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.
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
I would prefer to ban uneducated parents, myself, but policing it would be a nightmare.
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...
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
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.
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...
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.
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 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.
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.
You a troll? This guy didn't say "I got mine screw you". He served the community by taking a risk and getting himself and his kids vaccinated. That's the exact opposite of "got mine screw you".
What he's saying is, "I contributed to the public safety at some small risk to myself and mine, SCREW the people too selfish and cowardly to do the same!"
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?
"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.
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...
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.
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...
hi.
Mortality is not the only useful measure here. It's great that fewer people die with or without vaccination, but there are impacts from being sick that are also useful to mitigate. In the worst cases, people can become permanently debilitated as a consequence of a disease that in others just caused a nasty rash. Another facto to consider, and this IMHO is compatible with the interest in military use for some diseases, is that if a big number of people gets sick at the same time, it is highly disruptive of life in society.
If instead of waiting for people to catch diseases and then gain natural immunity you do something to acquire immunity, you have a better chance of avoiding big numbers in morbidity, not just mortality. It is not just a nice bonus if by doing this each individual is less likely to be spreading the disease for several weeks that year, and is hopefully not becoming deaf or blind.
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.
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.
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.”