Slashdot Mirror
Vaccines May Soon Be Mandatory For Children In France (theverge.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: Last week, the French Health Ministry announced plans to make 11 vaccines mandatory for young children by 2018. French law currently mandates three vaccines -- diphtheria, tetanus, and polio -- for children under the age of two. The government's proposal would expand that list to include eight other vaccines -- including those against Hepatitis B, whooping cough, and measles -- that were previously only recommended. The proposal, which is to be presented to lawmakers by the end of this year, comes amid an ongoing measles outbreak across Europe, which the World Health Organization (WHO) attributed to low immunization rates. Italy passed a similar decree in May, requiring children to receive 10 vaccines as a condition for school enrollment. Germany, while stopping short of a mandate, has moved to tighten its laws on child immunization. But some experts question whether a vaccination mandate will sway public opinion in France, where distrust in vaccines has risen alarmingly in recent years. In a survey published last year, 41 percent of respondents in France disagreed with the statement that vaccines are safe -- the highest rate of distrust among the 67 countries that were surveyed, and more than three times higher than the global average.
OMG OMG they're trying to kill children!
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Not saying I disagree with you, mind... just pointing out why it may be that it was only with regards to children.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
In quite a few cases it can be easier to produce a vaccine for a child than for an adult - children's medicine is quite different from adult medicine, some treatments which are very effective in a child can be useless in an adult, which is why paediatrics is a major speciality all on its own, it has to be!
This is really good news for the research community. Full coverage ill mean amazing gains in learning not only how diseases propogate, but also the effect of scheduling, and the real risks involved with vaccinating. This could be a big nail in the lid of the anti-vax movement. Not to mention that France's children will be saved from a lot of nasty diseases.
Do you think that maybe the things you think get modded down due to group think get modded down because they're full of unnecessary insults and add no information to the conversation?
This site's being ruined by the fact that 90% of the commenters have entered troll territory - there's about 3 posts worth a damn each story max these days.
I was raised in a time when everyone of my age had all those deseases we have vaccines for now.
However people around age 20 - 30'are much younger, I actually wonder, too, how they fare. Especially as some of those 'child hood deseases' can be extremely dangerous for pregnant women or their fruit.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
You got it somewhat backward.
The viruses spread fast, becuause people/children are densky packed.
Not because they are children or not adults.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
But why not adults too?
Children have underdeveloped immune systems and are the least hygienic humans so this makes them most vulnerable and likely to spread disease. It's worth noting that the elderly are also highly encouraged to get annual flu vaccines because they have failing immune systems and it's far more likely to kill them and the elderly people around them.
That said, it's wise for everyone to get vaccinated against that which they are most vulnerable too and most likely to contract (i.e, the seasonal flu)
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Polio. Measles. Tuberculosis. Influenza. Rubella. Hepatitis. Smallpox.
Sadly, vaccines are a victim of their own success. Vaccines are indisputably the single most lifesaving medical development in the entire course of human history, more than surgery or anesthesia or pharmaceuticals. And perhaps it is the ultimate irony that it is only because they have worked so spectacularly well that humans, in their seemingly infinite capacity for stupidity, have somehow managed to grow to distrust them, because people in industrialized nations have almost entirely forgotten what it was like to live in a time when these diseases were not only common, but pervasive in the general population. Entire communities were decimated by polio. People have forgotten the death and the panic and the fear of these diseases.
The present situation is the result of a failure to educate. Every single child, as soon as they are able to comprehend, must be taught of the history of these pandemics. Not just a recitation of statistics; people need to be SHOWN IN GRAPHIC DETAIL what these diseases did to humanity throughout history.
People built museums to remind ourselves of the Holocaust; of the killing fields of the Khmer Rouge. Yet, for the most part, we do not educate younger generations about the horrific scope of deaths these diseases have wrought on society. Why is that? Is it really only because we care when people die at the hands of despots? Dead is dead. A virus doesn't care who you are.
For fucks sake, did you actually read my post *at all*?!
Yes, vaccines *work* in the same way - I didn't say they don't. What I did say is that in quite a few cases it can be easier to produce a vaccine for a child than for an adult - and it is, in quite a few cases you can't simply use the child vaccine in an adult, it simply won't work due to the immunological response the adult body will have. There is a reason why Chicken Pox is a *serious* illness in adulthood that can cause death but not really considered a fatal illness for children - because children's bodies work differently! Which is why the shingles vaccination has to be done very carefully for older patients (its a much higher concentration than children are given for chicken pox).
Vaccinating adults is entirely possible, but what can be effective for a child isn't necessarily so for an adult - and in any case, vaccinating in an underdeveloped immune system will always produce better long term results than vaccinating in a developed immune system. That is why we target kids - for both the immediate benefit and for the long term benefits.
My wife (a doctor) is currently laughing her head off at your post...
Take a look at how Tdap vaccine is given based on age - the adult vaccine is formulated differently with a lesser quantity of antigens than the child vaccine, because the vaccine in adults can trigger swelling of the arm its given in, while that doesn't occur in children. Other vaccines require significantly more active ingredient in the adult vaccine because of the immunological response - but increasing the concentration means the formulation of preservative etc has to also change...
There are many many ways in which the age contributes to the vaccine given. Doesn't mean the process of vaccination works differently, but it does mean that the same treatments may be ineffective in an adult, requiring a different vaccine to be developed.
That was what I said. Reread it.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
My (standard set of )vaccines are up to date, and then some. Still working on getting a few (that are considered 'optional' by our lovely US insurance companies...price of a vaccine is in the hundreds, price of a hospital stay is in the tens of thousands, yet which option do they seem to promote?), some of them will be tricky to get since they aren't available in this country yet (Hepatitis E, etc.), and others you seem to need to know the secret handshake to get (Bubonic Plague, possibly Smallpox).
On the bright side, I've been vaccinated against things like: Hepatitis A &B (as I said, completely caught up), Rabies, Typhoid, Yellow Fever, Japanese Encephalitis, Human Papillomavirus (HPV), Tetanus, Diphtheria...
The Cholera vaccine, Vaxchora, seems to be a bit of a disappointment, as its potency drops off in months (may be useful for a short trip, but for those of us who want to get at least a year of decent immunity out of it...no). There's another, Dukoral, which appears to improve in immunity over time, so I might go for that, but there's a question of whether it will be easily available.
And then there's the Anthrax vaccine, which Passport Health offers to the general public, which I have on my list of things to get. Multiple shots, I grant you, and realistically, like The Plague (Black Death), chances are you are a goner if you inhale the spores, as opposed to drink something laced with them or touch something covered in them, but some immunity can be better than none.
The Hepatitis E vaccine is made available via the Chinese, but I believe Mexico (and some other Central American countries) may have it available, so it might be worth picking up while on vacation.
The US military has a vaccine for the Adenovirus, through a singular supplier, though I am not sure how to get access to that. Same with The Plague (Bubonic Plague, The Black Death) as the vaccines for these are still being produced, but the manufacturer isn't listed (from what little I've glanced), and nobody is offering it (i.e. you can't walk into a travel clinic and ask for it, nor is it something that you can ask your family doctor to order for you...).
Additional diseases that we have vaccines for, but are not available to the general public in this country (this is not a complete list): Tick-Borne Encephalitis, Q Fever, Dengue Fever, Tuberculosis, Smallpox.
There are also many vaccines being developed, such as the vaccine for Malaria, Zika, etc.
From the point of view of "bodily integrity", which is frequently invoked in defense of legal abortion, I'm not sure how one can support this ruling. That said, France could ban unvaccinnated children from public schools (and/or adults from university) and that wouldn't violate anyone's bodily integrity.
There is a risk of dying in a car accident driving to the doctors office to vaccinate your kid. So in that respect they aren't safe. Is there a chance your kid will have a fever or a sore arm yes. Do I think the doctors at least in Canada have down played the risk of kids having fevers or other adverse side effects based on my very biased sample size of 5 kids, hell yes. And I suspect this is one reason the medical community might not be trusted. Do I think a day of my kids having a fever is worth it to prevent them from just having even chicken pox? Definitely.
When the anti-vaccine hysteria was peaking about 15 years ago, the consensus was that it would last until a bunch of children all died from a preventable disease. 35 dead in the current outbreak - we get mandatory vaccines.It's sucks to be right sometimes.
None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
Vaccinations are a classic case of internalized pain and externalized benefit. You internalize the pain of the needle, the temporary side-effects (which are imagined to be far worse than they are), and time & financial cost of the vaccine. You externalize most of the benefit of the vaccine to younger children whose bodies are too fragile to take the vaccine, and to people who remain too fragile to get a vaccination.
Once you're old enough to get your vaccination, you've already received the benefit of the vaccine from the children and adults before you because you weren't exposed when you were younger. It's very tempting to say screw everyone after me and rationalize that decision by listening to and citing the anti-vax arguments.
You take a disease like Hepatitis B which if exposed to a baby by its mother, the baby has a 97% chance of becoming a life time carrier. That also means they have a 30% chance of liver problems and/or liver cancer later in life. It also means they may have to spend $10K a year on virus suppression medication. If there was a conspiracy, it would be to suppress the $50 Hepatitis B Vaccine to earn a whole lot more money on medication later.
...vaccinating in an underdeveloped immune system will always produce better long term results than vaccinating in a developed immune system.
Is that universally true, though? I don't remember the specifics, but not long ago I heard about a booster vaccine to BCG (Bacillus Calmetteâ"Guerin, for TB) that failed its efficacy trials because it didn't work in children, although it does work for adults.
My health plan is Kaiser Permanente, and every time I visit I get a list of upcoming vaccine dates and such. Since they're both a medical provider and medical plan, they have a vested interest in keeping customers healthy so that they can keep more of their money. They're also very good at signing patients up to classes, like how to manage asthma, diabetes, what to do if you're having a baby, and so forth.
You both seem to mean the same, parent poster just simplified it.
Much potential for a dark comedy.
Vaccination should be compulsory unless there is an medical reason not to. And parents who do not vaccinate should be charged with anything from child endangerment all the way up to involuntary manslaughter.
'nuff said.
It's kind of like the folks who insist that they should not have to fasten their seatbelt when they drive, because they do not understand how this could impact anyone else. All it takes is a comparatively minor bump/hump in the road to displace someone from their seat, leaving them unable to control the vehicle.
There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
Your immune system reacts to the flu antigens, which is why the vaccine works. The symptoms of an immune response to flu antigens happen to be the same whether they are on the virion or not, less the cellular death part.
Unless you travel overseas a lot? You're simply not likely to encounter yellow fever.
Rabies is so rare that, unless you are a veterinarian or do certain types of health work, you're much more likely to get struck by lightning. You can get immunized successfully after exposure.
Smallpox has been eradicated.
I thought I was borderline crazy for getting immunized for Hep A, but wow, you take it a long way.
What everyone really needs though, are the old standards, especially pertussis. I know someone that died of pertussis, she was too young to be immunized.
Oh, and I think the tuberculosis vaccine is of limited use. Not very effective and makes screening for TB difficult.
--PeterM
But why not adults too? There are more vaccinated adults than children
Honestly.... I don't know or remember all of what I was ever vaccinated against, Or how long each vaccine lasts.
It's not like you get an annual ticket reminding you what your vaccines are or when they expire.
I had lots of vaccines as a kid/teenager, and even if I know exactly what clinics I visited as a kid... it is doubtful there would be
any record kept for more than a few years.
"Rabies is so rare that, unless you are a veterinarian or do certain types of health work, you're much more likely to get struck by lightning. You can get immunized successfully after exposure."
Here's the problem with that approach: by the time the symptoms surface, you are as good as dead. And getting immunized after exposure is great if you know you have been bitten by a rabid animal (hence the focus on capturing animals that have bitten animals, and testing them for Rabies...), but if you are bitten in your sleep (bats, rats, etc.), or don't think much about that squirrel's / dog's / cat's bite (or what have you)...why put yourself in such a precarious position? We live on as planet filled with animals, many that we aren't paying attention to on a daily basis, and yet they are a part of our lives. Why would you play the lottery with such a horrible disease? Look up some YouTube videos of human beings infected with Rabies -> a gun and a bullet would be a blessing.
"Smallpox has been eradicated."
You forgot this: *. It still exists, albeit in labs, where it is being "studied." Also, the US has a giant stockpile of Smallpox vaccine for every US citizen. And yes, healthcare professionals have access to the vaccine. Smallpox can supposedly be brought back from the dead very easily (may be FUD, may not, check your mileage).
"Oh, and I think the tuberculosis vaccine is of limited use. Not very effective and makes screening for TB difficult."
The BCG vaccine is widely used outside the US. As for the false positives it can create using TB skin tests...this is not so much an issue with TB blood tests. But yes, you are right about its variable efficacy: 0%-80% per person. They are trying to fix that with a booster shot (of a different design; MVA85A?), or going with a different primer altogether.
And we are agreed that the standard (or old vaccines as you call it) are a good idea.
Also, a question just for you, Hep A, but no Hep B?
Bang for the buck. Children are the most at risk for these things because their immune systems are less established, they are less fastidious and they're more likely to get in contact with a given pathogen because children are packed together in the hundreds every day. It's also a much smaller demographic and easier to track.
Doing the adults too would obviously be a good thing, but it's a much greater (and costly) task.
Not to mention that most current adults *are* already vaccinated, because *their* parents weren't anti-vax asshats.
All these measures to encourage (or enforce) vaccines in children are great.
But why not adults too? There are more vaccinated adults than children (most vaccinations lose effectiveness after a period of time).
Well there is one simple reason, Adults dont need them.
:)
1. Immune systems in children are still developing, this puts them at risks of diseases and illnesses that would not affect an adult.
2. Adults already carry natural immunities to childhood diseases, often by surviving it. Immunisation simply reduced this by introducing the antibodies before the disease was contracted.
3. The majority of adults are already immunised. Most of our childhood immunisations were introduced well over 40 years ago, the anti-vaxxer movement only started to take steam in 1998 when Andrew Wakefield published his FAKE report on vaccinations.
Most of the vaccinations for particularly bad diseases are for life. Those few that aren't are almost always optional unless you live in a country with a particularly virulent disease. Things like Tetanus should be kept up to date, but it's not life threatening if you dont (if you're travelling, it's worth seeing if you need a jab or two, some countries have diseases that western nations dont). What is life threatening is willingly exposing a human child to preventable diseases because David Avocado Wolfe told you gravity is a toxin.
OTOH, I don't recommend some vaccines, mainly optional ones. Unless you're a high risk case, it's not worth getting a flu jab every year... or immunising for Japanese Encephalitis if you never leave Canada. However I have science based reasons behind this, there's never been a science based reason not to immunise a child against Polio.
I probably do need a Tetanus booster, last one I took was Oct 2007 and I'm a frequent traveller
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
You are mostly correct. I'd even guess that you would have been modded up if you hadn't included "And don't dare fucking criticize the piece of fucking shit that is Linux.".
Good point. Either way, it's good herd management, to keep the tax cows healthy.
I've been on Slashdot for a while, so I know a bit about cows (MOOOOO).
As far as I know, paying taxes is not one of the things that cows do.
It's worth noting that the elderly are also highly encouraged to get annual flu vaccines because they have failing immune systems and it's far more likely to kill them and the elderly people around them.
If your immune system is failing then a vaccine isn't going to help you. Why not? Because a vaccine works by "priming the pump" on your immune system. It causes your immune system to create antibodies to the disease. A non-working immune system won't create those antibodies.
No, the reason elderly are encouraged to get vaccinated against flu is because their OTHER systems are less resilient to the effects of a major illness, not because their immune system is failing. For example, if you've lost lung efficiency because you are old, then a disease that hampers breathing will be more serious than for someone whose lung functions are normal.
It would be irresponsible of me to future generations to get vaccinated. If everyone lives to breeding age even with weak immune systems, then weak immune systems will become common in future generation,
I think you are trying for humor here, but consider this. Mandating vaccinations of children will be an effective selection mechanism against anyone seriously allergic to those vaccinations. As children, this will remove them from the gene pool prior to reproduction, removing the genetic tendency to allergy.
This is a good thing for society as a whole, even if it isn't so good for individuals. But then, that's the whole purpose of vaccination and the concept of "herd immunity".
Right, I got the Hep B immunization too, but in retrospect, like the Hep A immunization, my risk is so low I don't think I really needed it. Non-standard for me, but one I took anyway, was the chickenpox immunization. I think I could use a booster now. I am also considering taking one of the pneumonia vaccines.
Re: rabies: 1-2 rabies deaths per year in the USA. Lightning: 50-ish deaths per year. That's a low enough risk I won't bother with the shot. And have you heard of the girl who survived rabies by means of being put into a coma? A person need not suffer horribly due to rabies anymore. They can put you out and keep you out.
Smallpox: If smallpox is re-released upon the world, then I'll get the vaccination. Hopefully, if that happens, whomever unleashes that abomination upon the world will not have altered it sufficiently that the old vaccine is useless.
I'll add a remark: I will absolutely take a vaccination even if I am low risk of acquiring disease if it is part of a worldwide eradication effort. Like I'll gladly take a polio booster.
PS: I really, really support increased efforts in developing new vaccines for things like TB, malaria, zika, ebola.
PPS: The standard vaccinations (your term is better) are standard for good reason and the nonstandard aren't standard because the benefit is relatively low.
It's a milk tax.
Look, I know my other post got modded down.
But this is the ultimate "nanny state" move.
Nominally motivated (according to the article, which the moderators apparently did not read) by the recent measles outbreak, the move is intended to protect the population at large, rather than the individuals being vaccinated.
If you understand the mechanism for herd immunity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Then you understand that the minimum R0 for Pertussis ("whooping cough") and Measles is 12, and in modern strains, closer to 17 and 18, respectively.
That means that you have to have 94% and 95% successful vaccination to hit the threshold where you are actually protecting the population from the spread of the disease in the population.
6% of the population is immunocompromised. This doesn't have to mean HIV; it also means hepatitis, organ transplant, organ failure for other reasons, Lupus, Mononucleosis, Epstein-Barr virus, or Helicobacter pylori, and other diseases.
Even if you immunize everyone, and the vaccines are 100% effective, you've already lost on measles, and you're 1% away from losing on pertussis.
And this assumes a homogenous population, in which that 6% is spread throughout the population uniformly -- and that you don't immunize them, you give them an exception -- which the legislation doesn't allow: you get immunized whether you can tolerate the vaccine or not.
Add to the 6% the 2% allergic to the non-vaccine proteins that result from the culture medium, and you have lost on pertussis as well.
Unless you willfully kill off people, vaccination, even with 100% effective vaccines, will never, ever successfully eradicate measles or pertussis: they are here for the long haul, and they will be with humanity until a method other than vaccination us used in order to either eradicate or contain the diseases.
It turns out containment actually works. It's called quarantine, and the U.S., after several outbreaks of Ebola -- resulting in deaths -- on U.S. soil, the U.S. instituted quarantine for doctors returning to the U.S. from hot zones. And there have been no more outbreaks in the U.S..
This is precisely how we dealt with tuberculosis, before we could do anything about it, and it's precisely how we dealt with Hansen's disease (leprosy). and it freaking works. It's just not politically correct to quarantine people from hot zones -- until it is.
---
And the vaccines are still not 100% effective anyway -- unless you get a type 1 IgE reaction because of antibodies. If you only get a type 2 IgE reaction, then you are going to be an asymptomatic carrier, and spread the disease around. You're going to be a Typhoid Mary. Thankfully, only a fraction of people end up type 2 -- but it still happens. It's why the OPV (Oral Polio Vaccine), which is still used in countries like India and Pakistan, who won't buy solar powered refrigerators for rural clinics -- has resulted in secondary live virus vaccine infections that have resulted in 48,000 cases of partial or complete polio myelitis based paralysis so far.
We use recombinant polio vaccine in Western countries -- where we have refrigerators and reliable electricity -- called IPV -- Injectibale Polio Vaccine. It doesn't have these side effects.
Ironically, the recombinant measles vaccine, rather than the attenuated virus version -- is drastically less effective. In other words, some 35% of people who get the measles vaccine will not be immune to measles.
There's a way to fix this, but it's hugely expensive: perform antibody titers, and verify a Type 1 IgE reaction, and if the person doesn't have the antibodies, immunize them again. And again. And again. Until they have the antibodies. This technique is sometimes used on health care workers who will be knowingly going into a hot zone. But it's an expensive procedure, verifying that an immunization worked.
And if you think the 35% number
No, densky packed. All of Angel's spelling mistakes are terrible (usually there are multiple mistakes). He needs to learn to use a fucking spell checker or at least proofread the thing.
Thank you, that made sense.
Hmmm. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
I don't think you're accounting for reduction in active virus across generations. If immunization done properly, the chance of getting infected will continue to decrease each generation until the odds of coming across it are slim to none.
That they don't kill people? Not every company operates like a car company and lives with lawsuits to cut corners. When the government pays for it in volume, you can afford to put the cost of quality control into it.
But why not adults too? There are more vaccinated adults than children
Honestly.... I don't know or remember all of what I was ever vaccinated against, Or how long each vaccine lasts.
It's not like you get an annual ticket reminding you what your vaccines are or when they expire.
Every state I have been in has a little yellow booklet they give you to keep track of vaccinations - I think my wife has one with some sort of internation logo on it (WHO?). You are supposed to keep track in that booklet and keep it with your "important papers".
I just had a friend who might be the first case of diphtheria in the country this year. If you haven't had a DTP booster shot in the last ten years, maybe it is worth while doing so. Tetanus still kills a few people in the US every year.
http://apps.who.int/immunizati...
The list isn't very long, and there is little danger in getting "overimunized" so if you don't know what you've been imunized against it isn't so tough to just get them all.
So, 35 people died from disease. How many died from injecting toxic chemical cocktails together with viruses? No, right, keep forgetting; we're not allowed to do research on that.
There is a lot or research of the effectiveness and dangers of all of the vacines we are talking about. Heck the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services even has a website for tracking reactions in the US: https://vaers.hhs.gov/
Of course, if you believe that everyone in the industry and the HHS is "in on it" then there probably isn't much I could do to help convince you. It does seem like people working in "big pharma" as well as for the HHS seem to believe their own "propaganda" since they seem to have high rates of immunization of their kids, unless you think they are using the "safe stuff" and sticking the "toxic chemical cocktails" into the rest of us. Or maybe they just hate kids in general.
Wow... I didn't even see that typo, even when I reread it before posting the above reply. I only noticed it when you pointed out the specific mistake.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Are you dense? It's like you're plugging your ears and intentionally ignoring science.
For fucks sake, did you actually read my post *at all*?!
Yes, vaccines *work* in the same way - I didn't say they don't. What I did say is that in quite a few cases it can be easier to produce a vaccine for a child than for an adult - and it is, in quite a few cases you can't simply use the child vaccine in an adult, it simply won't work due to the immunological response the adult body will have. There is a reason why Chicken Pox is a *serious* illness in adulthood that can cause death but not really considered a fatal illness for children - because children's bodies work differently! Which is why the shingles vaccination has to be done very carefully for older patients (its a much higher concentration than children are given for chicken pox).
Vaccinating adults is entirely possible, but what can be effective for a child isn't necessarily so for an adult - and in any case, vaccinating in an underdeveloped immune system will always produce better long term results than vaccinating in a developed immune system. That is why we target kids - for both the immediate benefit and for the long term benefits.
My wife (a doctor) is currently laughing her head off at your post...
Take a look at how Tdap vaccine is given based on age - the adult vaccine is formulated differently with a lesser quantity of antigens than the child vaccine, because the vaccine in adults can trigger swelling of the arm its given in, while that doesn't occur in children. Other vaccines require significantly more active ingredient in the adult vaccine because of the immunological response - but increasing the concentration means the formulation of preservative etc has to also change...
There are many many ways in which the age contributes to the vaccine given. Doesn't mean the process of vaccination works differently, but it does mean that the same treatments may be ineffective in an adult, requiring a different vaccine to be developed.
Is it that simply, adults weigh more than children, that's why their dose is larger.
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
This is a request to the editors and owners of slashdot.org, whenever vaccines come in play:
I'd really *really* like to be able to mod someone IGNORANT.
The spell checker on iOS/Safari on my iPad often does not work.
I'm sorry for that.
And rereading my post does not work, as I don't see spelling mistakes.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Not trying to outrun Death. There may have been a few cases where I've turned around, and given him a hug. That's not what this is about. This is about removing unnecessary suffering, cruelty, and pain; it's about the false dichotomy that keeps so many people prisoners in their homelands, or open to easily preventable diseases.
For an average US citizen to go out and see the world, and go beyond the tourist spots, how many different vaccines are needed? You want to go hiking in that forest, or possibly have an authentic meal? Or maybe you're there to help people, and instead end up in a hospital bed; the disease doesn't have to kill you to screw up your life plans.
We have 1-2 rabies death per year in the US on average, why not make that 1-2 deaths per decade?
And the best / worst part of this is the cost of these vaccines: for people from almost any other country, they cost pennies on the dollar; going to pull a number out of my ass, and go with ~$2 per vaccine; while in the US, 'travel' vaccines can cost, at a minimum, say, $100 (that was the cost of my Typhoid vaccine), and many times much more. For those worried about the cost of vaccinating the masses for these additional diseases, it appears to be a matter of negotiations, not so much a matter of absolute limited supply.
Tetanus also works after the infection. Why take the risk of a vaccination reaction instead of waiting and getting the shot when you need it. I guess it depends on how often or how likely the child is to get rusty puncture wounds to determine if the preventative is worth it.
-- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
Hello there retard. Get back to us after you learn what a vaccine is.
News flash, the pertussis vaccine actually makes you more susceptible to the more dangerous version of pertussis.
Rust has absolutely nothing to do with tetanus. It comes from bacteria in shit, primarily that of horses and cows. Also, the infection itself will not hurt you, it is the toxin that the bacteria produce, which there is an anti-toxin for. Besides, the vaccine does not in any way prevent the bacteria from infecting and colonizing a wound, it just has a small chance of protecting you from the toxin, if you've had it very recently.
Some of your points might make sense, IF there was a single vaccine that lasted beyond 10 years.
By the way, those vaccines are less useful in a young child because their immune system is less mature. If they are less than 18 months old there is absolutely nothing to gain from a vaccine because a baby's immune system is anti-inflammatory by default. If it wasn't then the slightest illness would cause irreversible brain damage. Vaccines work by causing an inflammatory response, which the babies cannot do, which makes them entirely worthless to give to babies. In fact it is very dangerous.
The refugees are vetted better than the vaccines are.
Immunity conferred by immunization is not heritable.