Vaccines don't cause autism (duh)

[Thor]

Also wanted to add that in the example of measles, lets not forget the costs to the healthcare system if you want to ignore the safety and health of our society. Our tax dollars are being wasted thanks to parents refusing to protect their children.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Baron von Kriterium

Not a sock-puppet. If you want to get vaccinated, go for it. I'm not stopping you or persuading you not to. If you're all vaxxed up, you have nothing to worry about. Correct?

As others mentioned, it isn't necessarily getting the disease that people are afraid of, but rather getting it and passing it on to someone that does not meet the criteria to be vaccinated or has a compromised immune system. It's more about protecting others than protecting themselves.

There is also the fact that vaccines are never 100% effective. For some people, the vaccine may not take and they can still get the disease.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Baron von Kriterium

MOD EDIT: Removed quoted post.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Interesting thought experiment.

If non-vaccinated kids get sick from a vaccine preventable disease, should the healthcare system charge parents for the cost of services?

(Exceptions obviously to those who can't get vaccinations) and once a child turns 18, have the responsibility to get vaccinated shift back to them.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

Interesting thought experiment.

If non-vaccinated kids get sick from a vaccine preventable disease, should the healthcare system charge parents for the cost of services?

(Exceptions obviously to those who can't get vaccinations) and once a child turns 18, have the responsibility to get vaccinated shift back to them.

Yes the parents should be charged, they had a means of preventing the illness and they chose not too. They should absolutely have to cover the bill. Why should the taxpayers pay for others to be blatantly stupid and negligent?

[Thor]

Add to that, if parents refused vaccinations for their children, those children can be proven to have spread the disease to another child that dies, can the family of that dead child sue the parents? Again meeting all the criteria above.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Baron von Kriterium

Kids got measles and we all survived. We all got German measles. We all survived. We al got the mumps. We all survived. We all got the chicken pox. We all survived.

No you didn't. The people still alive did though

[Jimmy Stang]

Fact: 100% of children that didn't die of measles are still alive.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Julio

McCarthy has not been on The View since last summer.

Not that you lose any points for not knowing that...

Yeah but you do for pointing that out.

Deduct 10 points from Slitherin.

[calf]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

Fact: 100% of children that didn't die of measles are still alive.

What if their car had brakes and they died in an accident?

[fatso]

Originally Posted by Baron von Kriterium

So get your shot. Nothing to worry about. Go on about your life, drone.

...

Not a sock-puppet. If you want to get vaccinated, go for it. I'm not stopping you or persuading you not to. If you're all vaxxed up, you have nothing to worry about. Correct?

And this right here is the sum of the pro-disease side's argument.

No interest in understanding vaccines, epidemiology, or public health issues like community immunity. In fact, they don't even bother to address it. Instead, it's a thinly veiled conspiracy theory where us "drones" presumably are being misled by every single reputable medical professional/organization.

But when pushed, of course, the answer is "hey, why are you worried if you vaccinate"? Well, it's not that simple, but they don't care, of course. But moreover that position or question from the pro-diseasers is flawed because, unlike them, not every one is a selfish #######. Unlike them the majority are decent people who do not believe they or their family are special snowflakes distinct and better than the general society for whom science is working. If individuals can do things that are scientifically proven to be beneficial for them, and that will enhance the general health of their neighbours, particularly the vulnerable, individuals ought to do them. In fact, we have an ethical and moral obligation to do them.

So ya, I'm likely to not get sick because I'm vaccinated. You're right. But here's the difference between us. I'm astute enough to figure out that not everything is about me. You apparently still need to learn that lesson. Hopefully you don't hurt anyone along the way.

[Dan02]

+1 for calling them pro-diseaser rather then anti-vaxxer from now on.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

Interesting thought experiment.

If non-vaccinated kids get sick from a vaccine preventable disease, should the healthcare system charge parents for the cost of services?

(Exceptions obviously to those who can't get vaccinations) and once a child turns 18, have the responsibility to get vaccinated shift back to them.

I would say yes except for the fact that a large portion of the people who use healthcare services do so because they inflicted damage on themselves, from smoking, obesity, drinking and drugs. If someone smoked three packs a day for thirty years and is dependent on BiPAP and has multiple hospitalizations for acute exasperation of COPD, should we charge them for the costs.

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by calf

What if their car had brakes and they died in an accident?

Good point. Proof that vaccines don't work!

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

Interesting thought experiment.

If non-vaccinated kids get sick from a vaccine preventable disease, should the healthcare system charge parents for the cost of services?

(Exceptions obviously to those who can't get vaccinations) and once a child turns 18, have the responsibility to get vaccinated shift back to them.

No. You can't. No more than charging fat people who develop high cholesterol.
I do believe, unfortunately, that vaccination is a choice, however we get to set rules in public school, etc.
No non vaccinated children in any public school or in any community groups (sports, etc). Won't protect the herd in public places, but that is beyond our control. Schools, etc are within our control.

[calf]

I don't think you can charge parents a cost, but you can make it difficult for pro-diseasers to function in society. Banning un-vaccinated people from workplaces, must stay at least 5m from the entrance of public buildings while un-vaccinated etc.

[ernie]

A person can be charged and jailed for willfully and knowingly transmitting a dangerous disease such as HIV/AIDS. If a child unable to have a vaccine (age, intolerance) contracts a disease from someone whose parents knowingly rejected vaccines, the child dies or has some permanent damage...do the parents of the injured child have a right to sue?

I think there is a very good chance we will see just that play out in the courts in the next few years.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

Interesting thought experiment.

If non-vaccinated kids get sick from a vaccine preventable disease, should the healthcare system charge parents for the cost of services?

(Exceptions obviously to those who can't get vaccinations) and once a child turns 18, have the responsibility to get vaccinated shift back to them.

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

Yes the parents should be charged, they had a means of preventing the illness and they chose not too. They should absolutely have to cover the bill. Why should the taxpayers pay for others to be blatantly stupid and negligent?

We might as well abolish the public health care system and just go to a private system where users pay for whatever treatment they need. Many healthcare visits are avoidable. Why should taxpayers have to pay for injuries resulting that occur when individuals make the decision to partake in activities such as football, hockey, skiing, etc?

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

We might as well abolish the public health care system and just go to a private system where users pay for whatever treatment they need. Many healthcare visits are avoidable. Why should taxpayers have to pay for injuries resulting that occur when individuals make the decision to partake in activities such as football, hockey, skiing, etc?

Agreed. Do people enjoy doing sports? Driving ATVs? Drinking alcohol? Skiing?

Avoiding injury isn't possible and risky behaviours are a spectrum, not a black and white issue. Where would we draw the line?

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

We might as well abolish the public health care system and just go to a private system where users pay for whatever treatment they need. Many healthcare visits are avoidable. Why should taxpayers have to pay for injuries resulting that occur when individuals make the decision to partake in activities such as football, hockey, skiing, etc?

Completely in agreement here. With our system we have agreed to take on the liability of everyones stupidity, be it sports, drinking/drug abuse or anti-vaccination.

In addition we don't need people who catch the measles not seeking treatment and spreading it further because they can't afford the cost of treatment.