Yeah I know the analogy was not a good one, I was just trying to state if you know the threat is a real and credible one it is foolhardy to ignore it until it happens.

As long as you survive having the disease LOL

Just say you're a contrarian and move on. Science and common sense are not on your side.

Common sense is on my side...fact: the chances of getting let alone dying from these diseases is slim to none (assuming you live in usa)

Just say you're a contrarian and move on. Science and common sense are not on your side.

Fact: the reason the chances are low in the United States is due to vaccines and because most people have the sense to get vaccinated.

Polio has been essentially eradicated in the world with the exception of Afghanistan. Bill Gates put his money, along with Warren Buffets', up to eradicate polio world wide.
Some of the smartest minds in the country couldn't figure out why it kept popping back up in Afghanistan. They have since learned that Polio erradication in Afghanistan has been particularly hard to eradicate due to war.

Please tell me what your theory on this is. Is the gates foundation part of the scientific conspiracy? Are they trying to make money (by spending their own)? Is their philanthropic mission to poison people?

Unfortunately antivaxxers influence other uneducated people. So one person turns into a family which turns into a small community and all of a sudden diseases pop up again and the cycle starts over.

Here is a vaccine success story from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Over the past three decades, the world has made tremendous progress toward the eradication of polio. In 1988—when wild poliovirus was present in more than 125 countries and paralyzed 350,000 people every year, primarily young children—the World Health Assembly set a goal to eliminate the disease, and the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) was launched. Since then, immunization efforts have reduced the number of cases by more than 99 percent, saving more than 13 million children from paralysis. India stopped the virus in 2011, and today, polio is found only in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Nigeria. In 2016, there were fewer than 40 cases reported globally.

Despite this progress, if we fail to fully eradicate this highly contagious disease, within a decade, we could witness a resurgence of as many as 200,000 new cases annually. Since 2008, more than 20 countries have experienced polio outbreaks—some of them multiple times. Efforts to reach unvaccinated children are often hampered by security risks and geographic and cultural barriers. Furthermore, vaccination campaigns cost approximately US$1 billion per year, a price that is not sustainable over the long term.

What impact did measles have in 1950, prior to vaccination?

Impact of measles in the United States.
Hinman AR, Orenstein WA, Bloch AB, Bart KJ, Eddins DL, Amler RW, Kirby CD.
Abstract
Measles has had a severe impact on children in the United States since colonial times. In the early decades of the 20th century, thousands of fatal measles infections were reported each year. During the 1950s an annual average of greater than 500,000 cases of measles and nearly 500 deaths due to measles were reported in the United States. Surveys indicated that 95% of the population had been infected with measles by the age of 15 years. The introduction of measles vaccine and its widespread use, which began in 1963, has had a major impact on the occurrence of measles in the United States. Reported numbers of cases, deaths due to measles, and complications of measles (e.g., encephalitis) have declined dramatically. Accompanying the decline in reported incidence of measles and following it by approximately seven years, has been a decline in the reported incidence of subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE). In recent years, the incidence of measles has dropped to levels that are less than 1% of those seen in the prevaccine era. In 1981, provisional figures indicated that only 10% of counties in the United States reported any cases of measles. The reported incidence in 1981 was 1.3 cases per 100,000 population, compared with an average incidence of 336.3 cases per 100,000 population in the decade 1950-1959. Thus, the impact of measles in the United States has been markedly reduced, and it is anticipated that indigenous transmission will be eliminated entirely from the country within the year.

This is possibly correct, IF you ignore the moral imperative of helping others. Which is why I tried and tried to engage you in a conversation about the ethical implications. Do you agree that you have ANY moral obligations to others?

A. I am not a child
B. 500 deaths/year out of a us population of how many millions?
To put it in perspective...there are 450 deaths/year from falling out of bed in the u.s.

I dont personally believe that vaccines are safe and as such, i dont vaccinate my own child. I also dont believe many of the diseases vaccines prevent are untreatable. So to say i have a moral obligation to take a vaccine i dont think is safe to help protect a population from a disease that is treatable, is for me not a moral/ethical issue, it is a personal choice.

You pro-vaxxers can prescribe all the jabs you want for anyone you want, but when you try to administer one to me, Imma stick that needle in someone's eyeball.

Settle down tough guy. Nobody is threatening you. You're a gamma sigma bear or whatever.

Do you acknowledge that measles, for a limited example, has a mortality rate of approximately 1:500, perhaps higher according to the recent Samoa experience?

Facts are not disputable. Yes it is true.

However, last year there were zero deaths of persons falling out of bed while taking a vaccine. Therefore, your best bet to survive is obvious.

In 1950 there were roughly 149 million people in the United States. Death isn't the only outcome when you fall ill with a disease. Encephalitis or polio is no joke either. The point is that many of those 500 deaths were preventable. At least today they are.

Your argument about falling out of bed is ridiculous but I will go along anyway. Most of these "falling" deaths are attributed to a preexisting illness. In fact, a good number happen in hospitals to sick patients. Totally preventable by using bed rails which is standard operating procedure for sick, disoriented or elderly patients.

The fact is, science has proven vaccines to be effective. You can argue all day long but you seem silly doing it. Vaccines have been effective against polio, the measles and countless other diseases. It's why people like yourself can be so cavalier about whether or not you get vaccinated.

I'm still waiting for anyone to reply to the question regarding the Gates Foundation. Can someone tell me why the Gates and Buffet's spend so much of their personal money trying to vaccinate people in underdeveloped countries? Is it for their personal profit, mind control, to poison children? Would love to know.

Because bill gates and warren buffet have more money then brain cells. They believe they are doing good for mankind. No shame in that.

Vaccines are effective...nobody is arguing they are not. But 500 deaths is not statistically significant (unless its me). How many vaccine injuries could be prevented? Hint: 100%.

Do you really belive the BS you say or are you trolling. I guess you think you have more brain cells than Gates and Buffet (capitalized of course). Watch the video, read the reports. This is fact. What alternate universe do you live in that allows you to think that the Polio vaccine has a higher rate of injury or death than the disease. Get real dude.

LONDON (Reuters) - Local Afghan Taliban leaders are hindering global efforts to end polio, but Afghanistan and Pakistan must continue their fight to “get to zero” cases, the philanthropist Bill Gates said on Monday.

In a telephone interview with Reuters, Gates was optimistic about the global plan to eradicate the paralyzing viral disease, but said Afghanistan’s conflict and power struggles hamper progress.

“The big issue there is always with the Taliban,” said Gates, whose multi-billion dollar philanthropic Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is one of the biggest funders of the polio eradication campaign.

Polio is a virus that spreads in areas with poor sanitation. It attacks the nervous system and can cause irreversible paralysis within hours of infection. Children under five are the most vulnerable, but polio can be prevented with vaccination.

Success in reducing case numbers worldwide has been largely due to intense national and regional immunization campaigns in babies and children.

Latest Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) figures show that worldwide, there were 33 cases of polio in 2018 and six so far in 2019 - 16 of them in Pakistan and 23 in Afghanistan. These two, plus Nigeria, are the last remaining countries where the disease is endemic.

no reason to. dont touch door handles, wear gloves often and keep clean. take vitamins and eat right as well.
i never get sick. last cold was 20 years ago or more.

An adult can be as stupid as they wanna be here in the good ol USA. Not likely to change. Freedom! Merica!

When the same adult makes the choice to withhold medical treatment from their minor child is when I have a problem. Especially when the anti-vaxxers also think it is OK to send their kid to same school as other kids. At the very least, I think it is fine to prevent their child from accessing public services if they will not adhere to a vaccination regimen.

Plenty of news stories out there where 14 yo kids finally figure out how whack their parents are and seek out vaccinations on their own.

I never said the vaccine has a higher rate of injury than the disease, just that 100% of vaccine injuries are preventable. If i travel to the pakistani/afghani boarder area i will definetly consider the vaccine.

Interesting. Add don't eat out at restaurants where your food is prepared by someone who may be sick or infected. Do not ride in a cab or Uber. Don't shake hands (good advice). I could go on and on as the list of things you shouldn't do is very long.

The fact that you don't get Polio isn't due to your super impressive immune system. It's because most American's are vaccinated and we have a excellent sanitation. That won't mean a damn thing for an unvaccinated child should they come in contact with someone who crosses the boarder with one of the diseases discussed.

The low risk of catching a disease isn't because of you or your immune system. It is in spite of you. Your neighbors have more common sense and are much smarter so you benefit from the fact that Polio isn't an issue.

Parents make decisions for their children based on their beliefs, not yours, thats what parents do. That is what makes america, america. Freedom to choose. If the vaxxers want to remove their kids from school because someone is not vaccinated feel free. Better yet put your kids in a bubble. They are being exposed to hundreds of germs with no vaccines everyday. Its not witholding a medical treatment. Its witholding a preventative medicine for a disease that doesnt hardly exist in our society. If your kid is vaccinated for these rare diseases, what are you worried about? My kid who has hardly been to the dr. Is going to give your vaccinated kid polio?

Who takes 2?

also go vegan or vegetarian. ive been that for over 20 years. never smoke, drank or did any drugs. Many factors lead to sickness besides DNA. IDK, i don't trust needles and what can be in them. $$$$ is the goal, not our personal health. Drug companies care about making money, not curing or making people healthy.

They want to take your kids, take your home and throw you in a re education camp.

I think it's going to be the other way around where non vaccinated people won't be allowed into crowded situations like schools.

The supreme court has already ruled that states can make vaccinations mandatory, and all 50 states have laws in place regarding schools and vaccines.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccination_policy

Currently today they balance this out by allowing religious or philosophical exemptions, but with more people opting out due to denying the science versus a real reason, I can see that being tightened down.

I do appreciate those who are able to own their decisions and say "I understand and agree with the science but I don't want vaccinations because of X". That's a completely different issue than saying the science is wrong.

Being able to make personal choices is part of what makes us free, but when too many people make poor decisions that impact public health something has to be done. Second hand smoke would be an example.

Medical doctors are wrong all of the time. Just because you/the medical community believe it is a poor decision does not make it true. I still dont understand how they allowed a law to be passed limiting suing vaccine makers. If they are so safe, there shouldnt be a need. What happens if my daughter gets injured? $100,000 wount be enough for her medical expenses yet merrick made 6.5 billion last year (with a b). Tightening rules with waivers wount change anything. My kid wount get them and will still be going to church/malls/buses/restaurants.

Maybe running water, proper sewage handling and respect for property rights might prevent more polio without causing more polio.... like it has everywhere it's been tried. You see, there is a lot of "rooster taking credit for the sunrise" going on around here. And Gates/Buffet/Winfrey/Branson eugenicist monsters are actually trying to kill people, not "save" them.

So in your mind, medical tyranny is preferable to medical freedom. I haven't seen one 14YO kid who has "whack" parents take care of themself, but you'd throw them in a government-sanctioned rape house to teach their dipshit parents a lesson. What ever happened to "my body, my choice"? If my kids think I'm whack, I'll bring them to a lawyer (at their expense) to have a discussion about emancipation.

Thank you, O Arbiter of Common Sense. Now, how many vaccine-injured children do you consider a reasonable cost for your herd? 0%, 1%, 5% 25%? Seriously, what is the number of otherwise healthy kids you are willing to debilitate for life to "save" the unwashed masses. If you can't objectively answer this question, your opinion is moot.

So now the US polio epidemic in the 1940s was caused by lack of respect for property rights? And then Eisenhower restored social order and the cases conveniently dried up on their own just as the polio vaccine became widely available? The bar is high, but this may be the dumbest thing you’ve posted since the psycho-sexual pyramid.

It's all in his name.....

I consider 284 compensation claims (of which 143 were granted) on 126 million measles vaccinations over a 12-year run to be entirely acceptable, since measles used to kill 400-500 Americans a year. That’s a 0.0002% injury rate, BTW, assuming every claim was actually legit.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/18/health/vaccine-injury-claims.html

Of course you wanted your claimants to be “debilitated for life” for your hypo, so we’re talking some subset of those claims and an even lower percentage.

This escalated quickly. Not sure where rape houses are, but you should report them. Here is an article where states are addressing the parents right to lunacy while allowing the children to elect for actual healthcare: https://www.governing.com/topics/health-human-services/sl-teens-can-choose-to-get-vaccines.html

Parents cannot, in fact, do anything they want to their children. Children have rights that sometimes surpass their family's beliefs and there are laws that ensure those rights can be asserted. States allowing children to elect to be vaccinated are an example of those laws. Plenty of other examples.

FTR - I am not trying to persuade Madtown, Sad Sack or anyone else to switch sides or get a vaccination or whatever. Since the advent of social media platforms a lot of fringe views get a whole lot of what we used to call 'ink'. They are entitled to their personal opinions.

But all that ink can cause some people to think that both sides of an argument are worth considering - anti-vaxxer, pizza-gate, flat earth, windmill cancer, moon landing hoax, etc. Whenever I see foolishness I feel obligated to speak up a bit.

Fact is, vaccines have risk. Ones i am not willing to take. Its not opinion...i dont feel obligated to help the heard for a disease that is treatable.

Agreed. Wolfmarsh also said it well with this:

There truly are some subjective decisions to be made, like tolerance for an immediate but extremely remote risk in receiving a vaccine vs. the far greater but still relatively small risk of future infection, or the remote risk of getting vaccinated vs. the benefit of "herd immunity" to your whole community (including you and your family, of course) if enough people accept the vaccine. If you prefer to accept a 1% risk of serious illness later rather than take a shot with 0.0002% rate of serious side effects, I can tell you the math's against you but only you know your own mind and tolerance for present vs. future risk. Likewise, we all have to decide for ourselves if protecting the health of others is of any value in weighing the risks and benefits of vaccinating.

But if your starting data and assumptions are all fantasy bullshit (vaccines cause autism, clean water and Neosporin make vaccination superfluous, CDC is a front for the NWO, etc.) it's impossible to make an informed decision.

Well said and finally a vaxxer i can agree with.

According to this report on the vaccine injury compensation program: https://www.hrsa.gov/sites/default/files/hrsa/vaccine-compensation/data/data-statistics-vicp.pdf

"for every 1 million doses of vaccine that were distributed, 1 individual was compensated". That's only 0.0001%.

Let's take that further and say that there were 10 people injured for every 1 million doses of vaccine. That's still only a 0.001% incident of injury. I still find that acceptable.

There's a big scale difference between something like 0.001% and 25%. If a vaccine had a 25% chance of a serious side effect, it wouldn't be in use and of course that would be a much different decision.

The question I think you really want me to answer is "What % risk am I willing to personally accept for my own kids?", because that's where it becomes more than just words. For that, I can answer that the current risk (whatever you want to quantify that as) is acceptable to me, as I "rolled the dice" on myself and my kids. Also that's a question that has a different answer for every single person.

A better question would be, because you decided that, should everyone also have the same opinion or be forced to vaccinate? Because i personally dont worry about getting; the flu, pertussis, rubella, mumps, measles, polio, ebola, hepatitis, ect.

So you, being in the medical profession, are against preventative medicine and vaccines? Interesting!!

Correct. Did you know that even the safest medicines (otc) kill many people and do damage to your liver/kidneys? Your headache wasnt caused by a lack of tylenol.

I'm just happy that we can all agree that there are none that would have us take shots or medicines that a person had decided he or she would rather not.

I'm with you on personal choice up until shit hits the fan, like in Samoa. If there's a legitimate epidemic and kids are dying in droves, I think the government has a duty to step up and try to save lives, including mandating vaccinations where that would be effective. Now I don't know if Samoa is tazering people and vaccinating them while they're down (if so, I'm against it) or just levying fines, social stigma, or other punishment for the non-complies (the better course, still probably gets you to protective vaccination rates without hurting people by applying physical force).

I know it's an arbitrary line -- why stop at a measles epidemic when you've got people dying from the flu every year that could be spared if we routinely force-immunized everybody every year? But as an adult I've come to accept that a certain amount of arbitrariness and "I know it when I see it" is unavoidable in life, and it's probably best not to pretend we're 100% rational since none of us are.

In the States, anyway, I think we could easily get back to highly protective vaccination rates just by requiring vaccinations at the public school house door (legit. medical exemptions only), which should keep us from ever getting to the place Samoa finds itself in today.

Like I said earlier that's exactly how it was done when I was growing up. You went to school with a paper your parents signed and everyone was lined up in an auditorium and got their shots; no shots, no school, that simple. We even had dentist that came and made sure your teeth were cleaned. lol

Samoa seems to have a fairly dense population of 70 people for every square kilometer up from 20 in the 1950s. 1/5 of the population there died during the flu epidemic of 1918-1919.

Sad indeed, but in crowded, less than sanitary conditions especially in the tropics, mother nature will try to restore some balance and diseases will happen. Vaccinate for one, and something else is sure to do the same.