are not your property or the government property either. So how do you justify that your paranoia should be universal?

    35. Re:Children are not property. by lars_stefan_axelsson · · Score: 1

      I'll sort of give you drugs, though most of that is actually motivated in terms of what drug addicts do to their surrounding (crime, family etc. etc.), but I'll give you that.

      Euthanasia though, I won't give you as easily. There's no-one trying to outlaw killing yourself as far as I know, only forbidding the medical profession from helping you (something I agree with BTW). There aren't typically any legal repercussions for attempted suicide, or even helping someone else, as long as you don't "help" crosses over to "murder".

      --
      Stefan Axelsson
    36. Re: Children are not property. by Woldscum · · Score: 1

      So explain to me how abortion is legal? A woman can kill a child just because it is Unwanted.

    37. Re:Children are not property. by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      It's been a few years but the US military used to require the flu vaccine every year. And it's not like you could just opt out and take an admin discharge.

    38. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.vaccinationcouncil....

      Your herd mentality will not protect you. You subscribe to buying immunity and forcing your will on others because you are scared. Using fear to motivate someone is called terrorism. "Buy our products and never ever get sick...er...unless your neighbors don't buy it in which case flog them in the public square! While they are tied up we can together force them to buy it! We at VaxCorp care about your immunity and not about anything else. Oh, and you can't sue us for damage caused by our products"

      I'll just leave this here for you. How people can maintain a medical license while spewing such nonsense is beyond me.

    39. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parents don't often commit genocide with smallpox with their children, or experiment with syphilis symptoms with their children.

      There are reasons not to want to load up on seemingly mysterious chemicals from the government. "Serenity" was a warning!

      I'm only have joking; I think the USGov has shown repeatedly they're not to be trusted with peoples' personal details and decisions beyond the most necessary measure.

    40. Re:Children are not property. by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Using fear to motivate someone is called terrorism.

      Bullshit. That's not what 'terrorism' means at all. We suffer from enough dilution of that term, don't make it worse.

    41. Re:Children are not property. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      It varies from state to state. Assisted suicide is legal in at least Washington and Oregon (those I know of; there are probably more).

    42. Re:Children are not property. by lars_stefan_axelsson · · Score: 1

      Sure, I wasn't saying that I agree with all or even necessarily much of the legislation against drugs, only that the argument against them usually isn't couched in terms of what it does to consenting adults, but what those adults do to society at large.

      But if you check the history of Kevorkian he was acquitted all the times he assisted someone else committing suicide, but when he pressed the plunger himself he was convicted. Giving someone the hypodermic; OK. Injecting someone; not so much. So I think my original characterisation still stands. There is a bright line that must not be crossed legally speaking (mainly because it then becomes difficult to differentiate between murder and suicide after the fact), but if you stay on the right side of it you'll be in the clear.

      --
      Stefan Axelsson
    43. Re:Children are not property. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "you don't have an inalienable right to walk around them as a disease vector."

      Of course you do (and you have every right to keep your kid from getting a vaccine), because it's the base-line level of risk that everyone lives with by default. Anyone else being vaccinated should only be an impovement on that, not the other way around, and anyone who wants to get any given vaccine can be happier than not to have it, because they may feel safer for it. External hostility is not appropriate. It's not digging a hole to do nothing, like choosing to drink and drive, nor is it anyone else's choice but the individual. There is an assymetry in the world that sense. It's like the difference between shorting a stock or buying it. In order to short it, there has to be room to move backwards and that other people have bought it. There is no price ceiling on a stock though. As is the case with vaccines, there is no room to move backwards when we are talking about risk. We are each, individually, at the default level of risk - there is nothing to short, and nothing to call a loss by declining a vaccine - and your choice should be considered an improvement. It doesn't matter if you think there's an untapped improvement, if you could just force everyone, since the base-line is like voltage - the difference is relative to the starting point, which in this case is individual choice. If a kid doesn't get a vaccine and something happens that a "truthy" argument can attribute plausibly and directly to not getting a vaccine, then a case could be made that there was neglect, but even in that case, laws should be punitive, and not attempt to be preventative, unless you want to dance with the government over every little thing the e mob wants to crucify you for. Not feeding your kid is also different than not giving them a vaccine. Food is necessary for life, and you are obligated to provide necessities for the life you create, whereas life exists perfectly well without vaccines, and will continue to. Vaccines have never been a necessity. It has nothing to do with the REASON you starved your kid, and everything to do with the post-facto nourishment. Again, you are free to do what you think is your part for other people, and other peoples' kids, and get a vaccine, but don't punish people for disagreeing with you about something that is up to them. Don't want kids to be exposed to a disease you think they shouldn't be? Vaccinate *yourself* as a gift to them, to prevent yourself being a vector - not that you should feel compelled to - but leave it at that, because that's where your say ends. You can even try to convince others - it's a free country - but you have no right to force them, or get the government to win an argument for you with force. That's where the argument falls apart... I am not even anti-vaccine, I'm anti abuse-of-power and promoting coercion.

    44. Re:Children are not property. by rdnetto · · Score: 1

      So parents can't treat their kids like "property", but the government can?

      Not vaccinating your kids is stupid. But forcing people to do it to send their kids to public school, then forcing them to attend said public school unless they're rich enough to pay for a private school, is class warfare. I hope these states have charter schools and/or a voucher program.

      Why should private schools get a pass? If kids not being vaccinated is a health risk (to themselves and their peers), then that requirement should be applied to all kids attending school.

      --
      Most human behaviour can be explained in terms of identity.
    45. Re:Children are not property. by operagost · · Score: 1

      Because private schools are PRIVATE. You don't have to send your kids there.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    46. Re:Children are not property. by rdnetto · · Score: 1

      Just because an organization is privately owned, doesn't mean they get a free pass from health and safety regulations. In other words, I'm saying the requirement for vaccinations shouldn't just be a matter of policy (for public schools), it should be a legal requirement for all schools.

      --
      Most human behaviour can be explained in terms of identity.
  5. What are Autism rates in Mississippi by ndavis · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Does Mississippi have more Autistic children than other states with lower vaccination rates? I think that should be looked at so maybe we can show that this is not the cause of Autism.

    1. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by alen · · Score: 1

      i think I read that NJ has the highest autisim rate. and i don't know if it is true, but some of the older studies have linked autism to upper middle class families and zip codes

    2. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by mean+pun · · Score: 1

      Although I understand why you would want to do this, I doubt it will work. For this purpose the difference between 90-ish and 99.7 percent vaccination rate is probably too small to produce a statistically significant difference. Besides, the objectors are unlikely to be swayed by statistics.

    3. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmmm. No help there.

    4. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Middle class families can't possibly just admit to having a naughty kid. So they find someone who'll diagnose the kid with "something on the autistic spectrum" (a nice vague term if ever there was one). Other families would just consider they had a naughty kid, and that would be it.

    5. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i think I read that NJ has the highest autisim rate. and i don't know if it is true, but some of the older studies have linked autism to upper middle class families and zip codes

      Because if you're poor then you're just plain stupid, not autistic.

    6. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by sabbede · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Apparently the CDC only has data from 11 States, and Mississippi isn't one of them. Other groups have more data available, but so far the best compilation I've found is at some anti-vax site - http://vaxtruth.org/2012/04/wh... Their chart has Mississippi ranked 44th for autism rates, West Virginia is 39th.

      And yeah, that does make the autism argument look real dumb. Especially when you look at the top 3 States for autism - Minnesota, Maine and Oregon; which interestingly enough also have some of the highest rates of non-vaccination.

    7. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1, Informative

      These reports seem to be a bit old (from 2011 or so), but here are a couple:

      http://graphics.latimes.com/usmap-autism-rates-state/

      http://www.statemaster.com/graph/hea_aut_num_of_chi_wit_aut_percap-autism-number-children-per-capita

      In both, Mississippi's autism rates seem much lower than other states. However, this could be because of lack of testing or resources for parents of autistic kids. So autism incidences don't get reported and autism seems rate in the state. Better detection and resources are the main reason for the autism "spike", not vaccines or some mysterious "toxin."

      Full disclosure: My son was diagnosed on the spectrum - Asperger's Syndrome. I'm also likely autistic, though undiagnosed. (Getting a diagnosis for me now won't help me - I've developed my own coping mechanisms - or my son so there's no reason to pay for the diagnosis.)

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    8. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ... they find someone who'll diagnose the kid with "something on the autistic spectrum" ...

      Part of what is happening is that parents seek help with the school system for their "naughty kid" who is underperforming or has behavioral issues. Because of all the attention that autism has received, the schools have plenty of funding to handle kids who are "on the spectrum".

      Doctors know this and play the game handing out "autism spectrum" diagnoses in an effort to aid the parents in seeking an IEP (Individual Education Plan) for their problem children. Autism Spectrum Disorder is so vague that, depending on the day, you could probably cram 75% of kids into a ASD diagnosis.

    9. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 0

      Then keep in mind that the legal profession is to the Democratic Party what oil and pharma are to the Republicans. Antivax activism is their latest gold strike.

    10. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by dj245 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Apparently the CDC only has data from 11 States, and Mississippi isn't one of them. Other groups have more data available, but so far the best compilation I've found is at some anti-vax site - http://vaxtruth.org/2012/04/wh... Their chart has Mississippi ranked 44th for autism rates, West Virginia is 39th.

      And yeah, that does make the autism argument look real dumb. Especially when you look at the top 3 States for autism - Minnesota, Maine and Oregon; which interestingly enough also have some of the highest rates of non-vaccination.

      Those are all states where houses commonly have basements, and they are in the hottest zones for radon exposure. Those are all states where a large number of people get their water from wells, and arsenic in the groundwater is a problem. The Radium in groundwater map is tilted towards those 3 states too. When I was a kid in Maine, we drank untreated well water and played in the basement nearly every day.

      I think it makes a lot more sense to look at connections between long-term exposure to known toxins and autism.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    11. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by alen · · Score: 2

      nope, there is a vaccine fund for damages. you can't sue if your kid gets sick from a vaccine and you have to prove it was the vaccine that caused it

    12. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by alen · · Score: 1

      a lot of the hippy parents don't discipline their kids. i've seen on such kid like that. runs like mad in a movie theater disturbing others.

      and a lot of people are having kids later in life at the age where they want to chill out more instead of play with a small kid after work.

    13. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Have you spoken with a young adult from Mississippi recently?

      They have nearly a 99.7% Autism rate.

    14. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's commonly known in Minnesota that autism is caused by the six continuous months of winter we have here.

      Normally this is addressed by additives in the alcohol. (Examples: Canadian beer, Russian vodka.) We haven't got an import license to add those additives to our Summit beer yet. /tongue-in-cheek

    15. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Perversely as well, parents of extreme overachievers looking for any additional advantage will also seek out ASD diagnosis, since typically standardized tests, SATS, AP classes etc all make special allowances for children with learning disadvatages. An extra hour can be useful to get your scores up for that Princeton/Brown/Standford admission.

    16. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Looking at toxic exposure in children is a red herringt though. Autistic markers in the brain are present at birth - you want to look at exposure rates for pregnant and pre-pregancy mothers. By the time children are born, the fundamentals of that development are over.

    17. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by hey! · · Score: 1

      Well, most anti-vaxxers seem to have backed off the autism thing, and they're more onto rare, catastrophic side effects like encephalopathy.

      What I try to point out is that the diseases in question *also* have catastrophic side effects, including encephalopathy. In fact your chance of experiencing those catastrophic situations is *higher* if you don't vaccinate than if you do . In Bayesian terms, P(C | V) P(C | -V); where C is experiencing a catastrophic neurological injury and V is being vaccinated.

      But this argument doesn't take, because it's not about probabilities. For better or worse, people seem to weigh a possibility that occurs as the result of an action much more heavily than the same possibility when it occurs as the result of abstaining from action.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    18. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you could say autism rates are off the chart for Mississippi?

    19. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yeah, that does make the autism argument look real dumb. Especially when you look at the top 3 States for autism - Minnesota, Maine and Oregon; which interestingly enough also have some of the highest rates of non-vaccination.

      That makes sense when you think about it because autism causes non-vaccination.

      No really. The more autistic kids you see around the more likely you are to fall victim to the vaccinations cause autism crowd and opt out of vaccinations.

    20. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Less, but this is most likely due to lower diagnosis tate of the existing autistic population, as vacinations have no effect on autism rates

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    21. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by david_thornley · · Score: 2

      Huh? If there's a 95% vaccination rate, one in every twenty people is unvaccinated, so even if you're the quiet type you likely run into at least one a day. If there's a 99.7% vaccination rate, that's three people in a thousand, and most people would be unlikely to encounter one in a day.

      If a sick person runs into several unvaccinated people while contagious, there's a good chance the disease will spread. If a sick person runs into no unvaccinated people while contagious, it's likely to stop with him or her. In either case, it's likely that any given person you meet has been vaccinated, but it only takes two infections per case to cause a major outbreak.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    22. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by chill · · Score: 1

      That's just among NJ politicians.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    23. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you spoken with a young adult from Mississippi recently?

      They have nearly a 99.7% Autism rate.

      Does extrapolating from a single data point count as Autism or retardation? Or do you have both problems?

    24. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by houghi · · Score: 1

      Interesting? Why is this modded interesting? If anything, it should be modded 'funny'.
      As there is NO relation between vaccination and Autism, there should be no question about it, because that might some people make believe that there IS some sort of link.

      "What are the rental car rates?" would be a just as relevant.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    25. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by ndavis · · Score: 1

      Interesting? Why is this modded interesting? If anything, it should be modded 'funny'. As there is NO relation between vaccination and Autism, there should be no question about it, because that might some people make believe that there IS some sort of link.

      "What are the rental car rates?" would be a just as relevant.

      Not sure if you read my post but my reasoning was to show that no link exists between vaccines and autism. We are in agreement that vaccines do not cause autism but I'm hoping that something like this might prove it at least a little bit.

    26. Re:What are Autism rates in Mississippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aw, you can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent. Forty percent of all people know that.

  6. Re:thank god for the poor states by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Its because they don't have internet, so don't know they should be scared of vaccinations.

  7. Makes USA kind of look like ancient Rome by jbssm · · Score: 2

    In ancient Rome the children where legally the property of the father until they where old enough.

    Some states in USA do the same, they allow the parents to make choices for their children that are scientifically proven to be deadly in certain circumstances. Thereby the USA are legally stating that in the eyes of the state, children are the legal property of their parents in certain cases.

    1. Re:Makes USA kind of look like ancient Rome by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Being that America's moral and ethical values are falling like ancient Rome, this is par for the course. In fact, i'm really thinking that America is just the phoenix of Rome. It fucking moved half-way around the world!

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:Makes USA kind of look like ancient Rome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, when you can kill them just because they haven't passed through a birth canal, I'd say we as a country treat them worse than legal property.

    3. Re:Makes USA kind of look like ancient Rome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Thereby the USA are legally stating that..."

      Stop throwing around adverbs like that. Children are not property, under US law, in any case.

    4. Re:Makes USA kind of look like ancient Rome by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      In ancient Rome the children where legally the property of the father until they where old enough.

      Actually, according strict traditional Roman law, sons were the legally the property of the father until he died. Daughters were his property until they married, at which point they became the property of their husbands' fathers. It became usual for a father to emancipate his sons when they came of age, but if he didn't, they remained his property.

    5. Re:Makes USA kind of look like ancient Rome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you'd rather have your children be property of the state? What a great solution! If you have another I'd love to hear it since you didn't offer anything up in a constructive manner in your post.

    6. Re:Makes USA kind of look like ancient Rome by bledri · · Score: 1

      Being that America's moral and ethical values are falling like ancient Rome, this is par for the course. In fact, i'm really thinking that America is just the phoenix of Rome. It fucking moved half-way around the world!

      In what way are America's moral and ethical values falling? What was the hay day of America's moral and ethical values? Was it when African-Americans could not vote? Or when women couldn't vote? Or when homosexuals were thrown in jail? Or when inter-racial marriage was illegal? Or when the Native Americans where slaughtered and kicked off their land? Or when women couldn't own property and African-Americans were property? Or when lynchings were common? Maybe it was back when children worked in sweat shops, was that the epitome of ethics and morality? Or was it when we rounded up all the Japanese, confiscated their property and imprisoned them in internment camps.

      There are big issues that need addressing, and there are many struggles ahead. There will always be struggles and problems. But I will take a world where, at least by law, all adults are: not property, allowed to own property, allowed to vote, and can love and live with any other consenting adult then the "good old days."

      Why do people pine for the "glory days" that never were?

      --
      Some privacy policy Slashdot.
    7. Re:Makes USA kind of look like ancient Rome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      America, UK, Australia, and Canada are in lockstep, so I wouldn't get so uppity if you're from one of those countries.

      But I agree, I think I'm in the decline of the American empire, and I'm very tempted to get out of debt and into some stable land ownership before it goes too much further.

    8. Re:Makes USA kind of look like ancient Rome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes indeed, in some states they will even allow the child to be driven around by a parent in a motor vehicle, and the parent may judge the conditions of the road and their own sobriety. And yet 30-40 thousand people die because of cars every year!

    9. Re:Makes USA kind of look like ancient Rome by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Worse yet, some states have laws on the books that specifically make parents non-liable for those deadly choices, so long as they justify it by their religion.

      RCW 9A.42.005
      Findings and intent — Christian Science treatment — Rules of evidence.

      The legislature finds that there is a significant need to protect children and dependent persons, including frail elder and vulnerable adults, from abuse and neglect by their parents, by persons entrusted with their physical custody, or by persons employed to provide them with the basic necessities of life. The legislature further finds that such abuse and neglect often takes the forms of either withholding from them the basic necessities of life, including food, water, shelter, clothing, and health care, or abandoning them, or both. Therefore, it is the intent of the legislature that criminal penalties be imposed on those guilty of such abuse or neglect. It is the intent of the legislature that a person who, in good faith, is furnished Christian Science treatment by a duly accredited Christian Science practitioner in lieu of medical care is not considered deprived of medically necessary health care or abandoned. Prosecutions under this chapter shall be consistent with the rules of evidence, including hearsay, under law.

  8. Re:conscientious beliefs... let's break that down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Except for the "science deniers" in this case would have to be the physicians themselves. But don't let the facts stop you from spouting off.

  9. so... by buddyglass · · Score: 0

    I'm cool with the public schools only admitting kids who're vaccinated. Imposing the same approach on private schools seems like overreach. Also, HepB shouldn't be in the schedule of required vaccines to enter kindergarten given its method of transmission.

    1. Re:so... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Perinatal or early childhood transmission may also account for more than one third of chronic infections in areas of low endemicity..."

      -Source: WHO

      http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs204/en/

    2. Re:so... by khasim · · Score: 4, Informative

      Imposing the same approach on private schools seems like overreach.

      Why? It's not like infections only happen in schools. Or that students spend 100% of their time at school. Look at the Disneyland outbreak.

      Also, HepB shouldn't be in the schedule of required vaccines to enter kindergarten given its method of transmission.

      I think that you are under the impression that it is ONLY transmitted via sex or needles.

    3. Re:so... by BVis · · Score: 4, Informative

      Hep B can be contracted in many ways. The hepatitis virus is extremely hardy as compared to other similar systemic diseases' virii, for example, HIV is far more delicate and cannot survive outside the body for long. Hep B hangs around on surfaces for much longer; if someone with Hep B bleeds on something and then a kid touches it, they can contract Hep B.

      It's not always unprotected sex and illegal drug use. Sometimes it's a kid touching something.

      --
      Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
    4. Re:so... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Infection around the time of birth or from contact with other people during childhood is the most frequent method by which hepatitis B is acquired in areas where the disease is common." --Wikipedia

    5. Re:so... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that you are under the impression that it is ONLY transmitted via sex or needles.
       
      And you've done so much to invalidate that impression.

    6. Re:so... by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      Primarily from mother to child during delivery. The likelihood of an child who hasn't been vaccinated both 1) contracting HepB and 2) passing it to someone else at school are fairly low. Much lower than, say, measles.

    7. Re:so... by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      Why? It's not like infections only happen in schools. Or that students spend 100% of their time at school. Look at the Disneyland outbreak.

      The main reason to require vaccination in public schools is that they're a resource that's supposedly available to everyone. I shouldn't have to expose my kid to other kids who haven't been vaccinated in order to access the public school system. So we require vaccinations there. Private schools are private. That's why you can send your kid to a school that teaches young earth creationism if you want. Likewise, you could elect to send your kid to a school that doesn't require vaccinations. I would support a reporting requirement, though, obligating private schools to publicize in their promotional materials whether they allow un-vaccinated students to enroll. That way parents can make an informed decision.

      I think that you are under the impression that it is ONLY transmitted via sex or needles.

      Not really. It's transmitted by blood, or bodily fluids containing blood. That can happen without sex or needles but, outside of mother-to-child transmission during delivery, its more rare. I would be much less concerned about sending my kids to a school where some of the students weren't vaccinated against HepB than I would be about sending my kids to a school where some of the students weren't vaccinated against measles, mumps, rubella, pertussis, etc.

    8. Re:so... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I would support a reporting requirement, though, obligating private schools to publicize in their promotional materials whether they allow un-vaccinated students to enroll.

      And then we get a few schools where the unvaccinated congregate, so if one kid gets the measles it's going to sweep through the school and trigger a large outbreak.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    9. Re:so... by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      At least all the unvaccinated kids would be confined to a ghetto, of sorts. Maybe more outbreaks (and, consequently, more dead kids) would motivate more parents to vaccinate.

  10. Re:conscientious beliefs... let's break that down. by Crashmarik · · Score: 0

    You need to tell that one to conscientious objectors.
    So it's anti science to not want to kill people ?

  11. Re:conscientious beliefs... let's break that down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    con- against, anti

    No, "contra-" means against. "Con-" means "with".

  12. Your rights don't include infecting my kid or me by NotDrWho · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Your "conscientious" rights don't include the right to put other kids who *can't* get immunized at risk (or adults who weren't immunized as kids). If you want to conscientiously object to getting your kid immunized, then a school should have the right to conscientiously refuse to admit your kid. Create a special conscientious school or something and keep the fuck away from the rest of us.

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
  13. Re:thank god for the poor states by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think medicaid could be a factor. I'm from Canada, so I really like my tax funded healthcare. I think that specifically funding certain things like vaccinations to assure that everybody can receive them without cost is a huge advantage to the entire country. I can see why some people wouldn't want to pay for somebody else's knee surgery, or heart transplant if they brought it on themselves by their own lifestyle, but things like vaccinations help the entire population, are just about every person is born susceptible to these diseases. So it makes sense to make sure that as many people as possible are immunized. If somebody isn't immunized, then even the rich people who are insured are at risk in the event that their infants are too young to be vaccinated, or couldn't be vaccinated because of medical complications.

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  14. Re:conscientious beliefs... let's break that down. by Thanshin · · Score: 1

    Constipation - Antipack
    Conquest - Antihunt

    Yep. It works.

  15. Re:thank god for the poor states by geekmux · · Score: 1

    Its because they don't have internet, so don't know they should be scared of vaccinations.

    Seems like a 99.7% vaccination rate would be the perfect data pool in which to prove or disprove your paranoia.

    What say you, Mississippi statistics? (taking into account the McFood Pyramid that is quite popular in the south of course)

  16. Sad to see how far the USA has fallen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    I grew up in the 80s and although I'm not American I looked up to America as the greatest country on the face of the planet. I dreamed of ways of one day making it to the States. I'd've signed up for a 10 year hitch in the military; anything to be an American. Now you look at the US and you give your head a shake because it's one of the most embarrassingly paranoid, crazytown countries there is. It's no different than Russia, China, Iran or North Korea. And the quality of life there is also about the same as in those countries. You can see glimmers of hope once in awhile in terms of science or something but it's quickly snuffed out by the nutjobs who are infinitely louder. I'm following the run up to the 2016 election and you've got presidential candidates *arguing* over vaccinations. Are you fucking serious? Jenny McCarthy was able to create this much confusion? Dudes what in the fuck are you guys up to? Cut your defense budget by half. You'll still have all the weps you need. Pull your military back home from places like Germany, Japan, and Italy. That war's over. Triple NASA's budget. Fund healthcare like every other civilized country. Get back on the right track. Sadly, I don't think it'll ever happen. No matter who gets elected he'll just be shouted down by the other side. The States is sunk and it's really a tragedy. I think it can be traced back to the JFK assassination. The States was on the right track and then 24 hours after he's killed LBJ signs the order to invade Vietnam. It was ALL downhill from there. I realize that now. Well, good luck "convincing" your population that vaccines are safe and beneficial. Even Nigeria was laughing at you today saying maybe they'll have to screen Americans for measles. :(

    1. Re:Sad to see how far the USA has fallen by BVis · · Score: 1

      Why do you hate America? /s

      --
      Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
    2. Re:Sad to see how far the USA has fallen by moeinvt · · Score: 2

      Note the glaring contradiction in your analysis. You're advocating that we allow the U.S. federal government to take over the entire USA medical system. Yet, it is this very same government that pursues the policy of global military imperialism. There is no "other side" on this issue. We have two dominant political parties who have managed to exclude everyone else from the political system. Both of these parties agree on this aggressive foreign policy and global military presence.

      The debate about vaccines in the public policy sphere is about whether or not the government can force you to inject something into your body. This is the government that spies on its citizens, engages in torture, incarcerates and assassinates its citizens without charge or trial, refuses to prosecute government employees for blatant criminal activity, etc. etc. You think I'm going to let them stick a needle in my arm and just trust their word that it's good for me? These people would inject U.S. citizens with the live AIDS virus or antibiotic resistant TB if it served their purposes. I think I'd rather borrow a needle from a junkie than a federal bureaucrat.

    3. Re:Sad to see how far the USA has fallen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think I'd rather borrow a needle from a junkie than a federal bureaucrat.

      Please note that most people go to their doctor or a health clinic for vaccinations. I think this is where you have made a mistake.

    4. Re:Sad to see how far the USA has fallen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Note the glaring contradiction in your analysis. You're advocating that we allow the U.S. federal government to take over the entire USA medical system. Yet, it is this very same government that pursues the policy of global military imperialism. There is no "other side" on this issue. We have two dominant political parties who have managed to exclude everyone else from the political system. Both of these parties agree on this aggressive foreign policy and global military presence.

      The debate about vaccines in the public policy sphere is about whether or not the government can force you to inject something into your body. This is the government that spies on its citizens, engages in torture, incarcerates and assassinates its citizens without charge or trial, refuses to prosecute government employees for blatant criminal activity, etc. etc. You think I'm going to let them stick a needle in my arm and just trust their word that it's good for me? These people would inject U.S. citizens with the live AIDS virus or antibiotic resistant TB if it served their purposes. I think I'd rather borrow a needle from a junkie than a federal bureaucrat.

      http://www.reynoldskitchens.co...

    5. Re:Sad to see how far the USA has fallen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Note the glaring contradiction in your analysis. You're advocating that we allow the U.S. federal government to take over the entire USA medical system. Yet, it is this very same government that pursues the policy of global military imperialism. There is no "other side" on this issue. We have two dominant political parties who have managed to exclude everyone else from the political system. Both of these parties agree on this aggressive foreign policy and global military presence.

      This is only true because the government is protecting/advancing the interests of its constituents, large corporations. At home, the priorities are almost the opposite of what you're implying... The wealthy are afraid the government will protect the average citizen from the negligence and abuses of large corporations. They promote big government for the abroad (empire) and small government at home -- inculcating a kind of political schizophrenia.

      Furthermore, said wealthy corporatists have an interest in not contracting communicable diseases from the rest of the population... so the spread of a preventable epidemic is an example of libertarian paranoia backfiring on them (and everyone, really).

      The debate about vaccines in the public policy sphere is about whether or not the government can force you to inject something into your body. This is the government that spies on its citizens, engages in torture, incarcerates and assassinates its citizens without charge or trial, refuses to prosecute government employees for blatant criminal activity, etc. etc. You think I'm going to let them stick a needle in my arm and just trust their word that it's good for me? These people would inject U.S. citizens with the live AIDS virus or antibiotic resistant TB if it served their purposes. I think I'd rather borrow a needle from a junkie than a federal bureaucrat.

      Really? On what scale? One or two rogue miscreants? I'll take my chances with the vaccines.

  17. Not 5 vaccines, 7-11 by michaelmalak · · Score: 0, Troll

    I'm a moderate anti-vaxxer -- one of the many who separate, delay and select. When I read the Slashdot summary that said "5 vaccines", I thought, "oh, that's not so bad." But I just now looked it up and it's really between 7 and 11 (11 for those of us who separate, as two of the 7 are triple-vaccines):

    1. Hepatitis B (HepB)
    2. Inactivated Polio (IPV)
    3. Diphtheria, Tetanus, Pertussis (DTaP)
    4. Haemophilus influenzae type
    5. Pneumococcald (PCV)
    6. Measles, Mumps, Rubellae (MMR)
    7. Varicellaf (VAR; aka Chickenpox)
    1. Re:Not 5 vaccines, 7-11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm a moderate anti-vaxxer

      I expect the Slashdot crowd will be by soon enough to burn a giant effigy of a syringe on your lawn. No robes, just Guy Fawkes masks.

    2. Re:Not 5 vaccines, 7-11 by Pope+Hagbard · · Score: 4, Insightful

      By "moderate anti-vaxxer", you mean "I've got Dunning-Kruger and think I know more than doctors and scientists who study this for a living". You're hardly the only slashdotter who wrongly thinks he's smarter than actual experts.

    3. Re:Not 5 vaccines, 7-11 by BVis · · Score: 1

      What's the argument for separating? Is it a concern that the immune system may not deal as well with multiple vaccines at once?

      --
      Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
    4. Re:Not 5 vaccines, 7-11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "I'm a moderate anti-vaxxer"

      In other words, you're only somewhat stupid?

    5. Re:Not 5 vaccines, 7-11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's the argument I've heard. But I've also read articles that suggest the average kid's immune system is capable of handling the effects of about 1000 to 5000 immunizations at once. Separating seems to be mostly hogwash.

    6. Re:Not 5 vaccines, 7-11 by 3.5+stripes · · Score: 1

      So which of those do you object to? Varicella maybe?

      --


      He tried to kill me with a forklift!
    7. Re:Not 5 vaccines, 7-11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I can see waiting on Varicella until around age 9 or 10, as pre-puberty symptoms of chicken pox are generally pretty mild.

      It's pretty stupid to NOT get the Varicella vaccine after the onset of puberty if you haven't had chicken pox yet, as symptoms increase significantly as you age. IIRC, symptoms post-puberty can include permanent debilitation and/or death depending on person and age.

      For the other vaccines listed, you'd have to be pretty stupid to not get them as early as you can, as all of those diseases have a high risk of debilitation and/or death regardless of age.

    8. Re:Not 5 vaccines, 7-11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It allows him to feel trendy without appearing quite as much of a dumbass as full antivaxxers.

    9. Re:Not 5 vaccines, 7-11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any particular one of those diseases that you would prefer to have your child get lasting damage from?

    10. Re:Not 5 vaccines, 7-11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If I remember correctly there is at least one case where you would be wrong. I can't remember which vaccines they were, but some time ago they tried to add another vaccine to one of the three vaccine cocktails. The significant adverse side effects doubled from (I believe) 4 in 100,000 to 9 in 100,000. Medical professionals suggested that the 4 vaccine cocktail be removed from usage.

    11. Re:Not 5 vaccines, 7-11 by BVis · · Score: 2

      It's nice to see some actual science in this conversation. I don't know if I consider 1 additional severe reaction in 2300 to be worth the inconvenience of separate vaccines, but at least there's a rational basis for it.

      --
      Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
    12. Re:Not 5 vaccines, 7-11 by budgenator · · Score: 1

      So you only sip the kool-aid then?

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    13. Re:Not 5 vaccines, 7-11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even though chicken pox can be considered pretty mild in younger children, having chicken pox and surviving (as most do) leaves you vulnerable to getting shingles later in life -- which is considered quite painful and is often brought on by stress (most frequently in 60's and older, but can happen much earlier in life as well). It's expected that being vaccinated for chicken pox (and thus not getting the illness) should result in not being at risk for shingles later in life.

      That's a reason to get vaccinated prior to puberty.

    14. Re:Not 5 vaccines, 7-11 by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      There's a shingles vaccine also, that I got first time I visited the doctor while 60, but that's only partly effective. IIRC, it reduced my chance of getting it by very roughly half. Worth doing, but I can't rule out getting shingles.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  18. So.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Vaccines cause smoking, obesity and physical activity in addition to autism? Why does anyone get them?

  19. Re:thank god for the poor states by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Guess which two states have the lowest rates of autism. Yep, it's Mississippi and West Virginia at .04 and .05.
    http://graphics.latimes.com/usmap-autism-rates-state/

  20. Good for Mississipi by chthon · · Score: 1

    But underlying all this, it seems that the US American belief that you should have the complete right as a parent to decide how to raise your children, even if it is against their well being, is not new. I clearly remember 'Huckleberry Finn', and the description of his father who falls in the same category as those people that are opposed to vaccination (for whichever reason). And that was written 130 years ago.

    1. Re:Good for Mississipi by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

      But underlying all this, it seems that the US American belief that you should have the complete right as a parent to decide how to raise your children, even if it is against their well being, is not new. I clearly remember 'Huckleberry Finn', and the description of his father who falls in the same category as those people that are opposed to vaccination (for whichever reason). And that was written 130 years ago.

      Right, and I even agree with them. But in this case you're not just making a choice that puts your kid at risk. You're also making a choice that puts my kid at risk, which is where it crosses the line. If a vaccine were 100% effective, I'd agree with them on choice. But they're not, so they should be mandatory.

  21. Mississippi == "Dumbest" state by billrp · · Score: 1

    (Google it) Therefore, only dumb people get their kids vaccinated

    1. Re:Mississippi == "Dumbest" state by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [Feeding troll]
      This is like saying that everyone in California is smart because of Silicon Valley
      [/Feeding troll]

    2. Re:Mississippi == "Dumbest" state by BVis · · Score: 1

      Or, since the dumb people would choose not to vaccinate, the fact that it's required compensates for the stupid. I think you've got a case of cart-before-horse.

      --
      Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
    3. Re:Mississippi == "Dumbest" state by rmdingler · · Score: 1

      (Google it) Therefore, only dumb people get their kids vaccinated

      Or: When you're 'smarter' you're more likely to put your individual needs above that of the village.

      Is it any wonder they hate the book smart tribe?

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    4. Re:Mississippi == "Dumbest" state by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      I think it shows the peril of smart people thinking they're smarter than people who make medicine their career, and that they "know better" because they've done the research through anti-vax site.

      In other words, being intelligent is no defense from doing stupid shit.

  22. Re:conscientious beliefs... let's break that down. by BVis · · Score: 2

    I think GP means the 'conscientious objection' that would basically allow any parent to refuse the vaccinations for any reason they see fit.

    --
    Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
  23. Re:thank god for the poor states by Pope+Hagbard · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm no antivaxxer, but do they have the lowest rates of autism, or merely the lowest /diagnosed/ rates? Given their poverty one can imagine fewer people going to the doctor in those states.

  24. Re:Highest in infant mortality by Translation+Error · · Score: 1

    If you google, infant mortality by state, Mississippi has the highest infant mortality rate. Double that of many states... It must be a coincidence.

    Don't be ridiculous. It's obviously because of vaccinations and not:

    *having one of the highest premature birth rates in the nation *obesity during pregnancy (Mississippi leads the nation in obesity too) *widespread poverty *an incredibly high rate of teenage births
    --
    When someone says, "Any fool can see ..." they're usually exactly right.
  25. Re:foreign invasion by rmdingler · · Score: 1

    You make a valid point, but when foreign invasion is substituted for immigration, it presents your argument in a poor light.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

  26. Re:Highest in infant mortality, not just vaccinati by BVis · · Score: 1

    If you bother to look beyond the surface numbers, I will bet that you will find that poverty correlates much more strongly with infant mortality than rates of vaccinations. And MS is pretty poor.

    --
    Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
  27. Re:Your rights don't include infecting my kid or m by Himmy32 · · Score: 1

    Even more so, it's not just at school where infection can be spread. There is no reasonable way to keep someone out of all areas of public life.

  28. Brilliant! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Brilliant!

  29. And the other state is...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn. I guess a list of two is too damned large to publish.

  30. Re:thank god for the poor states by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mississippi has long had a policy among both private and public health care providers of "sitck'em when you get'em", meaning that every time a child was seen by a physician, their vaccination records would be checked and any missing vaccinations or boosters administered. (Same thing if a mom or dad came in and had children with them.)

    Actually Mississippi's rate is a bit lower since all vaccine manufacturing decisions were taken over by DC during the Clinton Admin., making it harder for both public and private health care providers to keep stocks on-hand.

  31. A good proxy for finding the areas of the country by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...with the lowest vaccination rates is to stick as pin in the map at every Whole Foods location. I would bet most anti vaccers real reason is not so much autonomy when it comes to their kids but more an anti scientific stand. These types are very good at justifying exactly which science they want to believe and what they don't.

  32. Re:thank god for the poor states by blueg3 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Everywhere I've lived in the US, vaccinations are provided gratis by the local health department.

    People with insurance usually go to a doctor and get their vaccinations through them, but the health department will also do it for free. (That's the same health department that will run free STD tests.) Often, the real battle is communicating to people that these resources are available, fighting the stigma associated with getting free services from the government, and the practical issues of getting a working person over to a busy government office.

    As many childhood vaccinations are practically mandatory in the US, as they're required for attending elementary school (which is also mandatory), it makes sense that they're freely available.

    As a result, I think, of Obamacare, all childhood vaccines and most adult vaccines (including flu) are free to anyone with insurance.

  33. Re:foreign invasion by pla · · Score: 5, Informative

    Although we may agree on the need for less porous borders, the CDC actually has solid data on the causes of outbreaks like the current one. And, they don't typically start with "foreign invaders" - They start with unvaccinated legal US citizens going on vacation and coming back infected.

    So yeah, idiots choosing not to vaccinate, whether because Jenny or Jesus said so, do count as the entire problem.

  34. Re: thank god for the poor states by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lowest reported rates. Diagnosis isn't that simple. Not saying that it is certain, but they could ignore or misattribute any problems.

  35. Mississippi by UdoKeir · · Score: 1

    The amended version of House Bill 130 puts into law the state's existing practice of granting medical waivers to children whose physicians request them, and in doing so, removes the Mississippi Department of Health's ability to deny such requests.

    In other words, this allows the anti-vaxxers and religious nuts to go to their chiropractor, osteopath or other quack to get an exemption. Hell there are plenty of MDs that will write a prescription for anything you want for $50.

  36. 99.7% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Useless statistic. 99.7% of the children in the sample forced to be vaccinated are indeed vaccinated.
    So how many parents opt out of public school because of Mississippi's vaccination policy? A much more relevant number would be the number of kindergarten AGED children vaccinated.

    1. Re:99.7% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, falsified statistic based on the active whistle blower court case against Merck in Pennsylvania

  37. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  38. Oh, some rich are a huge part of the problem by dfenstrate · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If somebody isn't immunized, then even the rich people who are insured are at risk in the event that their infants are too young to be vaccinated, or couldn't be vaccinated because of medical complications.

    The self-indulgent rich are actually a huge part of the vaccination problem. Check out where some of the latest outbreaks have been- Hollywood, Disney world, etc- not places for people with no money.

    A journalist named Seth Mnookin wrote a book, "The Panic Virus: A True Story of Medicine, Science and Fear", and was Interviewed recently:

    anecdotally and from the overall data that's been collected it seems to be people who are very actively involved in every possible decision regarding their children's lives. I think it relates to a desire to take uncertainty out of the equation. And autism represents such an unknown. We still don't know what causes it and we still don't have good answers for how to treat it. So I think that fear really resonates.

    Also I think there's a fair amount of entitlement. Not vaccinating your child is basically saying I deserve to rely on the herd immunity that exists in a population. At the most basic level it's saying I believe vaccines are potentially harmful, and I want other people to vaccinate so I don't have to. And for people to hide under this and say, "Oh, it's just a personal decision," it's being dishonest. It's a personal decision in the way drunk driving is a personal decision. It has the potential to affect everyone around you.

    Further:

    I talked to a public health official and asked him what's the best way to anticipate where there might be higher than normal rates of vaccine noncompliance, and he said take a map and put a pin wherever there's a Whole Foods. I sort of laughed, and he said, "No, really, I'm not joking." It's those communities with the Prius driving, composting, organic food-eating people.

    There's also a great comment attached, by a poster named 'Tom Billings (qualifications unknown)', that gets into the causes of autism: Genetic

    Actually, it's simpler than that. It's just very unpopular, because it says things about humans we don't like to hear. You don't need government subsidizing something for it to increase. That is only one cause of some increases in some things.

    The genes associated with autism are mostly SNPs and single folds. Single nucleotide polymorphisms and single folds are single mutation events. You would expect those to be just as common throughout history as a result. So, why don't we see in the past the same rates of autism we see today? It's brutally simple. The children born with such genetic differences mostly didn't survive to reproductive age. They were murdered.

    His comment goes on and it's worth a read.

    --
    Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
    1. Re:Oh, some rich are a huge part of the problem by dfenstrate · · Score: 1

      Maybe they just have information about immunizations that you do not have.. doctors that tell them that immunizations are unsafe that you do not see because you are sent to a nurse at best, but most likely a social worker with no medical education... she knows best what is good for you

      If that were true you would be able to cite doctors & studies supporting your position. But you can't, so you didn't.

      --
      Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
    2. Re:Oh, some rich are a huge part of the problem by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Actually, I thought I read a headline recently that said some new research pointed to the possibility that mothers taking anti-depressants might be at higher risk of their child developing autism. Of course, correlation doesn't prove causation, but given that autism rates have increased a lot in recent years, and anti-depressant use has skyrocketed, there might be something to it.

    3. Re:Oh, some rich are a huge part of the problem by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      Disney is for idiots and children. I don't think that being rich or poor has much to do with it. I've known plenty of poor people that spent far more than I would judge appropriate on trips to disney. Disney also employes a ton of poor people to work at their parks, and enough of them not being vaccinated probably helped spread the measles. I obviously am not a fan of disney, so maybe I'm a little biased, but trust me, they draw in customers from all social classes.

    4. Re:Oh, some rich are a huge part of the problem by bluegutang · · Score: 1

      So, why don't we see in the past the same rates of autism we see today? It's brutally simple. The children born with such genetic differences mostly didn't survive to reproductive age. They were murdered.

      Evidence? The number of people with reported autism has increased by hundreds of percent over the last couple decades. Were Americans killing off large numbers of their children before then? I don't think so.

    5. Re:Oh, some rich are a huge part of the problem by Turfoil · · Score: 1

      or that the factors that can cause autism are related to depression.

      --
      Waiting for a real sig
    6. Re:Oh, some rich are a huge part of the problem by Rakarra · · Score: 2

      Diagnoses of autism have climbed in part because we're a little more lax about what constitutes "autism." Fifty years ago someone would have been called "slow" or a "dullard," not autistic. I'm not saying this accounts for all the rise of diagnoses, but our our diagnostic standards have changed over the decades.

    7. Re:Oh, some rich are a huge part of the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "And for people to hide under this and say, 'Oh, it's just a personal decision,' it's being dishonest. It's a personal decision in the way drunk driving is a personal decision. It has the potential to affect everyone around you."

      It is a VERY personal decision - one that's about control of one's body, and consent. It is nothing like drunk driving, which creates new risk and exposes everyone to it. With vaccination, the vaccinated are immunized, by definition, so they are 1) not subject to the risk of other people's choices and 2) supposedly better off than they would have been. As such, there is no reason for them to complain - let alone try to violate anyone else's autonomy with bullying. Try being "cup-half full" for once...

      Don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with science, and I'm not against vaccines: I'm against forced vaccines. That shit ain't cool. The vaccinated need to come to terms with the fact that their say ends with them, and their children, not me and mine, even if I want the shots. They should be happy with that,because the alternative is bad fences making us neighbors.

  39. Re:Highest in infant mortality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lets analyze the process of having a baby in a hospital.. it must be related to the age of the parent... or their obesity.. Premature birth rates maybe..., but double the infant mortality rate of states with similar premature birth rates? ... I am just saying, you should get out of the bubble to realize that our healthcare system has some issues.. vaccination area is one of them. High, vaccination rate is great..., but poor vaccination administration process that scares away educated people who saw that it can work in 30+ nations above us in the healthcare ratings with almost no casualties

  40. Re:Your rights don't include infecting my kid or m by Triklyn · · Score: 1

    no, but children are legally mandated to receive an education. kids who can't get vaccinated, their parents could decide that a camping trip might be safer than one to a theme park, and they're free to make that decision. they can take measures, not so much with schooling. educating a kid is a full time job... you know what teachers do.

  41. A Doctor, not a chiropractor. by nickberry · · Score: 1

    If an MD writes the request I can go along with that. Not a damn chiropractor or a therapist or some other silly shit.

  42. Re:Your rights don't include infecting my kid or m by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unfortunately, today in state like GA and Mississippi, if your kid or you as an adult cannot get vaccinated for medical reasons, you will be denied admission to school already. If you do get vaccinated with an autoimmune issue, chance are you would be disabled for life. Options: disabled for life or go to school....

  43. Re:thank god for the poor states by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Guess which two states have the lowest rates of autism. Yep, it's Mississippi and West Virginia at .04 and .05.
    http://graphics.latimes.com/usmap-autism-rates-state/

    No, you are wrong.
    Look again at your map. Iowa is the lowest at .1% rate.
    Mississippi has .4% and is tied with Montana, South Dakota, Kansas, Colorado, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Louisiana, South Carolina.
    West Virginia is higher than any of those states at .5% and ties with 5 others at .5%

    Here's another set of maps, although from an anti-vax site: http://vaxtruth.org/2012/04/when-1-in-88-is-really-1-in-29/
    It's still not Misssissippi.

  44. Re:thank god for the poor states by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm no antivaxxer, but do they have the lowest rates of autism, or merely the lowest /diagnosed/ rates? Given their poverty one can imagine fewer people going to the doctor in those states.

    Mississippi does not have the lowest autism rate. The OP is wrong.

  45. Re:foreign invasion by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

    They start with unvaccinated legal US citizens going on vacation and coming back infected.

    Note that the measles vaccine is only 97% effective.

    Note further that the national vaccination rate is ~94.7%.

    Which leaves us with 5.3% of the population vulnerable due to lack of vaccine, and 2.8% vulnerable due to failed vaccine.

    In other words, the odds say about 35% of measles come into the country from vaccinated people going on vacation and coming back infected.

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  46. Re: thank god for the poor states by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/01/26/the-biggest-myth-about-vaccine-deniers-that-theyre-all-a-bunch-of-hippie-liberals/?postshare=1051423147010955

  47. Say what you will about the south. by Revek · · Score: 1

    We vaccinate. I"m old enough to remember measles, mumps and chickenpox. You don't have a up to date vaccination card your kid doesn't go to school around here. We call those antivaxers in California idiots and for good reason. I have a autistic child and I never blamed the vaccinations. Our modern society freaks out when kids walk home from a park on their own.

    Why aren't they freaking about the little plague vectors walking around spreading disease to those to young to vacinate and those with weakened immune systems?

    1. Re:Say what you will about the south. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      It's true that a lot of anti-vax sentiment is coming from the neo-hippie crowd. But if you look at the political platform, it seems to be concentrated more solidly on the Right, and particularly espoused by hardline, "anti-establishment" candidates that seem to be more popular in Deep South.

  48. Re:Your rights don't include infecting my kid or m by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    No, you're blatantly wrong. There are three potential reasons for an exemption: religious, personal, or medical. Let me put this in capitals so you can understand:

    EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE GODDAMN 50 STATES ALLOWS A MEDICAL EXEMPTION FOR VACCINATIONS.

    Source: CDC
    http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/imz-managers/laws/

  49. Re: thank god for the poor states by jythie · · Score: 1

    Is it not nice to find something that jerks and idiots of all political stripes can agree on?

  50. They might as well have killed the law by aepervius · · Score: 1

    People are good at nagging doctor. So they will get them write off the exemption, for no medical reason whatsoever. And if that doctor refuse, there will be another one which accept. They pretty much gutted the law.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  51. Re:Your rights don't include infecting my kid or m by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The recent cases of measles in the US were introduced by people who came across the border and brought measles in with them. The measles vaccine is not 100% effective. We would still have measles cases here in the US even if everyone was vaccinated. How about we stop allowing and encouraging people to cross the border and bring in diseases with them?

  52. Re:foreign invasion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your math is very strange.

  53. Re:conscientious beliefs... let's break that down. by JeffAtl · · Score: 1

    Except for the "science deniers" in this case would have to be the physicians themselves.

    Which will be easy enough to find - especially if they don't want to face liability issues for going against the will of the parents.

    Expect a huge influx of "child is allergic to all vaccine" reports from Mississippi doctors in the near future.

  54. Memo to Mississippi Republican Legislators: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We've detected a program that is, apparently, enforced by Mississippi law and that appears to be working. Please take measures to make this stop. It's going to make it that much more difficult to be able to drown government in the bathtub if this is allowed to continue.

    Remember: Government is the problem.

    Thank you,

    GOP Platform Committee

  55. If Mississippi and Arkansas didn't suck so hard... by Dareth · · Score: 1

    If Mississippi and Arkansas didn't suck so hard...Louisiana would fall off into the Gulf.... probably pushed by Texas.

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
  56. Missing story about Merck vaccination lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is one ongoing whistle blower vaccination lawsuit in the state of Pennsylvania. The full case is available via Google.

  57. Re:thank god for the poor states by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

    School aged vaccinations for this type of stuff are generally available for free (there's usually a local government-run "Health Department" that will administer them).

    Basically all the mandatory vaccinations are that way. The yearly flu-shot isn't completely free, though almost all insurances cover it if you elect to take it. At work they'll bring a nurse in for a day or two and you can just stop in and get one if you'd like.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  58. How about Antibiotics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps the people suspicious of preventive medical treatment might turn their focus on the over-used antibiotics so that when somebody really needs antibiotics in the future, they might actually work.

  59. People just don't trust doctors; MDs don't listen by Theovon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I've found very few MDs who have any kind of listening skills. I've known some brilliant ones. But many of them are shills for the drug companies, pushing unnecessary drugs and just all-around being ineffective. We're told to revere doctors, but the reality is that MDs are not scientists -- they're technicians, and often not terribly skilled ones. These facts are not lost on their patents. People just don't trust doctors. Vaccines are just one more dubious thing that MDs push on us.

    This distrust of the medical profession totally understandable, and you shouldn't call people morons for feeling this way. Most people are not scientists who can do their own research. Their only source of information is these doctors they don't like. If we want to fix the vaccination problem, we have to fix the doctors and get them to stop doing stupid things like prescribing antidepressants for autoimmune diseases. [*]

    The science of vaccines is solid. As with anything, it's not entirely risk-free, but the risks are worth the benefits for protection against some serious diseases. It's also irresponsible to put other people at risk. IF (huge IF) there is any correlation with autism, that correlation is miniscule compared to the effects of the other shit we put in our bodies (horrible American diet, pollution, etc.). But people are much more willing to skip a vaccination appointment than not eat that Big Mac.

    Incidentally, I heard recently something interesting about flu shots. If those who decide which viruses are being innoculated against predict them correctly, then flu shots work great. If, on the other hand, their predictions are too far off the mark, the flu shot may actually make you MORE vulnerable to viruses that they missed. Of course, you should verify this claim before deciding not to get a flu shot. This isn't a matter of effectiveness of vaccines but rather an issue of getting the right ones.

    [*] In medical school doctors are expliclty taught that if someone comes in with a constellation of symptoms, especially if they have them written down, then that person is a hypochondriac. The thing is, auto-immune diseases are not exactly a 1-in-a-million phenomenon. Hashimoto's and Lupus are quite well understood. They come with constellations of symptoms, and they also come with brain fog, which basically forces people to write down their symptoms. My wife had to perform her own differential diagnosis based on the symptoms to determine (abductively) that Hashimoto's is the clear best explanation, but nevertheless, she had to fight with one of the few endocrinologists in the area just to get tested. Of course she tested positive, but even in the face of the evidence, this doctor still doesn't want to engage in any kind of treatment plan. Why? Because endocrinologists make all their money from pushing drugs on diabetics and have no interest in anything else.

  60. Re:thank god for the poor states by Maritz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's amazing. What an amazing story. Get this out to the scientific community pronto, they've been pissing about doing studies of tens of thousands of people for decades, but fuck that, because you got sick a bit as a kid and now that you haven't been vaccinated you don't get sick. So yeah let's chuck the vaccines, based on what you think you experienced.

    TLDR anecdotes count for precisely fuck-all.

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  61. Onion... :D by Maritz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Onion as usual got right to the core of it :)

    "Regardless of what anyone else thinks, I fully stand behind my choices as a mom, including my choice not to vaccinate my son, because it is my fundamental right as a parent to decide which eradicated diseases come roaring back."

    Vaccine refusers are some of the most odious, self-entitled pricks on this planet.

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  62. Re:thank god for the poor states by nickberry · · Score: 2

    Those with insurance no longer have to pay for childhood vaccinations. It's covered 100% by insurance as required by law, as are the well baby(child) check ups for I think the first 5 years.

  63. Arm Bans for Un-Vaccinated. by kenj123 · · Score: 1

    I think people who don't have vaccinations should have to wear arm bands so the rest of us know to avoid them. They are petri dishes of infectious disease.

  64. Anti-Vaxxers by msobkow · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The anti-vaccine people are the most selfishly stupid people on this planet. Citing a discredited report linking vaccines to autism, taking medical advice from a media whore that appeared on Oprah over that of scientists and doctors, quoting conspiracy theory websites, and claiming "special knowledge" that is being "kept hidden", they put the very young who have not been immunized at risk of completely preventable diseases.

    They also put those who are on anti-rejection drugs after a transplant at risk. And those who are chemotherapy. And those who are on retroviral drugs.

    All they think about is their own paranoid delusions of a grand conspiracy "out to get them."

    John Cleese describes them better than I can:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvVPdyYeaQU

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:Anti-Vaxxers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or the active whistle blower lawsuit in state of Pennsylvania against Merck in regards to using animal samples within their human stats for the Measles vaccine.. oh hold on, everybody in my family is fully vaccinated and my kids will be... but when I mention that this is going on, people refuse to believe or even google it

    2. Re:Anti-Vaxxers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here is a copy of what is likely the real cause of the Measles outbreak at Disney:
      http://www.naturalnews.com/gallery/documents/Merck-False-Claims-Act.pdf

    3. Re:Anti-Vaxxers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All they think about is their own paranoid delusions of a grand conspiracy "out to get them."

      Why shouldn't they?

    4. Re:Anti-Vaxxers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here is a copy of what is likely the real cause of the Measles outbreak at Disney:
      http://www.naturalnews.com/gal...

      Please stop linking to naturalnews. You might as well be linking to the Onion, or Weekly World News.

  65. Re:thank god for the poor states by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

    . I can see why some people wouldn't want to pay for somebody else's knee surgery, or heart transplant if they brought it on themselves by their own lifestyle

    Are there really people who say "your particular combination of luck, genetics, circumstance and choices are so much more influenced by choice than anything that unlike other people with health conditions, fuck you" ?

    Are those people worried that the lack of financial incentives will be the tipping point?

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
  66. Re:thank god for the poor states by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This sort of comment makes it clear how misinformed the news has kept the world with regard to the state of US healthcare. Free clue; it's not like the media portrays it. In this case, anyone who wants their child vaccinated can get it done somewhere, and it's been so for decades.

  67. Re:thank god for the poor states by Blue+Stone · · Score: 1

    Essentially, they have a prophylactic to protect them from the virus that is vaccination denialism?

    --
    Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
  68. civil or criminal recourse? by smellsofbikes · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have a friend who, in her thirties, just got measles from one of her son's friends, and now she's lost her hearing -- a fairly common, and often permanent, complication of measles. She's trying to sue the parents, on the basis of one of them posting about how they didn't vaccinate their child because they didn't believe in it. She figures that if a person who has AIDS and has unprotected sex with people can be charged with murder -- a criminal act -- she should be able to win a civil judgment for at least negligence.
    If it works, it could be an interesting new chapter in the vaccination story, and does raise the question of why AIDS is handled differently than measles.

    --
    Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    1. Re:civil or criminal recourse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Was she get vaccinated?

    2. Re:civil or criminal recourse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Put me in touch with her, I will contribute to her legal fund.
      winehacker@gmail.com

  69. Only One "Whole Foods" in Mississippi by rssrss · · Score: 1, Informative

    This report in the main post above was absolutely guaranteed to inflame the condescension so inherent in the liberal coastal mentality that afflicts so many /. posters. No human society can be found that is not riddled with irrational pieties and unfounded self-congratulation. This is not to say that any human being not otherwise non-compis mentis would prefer to live in San Francisco over Peshawar. But, condescending to the rubes who live in Dixie is not only rude, it is foolish. Sometimes they really are smarter than /.ers.

    "Why the 'Prius Driving, Composting' Set Fears Vaccines By Greg Miller at ScienceMag.org on 31 January 2011

    Journalist Seth Mnookin's new book, The Panic Virus: A True Story of Medicine, Science, and Fear, explores the public health scare over vaccines and autism. ...

    Mnookin warns of grave consequences. Recent outbreaks of measles, whooping cough, and other preventable infections have sickened thousands of children and killed more than a dozen in the United States. Vaccine rates are falling below the level needed to prevent an outbreak in a growing number of communities, including ones with wealthy, educated populations.

    Q: There's a perception that vaccine refusal is especially common among affluent, well-educated, politically liberal parentsâ"is there any truth to that?

    S.M.: It's dangerous to make broad generalizations about a group, but anecdotally and from the overall data that's been collected it seems to be people who are very actively involved in every possible decision regarding their children's lives. I think it relates to a desire to take uncertainty out of the equation. And autism represents such an unknown. We still don't know what causes it and we still don't have good answers for how to treat it. So I think that fear really resonates.

    Also I think there's a fair amount of entitlement. Not vaccinating your child is basically saying I deserve to rely on the herd immunity that exists in a population. At the most basic level it's saying I believe vaccines are potentially harmful, and I want other people to vaccinate so I don't have to. And for people to hide under this and say, "Oh, it's just a personal decision," it's being dishonest. It's a personal decision in the way drunk driving is a personal decision. It has the potential to affect everyone around you.

    Q: But why liberals?

    S.M.: I think it taps into the organic natural movement in a lot of ways.

    I talked to a public health official and asked him what's the best way to anticipate where there might be higher than normal rates of vaccine noncompliance, and he said take a map and put a pin wherever there's a Whole Foods. I sort of laughed, and he said, "No, really, I'm not joking." It's those communities with the Prius driving, composting, organic food-eating people.

    --
    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
    1. Re:Only One "Whole Foods" in Mississippi by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      But, condescending to the rubes who live in Dixie is not only rude, it is foolish. Sometimes they really are smarter than /.ers.

      Sometimes they are slashdotters.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:Only One "Whole Foods" in Mississippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a Whole Foods near where I work. I avoid it like the plague. Not for the store itself, it's actually got a lot of good stuff. But as for most of the people who shop there- well I couldn't think of a better, more appropriate group to get hit by a measles outbreak (not that any group actually should). Can't even drive by the parking lot of that place without seeing someone act like a complete idiot or jackass.

    3. Re:Only One "Whole Foods" in Mississippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's popular to blame the ultra-liberal elite, but the reality is that outbreaks haven't been occurring within that population. In 2014, there was a surge of measles cases due to an outbreak in an Ohio Amish community. There hasn't been as many cases within a year since the Christian science student outbreak in 1994 in Missouri/Illinois.

      On a side note, my friend in Mississippi was very excited about getting a Whole Foods. Apparently, there isn't too much variety in food down there.

  70. Re:thank god for the poor states by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I do agree. The state would be a great pool to determine the efficacy of vaccinations. Are measles still contracted? What about chicken pox?

  71. Re:thank god for the poor states by Boronx · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When I was a kid I got a lot of vaccines. My income was zero. Now I get almost no vaccines and my income has skyrocketed.

  72. This is amendment is a mistake by mysidia · · Score: 2

    The amended version of House Bill 130 puts into law the state's existing practice of granting medical waivers to children whose physicians request them, and in doing so, removes the Mississippi Department of Health's ability to deny such requests.

    Normally, I would agree that this would be fine.

    However, the irrational anti-vaccine hysteria has become too widespread.

    What is going to happen, is there are going to be improper waivers given in the name of a "health issue" constructed for the purposes of avoiding vaccination.

    Inevitably, there are going to be some medical professionals who are persuaded. They should be students of science, but there are plenty in the industry who are not scientists and could be persuaded by some specious arguments.

    Therefore, I would say that their waiver should be subject to review. If there is any doubt; it should not be adequate just to find one professional to sign off on something. There should have to be a documented basis that would be accepted by the industry or by the average professional.

  73. Re:People just don't trust doctors; MDs don't list by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well said. And I can agree with a lot of what you said.

  74. Re:thank god for the poor states by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know how widespread this is in Canada but every september, my son's school insists on seeing each student's vaccination booklet. If your vacc's aren't up to date, you don't go to school.

    People should go further and refuse to let their children play with other children who have not been vaccinated.

    That would either cause the idiots to grow a clue or force them into tight little enclaves that will eventually take care of themselves.

  75. Re:foreign invasion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thank you so much for this... you're right... most people in the U.S. don't realize that people from Latin America are mandated by the federal government to keep track of their MANDATORY vaccines, so we have an even lower rate of non-vaccinated people in our countries, or, at least, in Mexcio, your friendly southern neighbor.

    I've been reading a few right wing reports where silly right wing people (Not all right wingers are this stupid, I know, I have a few friends who are really awesome republicans in the U.S.) who want to blame illegal immigrants so that poor "religion belief anti-vaxxers" don't have to feel the blame...well...the joke's on them, I guess... if kids don't have their vaccines, and the government finds out, you can say goodbye to your kids.

    So yeah, it was most probably those "personal belief" people who created this outbreak. A few of my friends who have been planning trips to Disney for more than six months are quite angry about this.

  76. Re:People just don't trust doctors; MDs don't list by firewrought · · Score: 2

    I've found very few MDs who have any kind of listening skills. I've known some brilliant ones.

    Yeah, I know what you mean. In talking to several doctors, I get the distinct feeling that I'm on the flip side of what happens when my mother-in-law has a computing problem: she hands me the computer and starts offering endless way-off-the-mark suggestions which I have to forcibly ignore while trying to concentrate on troubleshooting the real problem.

    Being listened to makes us feel better (in pretty much any human situation, but especially when our health is on the line). However, we as patients are generally dumping a load of crap on the doc when it comes to listing a "constellations of symptoms". It takes great patience and integrity for a doctor to diligently listen through all of that verbage for the 1-in-a-million gem, and most docs don't have that sort of time.

    I'm still learning how to use doctors effectively, and the best thing I've learned over the past few years is that... if you've got a disease that's poorly understood, find the docs who have the expertise on that condition. (And hope they aren't just pill-pushers, I guess.) My general internist thought I needed a pacemaker, the cardiologist controlled the worst symptoms with drugs, and the dysautonomic disease specialist knew what my problem was and established a treatment plan to fix it. Something that was a complete mystery to the first two doctors was a routine case for the third.

    --
    -1, Too Many Layers Of Abstraction
  77. This doesn't surprise me at all. by hey! · · Score: 1

    I have a young relative who's an anti-vaxxer. A lot of my relatives are science fans and natural history geeks, so its putting a lot of stress on the family.

    Here's the thing about anti-vaxxers. It's a stupid position but the people who take it aren't necessarily stupid or uneducated. What they are is rabidly anti-authority. "Question Authority" was even a popular left-wing slogan in the 60s and 70s. And it's a good idea, along with believing in your ability to decide for yourself, which is another value my generation worked hard to inculcate in our kids. But like anything else you can go overboard with these things; you need countervailing virtues to work them against. I think where many parents in my generation missed the boat was that we failed to inculcate a respect for the value of rational self-doubt. Constructive self-doubt is something our Depression era parents had by the bucketful, and so many of us saw it as a natural state to be overcome, not a positive virtue to be cultivated.

    The places you see the most knee-jerk anti-authority mindset are the places that were historically most full of free-thinkers and radicals. Places where people were taught to respect authority and institutions don't have this particular form of insanity (they have their own forms). So anti-vaxx is blue-state birtherism. But this kind of mindless anti-authorarianism has also increasingly become a feature of modern "conservatism", too. Violently emotional anti-establishment views are a feature of radicalsm whatever flavor that radicalism takes.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    1. Re:This doesn't surprise me at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you say he's an anti-vaxxer, do you just mean he's against government forcing stupid people to get vaccinated against their will? (It kind of sounds like you're saying that.)

      Or does he also believe that vaccination itself, causes harm? And if he were authoritarian (sounds like he's not, so I realize this is pretty hypothetical) do you think he would favor a law that prohibits people from vaccinating their "innocent, defenseless, unable-to-consent" children?

      BTW, "question authority" and constructive self-doubt aren't mutually exclusive. I know I'm a fuckit; I merely believe that most of my leaders are even dumber, and the ones who aren't dumber, are eviler.

  78. Stupid assholes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stupid assholes who actually believe ONE massively-debunked and retracted paper by ONE doctor who has since been stripped of his license to practice medicine, are going to catapult us into the next dark age.

  79. A solution to the problem by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    People who refuse to vaccinate (either themselves or their children) are also not allowed:

    Airbags, ABS, and Seatbelts in their cars
    Smoke detectors or fire extinguishers in their homes
    Insurance of any kind (that's socialism, right?)
    Chlorinated water from their water service
    Flame retardant furniture
    Any other safety device mandated by government ever

    The problem will take care of itself rather quickly when all of the anti-vaxxers have died off.

  80. Re:thank god for the poor states by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    When I got vaccinated as a kid, I always ended up sick at some point that same year.

    So as a kid, you got sick with polio, mumps, measles, and whooping cough, and lived to tell about it?

    I got sick a lot as a kid too. As an adult, I don't get sick much at all. It's normal for kids to get sick a lot: they're in school with hundreds of other kids, and catch it from them. There's a reason some people call kids "disease vectors".

  81. unvaccinated legal US citizens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The live, attenuated virus found in MMR vaccine does not cause autism, children anymore than a vaccinated child catching a disease from an unvaccinated child. The hysteria associated with this ongoing story is probably nothing more than news hype to sell newspapers.

    1. Re:unvaccinated legal US citizens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The (disproven) theory was that it was a preservative in the vaccine that caused problems, not the virus itself.

  82. Re:thank god for the poor states by deadweight · · Score: 2

    When I was a kid and got vaccinations, I could not fly an airplane. Now I don't get any and know how to fly. If we just stop with the vaccines, the Air Force can save a TON of money and get rid of pilot training!

  83. Re:thank god for the poor states by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had all of those, except for polio. I remember when a whole lot of kids from my grade school had the measels. I had whooping cough multiple times as a kid. This was before the vaccines had been invented.

  84. Re: thank god for the poor states by jd2112 · · Score: 1

    Hey, I don't care what the entire medical profession says. Jenny McCarthy says they cause autism. She's a celebrity so obviously she knows more than all of the doctors in the world right? And my next door neighbor's cousins best friends college roommate's sisters daughter had a tummy ache right after getting vaccinated so they must be bad right? /snark

    --
    Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
  85. Re:thank god for the poor states by Bonzoli · · Score: 1

    Do we have a map of which states cover mental health care with autism spectrum children?

  86. Re:thank god for the poor states by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yes. absolutely. Don't exercise. Smoke. Eat shitty food. Become 100 pounds overweight. Then expect me to pay for your diabetes medicine and lung surgery. Fuck no.

  87. Re:thank god for the poor states by Bartles · · Score: 1

    California is in the toilet when it comes to vaccination rates. Wealthy Progressive areas are the worst, followed by poor Progressive areas. Coincidence or Medicaid?

  88. Re: thank god for the poor states by Bartles · · Score: 1
  89. Re:thank god for the poor states by Bartles · · Score: 1

    Doesn't everybody have insurance, now that it's mandatory?

  90. Re:thank god for the poor states by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

    No one expects you to do shit. I do expect insurance companies to take care of those they ensure. And I do expect the government to help poor people.

    I don't know why your panties are in a bunch. What the fuck you expect. You want every health insurer to charge you a premium increase everytime you have sex outside of marriage? Every time you eat red meat? Everytime you don't eat red meat if the head of the company starts believing in Atkin's?

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
  91. Re: thank god for the poor states by Rakarra · · Score: 1

    Jenny McCarthy says they cause autism. She's a celebrity so obviously she knows more than all of the doctors in the world right?

    Her child wasn't even autistic. She couldn't even get that part right. He has Landau–Kleffner syndrome, and now that he doesn't show autism symptoms, she says that chelation therapy cured her son. Every statement she makes just gets worse.

  92. Re:thank god for the poor states by Rakarra · · Score: 2

    yes. absolutely. Don't exercise. Smoke. Eat shitty food. Become 100 pounds overweight. Then expect me to pay for your diabetes medicine and lung surgery. Fuck no

    No one expects you to do shit. I do expect insurance companies to take care of those they ensure

    In other words, you DO expect us to pay for them. If you're asking someone other than the person who gets sick to pay for the treatments, then you're asking all of us to. Neither insurance companies nor governments are pools of magic money, that money comes from insured folks and tax payers.

  93. It's _just_ religion, not "victim of success" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But it is one of two states that permit neither religious nor philosophical exemptions to its vaccination program.

    Isn't that pretty much what it all comes down to? Religion is the reason people decide to avoid the treatment, and the government forcing it on people against their religious beliefs, gets it done.

    It seems like a simple question of which thing (public health vs freedom) is most important. Note when I say a "simple question" I don't mean to imply it's easy for a politician to make a decision that everyone will like or that we can't have a good flamewar over it. I just mean for each person, there's some kind of absolute public-good-vs-freedom thing going on in their head, and the individual ends up deciding one way or another. (And I have a hunch that each person decides pretty quickly and easily, but maybe I'm wrong.)

    I don't think society is ever going to get rid of religion (i.e. 1000 years from now, lots of people will still make up answers to questions rather than actually trying to figure the answers out), so you can't really dodge the issue. It's not going to get obsoleted.

    1. Re:It's _just_ religion, not "victim of success" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But it is one of two states that permit neither religious nor philosophical exemptions to its vaccination program.

      Isn't that pretty much what it all comes down to? Religion is the reason people decide to avoid the treatment, and the government forcing it on people against their religious beliefs, gets it done.

      It seems like a simple question of which thing (public health vs freedom) is most important. Note when I say a "simple question" I don't mean to imply it's easy for a politician to make a decision that everyone will like or that we can't have a good flamewar over it. I just mean for each person, there's some kind of absolute public-good-vs-freedom thing going on in their head, and the individual ends up deciding one way or another. (And I have a hunch that each person decides pretty quickly and easily, but maybe I'm wrong.)

      I don't think society is ever going to get rid of religion (i.e. 1000 years from now, lots of people will still make up answers to questions rather than actually trying to figure the answers out), so you can't really dodge the issue. It's not going to get obsoleted.

      Your assumption is wrong.
      Religion is not the reason for the vast majority of anti-vaxers.
      All major religions support vaccination - Catholics, mainstream Protestants, Islam, Hindu, Judaism etc.
      Most of the people who claim religious objections to vaccination in the USA are liars.
      I'm aware that there are outliers such as Christian Scientists and the Taliban (who don't object to vaccination per se, only to western based vaccination campaigns). However, those are small in number.

  94. Re:thank god for the poor states by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    One issue is that you can not tell whether life style caused a particular case of heart disease or not. There is reason to believe that genetics as well as infections cause heart disease and perhaps more so than diet or exercise cause the same problems. For example a clogged heart valve may be mostly fatty material or calcium deposits or a mixture of both. Yet we have no idea of whether drinking a glass of milk causes calcium deposits in the heart in most people nor is fat intake tied to fatty accumulations in the arteries. The most northern tribes of native people have diets that are super high in fat and it does not appear to harm them.

  95. Way Back by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    In 1951 and 52 I had compulsory vacinations in Tunica Mississippi in the third and fourth grade. They would line us up a hundred or so at a time and give us our shots. They took off the needles and tossed them in a pan of water which turned pink from the blood. The sick part is that they sterilized the needles and used them over and over again. That creates a one in seven thousand death rate due to contaminted needles. For some reason it struck me as nasty and I threw a fit and refused to let them vacinate me. I had it done by my private doctor to meet school requirements. Back then the big fear in the delta was typhoid and the schools really did need to be certain that all the kids were vacinated. That region had a long history of typhoid outbreaks due to high ground water levels and use of home wells and outhouses for many homes.

  96. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  97. Re:foreign invasion by Orgasmatron · · Score: 1

    Mexico is now keeping track of vaccinations for every illegal that crosses the border into the US? The ones from Honduras? The ones from Yemen?

    --
    See that "Preview" button?
  98. Re:Your rights don't include infecting my kid or m by NewWorldDan · · Score: 1

    Your rights don't include injecting whatever the hell you think you should into my body or my child's. Now personally, my child is vaccinated against pretty much everything. At the same time, I'm very strongly against having public schools. Every private school should have the right to refuse service to any unvaccinated child. Also, while my child is vaccinated, I still fill out the conscientious objection form, because it's none of the state's business.

    Frankly, what I've been seeing from the latest outbreaks is it's overwhelmingly the unvaccinated who are getting sick with a very small percentage of the ill being those who have been vaccinated. With results like that, I don't think the argument that the unvaccinated put the rest of the population at risk holds that much weight.

    Once a few children get sick and die from these preventable diseases, a lot of people will decide that vaccination is the right course of action. It won't take any government mandate, either.

  99. Re:thank god for the poor states by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Doesn't everybody have insurance, now that it's mandatory?

    I don't. I'm unemployed and my state's Republican governor refused the Socialist Federal Handout from President Hussein Medicaid expansions that came along with ACA. Because I have enough money to buy ramen and Campbell's soup this week, and I don't have any children, I don't qualify for any insurance reimbursements whatsoever.

    Once the governor finally noticed that hospitals are closing down statewide and hundreds of of thousands of Tennesseeans are still uninsured, he realized the error of his ways and tried to get it done through a special legislative session. That failed this week because despite the Republican governor seeing the light and reversing his position, the Republican state legislators still refuse to accept a Socialist Federal Handout from President Hussein. They're all rich and half of them are physicians; why in heavens would anyone need help from the government to pay for healthcare, they wonder.

    As an unemployed, white, non-parent, male resident of Tennessee, the cheapest healthcare.gov option available to me is $197 a month (that would be ~$12 a month had our state accepted federal Medicaid expansion). I was paying $220 a month when I was comfortably employed; $197 a month is no bargain and for now that money is going towards food and a roof. They can penalize me on my tax return all they want.

  100. Re:thank god for the poor states by oobayly · · Score: 1

    Vaccinations stunted my growth - when I was a kid I was less than 5ft, now that I've stopped getting vaccinations I'm 5ft 11. Coincidence? I don't think so.

  101. Re:thank god for the poor states by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

    I'm not expecting you to do anything, individually. I do expect society to take care of people who are sick. I expect insurers to live up to their obligations as well.

    I have, quite literally, no idea why you oppose that. You seem upset. I'm not sure why. Why is helping sick people such anathema to you?

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
  102. Oh, *that* kind of moron. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thus fully answering the question of, "What sort of moron are you?" Congratulations.

    I bet that it's really all just a plot by the military industrial complex to inject tracking devices into people, so they know where to drop the chemtrails. That's why they crashed the planes into the Twin Towers, you know, because the terrorists were about to reveal all of the secret chemtrail equipment. It all came from the Roswell crash, of course. The chemtrails, and the vaccines, and the Apollo space program. The moon landings were faked, because they couldn't let the Russians know about the alien rocket technology. The aliens are responsible for HIV too, or at least the ones in our government. It's how they keep control, don't you see?

    I have to go. They're watching!

  103. Re:People just don't trust doctors; MDs don't list by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    Strange, most of the doctors I've visited were good at listening. There have been exceptions (one in particular would say something, I'd contradict it, and he'd go on without paying attention), but you'll also get exceptions. The doctors I've seen have also been good about making sure I understand what's going on and what I can do about it.

    BTW, is it stupid to prescribe antidepressants for people who come in with the symptoms of autoimmune disease? Modern antidepressants are fairly safe drugs, for adults anyway, and if most people who come in with those symptoms tend to be depressed, it may be a useful way of approaching treatment.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  104. Re:People just don't trust doctors; MDs don't list by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    You might want to deal with academic-type doctors if you suspect a rare condition. Some of them tend to blow off common problems as uninteresting, but are great at finding the rare ones.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  105. Re:thank god for the poor states by mjwx · · Score: 1

    Everywhere I've lived in the US, vaccinations are provided gratis by the local health department.

    Organisation may be a serious problem there.

    With Australia and Canada. Nationwide you can go see a GP for your childs immi and receive it. Basic adult immunisations like a tetanus booster are free for life.

    You dont have to search for a clinic that provides the free vaccines, it doesn't change if I move states, your records move with you easily.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  106. Re:Your rights don't include infecting my kid or m by chill · · Score: 1

    And? Medical exemptions are not some sham to provide an "out" to the religious and personal exemption crowd. From the article:

    "For kindergartners that year, Mississippi approved just 17 medical exemptions, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said. Neighboring Arkansas, which had about 3,100 fewer kindergarten students than Mississippi that year, recorded 24 medical exemptions."

    This strikes me as honestly kids who might seriously have a condition that makes certain vaccinations dangerous. I mean 17 out of 45,000+ is a damn small number.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  107. Re:conscientious beliefs... let's break that down. by mark_reh · · Score: 1

    pro means with, con means against.

  108. Re:conscientious beliefs... let's break that down. by mark_reh · · Score: 1

    The science clearly demonstrates that vaccination works, period. To deny it is idiocy. Anyone can be an idiot, including some physicians. They are in the minority (and wrong) among physicians.

  109. Libertarians -- from the article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Moreover, every time researchers examine the political outlooks of vaccine deniers through representative surveys, it seems that they fail to find a significant leftwing bent. Consider two major studies on this from the last two years:

    * In a 2013 paper in PLOS One, Stephan Lewandowsky and two colleagues studied what makes people reject vaccines, and got a complicated result. Namely, they found that while political conservatism made people somewhat more pro-vaccine, having a free market ideology led in the opposite direction — towards having more vaccine skepticism.

    “Opposition to vaccinations involved a balance between two opposing forces, namely a negative association with free-market endorsement and a compensatory positive association with conservatism,” wrote the authors. “The different polarity of those associations is consonant with the notion that libertarians object to the government intrusion arising from mandatory vaccination programs, whereas people low on conservatism — who, by implication, are liberal or progressive — may oppose immunization because they distrust pharmaceutical companies.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

    So people who would jump to the conclusion of "liberals" because of the geography involved probably are ignoring the *other* major demographic in those areas.

    The main takeaway from the article is that denial of medical care is starting to spread beyond the usual ultraconservative religions and groups like the John Birch Society.

    "Gov't Vaccination Agenda" LOL

  110. Re:thank god for the poor states by blueg3 · · Score: 1

    You dont have to search for a clinic that provides the free vaccines, it doesn't change if I move states, your records move with you easily.

    Here, you don't have to search for a clinic that provides free vaccines, either. It's a local government department.

    All local services change if you move states. You certainly don't see the same GP after you move, no?

  111. Re:The vaccines CAUSE the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Measles vaccines kill more people than measles, CDC data proves

    Measles outbreak likely caused by vaccinated children, science shows

    Measles and death?
    Well, that's just stupid. It is like saying that automobiles are no longer a major cause of dyslexia.
    The problem with measles in the pre-vaccination years wasn't death; the problem was that measles was a leading cause of blindness.
    It still is a huge problem: http://www.surveyophthalmol.co...

  112. Re:thank god for the poor states by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's because they are largely funded by public dollars that Mississippi's law may very well be watered down, a lot..... 'religious beliefs and objections' will get tossed squarely at the 'separation of church and state' front, which loses virtually everywhere except 'in god we trust' on our currency and coins.

    but.. lets throw some teeth into the revision..

    The amended version of House Bill 130 puts into law the state's existing practice of granting medical waivers to children whose physicians request them, and in doing so, removes the Mississippi Department of Health's ability to deny such requests. "If a medical professional thinks it's wise not to vaccinate, then that will be the gospel," said House Education Committee Chairman John Moore, R-Brandon.

    fine. but if that medical professional is wrong or is bribed (e.g. is just doing what the patient's parents say and is 'paying for'), take away his license to practice.. permanently.

  113. Re:People just don't trust doctors; MDs don't list by Theovon · · Score: 1

    In a lot of cases, SSRI's aren't going to work. Celiac disease, for instance, tends to be associated with leaky gut, where the mucosal lining is eroded, and the gut is more permiable. The mucosal lining is a major location where serotonin is stored. If your serotonin storage bank is nonfunctional, then there's not enough serotonin to selectively reuptake. Therefore, such people need to supplement it more or less directly by taking something like 5HTP. This converts to serotonin (and also permiates the blood-brain barrier better than tryptophan).

    In case you find this informative, and you also need to supplement norepinephrine, consider tyrosine and dessicated bovine adrenal gland. Tyrosine is precursor to several neurotransmitters.

  114. What are Autism rates in Mississippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    burn the strawman.

    I've never seen anyone claim that vaccinations are THE cause, simply that they can/do cause, but not in everyone. It is widely understood, in circles where people take more than 5 minutes to do some research, that there is more than one trigger for autism and that it is even reversible in many cases. Yes, it has been cured, time and again.

    No cites here, Ill let you do your own homework.

    Here's a hint though: why would a child who is not on any medication test positive for opiates?

  115. Re:thank god for the poor states by vandamme · · Score: 1

    I was vaccinated at birth, and was so traumatized I didn't talk for two years.

  116. Re:thank god for the poor states by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

    That's amazing. What an amazing story. Get this out to the scientific community pronto, they've been pissing about doing studies of tens of thousands of people for decades, but fuck that, because you got sick a bit as a kid and now that you haven't been vaccinated you don't get sick. So yeah let's chuck the vaccines, based on what you think you experienced.

    TLDR anecdotes count for precisely fuck-all.

    Certain vaccines should be compulsary. Polio, Measles, diphtheria the Poxes. If your kid does not have any of those he should not be allowed in schools or where he is in contact with healthy kids.

    Want a vaccine for the flu, thats not the same.

    --
    Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  117. Re:thank god for the poor states by bobvious · · Score: 1

    The fact that a troll posts such assholery doesn't bother me, but that this gets a +5 for Insightful is pathetic.

  118. Re:thank god for the poor states by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

    Maybe its just that some folks can't see the humor, nor the point.

  119. Re:thank god for the poor states by bobvious · · Score: 1

    The point is your and others desires to condescend. The internet is essentially ubiquitous in Mississippi, but you wouldn't know that as you've probably never been to the state. Whatever horrible reason there is that Mississippi has something right, it can't be good, can it?

  120. Re:thank god for the poor states by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

    Lighten up there. Just having a little fun with stereotypes, don' t tell me you've never done that, and throwing in a hint about how internet fodder feeds fears like the vaccination thing. Maybe you just didn't catch on.... guess you are from Mississippi! (jk).

  121. Re:thank god for the poor states by bobvious · · Score: 1

    If it hadn't been done to death. Like I said, one troll, no problem, but +5 for insightful? It's not just you that makes me bitch. Try living in MS for a while, and you'll find more genuine people than anywhere else you go. At least that's been my experience. Except Ole Miss. Ole Miss sucks.

  122. Re:thank god for the poor states by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

    OK...sorry for taking the cheap shot. Most marked it as funny, but the some were more tuned into the internet point than any thing to do with Mississippi. I grew up in the Appalachian mountains, I've heard it all as well.

  123. Does that mean... by stomv · · Score: 1

    Does that mean I'm against fused or with fused?

  124. Re: thank god for the poor states by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its not so much paranoia as it is common stupidity :)

  125. Re:thank god for the poor states by DriveDog · · Score: 1

    This is neither the time nor the place for pragmatism and logic. If you can't bring an inflexible ideology based on fear and ignorance to the table, nobody's going to listen to you.

  126. Duh, the me fix that for you. by TheRealLifeboy · · Score: 1

    "We have been a victim of our success, and people don't realize how bad these diseases are," said Mississippi state epidemiologist, Dr. Thomas E. Dobbs III,

    "We have been a victim of our success, and people don't realize how bad these diseases are for the pockets of the pharma gaints. Lifelong immunity against measles could kill our business!" said Mississippi state epidemiologist, Dr. Thomas E. Dobbs III,

    There, FTFY.

  127. Re:thank god for the poor states by Bartles · · Score: 1

    If you qualify for the federal exchange, the medicaid expansion would do nothing for you. How much do you pay for internet every month?

  128. Re:thank god for the poor states by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They have the highest rates of autism in the Country. http://www.dmh.ms.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/MAAC_2014_Report_KS_Final_2014.pdf