Slashdot Mirror
Australia To Ban Unvaccinated Children From Preschool (newscientist.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from New Scientist: No-jab, no play. So says the Australian Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, who has announced that unvaccinated children will be barred from attending preschools and daycare centers. Currently, 93 percent of Australian children receive the standard childhood vaccinations, including those for measles, mumps and rubella, but the government wants to lift this to 95 percent. This is the level required to stop the spread of infectious disease and to protect children who are too young to be immunized or cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons. Childcare subsidies have been unavailable to the families of unvaccinated children since January 2016, and a version of the new "no jab, no play" policy is already in place in Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland. Other states and territories only exclude unvaccinated children from preschools during infectious disease outbreaks. The proposed policy is based on Victoria's model, which is the strictest. It requires all children attending childcare to be fully immunized, unless they have a medical exemption, such as a vaccine allergy.
Wonderful. Good on ya, Australia. Outside of very uncommon medical situations, there is no damn reason for anything less than this. It's a goddamn embarrassment that there are fracking measles outbreaks in the 21st goddamn century, much less that they're getting larger and occurring with increased frequency.
Vaccines save lives. Full stop.
This is a great idea. I'm sad that kids with stupid parents cannot get into school, but it's not worth risking all of the other kids, especially those who cannot get the vaccine due to medical reasons.
I'm unsure banning children of uneducated parent is the best course of action...
Elok
Right-wingers should be very happy about this. They are, after all, social darwinists, are they not ?
Anti vaxxer aren't humans.
Yair, 'bout that, h33t.. we've been havin' some trouble gettin' them arfids down the needle. We were gunna use a bigger needle but the kids sorta freaked, ya know? Don't blame 'em, meself. Any nong approaching me with a McDonalds-straw-sized needle is gunna get a boot to the balls.
This is a great idea. I'm sad that kids with stupid parents cannot get into school
This is to do with day care for pre-schoolers, I don't think we are at the stage where we are going to stop kids attending school. Even the link in the above story to the Australian Anti-Vaccination Network --a link to the AVN ... FFS editors, how about here instead?! --doesn't make that claim.
The Federal policy in force at the moment is the "no jab, no pay" policy, meaning that parents of unimmunised children are not eligible for childcare related tax rebates etc.
This is not a ban from primary or secondary schools, only pre-school and day-care facilities where the concentration of children with less developed immunity is high.
Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
The RFIDs that the vaccines contain for tracking citizens should make taking attendance a lot easier.
and the added Autism will only help boost the Australian economy through providing carer jobs!
Win Win!
I would prefer to ban uneducated parents, myself, but policing it would be a nightmare.
The RFIDs that the vaccines contain for tracking citizens should make taking attendance a lot easier.
Crawl back into your aluminum foil box and go away....
I'm unsure banning children of uneducated parent is the best course of action...
The aim being the protection of the children who --despite their parents having taken the socially responsible course of action in having them vaccinated -- may become seriously ill and even die as a result of unimmunised vectors being inserted into their day care facilities, I can think of no better course of action than simply to ban the vectors. What would suggest instead?
And what relevance is the educational status of the refusing parents? We are not talking about access to the education system, where it is sadly impossible to bad non-immunised kids, but access to day care facilities primarily for children younger than school age.
Around here kids are banned from school(primary and secondary) if they don't have up to date immunization records, or a reasonable reason to why they're not immunized(i.e. severe reactions). Considering the absolute shit that happened a few years back with multiple measles, mumps and rubella, not to mention whooping cough outbreaks, it's nothing but a good option.
If there'd been a chickenpox vaccine when I was a kid, I would have taken it. 2 weeks of absolute shit, and it nearly killed my one sister(who spent 6mo in ICU). All because some little shit stain and their parents decided that it was a good idea to have their kid out in public while infectious.
Om, nomnomnom...
I'm 100% fine with this. I did my job, made my kids cry and took the 0.001% chance for the safety of the community. You can't be bothered? Fuck you.
In my Grandparents' generation, the recruiting posters said, "your country needs you" and people signed up to fight in a *war* to protect their families and communities, and many of those people didn't come back. Now we simply ask that you get a couple tiny jabs to protect your family and community from some of the most terrible diseases imaginable, and people think there's too much risk. Yes, there's a *tiny* risk, but you still choose to drive little Johnny all over town to soccer practices and birthday parties, putting your precious cargo at far higher risk of death from a car accident than any risk from the vaccine, and then there's the fact that your child is now much more likely to get those diseases. It's literally ridiculous.
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
That is currently being tried here in the Seattle area, but so many leftist parents are refusing vaccinations that it simply can't be done. The school district several of my friends are in have a nearly 25% vaccination refusal rate:
http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/article26252716.html
You can't deny nearly a fourth of the kids from education. Of course the Republicans here want to do that since they're anti-science and support mandatory vaccinations.
Crawl back into your aluminum foil box and go away....
In Australia they don't aluminum foil, they have aluminium foil instead. The latter apparently has the advantage over the former in that it hasn't been implicated in bringing about irreparable damage to human irony detection circuits.
In Aus preschool is nothing more than finger painting school. What they're doing is pushing the age level higher before the kids are put at risk by stupid parents.
I'm unsure banning children of uneducated parent is the best course of action...
So, would my kid be allowed in if I had her vaccinated with the individual vaccines for measles, mumps, and rubella?
Don't get me wrong, I am not one of those people who opposes vaccination. I am educated (3 college degrees, including a M.Eng.). However, after educating myself on this specific topic, the only question I have is, "why pull the individual vaccines from the market if they work?"
Why not leave them as an option for parents who prefer that approach? As it is, the pharmaceutical companies, the governments, or both, have created a situation where those parents who doubt the safety of the MMR vaccine (right or wrong) must choose between unsafe and no vaccine. They took away the proven safe alternatives that had worked for decades. Again I ask, "I wonder why?"
_Proven_ a non-issue.
Scandinavia has been mercury free for decades now. No change in autism rates compared to the rest of the world. Whatever it is, it isn't the mercury in vaccines.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
All because some little shit stain and their parents decided that it was a good idea to have their kid out in public while infectious.
Chicken Pox can be infectious without obvious symptoms. In fact, a person is usually infectious days before any signs appear.
Thus you are irate, when it is possible, even probable, that nobody knew of the potential for infection.
Love it! Aussie doesn't always get good press, but this is bang on. As a parent, with 3 kids, all vaccinated, 1 with autism, I whole heartedly support this. So many narrow minded "facebook educated" keyboard warriors out there, despite the real proof that getting your kids vaccinated works....
Idiot.. go back to school and do chemistry again.
I'm one of those *few* parents who had a child that was allergic and could not be vaccinated against one of the more virulent diseases. Fortunately, when she was older she outgrew that allergy and is now current on all her vaccinations. As a parent, sending my daughter to school where others CHOSE to not vaccinate their children thereby risking exposing mine to something nasty was a hard thing to do. I felt like I was living in the dark ages where being a part of any group could be anywhere from bad to a death sentence.
We might say that the parents who decide not to do the right thing are simply "dumb," or, as I called them, "*(!^*(&^!*%**'s." Time has taught me otherwise. In the US and elsewhere, many people aren't taught or don't remember basic scientific method. They have no idea what the difference is between doubting what they have been told, and actually engaging in critical, productive, thinking. STEM is important, but perhaps we should require those who can't handle it to take something more akin to STEM lite. Barring that, penalties for parents who refuse to take care of *OTHER PEOPLES CHILDREN* shouldn't be frowned upon. IMHO.
So what happens with all kids vaccinated? If it's not 100% for the vaccine's then those kids still could get the diseases they where vaccinated for....?
Because that's a bullshit straw man argument? They weren't pulled from the market because they never existed as separate vaccines anywhere in the world; http://www.hpsc.ie/A-Z/Vaccine...
Do you have a better option? It is better than no action.
Banning the vectors is good. Also helping would be not having large groups of very young children spending a lot of time in the same building. From a disease standpoint, preschool is a bad idea.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Seattle is the most educated city on the planet so of course we stand against vaccinations.
You can't deny nearly a fourth of the kids from education.
Why not? The Washington State education system is woefully underfunded. Cutting out 25% of the demand will bring the budget back into the black. Just tell the parents to home-school the little runny-nosed ankle biters.
Have gnu, will travel.
Put the children in foster homes, sterilize the parents.
And make sure your damn kids get vaccinated.
It's not uneducated parents that are the problem. It's a lot of middle-class mothers who are totally convinced by the pseudo-science and rubbish that's peddled on the internet and by "Wellness" gurus. Australia seems to be infested with them.
Someone has just been hammered for this.
The Paleo Diet is alive and well here, pushed by a chef who somehow has become a dietary-science expert and made a mint from pushing books that contain dangerous pseudo-diets.
We also seem to be very susceptible to charlatans spruiking special-cancer treatments that do nothing but give false hope, drain someone's bank account and leaves them dead quicker.
The alternative is to inflict serious diseases on kids who can't get vaccinated for medical reasons or for whom the vaccine was not effective.
Not vaccinating your kids is like not making them use a seat belt/car seat so they "will be thrown clear in a crash", letting them play with dog poop to "build up their immunity". Actually, it's worse: parents that don't vaccinate are risking their kids lives and the lives of all the kids they meet. It's child abuse - even if it's due to ignorance rather than malice - and the only reason I don't advocate taking such kids into care is that our social care system is so underfunded and broken that loving-but-horribly-negligent parents are probably better than what the state can provide right now.
An adult who developed Shingles could have caused it.
My wife had Shingles, which is a reactivation of the virus from childhood living in your spinal cell DNA. She had 1 spot and BAM all the kids came down with Chicken Pox two weeks later because they had not gotten that vaccination yet.
You really need to educate yourself because your blind rage likely bleeds over in to other areas of your ignorance and causes you even more discomfort...
You can't deny nearly a fourth of the kids from education. Of course the Republicans here want to do that since they're anti-science and support mandatory vaccinations.
Arrest the parents for child endangerment. The foster homes will get the kids vaccinated and they'll get an education. No reason to tolerate child abuse.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
In my state, you are required to send your child to school, otherwise you get fined. If you still don't, you can lose custody of your child. You are also required to have your child vaccinated to go to school. Win win!
In my experience it's not necessarily uneducated parents. Uneducated parents, if they have access to a pediatrician, are apt to follow his or her advice. It's educated parents who question, and the miseducated ones question and come up with bad answers.
What we are looking at in the anti-vaxxer movement is Emersonian self-reliance run amok. We've succeeded in teaching a generation not to put blind trust in authority figures, but without an interest in STEM for its own sake and with limited critical thinking skills, they have no choice but to turn to alternative authorities, individuals who embody everything that should be feared in an authority: deviousness, venality and ruthlessness.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
What drugs have you been taking? There never was a link to Autism. With the modern understanding of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) as a group of complex neurodevelopment disorders following the very narrow diagnosis that had been the case previously the number of people diagnosed increased dramatically. That increase was never linked to vaccines in any respected study. Mercury was an equally misleading claim. Methylmercury, not mercury, is used as a preservative in some vaccines. I would not want to say that this is 100% risk free as nothing is risk free but the fear is not justified. The amounts of mercury in the preservative in the vaccine are so small that they cannot be considered a genuine risk. The nature of mercury, as a poison, means that it remains in the body for the patients entire life. Therefore it will be part of the accumulated mercury content that may harm that person later in life but it would never be a significant part. Some people still get amalgam fillings in their teeth with serious amounts of mercury in them. Where possible methylmercury is no longer used but to be honest this removal is for PR reasons rather than medical reasons.
I'm unsure banning children of uneducated parent is the best course of action...
Actually, it is. Makes them less likely to encounter other children of uneducated parents, thus protecting them from exposure to whatever crud they may have.
In other words, if one of the unvaccinated families gets sick, it is less likely to spread if they're isolated from other unvaccinated families. Stick a bunch of unvaccinated kids in the same classroom, even with vaccinated kids? You've got yourself a nice little outbreak ready to happen.
Plus, you know, it keeps the infectious little snowflakes away from the poor kid who's immune system has gotten the crap kicked out of it by chemo, or who is on chronic immunosuppression for their kidney transplant, or who has a REAL allergy to a vaccine component.
Vaccination is one of the greatest public health advances, and a public good.
Avoiding vaccines without a medical reason is short-sighted and selfish, and frankly endangers the public.
In other words, you're a bad person, and you *should* feel bad.
Let me guess, the mark of the beast also shows on their foreheads?
Seattle is the most educated city on the planet so of course we stand against vaccinations.
Ha ha, oh man. I needed a good laugh. You should really learn to use a search engine.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Too bad we can't bring back the good ole' days without vaccines so that dickheads like you would not keep stinking up the gene pool. Some vaccines may have caused much more harm than good
A licensed vaccine to prevent measles first became available in 1963, and an improved one in 1968. Vaccines for mumps and rubella became available in 1967 and 1969, respectively. The three vaccines (for mumps, measles, and rubella) were combined in 1971 to become the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine. [from the Wikipedia article on MMR Vaccine
Regardless of whether the argument is a straw man, is it adequate for a child to receive the three separate vaccines? Assuming that they can be obtained, that it. If not, then why?
There's an interesting side angle to this. Australia has a strong public health system, so a lot of unvaxed people end up in public hospitals being fixed at public expense. Therefore, it is very reasonable that the state (ie, the other taxpayers) ask someone to take reasonable precautions; if they expect the taxpayer to pick up the tab, they should expect to be asked to take care. I kind of have the same feeling about things like bike helmets and seat belts. I object to my taxes paying for brain surgery on someone who was too stupid to wear a helmet. Put it another way: If you don't wear a helmet you're opting out of public health system... I don't think I'd implement that, but it kind of argues towards the point that if the state is bearing the cost of fixing the results of stupidity, then it has the obligation to encourage people away from stupidity. The question is -- how forcibly? Otherwise you ban smokes, you ban booze, you ban ... where does it end?
However, after educating myself on this specific topic, the only question I have is, "why pull the individual vaccines from the market if they work?"
Because nearly all parents are going to opt to vaccinate for measles, mumps AND rubella, and combining them means you give your kid two doses of vaccine instead of six.
Why not leave them as an option for parents who prefer that approach?
Because the market of parents who'd prefer to give their kids six vaccine doses rather than two is too small to profitably serve.
They took away the proven safe alternatives that had worked for decades.
Actually, that's not true. MMR was introduced in 1971, and by now has a much longer safety record than the individuals vaccines it replaces: Attenuvax (Measles, 1961), Mumpsvax (1967), and Meruvax (Rubella, 1969).
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
The first measles vaccine (according to http://www.historyofvaccines.o...) came in 1960, followed by the mumps and rubella vaccines later in the sixties, and then the first combination MMR vaccine in 1971....
I'm not sure where this page gets its information from, but I know for a fact (from my immunization records) that I was given three separate shots (administered the same day, mind you, but not a single shot containing a combination of the three vaccines) as a child, both for my initial vaccination (1973) and the subsequent boosters (1982). My son (now 8) got the combination MMR vaccine since they no longer manufacture the separate ones.
I print, therefore I am.
you think they just ban the preschool children and expect the kids to tell their parents "hey mom, i cant go to pre-school because your stupid"
Methyl mercury is very toxic.
Vaccines used thimerosal as a preservative, thimerosal is a different mercury compound.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
What's more, your "correction" to the previous person was for something he didn't say.
Some vaccines may have caused much more harm than good
When an anti-vaxxer comes at me I simply agree that vaccines have serious negative consequences, "You are sooooooo right, overpopulation is a serious global problem."
Fine their stupid fucking parents instead.
I homeschool my kids. I also vaccinate them.
I couldn't care less what requirements public education has, here or elsewhere. Just don't make me pay twice to educate my kids and stop letting local politicians be selfish bastards about public resources. The local park won't let a group of homeschooling parents setup a PE program w/o paying a $500/year annual fee for park permit....yet the public school kids get to throw everyone off part of the park during school hours.
The only credible research I've seen showed a possible connection to intestinal bacteria getting out of control after vaccination in some young children, with the advice to simply spread the initial two dozen or so recommended vaccinations over a slightly longer period of time (I think it was 48 months), with prioritization given to highly infectious and deadly diseases (e.g. meningitis).
There are also a bunch of "non-medical" ingredients in some manufacturer's vaccines that are prescription drugs (statins, etc.) used to "bootstrap" the vaccines but that are not approved for use in children otherwise. Some localities do enforce requirements on such ingredients in children's vaccines while others don't... I'm not aware of any specific research into the side-effects of such ingredients, but (as an example) our son's pediatrician avoided given vaccines containing unapproved ingredients to children out of simple caution.
Ultimately I think the biggest problem is that both "sides" are demonizing the other, with "pro vaccine" people calling anyone who has questions or fears about vaccines an idiot, dangerous, etc. and governments providing a liability shield to vaccine manufacturers and forcing parents to give their children more and more vaccines on an accelerated schedule, often with little or no notice. As an example, we were told our son's vaccinations were up to date at the beginning of the last school year only to be told 8 months later he needed another vaccination or he would not be allowed to continue going to school. Getting a notice from the government saying "do this or else" is hardly a way to build a trusting relationship. And experts not talking openly and freely with those that have concerns forces those with concerns to talk with the "alternate experts" that are willing to fill their heads with their agenda.
I print, therefore I am.
The question doesn't make sense. The vaccines you're talking about don't exist. The rule is that you need the MMR vaccine, because that's what's currently required to get immunized. I'm sure they'd consider changing the rule if/when a viable alternative were produced, tested, and shown to be effective.
The problem with mandatory vaccination (don't debate the semantics of mandatory, please) is the violation of human rights.
If vaccines are so great, for once in your life please try to persuade people peacefully that it is the Right Thing To Do(TM) instead of running to the state to force compliance.
Of course the Republicans here want to do that since they're anti-science and support mandatory vaccinations.
Make up your mind, are they anti-science or do they support mandatory vaccinations? Or did you throw in the anti-science as an unrelated insult?
I finally have an excuse to punch kids in the face at the local preschool playground! "Excuse me officer but does the school not have a policy of 'no jab, no play'?" At which point I know they'll see reason and begin punching the children too. ;)
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
"It's a lot of middle-class mothers who are totally convinced by the pseudo-science and rubbish"
You're being far more charitable than called for.
I think many of these parents fully understand the risks involved, but have chosen the selfish path.
If you shield your child from vaccinations you shield them from the low risk of vaccine related complications (which in rare cases can be very serious). Given the very low risk that your child will be exposed to the more serious diseases these vaccines protect against, and therefore the chances of getting the more rare side effects of these diseases are extremely low.
This approach can trade minimising the absolute risk to their child against increasing the risk to the community. However, this only works if they're in a very small minority of parents adopting this approach AND the risk levels (in particular, the risk of those diseases in the community) stay the same during the period at which the child can make such decisions for themselves.
Both of those assumptions have been false, the number of people not vaccinating has increased, and, consequently, the risk of contracting these diseases has been increasing as herd immunity decreases. It is unfortunate that it will be their children who will suffer from their selfishness.
Around here kids are banned from school(primary and secondary) if they don't have up to date immunization records, or a reasonable reason to why they're not immunized(i.e. severe reactions). Considering the absolute shit that happened a few years back with multiple measles, mumps and rubella, not to mention whooping cough outbreaks, it's nothing but a good option.
Having contracted whooping cough after herd immunity went away, about 8 years ago. I can say with authority that if you can do anything to avoid watching your child whoop, lose consciousness and die right before your eyes of an easily avoidable illness, you better do it. Because if you don't, you're complicit in their death.
Damn near killed me. and the whoops had a nasty tendency to happen when I was all alone. They hit whenyou are at the bottom of a breathing cycle, and the whole world actually turns kinda brown and dark, and fortunately the spasms stopped and I recovered, but I have no patience at all for these child abusers who put their children at risk of death.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Since it's pre-school that's kind of irrelevant. It's a place to park children and a play group not a school.
Sadly, they do have appy app apps. At least one of them is called VacciDate and gets government-sponsored advertising all the time. http://vaccinate.initiatives.q...
The same page you linked suggests the MMR came out 2 years prior to your initial vaccination and 11 years before your boosters. Are you /sure/ your immunization records are specific as to what needles were used and not just what you were immunized against? Who even has such a thing 44 years later...
Regardless, the window of MMR "trials" is 46 years vs maybe 2 years for 3x injections since Rubella vaccine was last "to market", so that article was a little overstated, but still "pulled from the market" is bullshit. That's like saying buggy whips were "pulled from the market".
banned from school if you dont take get jabbed, jailed if they dont go to school.
Regardless of whether the argument is a straw man,is it adequate for a child to receive the three separate vaccines? Assuming that they can be obtained, that it. If not, then why?
They cannot be obtained, but if for argument's sake we assume they can, and further on the assumption of a hypothetical provision or regulation formulated around the existence of these hypothetical vaccines in the hypothetical legislation --which has not yet been drafted much less passed as this is only the PM saying "we should do this," --then yes that would be adequate.
This is a great idea. I'm sad that kids with stupid parents cannot get into school,...
Ironically enough, the anti-vax crowd are the people most in need of education. This is basically prohibiting dumb people from going to school.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
Some people just don't know, or don't care to know the difference between methyl and ethyl groups.
Here's an experiment you can do at home.
Have a shot of wood alcohol. It will calm your nerves, permanently.
Have you ever fallen asleep at the keybhanusdiog?
Your child is vaccinated. If vaccinations work, then nobody is endangering your child's safety.
Just because playing Russian Roulette with a single bullet is dangerous, that does not mean that playing it with 5 bullets is no more dangerous. Risk (or "vaccinations work") is not an On/Off proposition.
Let's say the a vaccine give on average 80% immunity to a certain pathogen.
Can you see why regimen 2) poses the greater risk? Because vaccinations work, non-vaccinated children pose a greater risk to vaccinated children then other vaccinated children do.
Yes, I know all about "herd immunity". You're talking about your specific child, however.
The point of herd immunity is that the greater the number of individuals with immunity >0% the less the chance any particular individual with immunity <100% will be affected. The point of herd immunity is to protect specific individuals.
but the government wants to lift this to 95 percent. This is the level required to stop the spread of infectious disease and to protect children who are too young to be immunized or cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons
That's a pretty specific claim. Sure, maybe 95% is the generally accepted number to aim for, but it's not like 94.999% is significantly less safe than 95.001%.
Haha, I wouldn't want to know how many thousands of boring people those producers had to sift through to fill 40 minutes of airtime.
But to answer your points:
1) Personally after taking numerous shitty taxi trips from airports, I'd be glad if they just checked their ability to drive, forget their immigration status.
2) Yes, proper ones are, and yes, you can put someone's eye out. Or is removing someone's eye not a problem where you live?
3) Yes. They are classified as "less than lethal" weapons, but you can get unlucky and there are plenty of cases out there if you want to check it out.
4) Biosecurity is Very Serious Business in Australia. We are an island continent, and - cane toads and rabbits aside - have enjoyed the ability to keep most pests and nuisance animals out with simple checks at airports. I'm sorry if your country is a lost cause in that respect.
5) They are very, very sensitive, because smart smugglers triple-wrap their goods a layer at a time in a different rooms and only then do they transfer them to their luggage. If your bag is placed on a surface that had certain powdery substances on it a year ago, then you'll trigger that machine.
You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
There is a lot of hype here.
I'm one of the people that is a bit cautious about blanket vaccinations (therefore posting AC because that is so non-PC on /.). I guess it is also a bit academic to me, since I have no children (in the best /. fashion).
I do not understand the fascination with vaccination for "fairly innocuous" childhood diseases. We all got them as children, stayed in bed a week or so, and went back to school with newly acquired lifelong immunity. The problem with many of these diseases is that as children they can be had without ill effect, but not so when suffered only as an adult (deafness, blindness, infertility, etc.) My further understanding (from friends with kids as well as being trained as doctors) is that some of these vaccines do not provide lifelong immunity and have to be renewed with boosters every couple of years - not being available in adulthood. So in effect, we are slowly creating a society of adults with no immunity to debilitating diseases while also giving unnecessary money to the pharma industry.
Another interesting discourse that has recently come to my attention is the purported effect of fever on immunity and cancer. Apparently a fairly high fever (first observed in naturally acquired malaria) seems to selectively kill cancerous and per-cancerous cells, and so artificially-induced (and tightly monitored) fever has been used (apparently successfully) to treat cancer patients in Europe. With the removal of fever-causing childhood diseases, we do seem to see an increase in cancer, even in children. (I do understand that cancer factors are more complex than just this one thing.) You will have to do your own googling...
Thus a more pragmatic approach to me would seem to be to inoculate people (children) against devastating diseases (like polio) while allowing them to become infected with the less serious childhood diseases in childhood and let nature take its way there. Blanket vaccinations with everything the pharmas turn out, and schools mandating inoculations that should be optional, are not helping.
The amounts of mercury in the preservative in the vaccine are so small that they cannot be considered a genuine risk.
I'm confused here. Are you trying to get people to vaccinates their kids, or are you trying to convince them that vaccines are a government conspiracy to make them sick?
Because telling people that one of the most poisonous (non-radioactive) elements cannot be considered a risk is definitely going to help convince people it's a conspiracy.
What makes it even worse is that you could help convincing them to vaccinate their kids instead by simply admitting that using mercury in vaccines was a stupid thing, and nowadays they can get vaccines without mercury.
Suing the parents whose children not being vaccinated caused a measles (or worse) outbreak for the FULL costs of the medical treatment might help them get real.
I see that the colonial education system is of its usual quality...
I have the right to drive my car despite the chance I'll seriously injury someone else?
> Since it's pre-school that's kind of irrelevant. It's a place to park children and a play group not a school.
I've seen some very good pre-schools working with normal kids to help socialize them in ways that modern, smaller families who keep changing neighborhoods find very difficult. I've also seen them do invaluable work with children with learning or physical disabilities, and with children whose parents are struggling to make ends meet and can't themselves provide the variety of supervised outings and educationally oriented play time that a good pre-school provides. Those factors can be _very_ helpful for ensuring early familiarity with reading, writing, numbers, and dealing with other children.
OK wait. So you're suggesting undereducated parents should be responsible for educating their children? There seems to be a flaw in your logic there.
Not to mention uneducated people tend to be on the lower end of the pay scale so a large portion of those parents will be working stupid hours for little pay in order to keep their kids fed already.. finding time to educate them as well is likely not going to be plausible.
So in 10 years you've got 25% of your youth population being uneducated, unsupervised and hitting the streets with all of the great judgement skills your average teenager brings with them at the best of times.
A better solution would be to designate 25% of the schools for kids of anti-vaxxers. Sooner or later the problem will solve itself, one way or another. And those who don't have idiots for parents can happily continue on their way in a disease-free (or at least disease-minimized) environment.
So kids with stupid parents will be further disadvantaged by limiting education.
Frequently it's the fairly well educated ***but ignorant*** parents who are anti-vac. McCarthy is not "undereducated". The lower educated parents tend to be MORE likely to vaccinate their children because they don't have that cotton wool around their lives from inception and know that when some choices are bad, it still means some choices are less bad than others. And are more likely to listen to authority.
Yeah, I guess I underestimated the lack of sarcasm detection/humour among vaccination fanatics. My bad. Yours too apparently. Note to self: stay away from these threads.
Rubbish. You know nothing about preschool. Teachers with 4 year degrees. Full curriculum. Regulated standards. Play based, age appropriate learning.
Unsafe? Citation needed. No evidence.
Thus you are irate, when it is possible, even probable, that nobody knew of the potential for infection.
Yes of course just like the other AC that spouts off shit and has no idea of what they're talking about. Never mind the big, huge, gigantic announcement, on the TV, radio, magazines, newspapers, pamphlets sent home with kids, warning notices stuck to doors stating that there was a chickenpox outbreak and if you had even the slightest belief that you were infected, had come in contact with someone who was infected(and developed symptoms later), and etc., etc., etc., you should not be out in public.
Hate to break it to you kid, but this was less then 10 years after the last polio case in North America. Unlike today where people seem to have the belief that serious infectious diseases are gone, which works very well for things like TB. Which of course requires all kinds of new things especially if you do volunteer work.
Om, nomnomnom...
Ha! Another one. Rubbish. Stop spreading ignorant FUD.
What's happened? I actually agree with one of your posts! This is all very strange.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Actually, that's not true. MMR was introduced in 1971, and by now has a much longer safety record than the individuals vaccines it replaces:
Cool. So where are the results of the drug trials comparing the effects and side effects of MMR to a control? You know, like they do with other drugs.
Perhaps true in some cases but not exactly essential is it? The older posters here would have never been to a pre-school when they were young, and probably a pile of the newer ones as well.
As blunt instrument attempted social engineering goes it's mostly harmless.
Even if we believed their ludicrous claims, the chances of your child "catching" autism from a vaccine, or dying from one, or any other bad thing happening is lower than their chance of dying from the disease that the vaccine protects against. And that's using their own idiotic numbers.
It's like being forced into a choice of 1 in 100 death by bullet or 10 in 100 death by "natural causes", and picking 10 in 100 because it's "natural". You have to be mentally handicapped to make such a bad decision.
All because some little shit stain and their parents decided that it was a good idea to have their kid out in public while infectious.
Is this speculation on your part, or do you know this for a fact?
Because chickenpox can be contagious before you show any symptom.
1. Chickenpox can sneak in without any symptoms. You may be contagious even before you know you have chickenpox. But, the time you are most contagious is probably the first few days after the "pox" appear.
Actually, studies show that it's highly educated people who are the ones not wanting the government to force their child to have a medical procedure that is not free from possible serious side affects (according to the CDC and vaccine manufacturer published information) without their informed consent. Some of them have said that there's no way for them to get the correct information about whether it's safe for their child because they don't trust the information put out by the government or pharmaceutical researchers. For example, they want the government to investigate why a senior research scientist at the CDC (William Thompson) came forth as a whistle blower and said that he and his colleagues lied on at least one published paper about vaccine safety. The government hasn't yet investigated.
My vaccination card (which I do still have for some reason) lists the vaccinations separately while my son's lists a single MMR entry, and I do remember getting separate shots for my booster. As for why I didn't get the combined shot, it might have been a local government thing (vaccination schedules vary widely between counties/states/countries) or a cost thing (new drugs are typically more expensive than old ones). But they *were* administered on the same day...
I agree that "pulled from the market" is overstating things - it was just supply and demand.
I print, therefore I am.
So those who WON'T be 'vaccinated' because their parents know that 'vaccination' is a fraud are somehow 'dangerous', but those who "cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons" are NOT dangerous? Not a threat?
And to WHOM could they be a threat anyway? Surely not the 'vaccinated' 93% - LOL.
The myth of 'herd immunity':
http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2012/02/18/the-deadly-impossibility-of-herd-immunity-through-vaccination-by-dr-russell-blaylock/
Jenner was a fraud:
http://www.whale.to/v/hadwen1.html
Isn't it strange how it's virtually impossible to find out how vaccines are MADE, even though we have the entire internet to find out. Isn't that odd. Almost like the fraudulent companies who make this filth don't want you to see their 'scientific' methods.
There is no such thing as 'vaccination', and repeating the word over and over doesn't make it so.
EVERYBODY got measles and mumps when I was a child, every single child I knew had had them. And even worse for the pro-vaccination fraudsters, this fact is mentioned countless times on TV programmes and films from before the 1980s, when the vaccination manufacturers took over and decided what we were and were not allowed to think.
So now we have the laughable "the sky is falling in" nonsense, when parents refuse to have their children 'vaccinated' - because the fraudsters know that they are no more likely to get a disease than the so-called 'vaccinated' children.
Again, what is the difference in terms of DANGER or THREAT between those who "can't" be 'vaccinated', and those who WON'T be 'vaccinated'?
There can be NO difference between the two groups - yet somehow the poor "can't be vaccinated" groups are 'at risk', yet those who WON'T be 'vaccinated' are 'causing the risk'. Do you not see how stupid that is? You're saying that despite the exact SAME conditions (neither group have been 'vaccinated'), ONE group is a THREAT purely because they or their parents THINK THE WRONG THOUGHTS.
Actually, that's not true. MMR was introduced in 1971, and by now has a much longer safety record than the individuals vaccines it replaces:
Cool. So where are the results of the drug trials comparing the effects and side effects of MMR to a control? You know, like they do with other drugs.
You can do a google scholar literature view for a "systematic review" of controlled experiments, like you would with any other drug. You should confine your attention to high impact factor journals though.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
You could start with
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesaf...
which summarizes expected risks and links to some studies, published medical articles.
This is basic "social contract" stuff. Your part of the contract is that you expose your children to the very small risk that they will have an unfavourable reaction to being vaccinated. In return, you get to participate in all the things society provides: schooling, day care, playgrounds, theatres, etc.
I would never dream of forcing parents to vaccinate their children. But if that's their choice, they shouldn't get all the good stuff that goes along with fulfilling their part of the social contract, either.
In fact, I'd even go a step further. If it could be proved that somebody who had no choice about being vaccinated suffered because they were exposed directly or indirectly to a child whose parents chose not to vaccinate, those parents should be held legally responsible.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
My kid had the Chicken Pox 3 times. The first was a mild case from the vaccine, which is pretty normal. The second was an outbreak in his school, (all mild cases) caused by a child who received the vaccine. Again, this is somewhat normal with the live vaccine. The third was a full blown case of chicken pox because apparently he was one of the unlucky few that the vaccine didn't actually work for.
Given your statement I would be able to sue the school, parents of the kid who's vaccine caused dozens to get chicken pox, and possibly the doctor or person responsible for the vaccine.
Just remember, you reap what you sow.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Generalize much, lately? The common factor is not political belief but ignorance and stupidity.
Thus you are irate, when it is possible, even probable, that nobody knew of the potential for infection.
Yes of course just like the other AC that spouts off shit and has no idea of what they're talking about.
You mean I know that:
Chicken Pox can be infectious without obvious symptoms. In fact, a person is usually infectious days before any signs appear.
Funny, you left that out. It's kinda telling that you did. I know what I'm talking about. I know people can and do get Chicken Pox (and some other diseases) and become infectious without themselves knowing.
Never mind the big, huge, gigantic announcement, on the TV, radio, magazines, newspapers, pamphlets sent home with kids, warning notices stuck to doors stating that there was a chickenpox outbreak and if you had even the slightest belief that you were infected, had come in contact with someone who was infected(and developed symptoms later), and etc., etc., etc., you should not be out in public.
And yet as already pointed out to you, it is possible to HAVE become infectious, been in contact, and have NO belief at all that it happened. This is something you don't want to understand, because you would much rather be angry at unknown people. Who may have taken any number of actions, none of which could reasonably be anticipated.
Especially since your attempted excuse points to blaming your own parents for not keeping you under absolute quarantine. Why didn't they put you in a bubble?
Hate to break it to you kid, but this was less then 10 years after the last polio case in North America. Unlike today where people seem to have the belief that serious infectious diseases are gone, which works very well for things like TB. Which of course requires all kinds of new things especially if you do volunteer work.
Hate to break it to you, but people are hospitalized every day from various infectious diseases in North America, some of them contracted in the hospital, and some of them dying from it. You want to look for infection control in a hospital? Fine. Go for it. But do expect to be asked to have a directed and rational plan, as would be appropriate.
You, on the other hand, seem intent on raging at people, without even a clearly identified cause of action, when circumstances might be such that your ire is directed at persons who were merely going about their daily life, and had no reason to even believe there was a concern. You sound like you'd rather just burn the hospital down, because you're upset and angry.
This is not an uncommon mentality in the world, I don't know that I would consider it infectious, but it seems quite prevalent. Personally, I'd suggest you consider your illness, and whether or not you really should be going about trying to infect others with your mental disease.
Perhaps they should just require the parents to go through school again, seeing as how it didn't seem to stick the first time.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
It's true that there are always risks to anything, but they have invented risks (autism) that don't exist.
I'm sorry. "All vaccines are safe and effective" right? We know this because of science right? Just like the scientist who pumped monkeys with so much marijuana smoke they passed out from oxygen deprivation, just to prove to the American Government that "Marijuana kills brain cells." Just like the Lead industry had everyone in America thinking lead was safe and cheap for use in children's toys? (fortunately that misinformation didn't last more than a decade)
Anytime there is a bandwagon, i'm just the kind of person to run away from it screaming. And i feel this way about vaccines too. I don't like the groupthink that encourages governments to make vaccines mandatory. I like even less how big pharma is making more and more vaccines (of questionable efficacy, such as the HPV vaccine) and then lobbying government to make them mandatory too. This reeks of corporatism at its worst. Maybe all the commentators on this article are right, and all vaccines ARE safe and effective and "Herd Immunity" is a valid theory that applies to humans and I will be endangering my child by not vaccinating them until they are at least one year old, and then asking hard questions of my doctor regarding EXACTLY which vaccines they are giving to my child and WHY.
or maybe, in a decade or too, we will find out that Big Pharma was using money to finance bad science to push more and more vaccines on everyone. Just like we found out the Sugar industry managed to distract nutritionists from the dangers of sugar in the 80's and sent us on an anti-fat, anti-cholesterol crusade for two decades. Just like the American Government funded junk science that 'proved' cannabis was lethally dangerous, or would cause mental disorders, or brain disease.
I'll be downvoted to hell for this, but i felt this comments section needed at least ONE well worded logically reasoned argument against the popular opinion.
If they're reasoning instrumentally, then "no jab no play" makes perfect sense. WIth such a policy, not vaccinating has a direct cost: the child can no longer get into preschool. And since the risk to the child is very low, the cost should outweigh the benefit.
I think many of these parents fully understand the risks involved
You clearly haven't met these people. Here let me provide you a thought process:
"There is no risk of infection because
a) herd immunity,
b) my daughters diet of kale, avocado, and unicorn piss makes her immune,
c) you can never believe doctors as they are in the pockets of big pharma,
d) yes of course I know what big pharma means,
e) what do you mean I'm talking crap, you clearly don't understand. Maybe you should do a sugar detox because detoxing helps your brain and reduces the risk of cancer too.
Why not leave them as an option for parents who prefer that approach?
There are two classes of parents:
a) the classes who believe vaccines are evil big pharma propaganda. These people are not going to pick only one vaccine, especially because by selling them individually it's just another example of big pharma nickle and diming us.
b) parents who believe in vaccines, follow the schedule, realise that the kids need all three anyway, would likely not have a crying baby 6 times, but only twice, would rather not incur the cost of 6 vaccines but only 2.
The when the MMR vaccines were discovered to be compatible with combining in a single dose it stopped making sense to do them individually. Even travel vaccines such as Hep B et al come in multi-dose vials and doctors will generally advise single doses only in cases where you have a medical record showing you've received the single doses for the others and you're still covered. Even then I opted for the multi vaccine last time.
He won't because he's either a troll or an idiot.
Australia is a nanny state, but not for any of the reasons you list. They mostly make perfect sense given Australia's environment.
In the meantime try buy a Kinder Surprise in the USA. I think it's actually easier to get kids to go out and buy heroin.
I won't get vaccinated on principle. My government has no authority to tell me what I must, or must not put into my body.
We gave them authority over alcohol with the 18th ammendment, and then repealed it with the 21st ammendment, when we realized what a horribly stupid decision it was.
They have no authority to tell me I can't smoke marijuana. They have no authority to tell me I must get vaccinated.
My government can go fuck themselves if they think otherwise (especially that asshole, Donald Trump)
Literally no one here is arguing against vaccination.
But for some reason there is a flood of extremely agitated posters acting as though there is.
This is the proof of the falseness of the pro-vaccination argument. They have absolutely no perspective of the facts or risks, its all just hearsay with them, they are just literally having a psychotic episode because they perceive their children are threatened by some kind of conspiracy
What's happened? I actually agree with one of your posts! This is all very strange.
That's what happens when you step outside of your ideological echo chamber.
PArt of the problem seems to be that there are more and more vaccines for less and less serious illnesses but they're all going direct to the mandatory list. It would be more reasonable to have a core of well tested and understood vaccines that are required and then others that are suggested until they are better understood.
A good bright line test will be if it is in the core it shall be made available for free at the school given by a nurse on parental request. If it's not important enough to be made available on those terms, it's not important enough to keep the kid out of school.
Anti-science meaning "against all the (mostly incorrect) evidence that vaccines are terrible", which anti-vaxers tend to believe beats all the evidence that they help.
Failure to understand science? Yep!
Sure, however people who repeat claims that have been disproven by tests in large populations (mercury preservatives in vaccines) are in _fact_ idiots.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Ok - so I'm anal about this... but for those of us who are, it does do terrible things to our ability to hear what is being said. So be kind to those of us who have this disability.
This is a great discussion of the need for provision
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Eats-...
based on the old joke
“A panda walks into a cafe. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and fires two shots in the air.
"Why?" asks the confused waiter, as the panda makes towards the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife annual and tosses it over his shoulder.
"I'm a panda," he says, at the door. "Look it up."
The waiter turns to the relevant entry and, sure enough, finds an explanation.
Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves.”
You also have no authority of expose any of us to your poor decision. So on the same principle, we sentence you to exile or isolation.
Your freedom to swing your fist ends at my (and my children's) nose.
For some reason I remember them lining us up and that big multi-needle injection gun being pushed against our arm, a band-aid applied, then we all went out for recess. Was this a local/regional thing or am I seriously misremembering my grade school days?
Yeah, I guess I underestimated the lack of sarcasm detection/humour among vaccination fanatics. My bad. Yours too apparently. Note to self: stay away from these threads.
I've been burned by that over and over here too, and you'd think I'd learn. But I'm just too addicted to sarcasm to stop using it on Internet forums.
You can do a google scholar literature view for a "systematic review [google.com]" of controlled experiments, like you would with any other drug. You should confine your attention to high impact factor journals though.
He's not interested in that because he's already made up his mind and is coming from a "all this is bullshit" attitude.
Bullshit I don't. Don't try to pull that "Think of the children!!" argument on me.
It is most certainly adequate. There are ways of testing to see if a patient has immunity. For instance, if a patient had measles and has immunity, they should not be required to again get the vaccine. I recently had a immunity test to see if I needed boosters. I did not have immunity to chicken pox (since I've never had then nor was I vaccinated against them). I got a ditheria and pertussis booster because my immunity had waned a bit.
The importance is not the vaccines, but the immunity, which can be received from many sources (I knew I hadn't had it, but the doctor wanted to test me anyway in case I got it from somewhere). As I stated earlier, it's very easy to test for immunity, it's just easier to get the shot.
Vaccines used thimerosal as a preservative, thimerosal is a different mercury compound.
Bah, mercury is mercury, like sodium is a highly reactive metal, chlorine is a highly-toxic gas, and sodium chloride is a combination that's even worse.
Arrest the parents for child endangerment. The foster homes will get the kids vaccinated and they'll get an education. No reason to tolerate child abuse.
Why even risk giving parents the chance to endanger our children? Let's make government-run foster homes mandatory and bring some badly needed regulation to upbringing. This way we can really make sure that every child gets a fair start in life.
Australia certainly is a Nanny state but none of the items you listed would be reasons for it.
1) no their are not immigration checkpoints around airports for taxi drivers at all, where the fuck did you get that one from
2) yes a slingshot is a serious weapon, no different to a gun, cfross bow etc. all are designed to kill, whats your point? or is it you don't like gun and weapon licensing?
3) Yes a Taser is also a serious weapon that can kill and frequently does kill, Your point?
4) Australia has one of the most unique and vulnerable ecosystems in the world, I can't really fault them here for trying to protect that ecosystem as one slip up could send many species extinct, we don't have many of the diseases present in countries around Europe and US and it needs to stay that way
5) Drug testing machines are actually pretty accurate, they don't false positive much at all, however they are very sensitive so coming into contact with others that may have microscopic drug particulate matter on them can cause you to get a positive reading. It is also the reason they don't arrest you for a positive they do a quick search which if all is good you are on your way in a couple of mins.
Clearly, the GP was being sarcastic. What they really meant was "anti-freedom".
One big difference is that in the US vaccinations require multiple individual trips to the doctor which cost a fortune for those not on health insurance.
Whereas in Australia it is provided free by the government. And for schools, the nurse comes around and just jabs all the kids. Cheap and efficient.
Right now there is a measles epidemic going on in Romania, in the Balkan region of South-East Europe, due to the local orthodox christian church having spent the last decade or so trying to convince / brainwash locals not to get vaccinated. There are at least 7000 cases with almost two dozen dead kids so far. Luckily their western neighbour Hungary is 99% vaccinated, so the epidemic is unlikely to break through towards Western Europe (provided Italy does something to properly screen the many daily flights of romanian origin. On the other hand, the major air carrier between ROIT is Wizz Air, which is a hungarian registered company and they have been read the riot laws already.)
However, Hungary is now urging its citizens born before 1979 to receive a second "reminder" vaccine shot if they have contacts with romanian people, as some hospital nurses treating romanian immigrants have fallen ill with minor symptoms.
(People born before 1979 only received one shot at circa 9 months age, while those born later received that and a reminder / booster shot at 12-14 years old. In 1991 the measles vaccine was upgraded to a more effective recipe as advanced western biotech became accessible. Some very rural hungarian people born before 1962 could still be totally unvaccinated, although it was difficult to find employment in cities during the communist era without having a full shots passport. A long laundry list of vaccinations for about 11 different agents remain compulsory in Hungary, compulsory as in police and handcuffs for "new age parents". Recently the Rota virus shot for infants was introduced with gov't financing, if I understand correctly.)
Shouldn't you have a doctor (or nurse) vaccinate them?
Seriously though, parents who choose private school could make the same argument. People who choose to not have kids can also make the same argument. What I don't get is, here in Maryland, half of the tax revenue goes to education (and we have relatively high taxes). However, they somehow still don't have any money. They even (in theory) feed all of our casino profits into education. I'd like to get on that board where all this money must be getting funneled.
This is the right answer.
It's not uneducated parents that are the problem. It's a lot of middle-class mothers who are totally convinced by the pseudo-science and rubbish that's peddled on the internet and by "Wellness" gurus. Australia seems to be infested with them.
Someone has just been hammered for this.
The Paleo Diet is alive and well here, pushed by a chef who somehow has become a dietary-science expert and made a mint from pushing books that contain dangerous pseudo-diets.
We also seem to be very susceptible to charlatans spruiking special-cancer treatments that do nothing but give false hope, drain someone's bank account and leaves them dead quicker.
First off, I completely agree about your point with so-called "wellness" gurus and other charlatans like David "avocado" Wolfe. These people are doing more to increase sickness and disease than most wars in the last 50 years.
However the Paleo diet has some science behind it, a high protein, low carbohydrate diet has been shown to be beneficial for weight loss and muscle gain. Older Australians like myself knew it as the CSIRO diet before it got hipstered into "paleo". its a diet designed for weight management.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
In my experience it's not necessarily uneducated parents. Uneducated parents, if they have access to a pediatrician, are apt to follow his or her advice. It's educated parents who question, and the miseducated ones question and come up with bad answers.
Uneducated is the wrong word. Ignorant parents are the problem.
Having lived in developing nations, parents (and we're talking as young as 16 here) dont have second thoughts about vaccinations because they remember seeing these debilitating diseases in their childhood and in all likelihood, knew people who died from them. Now we're talking about people who rarely received more than a grade 3 or 4 education. In highly developed nations, people my age (mid 30's) grew up in an era when vicious child diseases were extremely uncommon. Few people my age knew someone disabled from polio. The worst we had to worry about was a few days off from Chicken Pox or the dirty kid passing on nits.
Never having to face such diseases combined with a culture that celebrates stupidity and disdains intelligence has created an environment where some people are utterly convinced that their ignorance is worth more than decades of medical research. Anti-vaxxers shouldn't be called ignorant and stupid and unapologetically so. We "fat shame" but are so reluctant to "stupid shame", something is fucked up with out society.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Those "some cases" wind up being a significant proportion of the children in pre-school. For the reasons I mentioned already, that socialization and early education is vital. Even for those of us who were older, and perhaps wealthier, childhood tutoring was one of the best educational aids we could get for children without relatives who were delighted to play and teach and share knowledge.
Stick a bunch of unvaccinated kids in the same classroom, even with vaccinated kids?
You mean like homeschoolers do when they have to teach anything above a 2nd grade level? That's right, they all hop on over to the house of whoever in their homeschooling club is least ignorant on that subject. I don't think you could design a better way to spread disease short of actively infecting them.
So you want our government to follow the constitution, except for when it is most convenient for you, huh? Typical hypocritical Repug.