Soldato
Pretty much anyone can be a parent, the requirements for entry to that role are very low.
The risks and benefits of vaccination are very well known.
Heavy fines for those that refuse vaccination in Germany
- Thread starter Avenged7Fold
- Start date
Pretty much anyone can be a parent, the requirements for entry to that role are very low.
The risks and benefits of vaccination are very well known.
Commissario
So diseases that were once under control are again on the rise across Germany (and other European States)? Over here, TB was all but eradicated but is now on the rise again.
Because people aren't vaccinating?
Unless you're referring to the fact that people travel a lot more now..(I'm being generous with the motives behind your post).
America has had several large oubreaks of some diseases, usually around tourist attractions or airports where the local population has decided they don't need an autism causing injection (insert huge roll eyes).
Oddly enough people who come from areas where the diseases are more common (or more recently eradicated) tend to be far more likely to take up immunisations, usually because they're aware of the dangers of the diseases pose, unlike someone who has never dealt with someone who has had the disease and instead read the scare stories in the papers, on the internet and listened to such world renowned medical experts as Alex Jones on the horrors of vaccines.
I've seen people (who presumably have had some education as they can read/write and use computers) not seeming to be able to understand how many people Polio killed and maimed despite it being eradicated in the US only about 50 years ago (and a lot of it's victims are still around), or the death toll of the flu before vaccines and modern healthcare was available.
Personally it's one of the situations where I think the state should have a major role in deciding what happens, as like the justice system it doesn't just affect the one person who has decided not to vaccinate their kids, or those kids, it potentially puts very large numbers of people at risk (those too young to have the vaccine, the elderly and those with weakened immune systems).
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,257
TB is a different sort of issue.
The BCG which we used to give to everyone, we now only give to children with parents who are from certain places within the world.
It isn't particularly effective against the strains of TB we now see spread, so its direct use a vaccine is much lower.
It might come a time where a new vaccine against the newer strains is generated, but currently there doesn't seem to be the drive for this by any particular drug company.
Likely due to the low rates.
Its a shame, but stopping the BCG was a reasonable decision, shame it doesn't provide the protection we would want against current strains.
As for MMR, measles has had rampant resurgence over past 18 months, a completely preventable disease, I wouldn't like to see an outbreak in the UK, and I think we must take steps to see everyone gets immunised.
The BCG which we used to give to everyone, we now only give to children with parents who are from certain places within the world.
It isn't particularly effective against the strains of TB we now see spread, so its direct use a vaccine is much lower.
It might come a time where a new vaccine against the newer strains is generated, but currently there doesn't seem to be the drive for this by any particular drug company.
Likely due to the low rates.
Its a shame, but stopping the BCG was a reasonable decision, shame it doesn't provide the protection we would want against current strains.
As for MMR, measles has had rampant resurgence over past 18 months, a completely preventable disease, I wouldn't like to see an outbreak in the UK, and I think we must take steps to see everyone gets immunised.
Soldato
I don't know if anyone here has read it but there's a novel by Ken MacLeod, 'Intrusion'. It's not about vaccinations but there is a standard treatment given to pregnant women that "improves" their child - cleans up genetic "imperfections", immunises them against many diseases and other small tweaks. The central characters are two parents who decide they don't want to give their child "the fix". This is especially problematic for the authorities because the parents are neither muslim nor Catholic and therefore can't give a faith based reason not to take it. It's not an Orwellian dystopia, but there is a steadily more smothering atmosphere as more and more pressure is applied as the pregnancy progresses. There's probably not much to add to this thread from it except that it's probably a good capture of how parents in such a situation feel and how when society can suddenly shift when the mass of people decide they know what's best for the minority.
I think more than anything else it's the principle that has no clear boundaries. What if we as a majority decide that some genetic feature should be cleaned up or that particular religious beliefs (those not numerous enough to get the untouchability of Islam or Christianity) constitutes harming a child. It strikes many people as taking away their choice of how to best look after their child.
I think more than anything else it's the principle that has no clear boundaries. What if we as a majority decide that some genetic feature should be cleaned up or that particular religious beliefs (those not numerous enough to get the untouchability of Islam or Christianity) constitutes harming a child. It strikes many people as taking away their choice of how to best look after their child.
- Joined
- 4 Jan 2013
- Posts
- 3,783
Its a difficult one due to the potential impact upon others.
Simply saying the government knows best however is stupid. Unless they should have mandated thalidomide back in the day due to knowing all?
Lots of the diseases are being brought in from outside so I reckon immunisation won't work against all strains.
I would say education is probably the best bet. Incentivise parents with a good educational campaign and with subsidises. A positive rather than a negative approach..
Either way I'm just glad glaucus has no say in anything other than a railway track...
Simply saying the government knows best however is stupid. Unless they should have mandated thalidomide back in the day due to knowing all?
Lots of the diseases are being brought in from outside so I reckon immunisation won't work against all strains.
I would say education is probably the best bet. Incentivise parents with a good educational campaign and with subsidises. A positive rather than a negative approach..
Either way I'm just glad glaucus has no say in anything other than a railway track...
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 8,333
ever seen the film gattaca?
whilst these concepts are interesting, this specific topic isn't exactly about genetic engineering.
When he's referring to TB that is a particular issue that has arisen re: immigration... though I don't really see it as an argument against immigration (whether the other poster does or not I don't know) - I do see it is a genuine issue, that it is perhaps an indication of a need for better medical checks in general and/or requirement for vaccinations as a condition of immigration.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,257
AUS, NZ and other insist upon chest rads before entering, to screen for TB. How effective this program is I am unsure as I've never looked into the false negatives of such a program, but it does make sense at a public health level. Its possible we now do also for non-EU, again I don't know our exact protocol but it would prove helpful in combatting the rise of such a disease.
Permabanned
One of the decisions the German's must make for welcoming so many illegals with probably zero inoculation history into their country with zero health (or any....) checks from lands where contagious diseases are rife. It's madness we in the UK don't have more contagious diseases on the notifiable list, especially when drugs allow carriers a pretty much un-compromised life, but maintaining the ability to infect the unwary.
Not vaccinating your children is a dumb thing to do, unfortunately the state only has a few options to encourage it.
The question is at what point should the state intervene for the health of both the individual child and that of the rest of society.
The question is at what point should the state intervene for the health of both the individual child and that of the rest of society.
In the 1950's my Parents had to present clear chest x-rays before they were allowed to travel from the UK to Africa (Northern Rhodesia)
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,257
Indeed, but I do not know the current situation.
Lots of our current Tb came from eastern Europe and Pakistan, but beyond that I am unsure of our direct protocols.
-edit, not really to do with vaccination, as we can't vaccinate against these strains.
BCG is ineffective.
rest of vaccines, usually great stuff.
not convinced on zoster yet, as most people get it and have done for generations with little issues.
I guess a more reasonable alternative would be to quarantine the unvaccinated child so they are unable to potentially infect others, that way no-one is forcing anyone to do anything, but the children of sensible parents are protected
Can you please elaborate/explain this please. I've seen this said several times by various people.
Surely if "sensible parents'" kids are protected by their vaccine, then why do un-vaccinated children need to be quarantined?
I've seen the same argument several times but I don't get why people always get annoyed at others who don't wish to vaccinate? If you're vaccinated then surely you trust the vaccine to keep you protected, not having to quarantine people just because they're not vaccinated.
You can still propagate diseases even if you're vaccinated, so again I don't get what use quarantining all un-vaccinated people would be...
Would appreciate if someone can kindly explain.
that's a very simplistic view - firstly vaccines aren't 100% effective and the concept of herd immunity is compromised when more people decide not to vaccinate - the higher that percentage of non-vaccinated people the quicker a disease can spread
secondly there will be younger kids/babies who haven't yet had their vaccinations - it isn't like everyone is jabbed with a cocktail of vaccines from the moment they're born
Because there are a small volume of people who genuinely can't have the vaccine, and so require herd immunity to keep them safe. The refusal to vaccinate children capable of having the vaccine doesn't just endanger them, it endangers other people (both adults and children) who have genuine reasons why they didn't have a vaccination.
I am personally very wary of places where measles is common for precisely this reason.
Caporegime
Who has asked them to do this, the vaccine seller companies?
What if there is a problem with the vaccine that it has side effects not realised for several years? Major lawsuits against the government ?
What if there is a problem with the vaccine that it has side effects not realised for several years? Major lawsuits against the government ?
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 8,333
the same thing that happened with mercury, asbestos, car emissions and smoking to name a few: damn all until it becomes a problem then steps to remove it.
its a raw deal but it's called living, thanks to those before who suffered likely there will be less risk than previous generations but we're constantly improving
Commissario
Many of the vaccines are based on methods that have been tested thoroughly for decades and what side affects there are, are generally far rarer and milder than you'd get from the illnesses they help prevent.
Soldato
I agree and don't agree - it's a fine line between dictatorship and logic.
They should make it that is your child comes down with a certain disease and they are not vaccinated through a choice you made you are liable for the treatment costs.
Kinda like Jehovahs (is it?) and blood transfusions etc. It cannot be forced on them.
They should make it that is your child comes down with a certain disease and they are not vaccinated through a choice you made you are liable for the treatment costs.
Kinda like Jehovahs (is it?) and blood transfusions etc. It cannot be forced on them.
And in the meantime before noticeable side effects become apparent, that child is infecting everyone they come in contact with, i guess those other kids better be liable as well huh?