The vaccination debate.

[VeryShyPerson]

That's like reading about how descendents of people surviving the black death have a genetic resistance to HIV (I may be remembering this wrong though, it's been some years) and going "Hey, let's release the plague again to get rid of AIDs!" Not such a great idea, especially when we have enough samples in laboratories to work with.

[ThePest179]

It isn't happening ONLY in the non-immunized areas...

 

Non fatal versions? Yes, the disease spreads in vaccinated crowds, but only non fatally. In anti Vaccination circles, the disease is killing people. The virus is also more likely to infect non vaccinated people, being weaker to the disease.

[BTGBullseye]

It's all about likelihoods... You are less likely to contract a fatal form of a disease if you're vaccinated, but it isn't guaranteed. That's all. You're not guaranteed to contract a fatal form of any disease simply because you didn't get vaccinated, just more likely. Blaming the unvaccinated for the spread of diseases is like blaming people that don't use turn signals for all forms of car crashes.

 

Vaccination isn't a cure, or a guaranteed preventative, it is merely introducing a severely weakened or dead form of the virus, and hoping the immune system uses it to become more resistant or immune to that particular strain of the virus.

[ThePest179]

It's all about likelihoods... You are less likely to contract a fatal form of a disease if you're vaccinated, but it isn't guaranteed. That's all. You're not guaranteed to contract a fatal form of any disease simply because you didn't get vaccinated, just more likely. Blaming the unvaccinated for the spread of diseases is like blaming people that don't use turn signals for all forms of car crashes.

 

Vaccination isn't a cure, or a guaranteed preventative, it is merely introducing a severely weakened or dead form of the virus, and hoping the immune system uses it to become more resistant or immune to that particular strain of the virus.

 

Less likely? you mean somewhere close to 90% less likely?

[BTGBullseye]

95% actually, and another 4.5% if you get a second vaccination dose afterwards. Still, that means that 5 out of 1000 vaccinated are still vulnerable.

[Vapymid]

Blaming the unvaccinated for the spread of diseases is like blaming people that don't use turn signals for all forms of car crashes.

 

I would not be so categorical on that. The thing is that the non-vaccinated people act as incubators for the virus. When they are infected, the virus multiplies and irritates the lungs and the throat, causing coughing, which then spreads the virus through the air.

 

In immunised people, the virus (if they become exposed) is immediately suppressed by their immune system and does not get to multiply, so they don't act as a vector for the infection.

 

I really don't understand where the opposition to immunisation is coming from... Is it because of automatic opposition to anything coming from the Goverment? Or are there religious reasons?

 

I know, the MMR problem was triggered by a falsified medical report, but still there has to be a fertile ground of people with negative confirmation bias for a public panic to spread...

 

Regards

[BTGBullseye]

Getting the vaccine doesn't mean that you're immune... 0.5% (or 5 out of 1000) don't develop the immunity from the vaccine. IT ISN'T ONLY THE NON-VACCINATED THAT SPREAD THE DISEASE!!!

[VeryShyPerson]

Still, the more people vaccinated the less likely it is the disease is gonna spread around.

[BTGBullseye]

Never disagreed with that, but it isn't ONLY one group (the anti-vaccination crowd) that causes or transmits diseases.

[ThePest179]

Getting the vaccine doesn't mean that you're immune.

 

Which was never stated to begin with. getting the vaccine means your immune system can easily fend off the virus.

[BTGBullseye]

No it doesn't. 5 out of 1000 don't get ANYTHING from the vaccine.

[Vapymid]

5 out of 1000 don't get ANYTHING from the vaccine.

 

In other words, 995 people out of 1000 develop immunity after full course of vaccination (initial + a booster shot) - pretty good odds to chance getting vaccinated, I'd say

 

Regards

[BTGBullseye]

If everyone in the USA was immunized, then there would still be 1.59 million in the USA alone that would not have an immunity. 36 million world wide if everyone everywhere was immunized. These are not small amounts, even when compared to the total populations of 319 million and 7.167 billion.

[VeryShyPerson]

Still, with everyone else vaccinated, the less likely they get exposed to the disease. But the people who choose not to vaccinate are putting everyone else at more needless risk, including those who didn't develop that immunity. So aside from a legitimate allergy or whatnot, WHY WOULDNT YOU GET VACCINATED?!?!

[ThePest179]

No it doesn't. 5 out of 1000 don't get ANYTHING from the vaccine.

 

This is undisputed? A consensus among medical personnel? Even if it was 5/1000, those are still great, as it means vaccines are a huge success.

[BTGBullseye]

This is undisputed? A consensus among medical personnel?

http://www.cdc.gov/VACCINES/VPD-VAC/measles/default.htm

 

Go through and find it for yourself. Only 90% get an immunity from first round, and "most" of the rest get it from second round... (my cousin works for FEMA, and said that the stats they got from CDC and WHO for the immunity failure rate was 1 in 200)

[ThePest179]

This is undisputed? A consensus among medical personnel?

http://www.cdc.gov/VACCINES/VPD-VAC/measles/default.htm

 

Go through and find it for yourself. Only 90% get an immunity from first round, and "most" of the rest get it from second round... (my cousin works for FEMA, and said that the stats they got from CDC and WHO for the immunity failure rate was 1 in 200)

 

I will not trust you anymore if you "claim" to have a "friend" in a high area of work, or just anywhere in general to back up your arguments, because they are unverifiable sources that I cannot (and the rest of us cannot) see or hear. You can only trust what someone said so far. So even if you DO know such a person, I can't verify it. Alright?

 

By the way, where did it say "only 90% of people are immunized from measles if they get the vaccine"? Could you point it out please?

[BTGBullseye]

Sorry, 95% from first round, 99.5% second round total. It's the "Q&A about measles and vaccines" link.

 

You should take a look at the side effects link too.

 

I'm sorry you don't believe that I know people, and trust them. That is 99% of my 'behind the scenes' information, just like anyone else. (including all reporters)

[ThePest179]

I'm sorry you don't believe that I know people, and trust them. That is 99% of my 'behind the scenes' information, just like anyone else. (including all reporters)

 

I can't verify that these people are real, that's why I can't trust you when you say "I know a person in X". Only verifiable proof can be used in an argument.

 

For example, what if I told you that I know a guy in the CIA who told me that they fabricated the idea that Iraq had WMD before the 2003 invasion, or were really telling the truth and Saddam moved them all to Syria*? How would you know?

 

*This is just for use as an example. I'm not trying to state my opinion on weather or not Iraq had WMD/moved them somewhere else.

[BTGBullseye]

For example, what if I told you that I know a guy in the CIA who told me that they fabricated the idea that Iraq had WMD before the 2003 invasion, or were really telling the truth and Saddam moved them all to Syria*? How would you know?

I know people in the CIA... And the non-intrusive parts of the NSA... That's how I'd know. (BTW, there were, and still are WMDs in Iraq; they're just buried in the deserts)

 

As for the name of my cousin, for your attempts at verification... Katrina Christian.