Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
OK Republican calling for forced vaccininations - as predicted
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="sh00ter" data-source="post: 2757804" data-attributes="member: 24531"><p>no, that is over-simplified....first, if you are a real doctor and you are willing to even acknowledge vaccine risks I appreciate it. My position for this thread is that parents should have the right to choose what is injected into their kids; I believe the gov't mandate is oppressive. Especially when you take into account WI-38 & MRC-5. The fact those are used to develop vaccines are a clear case for religious exemption. When you couple that with the published side effects and known ingredients (such as carcinogens like formaldehyde, etc.), I just do not see how the gov't can force people to violate their conscience or do something they perceive could be harmful. </p><p></p><p>I think the better approach is to encourage it and let it stand on its own merits. Here in 2015 Oklahoma, we do not have a problem that warrants emergency action such as "forced vaccination". Of course I think vaccines lower disease rates over a population. But this is a very complicated issue because you are asking people to go against their own religious beliefs and inject without question all the shots that they are told to. And when you take that postion, then certainly it is even more important for us to discuss the individual vaccines and even number shots to determine those which the risk/benefit can justify it. I've covered this ad nauseum previously doctor; we have the highest infant mortality rates in the world vs the most shots. When we had fewer shots say in the 1970's our rate was better. Currently, there are other westernized nations that do half the shots we do and they rank better than us in infant mortality. </p><p></p><p>Being a doctor, I know you want to help people and part of that is using your intellect; not just following the AMA/CDC scripts. Some of these shots are not as beneficial as others and we should not treat them equally. In my opinion, there should be a main set of shots similar to the 1970's that are recommended and encouraged. Then the others would be a second "optional" schedule that explains to parents that the main schedule is to cover the really bad diseases and the "optional" schedule is for things like Rotavirus which doesn't pose a significant threat in the USA like say polio could. The hope would be a tiered approach where parents and doctors were better educated on these tiers and could choose what is best for their child/patients. Perhaps we could also learn something from other 1st-world nations and reduce the total number of actual shots for those vaccines that require multiple injections; if of course our own studies warranted it. </p><p></p><p>But to answer your question further, is I do not consider any and all vaccines/diseases they put on the schedule as equal. But generally, I think that vaccines lower disease rates but just like prescription drugs, affect some people worse/better than others. Having a kid's IQ decreased by 5pts is hardly detectable vs. a child who gets encephalitis and goes into a coma or something. But then again, using the Rx example, some people will take statins and have a few liver cells die enough to increase enzymes a few pts; and others will get liver failure...we are all different but of course much less will get encephalitis than will have minimal effect that might not even be able to be attributed to the shots. <strong><u>So, I think that for the population as a whole, vaccines have been beneficial vs. the risk</u></strong>, but they have still come with a price for some people and again, not all vaccines on the schedule are of equal benefit in my opinion. This is what we are supposed to do...question, discuss, challenge and think for ourselves. It leads to better quality in many areas of life. </p><p></p><p>And there is still the religious issue; you and I both know that if all Oklahoma Christians knew about some of the live virus vaccines being grown on WI-38 & MRC-5, then we'd probably have a 50% childhood vaccine rate instead of 99%. The only way to get this corrected is to make it known. I'd think that vaccine advocates like yourself would lead the charge for change in this area, so-as to take away another excuse people have not to vaccinate? But it should always <u><strong>remain a choice</strong></u> under normal times...we simply do not have the numbers to warrant mandatory vaccines in Oklahoma; close the border and it would be even less. Thanks again for engaging me instead of just attacking me; as mentioned, I understand why your side holds the opinion it does. I used to hold the same opinion when I was uninformed about some of the things we've discussed here.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="sh00ter, post: 2757804, member: 24531"] no, that is over-simplified....first, if you are a real doctor and you are willing to even acknowledge vaccine risks I appreciate it. My position for this thread is that parents should have the right to choose what is injected into their kids; I believe the gov't mandate is oppressive. Especially when you take into account WI-38 & MRC-5. The fact those are used to develop vaccines are a clear case for religious exemption. When you couple that with the published side effects and known ingredients (such as carcinogens like formaldehyde, etc.), I just do not see how the gov't can force people to violate their conscience or do something they perceive could be harmful. I think the better approach is to encourage it and let it stand on its own merits. Here in 2015 Oklahoma, we do not have a problem that warrants emergency action such as "forced vaccination". Of course I think vaccines lower disease rates over a population. But this is a very complicated issue because you are asking people to go against their own religious beliefs and inject without question all the shots that they are told to. And when you take that postion, then certainly it is even more important for us to discuss the individual vaccines and even number shots to determine those which the risk/benefit can justify it. I've covered this ad nauseum previously doctor; we have the highest infant mortality rates in the world vs the most shots. When we had fewer shots say in the 1970's our rate was better. Currently, there are other westernized nations that do half the shots we do and they rank better than us in infant mortality. Being a doctor, I know you want to help people and part of that is using your intellect; not just following the AMA/CDC scripts. Some of these shots are not as beneficial as others and we should not treat them equally. In my opinion, there should be a main set of shots similar to the 1970's that are recommended and encouraged. Then the others would be a second "optional" schedule that explains to parents that the main schedule is to cover the really bad diseases and the "optional" schedule is for things like Rotavirus which doesn't pose a significant threat in the USA like say polio could. The hope would be a tiered approach where parents and doctors were better educated on these tiers and could choose what is best for their child/patients. Perhaps we could also learn something from other 1st-world nations and reduce the total number of actual shots for those vaccines that require multiple injections; if of course our own studies warranted it. But to answer your question further, is I do not consider any and all vaccines/diseases they put on the schedule as equal. But generally, I think that vaccines lower disease rates but just like prescription drugs, affect some people worse/better than others. Having a kid's IQ decreased by 5pts is hardly detectable vs. a child who gets encephalitis and goes into a coma or something. But then again, using the Rx example, some people will take statins and have a few liver cells die enough to increase enzymes a few pts; and others will get liver failure...we are all different but of course much less will get encephalitis than will have minimal effect that might not even be able to be attributed to the shots. [B][U]So, I think that for the population as a whole, vaccines have been beneficial vs. the risk[/U][/B], but they have still come with a price for some people and again, not all vaccines on the schedule are of equal benefit in my opinion. This is what we are supposed to do...question, discuss, challenge and think for ourselves. It leads to better quality in many areas of life. And there is still the religious issue; you and I both know that if all Oklahoma Christians knew about some of the live virus vaccines being grown on WI-38 & MRC-5, then we'd probably have a 50% childhood vaccine rate instead of 99%. The only way to get this corrected is to make it known. I'd think that vaccine advocates like yourself would lead the charge for change in this area, so-as to take away another excuse people have not to vaccinate? But it should always [U][B]remain a choice[/B][/U] under normal times...we simply do not have the numbers to warrant mandatory vaccines in Oklahoma; close the border and it would be even less. Thanks again for engaging me instead of just attacking me; as mentioned, I understand why your side holds the opinion it does. I used to hold the same opinion when I was uninformed about some of the things we've discussed here. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
OK Republican calling for forced vaccininations - as predicted
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom