As a retired school nurse who worked in schools in the most “under-served” areas of Los Angeles, I witnessed, to my consternation, the quirky nature of immunization rules in schools. Students are required to comply with a regime of immunization for very legitimate health and scientific reasons. Yet an escape hatch is provided for anyone who wanted to avoid getting the shots, mostly for trivial and frivolous reasons. The one that riled me most is mandating the school to enroll the “homeless” children without required immunization. The indigent disposition of this population generally makes them more vulnerable to contracting the diseases targeted by these vaccines. It would stand to reason that they be required to get these shots. Public and school health services provide the shots free of charge. But politics trump science as usual. They are enrolled without immunization. Social workers who should follow up and see that they get the shots never do so. Since these students are always on the move, they would move on to another school and the same scenario will repeat all at the expense of the majority of students and risking undermining of herd immunity.
9
From another comment: "there is something extreme about the government taking the responsibility of ones children away from the parent and mandating that the child be injected with with a drug or they will not be allowed to go to public school." It is called "public" school becasue it is free to all. One of the prices a parent has to pay is that they need to immunize their child(ren) from diseases that can harm so many more children than juts their own. If there is a medical reason to not vaccinate, cool. If the reason is personal opinion, contrary to medical knowledge, then it is time for government protection for all students within the "public" schools.
31
The reason given by Dr. Pan for introducing this bill is he says that unvaccinated kids put other kids at risk, especially immunocompromised kids who themsleves cannot be vaccinated. Fair enough.
Dr. Pan should know that recently vaccinated people are told to stay away from immunocompromised people because live virus vaccines, and b. pertussis, has been shown to infect vaccinated and unvaccinated people with vaccine strain disease.
If the State will mandate medical procedures for the greater good, again there is an argument to be made for that in extreme circumstances. After all- the State can draft our kids to be killed or mutilated in far off lands- like Viet Nam.
The problem I see is that not only are vaccines mandated, they are also given a free pass in terms of liability. The drug companies have a built in marketing machine- state and federal vaccine mandates- and no responsibility.
It is not quite true to day that vaccines are proven to be safe and efficacious. If they were, there would be no need for a Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund.
There is no neurosurgery, cardiology, or any other type of gvo't run compensation program, except for vaccines.
Dr. Pan should know that recently vaccinated people are told to stay away from immunocompromised people because live virus vaccines, and b. pertussis, has been shown to infect vaccinated and unvaccinated people with vaccine strain disease.
If the State will mandate medical procedures for the greater good, again there is an argument to be made for that in extreme circumstances. After all- the State can draft our kids to be killed or mutilated in far off lands- like Viet Nam.
The problem I see is that not only are vaccines mandated, they are also given a free pass in terms of liability. The drug companies have a built in marketing machine- state and federal vaccine mandates- and no responsibility.
It is not quite true to day that vaccines are proven to be safe and efficacious. If they were, there would be no need for a Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund.
There is no neurosurgery, cardiology, or any other type of gvo't run compensation program, except for vaccines.
8
I do not call the vaccines a phobia when my baby girl went into anaphylaxis shock within 45 min of receiving the mmr vaccination at 12 months. I want to be informed change the cocktail. Make the vaccines safer for the all. Kids die more from vaccine injury then measles in the US. Wake up everyone of it was your child you would not march your child to the unknown
9
Dr. Morris was chief vaccine officer for the Bureau of Biological Standards at the National Institutes of Health and later with the Food and Drug Administration, when the bureau was transferred to that agency in the 1970s.
He argued that research carried out by his unit demonstrated that there was no reliable proof that vaccines were effective in preventing influenza, and he accused the government of basing its mass vaccine programs for flu primarily on claims made by pharmaceutical manufacturers.
Subsequent events seemed to support Dr. Morris’s skepticism. The 1976 swine flu vaccinations were fraught with problems, and the government discontinued the inoculations after 49 million had received the vaccine.
The incidence of swine flu among the vaccinated was seven times greater than it was among those who had not been vaccinated, according to news reports. In addition, 12 Americans who had been vaccinated against swine flu died of complications related to Guillain-Barre syndrome, a polyneuropathy affecting the peripheral nervous system. More than 200 were paralyzed, news accounts said.
In the early 1970s, with his lawyer, James Turner, Dr. Morris compiled a list of what they said were blunders and inefficiencies in the testing and licensing of vaccines, which he said cast doubt on their value to the public.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/vaccine-specialist-j-anth...
He argued that research carried out by his unit demonstrated that there was no reliable proof that vaccines were effective in preventing influenza, and he accused the government of basing its mass vaccine programs for flu primarily on claims made by pharmaceutical manufacturers.
Subsequent events seemed to support Dr. Morris’s skepticism. The 1976 swine flu vaccinations were fraught with problems, and the government discontinued the inoculations after 49 million had received the vaccine.
The incidence of swine flu among the vaccinated was seven times greater than it was among those who had not been vaccinated, according to news reports. In addition, 12 Americans who had been vaccinated against swine flu died of complications related to Guillain-Barre syndrome, a polyneuropathy affecting the peripheral nervous system. More than 200 were paralyzed, news accounts said.
In the early 1970s, with his lawyer, James Turner, Dr. Morris compiled a list of what they said were blunders and inefficiencies in the testing and licensing of vaccines, which he said cast doubt on their value to the public.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/vaccine-specialist-j-anth...
13
A reasonable law that should be enacted. It is sad so many want to profit off the expense of others but there you have it. CA needs to exclude un-innoculated wacko's from public (taxpayer funded) resources to the extent the law will allow. Furthermore - allowing groups of wacko's to home school their spawn endangers the public - so I do not agree this provision is a good idea.
8
Perhaps recently vaccinated kids should be exclude from school as well, based on your reasoning. The CDC recommends that recently vaccinated kids be kept away from immunocompromised individuals due to possibility of the vaccine shedding and infecting others.
7
Vaccinations must always be a choice, as vaccines are unsafe.
This is dissemination of miss information, via omission.
If vaccines were safe, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) would not exist.
There are no studies on the combination of vaccines given to children simultaneously, within a short period, are safe.
This is the works of another lackey of the pharmaceutical companies, who will reap billions, if you believe these lackeys.
The pharmaceutical companies did not produce a vaccine, for Ebola, in the past, because there was no profit in it.
These are the same folks who first said saccharin was carcinogenic, and later retracted.
These are also the same folks that said dietary cholesterol was a problem, and nowadays say it is not a problem.
These folks do not have your best interest, at heart.
This is dissemination of miss information, via omission.
If vaccines were safe, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) would not exist.
There are no studies on the combination of vaccines given to children simultaneously, within a short period, are safe.
This is the works of another lackey of the pharmaceutical companies, who will reap billions, if you believe these lackeys.
The pharmaceutical companies did not produce a vaccine, for Ebola, in the past, because there was no profit in it.
These are the same folks who first said saccharin was carcinogenic, and later retracted.
These are also the same folks that said dietary cholesterol was a problem, and nowadays say it is not a problem.
These folks do not have your best interest, at heart.
6
Part of the current public support for the anti-vaccine movement in the USA, UK and Australia is the determination by many groups to find one simple, outside cause of autism. Blaming a vaccine is a much more acceptable, easier and more satisfying strategy than trying to understand a very complex condition that likely began either at the moment of conception, or in the womb. The limited understanding of autism, such as we have, requires very sophisticated understandings of biochemistry, molecular biology, cellular biology, genetics and epigenetics that are simply far too complex for the average person to get their heads around.
10
My kid is vaccinated according to schedule, I am a biologist and do not believe - I know vaccines work, and (mostly) how and (largely) why. That said, I have also read Langer-Gould et al., JAMA Neurology, Dec 2014 where she shows that vaccinations PRECIPITATE (not CAUSE) the onset of MS and other CNS related illnesses (i.e. same number of affected in control group, but earlier). That means the kids that got vaccinated got their MS earlier than they would have if they had been infected naturally. (Which makes perfect biological sense, MS flares up upon infection.) That also means that there is a lot that we do not know about MS and possibly autism. It seems possible that MS, autism and other CNS related illnesses have an activating (inflammatory?) component to them, that could be avoided by not vaccinating them AND by preventing infections/inhibiting pathways that are activated upon infection. It is also possible that the scientists who do the studies and statistics are not corrupt and the parents who observe that their child regresses greatly just after vaccination are not crazy, either. In this case, kids with the corresponding molecular markers should be excluded from vaccination and it would be nice if some money were made available to study these CNS related illnesses better. (Since June 2014 we know why we sleep, so there might be a long way to go.)
16
It just angers me when I hear people say that childhood diseases -- in the good old days -- weren't so bad. "Everybody" got measles, mumps, chicken pox. Yes, and some of us still suffer the after effects of those diseases. I am not the only person who was left with only partial hearing -- wearing hearing aids my entire life -- because of measles.
28
"weren't so bad"? how do you know? did you meet with every child afflicted? 100,000 still die each year form Measles- "isn't so bad"..... get a life and some intelligence while you're at it.
4
my apologies "Zejee"- my comments were actually meant for those same people you're angry at, I just didn't express it correctly. Again, my apologies
3
there have been no measles death in the US for over 15 years. Can you comment on measles deaths had declined over 99.9% prior to the introduction of measles vaccine in 1963? Why is the US ranked 34th in the world in infant mortality when we have the most aggressive vaccine schedule?
The California legislators are protecting innocent infants, immune compromised children with cancers, and the elderly by this extraordinary display of common sense.
Should this sensible bill fall by the democratic way side, a pragmatic bill could stand in its place-one that charges responsible parents for every single dime that their collective idiocy costs the state of California.
Should this sensible bill fall by the democratic way side, a pragmatic bill could stand in its place-one that charges responsible parents for every single dime that their collective idiocy costs the state of California.
16
'democratic wayside"- have you view the video of citizens who testified for or against this bill? The final count was 754 opposed the bill and 34 were in favor.
6
That pesky 1st Amendment...
While going along with not forcing parents to do something against their personal beliefs, there's nothing whatsoever at odds with holding those parents liable for the consequences of their actions.
Child endangerment, child abuse, assault with intent and possibly manslaughter are just some of the harmful consequences to which parents of unvaccinated children should be held liable and accountable.
While going along with not forcing parents to do something against their personal beliefs, there's nothing whatsoever at odds with holding those parents liable for the consequences of their actions.
Child endangerment, child abuse, assault with intent and possibly manslaughter are just some of the harmful consequences to which parents of unvaccinated children should be held liable and accountable.
13
How about holding pharma and gov't policy officials accountable? The Vaccine Injury Compensation Program give the pharma folks a free pass against being sued, having to answer discovery....is "accountability" a one way street, only applicable to people with whom you disagree?
How do you propose to handle vaccinated kids spreading vaccine strain disease to immunocompromised kids in school? How will they be held accountable?
How do you propose to handle vaccinated kids spreading vaccine strain disease to immunocompromised kids in school? How will they be held accountable?
7
A phobia is an irrational fear. There is nothing irrational about the fear of vaccines. Since the beginning of modern mass vaccination in the 1950's, the rate of all sorts of auto-immune diseases has risen astronomically in direct correlation with the periodic increases in the vaccination schedule. The infant mortality rate in this country has risen at a similar rate, as well as has the rate at which newborns die on the very first day of birth. Toddlers are getting diseases now that were unknown or confined to the very old 60 years ago. These facts may be ignored by many, but they are facts nonetheless.
Vaccines have never been proven to be safe or effective. On the contrary, all the historical, epidemiological and clinical evidence points in the opposite direction. When vaccine manufacturers say a vaccine has been proven effective, all they mean is that is has been shown to stimulate a response by the adaptive immune system. The ingestion of any toxin will do the same. That such a response produces immunity is no more true whether one injects a toxin or swallows it.
Vaccines do not prevent contagion. They exacerbate it. The cardinal rule of dealing with infectious disease is to minimize the centers of contagion. Vaccination multiplies those centers by the millions. Vaccines do not prvent disease. They cause it. The cardinal rule of surgery is to maintain a sterile environment so that the body's inner sanctum remains free of invaders. Vaccination does the opposite.
Vaccines have never been proven to be safe or effective. On the contrary, all the historical, epidemiological and clinical evidence points in the opposite direction. When vaccine manufacturers say a vaccine has been proven effective, all they mean is that is has been shown to stimulate a response by the adaptive immune system. The ingestion of any toxin will do the same. That such a response produces immunity is no more true whether one injects a toxin or swallows it.
Vaccines do not prevent contagion. They exacerbate it. The cardinal rule of dealing with infectious disease is to minimize the centers of contagion. Vaccination multiplies those centers by the millions. Vaccines do not prvent disease. They cause it. The cardinal rule of surgery is to maintain a sterile environment so that the body's inner sanctum remains free of invaders. Vaccination does the opposite.
9
There is absolutely no basis for all of these statements, and to claim that vaccines CAUSE auto-immune diseases, or anything else, based on "correlation" isn't science. Lots of things, such as increased pesticide use, could be responsible.
What disease is "caused" by a vaccine?
How come measles, whooping cough, tetanus, etc. have practically disappeared?
What disease is "caused" by a vaccine?
How come measles, whooping cough, tetanus, etc. have practically disappeared?
5
Thanks...and well written. Always did wonder upon what and how that position was rationalized. Alas, and including the invalid cause-and-effect logic implied in the first paragraph, don't...nay, can't...accept premises or conclusions as either valid or true...but thanks for putting it out here.
1
You could not be more wrong. There is no correlation in the rise of auto-immune diseases. The rise is because medical professionals now have better means to differentiate the autoimmune diseases that were once all categorized together. Vaccines have been proven to prevent contagion. I never got the chicken pox because there was a vaccine. Lets see some facts and not just conspiracy theories.
5
As a medical professional with a good deal of expertise in this area, I see vaccine risk as an overblown non-issue for many reasons. The real risks are minimal. Yes, there is some concern that a vaccine can cause autoimmune diseases, where the body mistakes the vaccine for itself and attacks one's own organs (like Guillain-Barre Syndrome). However, an outbreak of the diseases that vaccines prevent, risks an even more severe autoimmune reaction, so essentially the vaccines lower this risk as well.
It's also easy to see how vaccines that tend to be given at the same age that a disease like autism is first noticed inevitably get blamed for the disease, even though it is just an expected chance association.
But, being America, the land of freedom, we now have a situation where non-experts (also known as scared parents in this case) get taken seriously when they are making a bad decision. This is a decision which hurts their own children and puts others at risk. Sadly, as a society we don't recognize true expertise and when those experts suggest certain laws. This is really about ignorance, irrational fear, and lack of trust. Essentially, these are draft dodgers, but ones who won't fight in a just war, plain and simple. This is not Viet Nam, the enemy is real. The press and our leaders could help by calling these dodgers what they are and by focusing more on how society lost it's trust for experts.
It's also easy to see how vaccines that tend to be given at the same age that a disease like autism is first noticed inevitably get blamed for the disease, even though it is just an expected chance association.
But, being America, the land of freedom, we now have a situation where non-experts (also known as scared parents in this case) get taken seriously when they are making a bad decision. This is a decision which hurts their own children and puts others at risk. Sadly, as a society we don't recognize true expertise and when those experts suggest certain laws. This is really about ignorance, irrational fear, and lack of trust. Essentially, these are draft dodgers, but ones who won't fight in a just war, plain and simple. This is not Viet Nam, the enemy is real. The press and our leaders could help by calling these dodgers what they are and by focusing more on how society lost it's trust for experts.
27
If we don't allow a pyromaniac carrying a can of gasoline into a school; why should we allow children who could spread communicable, but preventable, illnesses into a school.
20
so you agree that recently vaccinated kids should be barred from school to protect the kids who for whatever reason cannot get vaccines.
3
A study of over 95,000 children (published today in the Journal of the American Medical Association) shows once again that ASD is not associated with MMR vaccination. In fact, among children with an older sibling with ASD, unvaccinated children were nearly _twice as likely_ to develop ASD as were those children who received both doses of MMR.
The authors concluded: "Consistent with studies in other populations, we observed no association between MMR vaccination and increased ASD risk.... We also found no evidence that receipt of either 1 or 2 doses of MMR vaccination was associated with an increased risk of ASD among children who had older siblings with ASD."
Jain A et al. Autism Occurrence by MMR Vaccine Status Among US Children With Older Siblings With and Without Autism. JAMA. 2015;313(15):1534-1540. doi:10.1001/jama.2015.307
The authors concluded: "Consistent with studies in other populations, we observed no association between MMR vaccination and increased ASD risk.... We also found no evidence that receipt of either 1 or 2 doses of MMR vaccination was associated with an increased risk of ASD among children who had older siblings with ASD."
Jain A et al. Autism Occurrence by MMR Vaccine Status Among US Children With Older Siblings With and Without Autism. JAMA. 2015;313(15):1534-1540. doi:10.1001/jama.2015.307
16
So the JAMA article was written by The Lewin Group and Optum. Consultants? Who paid for the study? Let's stop treating industry sponsored science as science. And let's do the comparison of vaccinated vs unvaccinated children and their health outcomes. Simple study. Let's do it!
PS. By the way, NY Times. We bought your pitch on WMD in Iraq. But knock it off on vaccines.
PS. By the way, NY Times. We bought your pitch on WMD in Iraq. But knock it off on vaccines.
8
Good lord Anna, what a stupid comment.
The study you suggest has been done. We used to not vaccinate people. They regularly died of polio, measles, mumps, rubella, and a myriad of other now easily preventable diseases. Now they don't. Vaccines have been studies extensively and there is absolutely no causation between them and any widespread negative health effects. If you want to go back to losing the ability to move your arms and legs, confined to a wheelchair for life, feel free. The rest of us aren't that stupid, and shouldn't have to deal with the science denial induced havoc you wreak.
The study you suggest has been done. We used to not vaccinate people. They regularly died of polio, measles, mumps, rubella, and a myriad of other now easily preventable diseases. Now they don't. Vaccines have been studies extensively and there is absolutely no causation between them and any widespread negative health effects. If you want to go back to losing the ability to move your arms and legs, confined to a wheelchair for life, feel free. The rest of us aren't that stupid, and shouldn't have to deal with the science denial induced havoc you wreak.
18
Oh that is grand. I worked in medical research and it did not matter who granted the money to pay for research. You purpose a hypothesis and use science to either prove or disprove. When you publish your findings it is reviewed by the journal that you put it in. How would that data be any less correct because it is industry sponsored.
4
In an editorial that accompanied the article in the Journal of the American Medical Association (published today) that showed yet again that MMR vaccine is not related to the risk of ASD, the author noted: "Accumulating data from various different sources, including genetic, neuropathological, electrophysiological, and even infant eye gaze preference studies, have suggested that the developmental pathways for autism are created much earlier than clinical symptoms are manifest." Recent evidence shows that autism begins to develop long before birth--and long before the administration of vaccines that some have wrongly blamed for ASD.
16
All children should be vaccinated. Full stop. I can understand parents having concerns about the number of injection being administered at a time. If that's the case, parents should speak with their child's pediatrician and see about scheduling multiple appointments to avoid that issue. The only reason why children are given multiple shots at the same time are because most parents don't have the time, flexibility, or the money to afford several appointments. Parents who are wiling to do that should be able to do so.
What I find disturbing are the people who perceive vaccines are being unsafe because of what they contain. Mercury has not been used in vaccines in many years. The preservatives in vaccines are used to give them a longer shelf life. If you eat processed foods you've probably eaten more dangerous chemicals than are present in the average vaccine.
What I find disturbing are the people who perceive vaccines are being unsafe because of what they contain. Mercury has not been used in vaccines in many years. The preservatives in vaccines are used to give them a longer shelf life. If you eat processed foods you've probably eaten more dangerous chemicals than are present in the average vaccine.
22
do your research, Thimerosal is still in flu shots, two recommended for pregnant women. Thimerosal is used in vaccines exported where there is no col storage chain.
5
The U.S Department of Justice issues a report on vaccine injuries and deaths every quarter to the Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines. This March 5, 2015 report states that there were 117 cases for vaccine injuries and deaths compensated from 11/16/2014 to 2/15/2015.
92 of the settlements were listed in the report, giving the name of the vaccines, the injury, and the amount of time the case was pending before settlement. Five of those settlements were for deaths linked to vaccines, with three deaths related to the flu shot. 73 of the 92 settlements were for injuries and deaths due to the flu shot, and the majority of flu shot injuries were for Guillain-Barré Syndrome
92 of the settlements were listed in the report, giving the name of the vaccines, the injury, and the amount of time the case was pending before settlement. Five of those settlements were for deaths linked to vaccines, with three deaths related to the flu shot. 73 of the 92 settlements were for injuries and deaths due to the flu shot, and the majority of flu shot injuries were for Guillain-Barré Syndrome
7
While it is sad any time a child dies, it is extremely rare for a child to die as a result of vaccines. The numbers you provide demonstrate this fact. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of children received vaccines during the three month period you site in which five children died of vaccines. If you look at worldwide data on pediatric death from infectious diseases for which we have vaccines, it's hard not to come down on the side of vaccines.
18
Thank goodness West Virginia and Mississippi are leading the way in science-based public policy. Hopefully, the benighted states of California and New York will follow their example.
19
Wisdom is sometimes defined as "knowing what you don't know". I'm a retired electrical engineer. I know a lot about semiconductor physics and how communication systems work. Although I pride myself on also being knowledgeable and thoughtful about my health issues, I would be a fool to not listen to my doctor. It would be the height of pride and hubris to pretend I know more about my health issues than my doctor. Epistemology is "how do you know what you know" and your subsequent justified belief. Whether someone's belief is true is not a prerequisite for (its) belief. On the other hand, if something is actually known (vaccines prevent disease), then it categorically cannot be false. Wisdom is knowing the difference.
14
Profound argument. And I completely agree. But you're far too trusting. Your assumption that what your doctor prescribes you for what ails you is the culmination of lots of research, time in practice and the good track record of the prescribed pill. But what if that's not the case? Can you imagine what kind of confusion people must have when they have no authority to turn to that they can trust? And why? You read, you figure it out. Its an absurd condition and its happening.
2
Perhaps rather than being crazy, selfish parents; these are informed and thoughtful ones who have read about how the doctors have sold out to pharmaceutical companies for kickbacks and clinical trials are funded by the same pharmaceutical companies. Follow the money...
11
Vaccines cost almost nothing. There are no patents and the profits are not there. Do you know that Jonas Salk GAVE his life's work on polio away to save untold millions from suffering? He earned a patent but he refused it because it was NOT about the money, it was about caring about his fellow man.
Which anti-vaxxers refuse to do. You want us to follow the money? The top-selling book on vaccines on Amazon was written by someone denigrating vaccines and profiting shamelessly off your children's suffering. But keep them away from mine.
Which anti-vaxxers refuse to do. You want us to follow the money? The top-selling book on vaccines on Amazon was written by someone denigrating vaccines and profiting shamelessly off your children's suffering. But keep them away from mine.
8
Oh yeah sure. All over world all the doctors are in cahoots with pharmaceutical companies, who by the way do not make big money from vaccines. They make more money from sickness. I am partially deaf -- thanks to measles when I was a child.
6
Nope, they're not only crazy they're selfish and criminally negligent.
3
As a taxman I’m interested in how numbers are used to validate different positions. A previous writer mentioned the US Court of Claims awarded $936M in 1200 vaccine cases in fiscal 2013 (Oct '13-Sept '14). Per the CDC, 147M flu vaccine doses were distributed in the U.S., and 10M preventative vaccines given to school-aged children in '14. Extrapolating numbers over a year’s time brings me to conclusions and a position I can share. By accepting all cases, we show 1200 proven in a period when over 157M doses were administered of just two of the many vaccines out there. This ratio of 15 cases per 2M doses administered each year is not a particularly high risk, given the man-hours lost in productivity (and life) with the illnesses these two vaccines prevent. And the Special Masters’ decisions have done what they are supposed to – quickly award monies to those that should receive compensation. Many of these cases were productivity settlements of $5-20K for lost work time; others in the $1 million range gave long-term payments for the long-term injured. The 1986 Special Masters’ ruling was to assure that court cases didn’t tie up needed drugs or delay payments to the deserving by pharmaceutical companies, and this seems to be working, relieving the courts and the waiting public. While numbers and statistics do not and will never allay fear, one should not need to cherry pick to find an immunologist to validate one's view when the profession has consensus. Gov. Brown should sign.
7
A consensus among immunologists and a state government mandating the use of a product. Dream-come-true-type situation for a manufacturer. Be aware. Fully vet anything anyone wants to inject into you or your family. That's all.
4
There is no room for personal belief in this issue. Harsh punishment is in order for parents who do not vaccinate.
8
How is immersing one's self in an unvaccinated population anything less than an occupational hazard? This would seem to me to be an opportunity for OSHA or a state agency to intervene.
10
My grandparents buried a 4 year old son .He died of an infectious childhood illness .My father was 5 when his baby brother died.His sister was 3. My eldest brother is named after him.
There was no vaccine available in 1938. One was subsequently developed.That illness had been eradicated in this country until recently. It is now back,thanks to the self-centeredness and paranoia of the anti-vaxxers.
There should be a Federal Law passed immediately.No one should have to bury a 4 year old child who dies of an illness for which a vaccine is now available.
These anti-vaxxers talk about imaginary ill effects of vaccines. My grandparents buried very real 4 year old son ,Marc Richard “Dicky”,who never lived to see his 5th birthday.
There was no vaccine available in 1938. One was subsequently developed.That illness had been eradicated in this country until recently. It is now back,thanks to the self-centeredness and paranoia of the anti-vaxxers.
There should be a Federal Law passed immediately.No one should have to bury a 4 year old child who dies of an illness for which a vaccine is now available.
These anti-vaxxers talk about imaginary ill effects of vaccines. My grandparents buried very real 4 year old son ,Marc Richard “Dicky”,who never lived to see his 5th birthday.
14
If my kid can't bring a peanut butter sandwhich to school, your kids can be vaccinated.
16
Simple solution--you can have all the personal belief exemption you want. You just can't attend public school (including university), be employed by the state, or be employed as a health care worker in any capacity.
There's no free lunch and you can't have it all. You can't advocate violence against others, I wish you couldn't carry a pistol, and you can't drive like a lunatic either. That's because those activities statistically lead to bad outcomes for other people who didn't have a say in your choice. This is no different.
It's one thing to actually have a medical reason not to be vaccinated. It's another to just not want to do so.
There's no free lunch and you can't have it all. You can't advocate violence against others, I wish you couldn't carry a pistol, and you can't drive like a lunatic either. That's because those activities statistically lead to bad outcomes for other people who didn't have a say in your choice. This is no different.
It's one thing to actually have a medical reason not to be vaccinated. It's another to just not want to do so.
18
Tempest in a teapot. "Marin County measles outbreak over."
How many cases were there in the quickly spreading outbreak? Two, a brother and sister. If measles were so contagious, you would think it would have spread. And because two kids got the measles, and are fine mind you, every child in the county (and state) should now have to get 50 vaccinations before going to school, from now to kingdom come????
I'm sympathetic to parents of immuno-compromised children, but genuine outbreaks are rare, and you could keep your kid home for a week or two if necessary.
Besides which, at least in Marin County, most of the parents who aren't vaccinating are highly educated and thoughtful. If there really were a major outbreak, the majority of them would probably get that particular vaccine for their kids. They aren't fundamentalist about it, however much the NY Times has portrayed them that way. (A mother interviewed by the Times here was furious with how the final article twisted her words.)
How many cases were there in the quickly spreading outbreak? Two, a brother and sister. If measles were so contagious, you would think it would have spread. And because two kids got the measles, and are fine mind you, every child in the county (and state) should now have to get 50 vaccinations before going to school, from now to kingdom come????
I'm sympathetic to parents of immuno-compromised children, but genuine outbreaks are rare, and you could keep your kid home for a week or two if necessary.
Besides which, at least in Marin County, most of the parents who aren't vaccinating are highly educated and thoughtful. If there really were a major outbreak, the majority of them would probably get that particular vaccine for their kids. They aren't fundamentalist about it, however much the NY Times has portrayed them that way. (A mother interviewed by the Times here was furious with how the final article twisted her words.)
9
Outbreaks can start with two. There is no such thing as a genuine out break; an outbreak is an outbreak, period. They have been rare because a critical portion of the community was immunized, until now.
Yes, measles is very contagious; read the history and check out any credible medical source.
Yes,if every child vaccinated the chance of outbreaks reduce exponentially. It's called herd immunity.
Yes, measles is very contagious; read the history and check out any credible medical source.
Yes,if every child vaccinated the chance of outbreaks reduce exponentially. It's called herd immunity.
8
Educated fools are the worst. Socrates pointed this out millenia ago--people who are competent in one area often over-estimate their abilities in other areas, and therefore do not know what they do not know, which is the worst form of ignorance because they are no longer even even listening to anyone else. Nowadays we call this the Dunning-Kruger effect.
I firmly believe that it is the arrogance of the (sort of, but not sufficiently, and often not scientifically) educated that is causing many of our problems. We need more humility and respect for learning. Some people really do know more.
I firmly believe that it is the arrogance of the (sort of, but not sufficiently, and often not scientifically) educated that is causing many of our problems. We need more humility and respect for learning. Some people really do know more.
6
Ha Ha Ha--looks like the folks just north of us think more highly of themselves then us denizens of SF! So we got that going for us, i guess.
I don't mind people not getting vaccinated if they don't mind a life-long quarantine.
11
Re herd immunity and libertarians:
Appease the libertarians
Allow those who want to be exempt have their non-vaccinated children only attend schools that that are solely for the non-vaccinated
Keep that herd together
Appease the libertarians
Allow those who want to be exempt have their non-vaccinated children only attend schools that that are solely for the non-vaccinated
Keep that herd together
10
The two most important advances in human health have been clean water and vaccines. I am so happy that our legislature is poised to do something to protect the newborns, the elderly, and the chemotherapy patients among us from the risks the anti-vaxers subject them to. And I am heartened that so many of the commenters here see things the same way.
If you love your children, vaccinate them, even if it doesn't "feel" like the right thing to do. It *is* the right thing to do.
If you love your children, vaccinate them, even if it doesn't "feel" like the right thing to do. It *is* the right thing to do.
14
So easy to condemn those concerned about vaccine safety until it is your baby hospitalized with a seizure after the flu vaccine.
8
Better than dead from that flu.
1
Use of the term "phobia" here runs counter to any propaganda rational. Many of these folk are members of the esteemed environmental and sustainable class who wish to pack humans into sardine cans somewhere along a high speed rail corridor between fantasy land and governor Brown's loft.
I would bet that the large majority of those who refuse to vaccinate their children for non-medical reasons devoutly believe in the reality of catastrophic, anthropogenic global warming, unperturbed by the fact that the evidence for the collective danger of non-vaccination is at least as strong and probably stronger than that for such global warning.
Vaccination is much like drinking alcohol. If you want to get drunk, if you want to not vaccinate your kids, go ahead, just do it on your own piece of turf. Keeping non-vaccinated kids out of public places is really akin to laws against drunk driving.
Vaccination is much like drinking alcohol. If you want to get drunk, if you want to not vaccinate your kids, go ahead, just do it on your own piece of turf. Keeping non-vaccinated kids out of public places is really akin to laws against drunk driving.
4
Thank you for the New York times for allowing debate - this has not been allowed publicly and the source we have is through comments.
It seems the whole issue of forcing vaccinations is based on the fear of the herd suffering if everyone is not immunised. However when you do your research you realise that is ineffective vaccines that are causing the problem not the unvaccinated.
http://www.techtimes.com/articles/5608/20140415/whooping-cough-bacterium...
"So far, it has been bad news as experts have found out the bacteria causing whooping cough have evolved.
This could mean that these pertactin-free strains have gained a selective advantage over bacterial strains with the pertactin protein," said Ruiting Lan, senior author of the latest study on whooping cough and associate professor at School of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences at the University of New South Wales."
The team of experts, led by UNSW PhD candidate Connie Lam, have looked into cases of whooping cough from across Australia and have found out that roughly 80 percent of the cases in 2012 were due to strains of the bacterium that do not have pertactin.
"The fact that they have arisen independently in different countries suggests this is in response to the vaccine.
It seems the whole issue of forcing vaccinations is based on the fear of the herd suffering if everyone is not immunised. However when you do your research you realise that is ineffective vaccines that are causing the problem not the unvaccinated.
http://www.techtimes.com/articles/5608/20140415/whooping-cough-bacterium...
"So far, it has been bad news as experts have found out the bacteria causing whooping cough have evolved.
This could mean that these pertactin-free strains have gained a selective advantage over bacterial strains with the pertactin protein," said Ruiting Lan, senior author of the latest study on whooping cough and associate professor at School of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences at the University of New South Wales."
The team of experts, led by UNSW PhD candidate Connie Lam, have looked into cases of whooping cough from across Australia and have found out that roughly 80 percent of the cases in 2012 were due to strains of the bacterium that do not have pertactin.
"The fact that they have arisen independently in different countries suggests this is in response to the vaccine.
6
In short, you'd rather have more people suffering from the existing whooping cough than fewer people suffering from the new resistant strain. Further, the fact that the bacteria had to evolve in the first place suggests that the vaccines were effective, otherwsie there wouldn't be selective pressure in such cases. Finally, nothing in this disproves the general idea of herd immunity.
1
I feel very sorry for the children of parents who are so wrapped up in their 'religious' beliefs that they don't care if their kids get sick and face the possibility of death.
6
For those of us who used to think vaccines were a great idea, but whose children had adverse reactions (which are very common) and can no longer support vaccines, we are left in the cold- stuck with home schooling. All BECAUSE we believed in vaccines. I am one of the loud mouths, and PROUD of it. Mercury or aluminum anyone? If you drop one of those vials for the flu shot, by law, the ENTIRE building must be evacuated. But it's perfectly safe to inject into infants and pregnant women. Am I the only one who thinks that is ridiculous? Babies do die from vaccines, or have their health permanently ruined. Should the state really be forcing that on families? Forcing death or vaccine damage? That is okay with everyone? Why?
6
Fine, don't vaccinate your kids. But keep them out of schools, malls, playgrounds, restaurants etc. Your "rights" end where public safety starts. Don't want to be vaccinated accept a lifelong quarantine.
7
Not vaccinating a child has much higher probability of being harmed, or even dying than, any mercury or aluminum could cause. By the way, update your reading -from credible sources, of course - on mercury and aluminum in vaccines. Your evidence is anecdotal at best; Your evacuation claims are just as good as clips from Hollywood movies. Also, look up on the history of disfigured images of children from various diseases that have been prevented by vaccines. I certainly don't want that upon my child.
5
Care to cite that law you reference?
4
Driving a kid without an infant car seat or in the front row is an offense. It endangers the child. Why is not vaccinating your kid not an offense? Countries like India have largely eliminated polio through vaccination.I guess memory is in distant past for the developed countries.
7
Blame Jenny McCarthy - how a person with no college education and zero understanding of how science works has so much influence. Don't tell me - in an age where actors (i.e. from CSI) are invited by Congress to comment on forensics, is she any less of an authority?
7
I am 56, and kids when I was growing up never had any serious diseases. We were all vaccinated, without a second thought by our parents. The exception was one girl who had contracted polio for some reason (maybe she got it before being vaccinated), and watching her clank around in leg braces was more than enough to let parents know they'd made the right choice.
I got really sick two years ago in CA, and my doctor said my symptoms no doubt were whooping cough. ("COUGH COUGH WHOOOOP!") He said it had become endemic in Northern CA. It just infuriated me, to become sick because of these selfish and ignorant parents. At my age, because my DTP vaccine had worn off, I was sick for almost three months.
Great. Now I have to worry about polio or measles? God forbid diphtheria makes a comeback.
I got really sick two years ago in CA, and my doctor said my symptoms no doubt were whooping cough. ("COUGH COUGH WHOOOOP!") He said it had become endemic in Northern CA. It just infuriated me, to become sick because of these selfish and ignorant parents. At my age, because my DTP vaccine had worn off, I was sick for almost three months.
Great. Now I have to worry about polio or measles? God forbid diphtheria makes a comeback.
9
Pregnant women and children as young as six months old might get 25mcg of ethylmercury per flu shot, even today. The EPA safe reference dose for ethylmercury is 0.1 mcg/kg (ingested) so if a six month old weighs 16 pounds, that's about 7.26 kg. So a "safe" ingested dose for this infant would be 0.1 x 7.26 = 0.726 mcg. The dose given in the flu shot, then, is about 34 times above the safe reference dose for ingested ethylmercury. The 2004 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report relied heavily on epidemiological studies to make a determination that vaccines have no relation to neurological disorders while disregarding a great deal of toxicological evidence; as a result, the medical community has been mislead into believing that the science on mercury in vaccines is much more sound that it really is. But even if we allow that the 2004 IOM report is sound, we are still left with giving children doses of ethylmercury well above the EPA safe reference dose, even though thimerosal (which contains the ethylmercury) is not essential in any vaccine. The medical community is unanimous in saying that mercury exposure should be minimized, yet this very same community allows mercury in flu shots that is well above accepted limits. The situation with aluminum in vaccines is no more encouraging. Aluminum is widely used as an adjuvant in various vaccine formulations and has been implicated in a multisystem disorder termed “autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants” (ASIA).
4
@dd
You've miscited the EPA stats. The EPA .1 mcg limit is for methylmercury, not ethylmercury.
"EPA's RfD for methylmercury, last revised in 2001, is currently 0.1 micrograms per kilogram of body weight per day."
http://www.epa.gov/mercury/exposure.htm
"The 2004 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report relied heavily on epidemiological studies to make a determination that vaccines have no relation to neurological disorders "
In short, they found no correlation, making the rest of your post of little forensic weight.
You've miscited the EPA stats. The EPA .1 mcg limit is for methylmercury, not ethylmercury.
"EPA's RfD for methylmercury, last revised in 2001, is currently 0.1 micrograms per kilogram of body weight per day."
http://www.epa.gov/mercury/exposure.htm
"The 2004 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report relied heavily on epidemiological studies to make a determination that vaccines have no relation to neurological disorders "
In short, they found no correlation, making the rest of your post of little forensic weight.
2
Breaking: "Vaccines Fall Victim to Their Own Success"
This generation of parents have not seen the horror of Polio or the suffering caused by measles and other childhood diseases because... Their parents had them vaccinated!
Are we really going to have to re-learn history here? How many children will have to suffer needlessly? How many totally unnecessary deaths will it take?
This generation of parents have not seen the horror of Polio or the suffering caused by measles and other childhood diseases because... Their parents had them vaccinated!
Are we really going to have to re-learn history here? How many children will have to suffer needlessly? How many totally unnecessary deaths will it take?
8
Parents who won't vaccinate their children should be prosecuted for child abuse and reckless endangerment.
5
An infant is incapable of getting to a doctor on its own for critical healthcare. Now we need a law to compel these parents to do the same? There is no cure for stupid.
6
If home schooling is not possible then they can take the same (non existent) risk as their peers. Vaccine and public school.
5
I'll say what everyone thinks but nobody will say: "keep your diseased kid away from mine". Your beliefs compel you to the step of no vaccination for your child? Fine. But go live far, far away from everybody else. I'm hoping that in a few years we start seeing lawsuits by people who's parents wouldn't protect them. A lifetime of misery when the problem could have been prevented? I would sue my parents into poverty.
10
The root of the problem is that in our society we've replaced medicines for health. We blunder along oblivious to our own role in our health, and when something goes wrong we demand a fix, after the fact.
Vaccines for trivial childhood illnesses make the world safer for a sickly population, and train us to just trust the drug companies.
Before our obsession with cleanliness kids got sick, became immune, and got well. Mumps, measles and chickenpox were routine.
If you don't want your kid vaccinated know your risk.
We should limit vaccine requirements for serious diseases like polio and small pox.
And your "beliefs" are irrelevant.
Vaccines for trivial childhood illnesses make the world safer for a sickly population, and train us to just trust the drug companies.
Before our obsession with cleanliness kids got sick, became immune, and got well. Mumps, measles and chickenpox were routine.
If you don't want your kid vaccinated know your risk.
We should limit vaccine requirements for serious diseases like polio and small pox.
And your "beliefs" are irrelevant.
3
Thank you for a reasoned and proper approach to the true problem.
1
Measles and mumps are serious illnesses. I am partially deaf -- because of measles. A neighbor's child died -- from measles.
2
Measles can be deadly and can result in birth defects.
7
When a proposed medical practice is endorsed by the pediatricians' association and the PTA, past experience suggests that considerations other than safety and effectiveness may have entered the equation.
2
You would allow your child to suffer, to be in pain, and to risk death of something utterly preventable because you want to give the finger to the PTA?!
No matter what you believe about vaccines, this is another attempt to limit our rights as Americans.
I believe that we should do no harm to ourselves or others. However, the herd theory makes no sense. Arguments used that those not vaccinated will spread the virus makes no sense, unless you accept circular reasoning. What the facts show is that just as many if not more who get infected were vaccinated.
I believe that we should do no harm to ourselves or others. However, the herd theory makes no sense. Arguments used that those not vaccinated will spread the virus makes no sense, unless you accept circular reasoning. What the facts show is that just as many if not more who get infected were vaccinated.
6
Honestly, to me the scary part is this is just another effort to debunk a long time state-sponsored program. The scare tactics used over the internet to debunk science are truly scary and make you wonder if you are making the right decision when you decide to have your child vaccinated. Its like advertising in some kind of horrible reverse. The pseudo-science which has been made possible over the last few years by the disinformation super highway, whether it be against climate change or the benefit of vaccination has all been for one singular purpose, to eliminate governmental authority to regulate. There is a lot of corporate money coming in from all directions to scare you into allowing your rights to be chipped away.
1
I'd say, fine, don't vaccinate, but then your kids are not allowed out in public. Not to the playground, the library, the stores, anywhere other people may be. Nor can their parents, who could be carrying the diseases they're so willing to have.
9
While I completely disagree with the anti-vaxxer mentality, I do feel that all people are entitled to their superstitions, however ridiculous they may be. However, in such cases, they should NOT be entitled to enroll their kids in public schools, camps, sports, etc. If you want your kids to be incubators for deadly, preventable disease, that's your choice, just keep them at home in a bubble.
7
Polio, measles, mumps , whooping cough, scarlet fever and a whole host of other really nasty illnesses have been around for a while - say the early 20th century and before, how much processed food were we eating then? How many Micky-d's were there in 1930? How many TV shows -( eye reference )?
Kids and adults were crippled and died. Vaccinations were the key. Sure big Pharma makes money, just as Whole Foods, Bikram Yoga, Mrs.Greens make money.
Ignorance is not bliss - ignorance is just ........ignorant.
If parents really want their kids to be exposed to the entire host of illnesses - mumps, measles, chicken pox, whooping cough, tetanus, sepsis, etc... ok, let them. Keep them out of public schools, make sure their private school mates think its ok to be crippled or die and then when their child dies or is crippled for life - live with it. Just don't allow them to be part of my childs world.
Harsh ? Perhaps - but not ignorant.
Kids and adults were crippled and died. Vaccinations were the key. Sure big Pharma makes money, just as Whole Foods, Bikram Yoga, Mrs.Greens make money.
Ignorance is not bliss - ignorance is just ........ignorant.
If parents really want their kids to be exposed to the entire host of illnesses - mumps, measles, chicken pox, whooping cough, tetanus, sepsis, etc... ok, let them. Keep them out of public schools, make sure their private school mates think its ok to be crippled or die and then when their child dies or is crippled for life - live with it. Just don't allow them to be part of my childs world.
Harsh ? Perhaps - but not ignorant.
6
So many comments, here and in the article, refer to a supposed "parents' right to choose what is best for their child" based upon their personal beliefs. In reality, parents have a duty, not a right, to do what's best for the child and, if what they do goes against what is best, that is in violation of that duty.
When all the most prestigious medical resources -- the CDC, Mayo Clinic, AMA, more -- declare, and history itself exemplifies, that failure to vaccinate is a million-fold more dangerous than the potential for side-effects from the vaccine, refusal to vaccinate is such a violation, and should be treated as the law defines, for the crime that act has committed: Endangering the welfare of a child.
When all the most prestigious medical resources -- the CDC, Mayo Clinic, AMA, more -- declare, and history itself exemplifies, that failure to vaccinate is a million-fold more dangerous than the potential for side-effects from the vaccine, refusal to vaccinate is such a violation, and should be treated as the law defines, for the crime that act has committed: Endangering the welfare of a child.
8
I see a lot of posts worrying about the loss of our freedoms over this issue. Come on. Mandated vaccinations used to be the law of the land. Everyone got them with little or no complaint. I received the MMR shot too early as a child, back in the 1970s and before they recommended a second booster shot, and was require to get a second shot at age seven by the Pennsylvania Dept. of Health or would not be able to attend school. What happened between then and now was a huge misinformation campaign that took hold in certain sections of the populace because of a loss of collective memory of the harm caused by the diseases for which we are vaccinated as well as a lack of understanding of how our immune systems work and how vaccinations impact those systems. Enough with the cries of freedom. We limit our freedoms everyday for public safety reasons. When was the last time you could drive 100 miles down a highway legally. You have to be a certain age to drive or drink. It is tragic that so many parents have been impacted by misinformation but that doesn't mean we should negatively impact our nation's public health because of it.
9
Parents must understand that benefiting from public services (e.g. schooling) comes with accepting certain responsibilities (e.g. vaccinating your kids).
If you don't want to take the responsibility, you can't enjoy the benefit.
Seems like a simple concept, but so many parents don't understand it.
I worry about how kids from such self-absorbed, irresponsible parents might turn out.
If you don't want to take the responsibility, you can't enjoy the benefit.
Seems like a simple concept, but so many parents don't understand it.
I worry about how kids from such self-absorbed, irresponsible parents might turn out.
6
IT'S NOT A PHOBIA . . .
...it's the product of the undereducated combing with the pseudo uber educated who simply don't comprehend that just because two events happen at about the same time to some individuals, it does not mean that one caused the other or visa versa. This is called the "cause and effect fallacy."
Yes, sciences are taught in the public schools and college and ... yet, in the main, it consists of memorizing all sorts of facts ... but, not what the essence of the scientific method consists of.
The implications of this go far beyond what you refer to as the "vaccine phobia in California." This applies to the lack of understanding of the relationship between the burning of fossil fuel and its relationship to greater amounts of carbon in the atmosphere which leads to the warming effect of the air, the melting of the polar ice ... and the rising of the oceans.
And, while I'm at this: the use of "supplements" by the ignorant and the so-called super educated.
For they don't understand science.
...it's the product of the undereducated combing with the pseudo uber educated who simply don't comprehend that just because two events happen at about the same time to some individuals, it does not mean that one caused the other or visa versa. This is called the "cause and effect fallacy."
Yes, sciences are taught in the public schools and college and ... yet, in the main, it consists of memorizing all sorts of facts ... but, not what the essence of the scientific method consists of.
The implications of this go far beyond what you refer to as the "vaccine phobia in California." This applies to the lack of understanding of the relationship between the burning of fossil fuel and its relationship to greater amounts of carbon in the atmosphere which leads to the warming effect of the air, the melting of the polar ice ... and the rising of the oceans.
And, while I'm at this: the use of "supplements" by the ignorant and the so-called super educated.
For they don't understand science.
14
And don't forget the irrational fear of GMO foods, which the vast majority of scientists deem safe.
3
Mr. Chowes refers to " the ignorant and the so-called super educated." The latter group is the core of the anti-vaccine movement in California. They are greens who are extremely concerned about global warming, which they see as a consequence of unnatural "toxins" in the environment. They similarly see vaccines as putting "toxins" in children's bodies. The problem is an ideological and cultural rejection of science, which is not required to be properly taught to non-scientists.
1
"Dick Springer," Either if you don't believe ~98% of
climatologists or suspect that vaccines are causing autistic spectrum disorders and God knows what else...,Then I posit that one's understanding of science is deficient. To be specific. the scientific method never predicts certainty as it is actually gives us a probability number.
So, in some cases where P = .9999999..., all rational persons assume it as a fact. Since scientists rarely have an ax to grind (with some exceptions), I listen to the researchers. But, always looks for methodologically well constructed articles in peer reviewed journals ... followed by meta study reviews.
And, I remember polio before Salk and Sabin.
climatologists or suspect that vaccines are causing autistic spectrum disorders and God knows what else...,Then I posit that one's understanding of science is deficient. To be specific. the scientific method never predicts certainty as it is actually gives us a probability number.
So, in some cases where P = .9999999..., all rational persons assume it as a fact. Since scientists rarely have an ax to grind (with some exceptions), I listen to the researchers. But, always looks for methodologically well constructed articles in peer reviewed journals ... followed by meta study reviews.
And, I remember polio before Salk and Sabin.
3
Hallelujah! Let's protect the children from their parents' paranoia.
6
when does a few people's "rights" and beliefs trump public health ?? you have NO right at all if your so called "belief" harms anyone and any child outside of your family. period.
10
People who refuse to vaccinate their children represent everything that's wrong with America.
I exaggerate, of course, but only a little.
One of the things that's gone wrong with our country is that we've lost all sense of communal responsibility. Believe or not, there was a time when people were willing to sacrifice for the common good. (Ask your grandparents about WWII, kiddies.) Now, the idea of subjecting your child to an infinitesimal risk in order to maintain the "herd immunity" that saves thousands of children every year is too much to ask. These people prefer to be free riders, allowing other families to take the risk while they receive only benefits.
Another important point: any potential for reasonable discourse and social consensus has been overwhelmed by a social media-driven sense that my opinion is just as valid as your facts. The internet has given currency to a wide range of conspiracy theories and outright falsehoods that people choose to believe. never mind the facts or the peer-reviewed science.
Hopefully, the California law will pass and these parents will be forced to confront reality: if you choose not to vaccinate your child, you're putting other people's children at risk, and that's not going to allowed to continue.
I exaggerate, of course, but only a little.
One of the things that's gone wrong with our country is that we've lost all sense of communal responsibility. Believe or not, there was a time when people were willing to sacrifice for the common good. (Ask your grandparents about WWII, kiddies.) Now, the idea of subjecting your child to an infinitesimal risk in order to maintain the "herd immunity" that saves thousands of children every year is too much to ask. These people prefer to be free riders, allowing other families to take the risk while they receive only benefits.
Another important point: any potential for reasonable discourse and social consensus has been overwhelmed by a social media-driven sense that my opinion is just as valid as your facts. The internet has given currency to a wide range of conspiracy theories and outright falsehoods that people choose to believe. never mind the facts or the peer-reviewed science.
Hopefully, the California law will pass and these parents will be forced to confront reality: if you choose not to vaccinate your child, you're putting other people's children at risk, and that's not going to allowed to continue.
16
If know-it-all parents prevent their kids from getting vaccinated based upon unfounded beliefs and junk-science I'd consider bringing these parents up on charges of child abuse.
3
Why not change from personal belief to an evidence based approach? Science is rarely if ever 100% certain about the safety of anything. Even the makers of vaccines agree that some percentage of those vaccinated will have "adverse" reactions that can lead to serious illness and in some instances even death. While the percentages are supposed to be small, it is still like a lottery. For the good of society you 1000 people must be vaccinated and yes, 2 of you might get sick and die.
So rather than this lottery why not allow a parent to simply present evidence on whether the mercury in the vaccines might pose harm to their child and agree to withhold their child from school in the event he illness? Use the clear and convicing standard for the evidence. Would you want your child to be one of the 2 per 1000 that died? Do you want to take that chance?
Hearings should also require the pharmacuticles to fully reveal all evidence concerning vaccine safety. Vaccines like Guarricil have caused numerous injuries and deaths but when the company settles with a grieving parent they require that settlement to be sealed thereby hiding any evidence that might cause the public to doubt the validity of their claims. This should stop and parents should be given a fully open, objective forum from which to raise science based objections.
While mainstream medicine vouches for vaccine safety, they also vouched for the safety of every product that has ever been withdrawn for safety reasons.
So rather than this lottery why not allow a parent to simply present evidence on whether the mercury in the vaccines might pose harm to their child and agree to withhold their child from school in the event he illness? Use the clear and convicing standard for the evidence. Would you want your child to be one of the 2 per 1000 that died? Do you want to take that chance?
Hearings should also require the pharmacuticles to fully reveal all evidence concerning vaccine safety. Vaccines like Guarricil have caused numerous injuries and deaths but when the company settles with a grieving parent they require that settlement to be sealed thereby hiding any evidence that might cause the public to doubt the validity of their claims. This should stop and parents should be given a fully open, objective forum from which to raise science based objections.
While mainstream medicine vouches for vaccine safety, they also vouched for the safety of every product that has ever been withdrawn for safety reasons.
3
You also need to include data on the death rate from measles, etc to those parents who don't want their children vaccinated.
5
From the CDC website: Since 2001, no new vaccine licensed by FDA for use in children has contained thimerosal as a preservative and all vaccines routinely recommended by CDC for children younger than 6 years of age have been thimerosal-free, or contain only trace amounts of thimerosal, except for some formulations of influenza vaccine. Unfortunately, reductions in the numbers of children identified with autism have not been observed since that time indicating that the cause of autism is not related to a single exposure such as thimerosal.
How is that for evidenced based information?
How is that for evidenced based information?
1
The HPV vaccine you have in mind is called "Gardasil," the injury (let alone the death rate) from vaccinations is two orders of magnitude (that means it's way big lower) than you claimed, there is no such thing as evidence that the mercury in vaccines has hurt anybody, and you're less than smart and knowledgeable.
1
Will medical exemptions be available based on genetic variants that impact methylation, the ability to tolerate and clear heavy metals and toxins, vs. bioaccumulate and cause toxicity? Will all infants, children and adults be screened for these at no cost, and exemptions granted as needed? Will vaccine makers offer single dose vaccines that have lower level of adjuvants (aluminum a common one) as an alternative, as is now available for flu shots?
Just as all children cannot eat peanut butter or gluten, or use the same personal care products, vaccines need to be adjusted for genetic variations. It is not one-size-fits-all. Have their been basket studies for vaccines, and of those reporting harm to the Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund? We are not all average. Some are outliers. This is pretty basic.
Just as all children cannot eat peanut butter or gluten, or use the same personal care products, vaccines need to be adjusted for genetic variations. It is not one-size-fits-all. Have their been basket studies for vaccines, and of those reporting harm to the Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund? We are not all average. Some are outliers. This is pretty basic.
2
Not unless and until there is evidence for it. Adjuvants enhance the immune response. Unless you're a cat, you have nothing to fear from aluminum salts in vaccines.
Exemptions are granted for medical reasons, not imaginary ones.
Exemptions are granted for medical reasons, not imaginary ones.
1
There is no genetic variation in methylation that would be contraindicated for any vaccination. That is just more misinformation from the antivaxx camp. So, I guess the answer would be no.
2
It's abundantly clear to me that public health policy in 2015 needs to be crafted through reverse psychology. Tell people they're not allowed to wear seat belts or get vaccinated against disease, and that they're required to smoke at least a pack a day. Because this is a country in which no pointy-headed bureaucrat is a-gonna tell me what to do, you'll see a marked improvement in life expectancy by the end of the week.
10
"Belief" - the most over-appreciated word in the English language. Almost every "belief" is eventually proven to be wrong, often dangerously so. Someday in the far far distant future, belief will be considered a derogatory term, and believers generally scorned.
"belief" - an opinion based on no evidence.
"belief" - an opinion based on no evidence.
7
What the anti-vacccination crowd may not understand is that their belief and practice has an impact on those who can not receive vaccinations. A small proportion of our society needs to be exempt medically from vaccinations and depends upon the rest of us to provide at least some immunity from potentially deadly diseases. For that reason alone, vaccinations are worthwhile. The drivel that chemicals in the vaccines can cause harm holds no water; people get more of those same chemicals by breathing our air and drinking our water.
8
Let me state that I do believe in having children vaccinated and that is a good thing for society. That said, I think our country is shifting in very disturbing directions which are leading to a society that crushes individual rights, putting everything in the government's hands. There is a legitimate question about "personal beliefs" and individual freedom that needs to be touched upon in debates like this.
Read Orwell's "1984" or Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World" or pick up any good history on Stalin's Russia or Nazi Germany or the movement for eugenics in California in the early part of this century and you will understand my concerns. What sort of society do we want to create in this country? Certainly not the one I grew up in during the late 1980s and the 1990s.
We use terms that imply value judgments that border on the disturbing...calling legislation "sensible" as opposed to those who oppose it who must by definition be "insensible." I hear people posting stuff that people opposed must be ignorant, but who are you or the government for that matter to make that call. Parents have the right to raise their kids as they see fit according to beliefs that they subscribe to...where do we stop with bills like this? Everyone has to be vaccinated...everyone must go to public schools even if they teach stuff I don't want my kids to learn? What ever happened to the idea that people have individual rights? We are turning our back on freedom, and becoming a society of conditioners
Read Orwell's "1984" or Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World" or pick up any good history on Stalin's Russia or Nazi Germany or the movement for eugenics in California in the early part of this century and you will understand my concerns. What sort of society do we want to create in this country? Certainly not the one I grew up in during the late 1980s and the 1990s.
We use terms that imply value judgments that border on the disturbing...calling legislation "sensible" as opposed to those who oppose it who must by definition be "insensible." I hear people posting stuff that people opposed must be ignorant, but who are you or the government for that matter to make that call. Parents have the right to raise their kids as they see fit according to beliefs that they subscribe to...where do we stop with bills like this? Everyone has to be vaccinated...everyone must go to public schools even if they teach stuff I don't want my kids to learn? What ever happened to the idea that people have individual rights? We are turning our back on freedom, and becoming a society of conditioners
10
So, did you think the same thing when you were required to have auto insurance, speed limits, wearing your seat belt, or not being able to drive drunk? One person's beliefs does not allow them to endanger others.
5
@Shane, yes you're absolutely right, it is about freedom. The freedom and right not to be unnecessarily exposed to a devastating disease because of a small community of people have their own ideas about things. I have the right not to be blown up by a suicide bomber as well. God willing, the rights of the public will always supercede the rights of the few in this country.
4
When individuals make well reasoned choices that don't endanger the rest of society then I support their 'rights'. When the individual makes decisions based upon 'people magazine science' then I am not willing to support their choices.
The 'greater good' is a concept that society must embrace to survive. This is a far cry from the society in '1984' that squashes any dissent. You are arguing for individual rights to 'trump science' in this case. Hardly a persuasive argument...
The 'greater good' is a concept that society must embrace to survive. This is a far cry from the society in '1984' that squashes any dissent. You are arguing for individual rights to 'trump science' in this case. Hardly a persuasive argument...
2
Global health workers understand both the necessity of childhood vaccinations and the tyranny of minorities such as the Taliban whose conspiracy theories put at risk thousands of children. We should not let this flat earth sentiment prevail. I am sympathetic to any parent who wants to protect their child. But when their beliefs are so far from the scientific mainstream and put others at risk I think they have an obligation to protect others from their choice by taking on the burdensome task of homeschooling. This is their choice.
In Marin County, CA one the wealthiest most educated counties in the country, anti-vaccination proponents prevailed on a local supervisor, Steve Kinsey, to vote against mandatory vaccinations, saying he feels community's are stronger when choice is preserved. Voters should exercise their choice and recall Kinsey. As the father of a young boy who can't for medical reasons be immunized has eloquently and courageously testified, his son's health should not be put at risk because of the unsubstantiated "beliefs" of conspiracy theorists. Let them exercise their choice by finding alternative educational opportunities for their children.
In Marin County, CA one the wealthiest most educated counties in the country, anti-vaccination proponents prevailed on a local supervisor, Steve Kinsey, to vote against mandatory vaccinations, saying he feels community's are stronger when choice is preserved. Voters should exercise their choice and recall Kinsey. As the father of a young boy who can't for medical reasons be immunized has eloquently and courageously testified, his son's health should not be put at risk because of the unsubstantiated "beliefs" of conspiracy theorists. Let them exercise their choice by finding alternative educational opportunities for their children.
32
How can you have a religious objection to vaccinating your kid(s)? Think God wants them dead?
2
I guess we are surrounded by people who believe the world is flat and the sun revolves around the earth.
5
Reading some of these comments is alarming. However, just as the generation that served in WWII as well as the one that saw what the Nazis did to Europe is dying, so is the generation that remembers what childhood diseases like chickenpox, measles, mumps, whooping cough, diphtheria, etc., did to families, children, and adults. Have any of the objectors ever considered that most of their good health is due to being vaccinated as children, that they didn't miss much school because they were protected? Obviously not. I guess that some lessons need to be learned over and over again. Ignorance is bliss until it affects your child or your life. But it's not bliss for those who cannot be protected because their immune systems are impaired or they are too young. If those of you who deny that vaccines are of any value to society keep your children away from anyone who is vulnerable, home school them, and don't ask for help when the children get measles, mumps, etc., I'm fine with your choices. But once your child has the disease and gives it to someone who cannot be protected you have just taken away their choice. That's why these diseases are considered communicable and highly contagious. Your rights end where the safety of society at large begins.
12
"But once your child has the disease and gives it to someone who cannot be protected you have just taken away their choice." This is a very important point. Should your child infect another and that other child dies you are an accomplice to murder. You have willfully taken another's life and must suffer the consequences. Are you willing to face the courts with the lamest of arguments " it is my belief"? Then OK have your belief behind bars.
Why should a parent gamble with their child's health and life. This is not about pro or against vaccines, its about choice. You start taking away a parents right to choose what is best for their child then we have nothing left. Would you want a stranger telling you that you have to have a medical procedure or you will not be able to have any social contact or be allowed to participate in activities. Oh, and there is a chance you could be disabled from the procedure. And if that happens you can't sue or receive damages b/c the procedure is protected along with the doctors. They are not liable if they screw up.
Don't be robots, hold your beliefs but allow others to also. "Herd immunity" is something made up by the vaccine companies, it's not real people. And if you think it is, than if you and your child are vaccinated and come in contact with a disease you should be fine regardless of whether the person next to you is vaccinated or not. Stop being ignorant and start standing up for yourselves and your neighbor. Before long you won't have a say in anything. Good luck!
Don't be robots, hold your beliefs but allow others to also. "Herd immunity" is something made up by the vaccine companies, it's not real people. And if you think it is, than if you and your child are vaccinated and come in contact with a disease you should be fine regardless of whether the person next to you is vaccinated or not. Stop being ignorant and start standing up for yourselves and your neighbor. Before long you won't have a say in anything. Good luck!
10
Speaking of being ignorant, thanks for the robotlike recitation of exactly the same old false claims.
1
You are gambling with every child's life when you disrupt herd immunity because you are frightened of things that don't exist.
4
A parent must gamble, because whatever they choose, there is a risk. There are rare adverse reactions to vaccines and you won't know until you have one. A child may or may not be exposed to a given disease and, if exposed, may or may not contract it, may or may not develop a serious complication, may or may not be injured or killed because of it.
Herd immunity is not "made up." Vaccines are not necessarily 100% effective for each individual. On average, having the rubella vaccine means that you have a 5% chance of contracting the disease on exposure. Without it, you have a 95% chance. The more people vaccinated, the less chance you will be exposed. Eventually, the disease may become extinct.
Herd immunity is not "made up." Vaccines are not necessarily 100% effective for each individual. On average, having the rubella vaccine means that you have a 5% chance of contracting the disease on exposure. Without it, you have a 95% chance. The more people vaccinated, the less chance you will be exposed. Eventually, the disease may become extinct.
1
What, no mention that this latest bit of science-denying is a phenomenon of the crunchy granola left in CA?
Remember that the next time you take a swipe at the right over climate change....
Remember that the next time you take a swipe at the right over climate change....
1
Except that, you know, LOTS of people on the left think this is ridiculous and hysterical. Oh, and there's no party supporting the vaccines-are-ruining-our-kids nuttiness. Except for Rand Paul and Chris Christie. What's that? They're not from the "crunchy granola left," you say?
These are not leftists. They can be described as a group that sees itself as separate from the society in which they reside, and recognizes no obligation to the public or society which they are surrounded by. That's a genuine rightist.
1
Go ahead sheeple you listen and trust the same government that robs you blind , wages wars everywhere non- stop lies just about everything. This is about control and money , our economy is 1/5 medical related insane since we still do not have single payer or any real choice with Obama care. I know of many who have gotten very ill from these shots , for those who are not old enough to recall there was a time when you didn't get a shot until 3 years old and then maybe 5 shots your whole childhood . I guess they didn't work so well as now that amount is now up to 20 times in childhood , sounds like to me either not effective or just a greedy big pharma pushing there shots...oh but they would never put profits before people. I am not anti vaccination just feel those that prefer to opt out should be allowed and not shamed or made to like they are bad parents.
6
If it's a choice between watching a child with measles or getting them vaccinated as soon as they can be, I'd opt for vaccination every time. I'm old enough to remember when mumps could run through an entire school system because children weren't vaccinated. Mumps can leave men sterile. By the way, do you favor not getting protected from tetanus because it's a shot? Do you believe in letting a child have whooping cough because a shot will protect them and you never got that shot as a child?
If you feel that all government does is rob you, kill you, cheat you, etc., why not move to a place where there is no government, where you have to depend on yourself for everything? Then see how you feel about government. I know of people who had polio, who were sterile because of having mumps, who have scars from severe cases of chickenpox, etc. If there is a way to avoid these common childhood diseases and your child is not in any danger you are a bad parent. If your child cannot be protected for some reason like leukemia, he depends upon others being vaccinated.
If you feel that all government does is rob you, kill you, cheat you, etc., why not move to a place where there is no government, where you have to depend on yourself for everything? Then see how you feel about government. I know of people who had polio, who were sterile because of having mumps, who have scars from severe cases of chickenpox, etc. If there is a way to avoid these common childhood diseases and your child is not in any danger you are a bad parent. If your child cannot be protected for some reason like leukemia, he depends upon others being vaccinated.
10
I like when people use the word sheeple because then I know they are just blind followers with no knowledge of their own.
3
This mom had a change of heart when all of her kids got sick:
bit.ly/AntiVaxReversalAfter7KidsGetWhoopingCough
"Hills' change of heart comes just weeks after baby Riley Hughes died from complications related to whooping cough in Perth... The 32-day-old infant died in his parents' arms after battling the disease. He was too young to be immunized..."
bit.ly/AntiVaxReversalAfter7KidsGetWhoopingCough
"Hills' change of heart comes just weeks after baby Riley Hughes died from complications related to whooping cough in Perth... The 32-day-old infant died in his parents' arms after battling the disease. He was too young to be immunized..."
8
If anti vaxers knew what whooping cough could do, we wouldn't be talking about this. And unfortunately this is always the case. Sometimes the knowledge comes too late sometimes you get lucky.
My attempt to link this topic with issues of California illegal immigration policy and recent spikes identified by CDC in HIV and other std transmission via msm has been censured.
it's because I called the Comintern and insisted.
They are not related.
1
I would bet that the large majority of those who refuse to vaccinate their children for non-medical reasons devoutly believe in the reality of catastrophic, anthropogenic global warming, unperturbed by the fact that the evidence for the collective danger of non-vaccination is at least as strong and probably stronger than that for such global warning.
Vaccination is much like drinking alcohol. If you want to get drunk, if you want to not vaccinate your kids, go ahead, just do it on your own piece of turf. Keeping non-vaccinated kids out of public places is really akin to laws against drunk driving.
Vaccination is much like drinking alcohol. If you want to get drunk, if you want to not vaccinate your kids, go ahead, just do it on your own piece of turf. Keeping non-vaccinated kids out of public places is really akin to laws against drunk driving.
7
You could, though I would not recommend it, follow a similar line by saying:
I am driving up to a Four-Way Stop. Since everyone will have stopped,
there is no need for me to stop and so you drive on through. That method
will work until you meet someone else who uses your method - then
both of you will ignore the Stop Sign and smash into each other.
If parents, who do not have their children vaccinated, are relying on the
vast majority of vaccinated kids to prevent their own children getting any
of the preventable diseases - are they not like the two drivers mentioned
above ?
I am old enough to remember when Measles, Chicken-Pox, Whooping Cough, Mumps, and God help the parents/children of those who catch it, Polio, fell like
plagues among we children.
I had a mild case of Polio as a child, you do not want to have to go through
it, or Heaven help, the far more serious case where your child is paralyzed.
Perhaps the vaccines can be given one by one - as fresh as possible - so the
parents who worry about multiple vaccines and stabilizing agents can be calmed.
In the end we do not let you drive on whichever side of the street you like -
Public Safety is a duty - so please have your children vaccinated.
I am driving up to a Four-Way Stop. Since everyone will have stopped,
there is no need for me to stop and so you drive on through. That method
will work until you meet someone else who uses your method - then
both of you will ignore the Stop Sign and smash into each other.
If parents, who do not have their children vaccinated, are relying on the
vast majority of vaccinated kids to prevent their own children getting any
of the preventable diseases - are they not like the two drivers mentioned
above ?
I am old enough to remember when Measles, Chicken-Pox, Whooping Cough, Mumps, and God help the parents/children of those who catch it, Polio, fell like
plagues among we children.
I had a mild case of Polio as a child, you do not want to have to go through
it, or Heaven help, the far more serious case where your child is paralyzed.
Perhaps the vaccines can be given one by one - as fresh as possible - so the
parents who worry about multiple vaccines and stabilizing agents can be calmed.
In the end we do not let you drive on whichever side of the street you like -
Public Safety is a duty - so please have your children vaccinated.
11
>
“Since men are so slightly amenable to reasonable arguments, so completely are they ruled by their instinctual wishes, why should one want to take away from them a means for satisfying their instincts and replace it by reasonable arguments?”
Freud
“Since men are so slightly amenable to reasonable arguments, so completely are they ruled by their instinctual wishes, why should one want to take away from them a means for satisfying their instincts and replace it by reasonable arguments?”
Freud
3
Be quick and pass the Bill. Restrict exemptions to a minimum. Delay and more children will be at risk. Phobias are thriving, especially amongst the worried well.
19
This is a necessary bill, and precedents are already set for other threats to public health, such as the right to be free from secondhand cigarette smoke. I wonder when our right to stay injury free and alive gets recognized, in the form of stricter gun laws?
12
No.
People have liberty given to them by their creator. Liberty includes deciding what is injected into your children's veins.
The problem is not with liberty --deciding whether or not to have your child injected, but in what to do with these children. A potentially tough question. Perhaps those not injected or --with susceptibilities --may need to be placed in a separate classrooms --or perhaps observing via television, during the pendency of an outbreak or flu season or whatever.
The remedy is not for government to usurp God-given liberty and invade the family in a Government Knows Best Orwellian campaign.
People have liberty given to them by their creator. Liberty includes deciding what is injected into your children's veins.
The problem is not with liberty --deciding whether or not to have your child injected, but in what to do with these children. A potentially tough question. Perhaps those not injected or --with susceptibilities --may need to be placed in a separate classrooms --or perhaps observing via television, during the pendency of an outbreak or flu season or whatever.
The remedy is not for government to usurp God-given liberty and invade the family in a Government Knows Best Orwellian campaign.
10
You have absolutely no idea how measles is transmitted I see, let alone what it costs to hire twice the number of teachers.
1
You do not have a god given liberty to have a public education or to be a danger to others.
This is a public issue. Rights and liberty of the bulk vs. Rights and liberty of a few. Focus your attention on the supplier and question the formulation of the vaccine. Don't waste your energy questioning the vaccine. Vaccines are good.
This is a very dangerous development. It means that the government can choose to inject into our children whatever it wants.
12
Nope. It would mean that unless it has been determined by a physician to be harmful a child must be immunized to attend school outside of the home. This isn't a conspiracy, it is a public health issue.
7
I say it is the ignorant parents that inject their children with harmful chemicals they know nothing about based on the recommendation of corporations, who's only purpose is to make money, they are the real abusers. Stop feeding your children junk(both through their mouths and eyes) and you won't have to vaccinate them.
7
See this is the kind of attitude that causes me to stop dead in my tracks. I am all for personal responsibility, 100%. I am all for limiting corporate power, 100% (who's only purpose is indeed to make money). I am all for a natural lifestyle and diet, 100%. But I'm also for knowing a little something about history and how we came to be where we are. Vaccinations have been one of human-kind's most successful inventions. They have saved countless lives and prevented suffering to a degree we cant even imagine. Our grandparents and great grandparents know, but because we don't have first hand knowledge we feel like its a non-issue. I'm all for intuition and instinct, but life is a balancing act. There is much good to be found in places one's "spidey sense" doesn't tune you into.
9
Really? So in that vein when polio, measles, mumps , whooping cough, scarlet fever and a whole host of other really nasty illnesses were around, say the early 20th century and before, how much processed food were we feeding then? How many Micky-d's were there in 1930? How many TV shows -( eye reference )? Kids and adults were crippled and died. Vaccinations were the key. Sure big Pharma makes money, just as Whole Foods Bikram Yoga, Mrs, Greens make money.....
Whats your point? ignorance is not bliss......
Whats your point? ignorance is not bliss......
7
I hope and pray that you don't have children. This kind of ignorance is truly frightening.
A similar bill in the Oregon legislature went over like a lead balloon a few months ago. A new compromise bill says that parents not wishing to vaccinate their children must watch a video saying what the risks of not vaccinating are.
4
I would like to see a second video added to that letting them know that they can be sued for endangering the health of their fellow citizens.
1
There's a lot of ill-informed, knee-jerk commentary here to go along with the poorly researched vagueness of the editorial itself. How 'bout we just call it pro-vax ranting.
Measles, Mumps, Rubella, and Pneumococcal Disease are one thing... highly contagious diseases for which herd immunity from vaccination does actually matter. These are diseases for which parents should definitely take the minute risk of vaccinating their children for society's sake.
Tetanus and Diphtheria aren't diseases for which herd immunity is really an issue. Not to mention the absurd vaccination AT BIRTH against Hepatitis B, a blood-borne disease which, yes, I suppose can be transmitted from mother to child, but uh... so can TB and Syphilis if we're being honest. These are vaccinations which matter far more to the profits, shareholders, and lobbyists of Merck and GlaxoSmithKline than to legitimate public health in the US, and shouldn't, by any means, be required of citizens living in a free society.
In fact, if you're over the age of 22 you probably aren't even vaccinated against Hep B, so I hereby demand all of you commenters ranting about public health to go get your unnecessary, three-course, Hep B vaccination immediately before you say another word about irresponsibility to society at large.
Full disclosure: I'm positive I have more vaccinations than you do, but I'm not about to expose my children to needles and chemicals that don't make a whit of difference to society's concerns.
Measles, Mumps, Rubella, and Pneumococcal Disease are one thing... highly contagious diseases for which herd immunity from vaccination does actually matter. These are diseases for which parents should definitely take the minute risk of vaccinating their children for society's sake.
Tetanus and Diphtheria aren't diseases for which herd immunity is really an issue. Not to mention the absurd vaccination AT BIRTH against Hepatitis B, a blood-borne disease which, yes, I suppose can be transmitted from mother to child, but uh... so can TB and Syphilis if we're being honest. These are vaccinations which matter far more to the profits, shareholders, and lobbyists of Merck and GlaxoSmithKline than to legitimate public health in the US, and shouldn't, by any means, be required of citizens living in a free society.
In fact, if you're over the age of 22 you probably aren't even vaccinated against Hep B, so I hereby demand all of you commenters ranting about public health to go get your unnecessary, three-course, Hep B vaccination immediately before you say another word about irresponsibility to society at large.
Full disclosure: I'm positive I have more vaccinations than you do, but I'm not about to expose my children to needles and chemicals that don't make a whit of difference to society's concerns.
10
When one of your children suffers a complication from one of these inconsequential childhood diseases you'll be thinking along different lines. Why do you want to leave open the possibility of your children getting these diseases as children or, gasp, as adults when it's even more dangerous for them? Children and adults used to die from these diseases. Children and adults used to suffer the aftereffects of these diseases. If you doubt it look at what rubella did, read "Little Women" and watch Beth die from the aftereffects of scarlet fever. (no, there's no vaccine for scarlet fever but it's a useful object lesson). Read about smallpox and how many it killed and maimed. Then you'll understand what a miracle vaccination is. It means we don't have to get the full blown version of a disease to be protected from it.
You sit there clearly the beneficiary of experience in a related practice and condemn folks for not being privy to the pool of real information you are. So, make it clear for us all. If you were to rewrite the CDC scedule what would be your primary edits and why?
i suggest finding out what "tetany," is, and how one dies from diptheria, rather than just mindlessly repeating the really rather stupid complaints of Tatyana What's-her-name.
With rare exceptions, the reasons offered for refusal to vaccinate don't hold up under scrutiny. Public health is an area where libertarian points of view are often trumped by general welfare of the population.
17
The bill should not be watered down. Where is my child's freedom if another child infects her because of a parent's distorted view of freedom. Where is my freedom if I am pregnant and get German measles from exposure to an unvaccinated child. These people want license....to do what they want regardless of the consequences. Basic freedoms are guaranteed by our constitution; we cannot grant license.
16
I am not anti-vaccine. However, if you are worried about measles, you should vaccinate yourself and your family. If you are one of the small number of people who can't be vaccinated due to allergies, then we have the sticky problem of whether we should force those who are strongly opposed to being vaccinated (for example due to ethical reasons) in order to protect the few who can't be vaccinated. Sort of like, should we outlaw peanuts to protect those with peanut allergies.
Given the amount of PhD produced by the various US universities, given the amount of money being made by US corporations based on scientific research, excellence, and innovation, one wonder why is it that the medical field seems to be immune to logic ?
If the average US citizen cannot see by him/herself the scientific and historic evidence ( see the death rates of babies / young kids over the last centuries ) then the US have a big problem with its educational system for producing such behaviours.
You do not compromise with death rates.
If the average US citizen cannot see by him/herself the scientific and historic evidence ( see the death rates of babies / young kids over the last centuries ) then the US have a big problem with its educational system for producing such behaviours.
You do not compromise with death rates.
4
This legislation will be found unconstitutional, as all the others have. I am not an anti-vaccine advocate, but the solution to this problem is to address and prove false all the claims the ant-vaccine type put forth, not to try and legislate compliance. Why is the heavy hand of government always the answer for you statists?
11
Those claims have long been proven falls in extensive studies, so I am not sure what more can or should be done to address them.
3
The government has no use to the people other than to protect their rights and liberties. The rights and liberties of the majority. And that's exactly what the state of California is demonstrating it can stilldo.
1
No, the supreme court ruled on this many times and found that to preserve public health the state and local authorities have the right to require vaccination
1
There has to be a way to categorize vaccinations as either required or optional based on the statistics. We all seem to be okay with the idea that the flu vaccinations are optional. Most people my age feel the chicken pox vaccine should be optional. On the other hand, polio and the measles were still devastating diseases 50-60 years ago. I remember kids I went to school with who were crippled by polio and babies born after moms were exposed to German measles. First we have to decide which diseases are inconvenient and which are life altering. Is it worth the expense to vaccinate against the common cold? We have a pretty good idea of the impact these diseases have on unprotected populations. We should be able to compare that to the number of people who suffer adverse effects from the inoculation process. For devastating diseases there should be no choice when we can demonstrate the population is significantly better off with the inoculation. What should that ratio be ? 10:1, 50:1 ? Unfortunately that is probably a political issue more than it is a scientific one.
10
You need to look up "shingles," and right away.
Unfortunately, vaccinations are not safe for all children. Until all the causes of vaccine injury are known and understood, the government should not be forcing risk carrying drugs on it's citizens.
13
True, vaccinations are not safe for all children, but let's allow science and the medical community to determine this; what is even more unsafe are parental decisions based off no scientific evidence.
Personal beliefs have no place in medicine. If my entire geographical area can be put at risk because one parent doesn't believe in vaccinations, then something is terribly, terribly wrong.
Personal beliefs have no place in medicine. If my entire geographical area can be put at risk because one parent doesn't believe in vaccinations, then something is terribly, terribly wrong.
2
Absolutely. Pharmaceutical manufacturing and engineering is the issue. Our government is tasked with making sure big pharm is taking the full burden of responsibility. We have the responsibility to stand up for one another and not accept any fraction of potential injury to be deemed satisfactory by the govt or big pharm. If we sleep on this, we could lose just as were losing by sleeping on climate change. The political forces which seek to mitigate the power of the people mostly sit on the right side.
The small percentage of non-vaccinated children may contract diseases but the vast majority who have been vaccinated will be protected.
So, why worry?
So, why worry?
3
Seriously? There are a) children who are too young to be vaccinated, b) people who are immunocompromised and therefore cannot be vaccinated, c) a fraction of people who do not mount an adequate response to vaccines and are therefore not protected despite being immunized.
This is why we need herd immunity.
This is why we need herd immunity.
RS, babies can't be vaccinated until they reach a certain age. Kids being treated for cancer who have compromised immune systems can't be vaccinated. Vaccination doesn't work in a very small percentage of cases.
I hope many of these people realize that polio, measles, and a few other diseases for which there are vaccines, are now spreading rapidly in the Middle East due to the inability to immunize people against those illnesses. This is all happening right now in war and conflict zones. And we all know that war zones create refugees that move across wide swaths of the planet and bring the diseases with them.
Just food for thought...
Just food for thought...
7
Vaccination helped eradicate polio and small pox and I don't know what else so there's a good side certainly but how it seems to me children my age (77) managed to grow up just fine having a natural vaccination work for us. You got the measles, mumps, chicken pox whatever and went back to school when it was over. It seems to me "mandatory" is going beyond the bounds of the social contract and is playing on fears to sell us something 'good for us' like auto insurance but is far more invasive of our sovereignty both physically and ethically. For what it's worth, Granny Ananda
7
Some people didn't survive it unscathed. Although my mother, 74, did survive measles unscathed she said she would not wish it on her worst enemy let alone someone she loves.
It sure sounds more and more like this country is going backwards a couple of centuries: health (vaccinations), home schooling, living in isolation, guns for "protection." What happened to us? What happened to progress? To the social contract? To living in community and taking care of one another? Building a better society? It is so disheartening and scary to see the direction we're headed.
14
Need to be very cautious about expanding the definition of home schooling to allow parents to conduct classes for children outside their family unit. May replace one problem with another.
2
Schools have to be kept under the public purview. There is enough damage being done to education already to make this an additional problem for the institution.
1
Even if you're the most pro vaccine person out there, you have to see that this "sensible" bill was born out of Disneyland hysteria, allows for an open door to unlimited vaccines by liable-free companies (without any kind of vote), and denies children the legal right to education in California. That is unacceptable. Further, this bill would have been killed on Wed 4/15 but instead the vote was delayed, just in time for a bill supporter to be added while an opposer to be switched out. Everyone of us should oppose such dirty behavior and should come together to stop it.
11
I was originally dubious about this bill; the more you guys aound off, the more I support it. You're not being denied the right to an education, by the way: you're being denied your fantasized right to endanger, sicken, and kill others.
1
Perhaps the actual problem is not American home schoolers or the GOP, but the effect of millions of poor immigrants from the third world pouring unchecked over our southern border into California? Odd, but not really surprising, that there is no mention of that remote possibility in the editorial or the comments. I suppose it's racist or whatever to even suggest the idea.
5
Nah, it's just stupid. We know who's coming down with measles and the like, and it's not them. We also know that vacc rates in Latin America are very good, so try again.
1
Most of our illegal immigrants come from south and central america where the vaccination uptake rates are higher than our own.
1
It would be a valid point if you had evidence of a connection, but it would still be a point that only reinforces the importance of vaccinating everyone else.
In my generation many kids got chicken pox and measles and mumps. Those diseases were no worse than a bad flu. Luckily there was polio vaccination which is a serious life changing disease. I think the fringe may have a point when it comes to minor illnesses like measles r chicken pox.
7
last year, measles 110, 000 children--due to vaccination, a massive improvement from the 500, 000 who died in 2001.
You may find 110, 000 dead children trivial. i do not.
You may find 110, 000 dead children trivial. i do not.
1
Measles: child can be blinded or deafened. Mumps: if contracted after puberty by males will affect testicles resulting in terrible pain and in sterility. Sure, many did not have complications but they are certainly possible, not to mention fetuses being deformed or killed by german measles(rubella), or chicken pox later returning as shingles.
1
I rarely agree with the Times editorial board and it is strange to see them advocating for the greater good of society over individual choice, but they are very simply right in this case, of course. The funny thing is that some readers comments suggest the anti-vaccination crowd are right wingers, but the parents who don't want to vaccinate their kids are mostly lefty vegan and hippie rich types in places like Californian, no?
2
Actually no. "Left" refers to someone who favors some kind of centralized government authority. "Right" refers to someone who disfavors the same. The folks who are intentionally dropping out of "the vaccination program" are among the right-wing, and could be characterized as a community that sees itself as separate from the rest of the collective.
No, in fact. idiocy is cross-political.
1
In The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith said, “Science is the great antidote to the poison of enthusiasm and superstition.” Unfortunately, the digital age presents many ideas as if they were proven science, instead of superstition. Every strange idea can find documented support on the Internet. For those groping for answers, superstition works very nicely as an explanation for their woes. However, in the case of vaccines, those superstitions affect the community and therefore they must be exposed and stopped. Cold.
8
So mandated vaccination accross the board. What then does that do for big pharm? Private entities just love when law requires their products and services be bought. It has already been shown that big pharm is capable of manufacturing vaccine products that to some degree are unsafe. What then can be done to assure formulations aren't allowed to "slide" during negative periodic economic valleys if laws are exacted to coerce consumption?
I'm sure it was someone else of relatively equal stature who originally asserted that it is money which is at the root of al evil.
For the love of all that is holy, please pass this bill! When Mississippi and West Virginia are the only states that have the good sense to not let a parent's idiocy affect their children's chances of developing polio and diphtheria, you know something is off-kilter. If California has the brains to follow through on this, and not let the Jenny McCarthy wannabes infect the population with their moronic vitriol, then perhaps the rest of the country will wise up as well.
Our grandparents would be horrified that parents today are deliberately passing up, and bad-mouthing, a chance for their children to avoid the scourges that plagued humanity for thousands of years. And why? Because of some bad science that received a forum in the name of "balanced coverage". Never mind the facts. May the ignoramuses that supported this garbage burn in the deepest pit for all eternity, and be cursed by the cries of the innocents that their stupidity killed.
Okay, so that's maybe a bit over the top. I tend to get a bit riled when parents are allowed to kill their children for no good reason.
Our grandparents would be horrified that parents today are deliberately passing up, and bad-mouthing, a chance for their children to avoid the scourges that plagued humanity for thousands of years. And why? Because of some bad science that received a forum in the name of "balanced coverage". Never mind the facts. May the ignoramuses that supported this garbage burn in the deepest pit for all eternity, and be cursed by the cries of the innocents that their stupidity killed.
Okay, so that's maybe a bit over the top. I tend to get a bit riled when parents are allowed to kill their children for no good reason.
9
It is the wages of ignorance. Too many people today do not realize what happens when epidemics do. It may take a major outbreak of a disease to convince the unknowing that they were wrong, I hope it is only the nay-sayers who suffer.
1
The anti-vaxx group in just as anti-science as global warming deniers. And like that group they've created their own critical mass via the Internet and now the "believe" that "big pharma" and crooked doctors are to blame. I'm a boomer and I remember polio and I remember pushing a classmate in a wheelchair or helping him when he stumbled in his braces. Does anyone remember the March of Dimes campaigns to get vaccinated for German Measles to prevent birth defects? While there may be roots of "concerned parent" in this discussion it's degenerated into an amalgam fantasy conspiracy theories. Society needs to call out the stupid and not let them hurt the rest of us because of their stupidity. Will it make them uncomfortable an generally feel bad - I hope so.
11
Amen. Except that i would give just a little more credit to their cause. I don't trust that big pharm will automatically assume the full burden of responsibility without considerable pressure from the feds. If big pharm turns around and says that it can't manufacture vaccines to meet a high degree of safety, then we need a strong govt to take initiative to force delivery the right, the safe product.
Everyone must pay taxes. Everyone must be vaccinated.
That's an obligation for living in a modern civil society.
Willful ignorance is not an excuse.
That's an obligation for living in a modern civil society.
Willful ignorance is not an excuse.
8
This is true, too some extent. However, the question comes up, what about those who do not comply?
There will always be some people who openly defy the law. How to deal with this people is the difficult issue. If someone is willing to fight to the death to resist vaccinating his kids, is society willing to grant him his wish and execute him?
There will always be some people who openly defy the law. How to deal with this people is the difficult issue. If someone is willing to fight to the death to resist vaccinating his kids, is society willing to grant him his wish and execute him?
Everybody must eat govt proscribed diet to avoid health issues, an obligation for living in a modern civil society? That is the (il)logical extension of your argument, and much more. My child, my choice.
A parent who refuses vaccination that protects against diseases that often kill unprotected children, using well tested vaccines that have been given safely to hundreds of millions of children, is committing the felony of reckless endangerment when they refuse to vaccinate their child.
3
Absolutely no way, no how should a child be exempt from vaccination due to "parental preference." If that is the case, then "my parental preference" for your child to stay home. Your wacky ideas about vaccination do not trump science and public health.
3
These people who argue that vaccinations cause diseases, when every credible medical study contradicts them, should be ashamed. They believe in fairy tales. Their children, and the children of others, are placed at needless risk by their foolish attitudes.
(Personally, I know better. Here is my theory: Whatever it is that those parents ascribe to vaccinations is caused by sunspots. Go ahead you "anti-vaxers," try to prove my theory wrong.)
(Personally, I know better. Here is my theory: Whatever it is that those parents ascribe to vaccinations is caused by sunspots. Go ahead you "anti-vaxers," try to prove my theory wrong.)
7
From the US Dept of Health & Human Resources:
Since the first National Vaccine Injury Compensation (VICP) claims were filed in 1989, 4,022 compensation awards have been made. More than $2.9 billion in compensation awards has been paid to petitioners and more than $123.9 million has been paid to cover attorneys' fees and other legal costs.
To date, 9,882 claims have been dismissed. Of those, 4,940 claimants were paid more than $65.7 million to cover attorneys’ fees and other legal costs.
When someones uses terms like "anti-vaxer", it is obvious their mind is already made up and they have not PERSONALLY reviewed the scientific data but rather believe what is spoon fed to them by their media outlet of choice
Since the first National Vaccine Injury Compensation (VICP) claims were filed in 1989, 4,022 compensation awards have been made. More than $2.9 billion in compensation awards has been paid to petitioners and more than $123.9 million has been paid to cover attorneys' fees and other legal costs.
To date, 9,882 claims have been dismissed. Of those, 4,940 claimants were paid more than $65.7 million to cover attorneys’ fees and other legal costs.
When someones uses terms like "anti-vaxer", it is obvious their mind is already made up and they have not PERSONALLY reviewed the scientific data but rather believe what is spoon fed to them by their media outlet of choice
1
Amen. Help those grandparents who shudder every time a potential threat like measles comes dangerously close. Personal intervention does not work as well as law. It is too easy for parents to opt out based on personal belief and ignore all scientific and rational discourse. All states should move in this direction.
1
'Sensible' is an unreasonable adjective in regard to this legislation. Having a 2nd cousin with significant issues related to the 'safe at the time' mercury based preservative in her vaccines (now banned) arouses my suspicions on just how safe these shots are. If parents are willing to take the risks of infection of their kids erring on the side of skepticism then its their risk.
When my dad had a heart attack in 1946 his cardiologist told him he needs lots of protein to heal and put him on an egg and steak diet. So much for 'modern medicine'. Not for one minute do I think Big Pharma is driven by anything other than profit.
R. U. Kidding
Kalap[ana, HI
When my dad had a heart attack in 1946 his cardiologist told him he needs lots of protein to heal and put him on an egg and steak diet. So much for 'modern medicine'. Not for one minute do I think Big Pharma is driven by anything other than profit.
R. U. Kidding
Kalap[ana, HI
2
I'm tired of the "Big Pharma" scare mongering. Guess what - the cost of vaccine preventable diseases (treatment, long term effects, outbreak control, lost wages etc) is far higher than that of vaccines. Please consider the possibility that vaccines, in addition to making some money for their manufacturers, are safe, effective and prevent needless suffering.
1
The "personal belief" exemption should be correctly recast as the "I saw something on the internet that scared me" exemption. A significant fraction of our population believes that vaccines cause autism; according to a Gallup poll, about the same number of Americans believe in astrology, and twice their number believe in ESP. Science-related policy should be based on science, not on "personal beliefs."
6
"People that don't want vaccinations have never seen the diseases they prevent." That is what my physician father used to say. I personally resent the fact that just because some ignorant fools don't "believe in" vaccinations, I have to worry about my six month old grandchild getting measles until she is old enough to get the vaccine herself at age one.
6
There is stupidity and then there is dangerous stupidity. Deciding that vaccination is bad falls into the second category. It has taken centuries of suffering to truly understand how devastating diseases can be. Entire populations were wiped out due to plagues. Infant mortality rates used to be unavoidably high.
And some want to risk going back to that era because of their personal beliefs? Personal belief will not scare away Mycobacterium tuberculosis... a BCG vaccine will.
I'd advocate amending the law to make such choices heavily punishable. If you want to risk endangering others' health, you belong in jail.
And some want to risk going back to that era because of their personal beliefs? Personal belief will not scare away Mycobacterium tuberculosis... a BCG vaccine will.
I'd advocate amending the law to make such choices heavily punishable. If you want to risk endangering others' health, you belong in jail.
5
Speaking as a family doc I would just observe that in the past it was standard practice to admit to the hospital any infant up to three months of age who had a fever of 100.4F to rule out sepsis. The introduction of the Hemophilous influenza (a bacteria) immunization decreased the frequency of meningitis in infants so greatly that only infants younger than one month are routinely admitted.
It is not about those libertarian parents, the issue is the safety of everyone else's family.
It is not about those libertarian parents, the issue is the safety of everyone else's family.
7
The issue needs to be made more clear. The vaccines themselves are not necessarily dangerous, but the preservative Thimerosal is used in the multi-dose vaccines. Single dose vaccines do not (or should not) contain Thimerosal, which is made from mercury and is very dangerous to health.
1
Anti-vaxxers are the epitome of selfishness and ignorance. Parents who don't vaccinate endanger the lives of infants too young to be vaccinated and kids with cancer. Our representatives in California need to make decisions based on scientific consensus, not cave to the demands of a tiny minority of science-denying nuts.
9
The children with cancer should have been vaccinated before they had cancer or were immune compromised. The probability of a non immunized child transmitting a deadly disease to a pre immunized baby is very small, and needs to be balanced against the legitimate wishes of some individuals not to be vaccinated. There is no perfect solution when balancing the rights of one against the fears of another.
Immune compromised means that the immune system is not working. Children and adults who receive certain treatments are no longer protected and need to be re-vaccinated after the treatment is completed and the doctors determine that it's safe.
There are many of us who did not vaccinate our children, but were not:
1) selfish;
2) fundamentalists;
3) anti-scientific;
4) bad at math
Etc. Contrary to this endless stream of misinformation which the NYT has contributed to once again, there really is a valid dispute about the efficacy and safety of vaccinations. The claims against the Vaccine Compensation fund that John references below are for real. Maybe you don't know anyone damaged by vaccines but we do. Then there is the unknown impact on the immune system. Look up the real scientific data on this issue, comparing the health of vaccinated and unvaccinated people over time. I am not saying we are right and the rest of you are wrong, just that you ought to quit being so arrogant. I was trained as a lawyer and my wife as an experimental psychologist. We have actually studied the data and it is very dubious that universal vaccinations (how many shots are there now??) are the way to go. About 1/3 of pediatricians don't vaccinate their own children on the recommended schedule. Why would that be?
1) selfish;
2) fundamentalists;
3) anti-scientific;
4) bad at math
Etc. Contrary to this endless stream of misinformation which the NYT has contributed to once again, there really is a valid dispute about the efficacy and safety of vaccinations. The claims against the Vaccine Compensation fund that John references below are for real. Maybe you don't know anyone damaged by vaccines but we do. Then there is the unknown impact on the immune system. Look up the real scientific data on this issue, comparing the health of vaccinated and unvaccinated people over time. I am not saying we are right and the rest of you are wrong, just that you ought to quit being so arrogant. I was trained as a lawyer and my wife as an experimental psychologist. We have actually studied the data and it is very dubious that universal vaccinations (how many shots are there now??) are the way to go. About 1/3 of pediatricians don't vaccinate their own children on the recommended schedule. Why would that be?
4
Your entire argument comes down to "I'm really smart even though I'm doing something that is proven to be really stupid and reckless."
The ACLU here in Cali states that the state has shown no compelling reason to trump civil/religious liberties. We agree here in Cali. And if you will all stop drinking the propaganda koolaid for one minute and do a bit of research, you might find out why many of us doctors, teachers, lawyers oppose the bill.
You might find that the widely touted "vaccines are safe" rhetoric is not true. Ask our Supreme Court who has ruled them "unavoidably unsafe." Or ask those 30,000 annually injured by them (reported by the gov system VAERS) which is only about 10% acc to CDC. Or ask those families awarded damages in the amount of 3.1 Billion dollars including 21 cases at the federal court of the VICP where the ruling included indicting the vaccine DTP and/or DTap vaccine as the triggering brain inflammation that led to "autistic-like" outcome. Or perhaps just read the vaccine inserts like Merck's Gardasil which lists over 1/2 dozen autoimmune disorders arising in some test subjects after administration of its vaccine. But all of this takes time and research....
Including the issue of herd immunity. Hmmm where is typhoid, tuberculosis, scarlet fever? No one argues vaccines may have contributed to decline but there are many other variables which contributed but oh those variable are not funded by Pharma. Or the CDC. CDC is too busy trying to figure out what it is going to do with Dr. William Thompson, the CDC whistleblower.
Well I am out of character space or I would go on..
You might find that the widely touted "vaccines are safe" rhetoric is not true. Ask our Supreme Court who has ruled them "unavoidably unsafe." Or ask those 30,000 annually injured by them (reported by the gov system VAERS) which is only about 10% acc to CDC. Or ask those families awarded damages in the amount of 3.1 Billion dollars including 21 cases at the federal court of the VICP where the ruling included indicting the vaccine DTP and/or DTap vaccine as the triggering brain inflammation that led to "autistic-like" outcome. Or perhaps just read the vaccine inserts like Merck's Gardasil which lists over 1/2 dozen autoimmune disorders arising in some test subjects after administration of its vaccine. But all of this takes time and research....
Including the issue of herd immunity. Hmmm where is typhoid, tuberculosis, scarlet fever? No one argues vaccines may have contributed to decline but there are many other variables which contributed but oh those variable are not funded by Pharma. Or the CDC. CDC is too busy trying to figure out what it is going to do with Dr. William Thompson, the CDC whistleblower.
Well I am out of character space or I would go on..
4
Vaccine "resistors" are a public health menace. They pass on dangerous diseases not only to those who have not been vaccinated, but also to those who have, since the vaccines are typically no more than 80% effective. In the absence of the resistors this rate is sufficient to disrupt and even wipe out the target illness, but the resistors, in their narcissism and ignorance, allow it to smolder and break out. By all means, lets have the strong legislation demanding full compliance.
2
I have well educated friends with MBA's that refuse to vaccinate. No matter what you say, they insist vaccines are dangerous, unnecessary and even if 78 million vaccines were given last year with few reactions to a vaccine, it is not worth the risk. It is hard to understand why educated people living west of the 405 would rather rely on superstition than science. After all, they certainly don't deny global warming. Very odd.
4
Not clear that a business degree necessarily qualifies one as an expert on the benefits and risks of different forms of medical treatment. Do your MBA friends regularly read the peer-reviewed scientific literature in this field?
If we as a government decide to mandate injecting substances into your or your children's bodies, then there should be very rigid restrictions on what those substances are. Just saying "vaccines are safe!" shouldn't give government's carte blanche to expand this authority.
I totally believe many vaccines are safe and effective. It's the future ones and other substances that I worry about. I'd rather not see all states over-reach here.
I totally believe many vaccines are safe and effective. It's the future ones and other substances that I worry about. I'd rather not see all states over-reach here.
3
Likely few of the parents that advocate their control over their children's immunization understand the history of Poliomyelitis in the USA and the profound affect of Jonas Salk and his associates in developing the first effective human vaccine for polio. The vaccine stopped a national epidemic that left thousands of infected individuals tethered to negative pressure ventilators a.k.a. "iron lungs". Most all in my generation stood in line and accepted the strong pain from a inter-muscular injection of the Salk vaccine as the alternative was the risk of living out lives as a para- or quadriplegic, or at worst, a very premature death.
3
I think most of the reluctance over vaccination started as a result of rumors and conjectures that thimerosal (the preservative used in vaccines) causes autism. Over the last number of years many scholarly peer-reviewed articles have been published (see http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12880876) refuting this, yet the internet perpetuates the spread of nagging, unfounded fear. Unfortunately, when it comes to "herd resistance" no man is an island, and public health must take precedence over "individual liberty".
5
"The bill was introduced in February in the wake of a measles outbreak at Disneyland in December that spread to many other states and infected mostly unvaccinated children and adults."
What percentage of infected individuals were already vaccinated? I think it would help the discussion to know what that percentage is.
What percentage of infected individuals were already vaccinated? I think it would help the discussion to know what that percentage is.
2
Let me state that I do believe in having children vaccinated and that is a good thing for society. That said, I think our country is shifting in very disturbing directions which are leading to a society that crushes individual rights, putting everything in the government's hands. There is a legitimate question about "personal beliefs" and individual freedom that needs to be touched upon in debates like this.
Read Orwell's "1984" or Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World" or pick up any good history on Stalin's Russia or Nazi Germany or the movement for eugenics in California in the early part of this century and you will understand my concerns. What sort of society do we want to create in this country? Certainly not the one I grew up in during the late 1980s and the 1990s.
We use terms that imply value judgments that border on the disturbing...calling legislation "sensible" as opposed to those who oppose it who must by definition be "insensible." I hear people posting stuff that people opposed must be ignorant, but who are you or the government for that matter to make that call. Parents have the right to raise their kids as they see fit according to beliefs that they subscribe to...where do we stop with bills like this? Everyone has to be vaccinated...everyone must go to public schools even if they teach stuff I don't want my kids to learn? What ever happened to the idea that people have individual rights? We are turning our back on freedom, and becoming a society of conditioners
Read Orwell's "1984" or Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World" or pick up any good history on Stalin's Russia or Nazi Germany or the movement for eugenics in California in the early part of this century and you will understand my concerns. What sort of society do we want to create in this country? Certainly not the one I grew up in during the late 1980s and the 1990s.
We use terms that imply value judgments that border on the disturbing...calling legislation "sensible" as opposed to those who oppose it who must by definition be "insensible." I hear people posting stuff that people opposed must be ignorant, but who are you or the government for that matter to make that call. Parents have the right to raise their kids as they see fit according to beliefs that they subscribe to...where do we stop with bills like this? Everyone has to be vaccinated...everyone must go to public schools even if they teach stuff I don't want my kids to learn? What ever happened to the idea that people have individual rights? We are turning our back on freedom, and becoming a society of conditioners
2
This action by these parents is symptomatic of many behaviors where people feel they have no collective responsibility even when they enjoyed collective benefits (such public schools).
In California, you see this everywhere: people driving below the speed limit in the left lane, people (especially white females) refusing to talk to census takers (I was one), and the utter inability of people, at least so far, to come to terms with the fact that they live in a desert. Don't Tread On Me has gone to far.
In California, you see this everywhere: people driving below the speed limit in the left lane, people (especially white females) refusing to talk to census takers (I was one), and the utter inability of people, at least so far, to come to terms with the fact that they live in a desert. Don't Tread On Me has gone to far.
3
If California does this, they should start, in conjunction, a massive, multi-year study regarding the rates of injury, and who suffers.
We still don't understand why some kids have bad reactions to vaccines, and profound problems afterwards. And make no mistake, some children are injured by vaccines. Stop fighting about that. Let's find out WHY some children are vulnerable, and how we can identify them before the harm is done.
All of the energy put into bluster and vitriol might be better directed towards admitting we don't know everything, and enthusiastically trying to find out what we need to learn.
If parents knew that our society was working towards solutions and acknowledging the validity of their concerns, they would be more willing to let their children be vaccinated.
We still don't understand why some kids have bad reactions to vaccines, and profound problems afterwards. And make no mistake, some children are injured by vaccines. Stop fighting about that. Let's find out WHY some children are vulnerable, and how we can identify them before the harm is done.
All of the energy put into bluster and vitriol might be better directed towards admitting we don't know everything, and enthusiastically trying to find out what we need to learn.
If parents knew that our society was working towards solutions and acknowledging the validity of their concerns, they would be more willing to let their children be vaccinated.
2
These studies exist in multitude, from countries that require have long requiredvaccinations and have complete health record (e.g. The Netherlands). There is no evidence that vaccines cause tha harm that the a full-vaccine crowd claims
1
My beliefs and behavior are with the majority here who do not want their children exposed to unvaccinated others, period. Still, dismissing "personal belief" in America across the board is not okay. The majority does not always hold the only reasonable option. Case in point -- a person declared "brain dead" (whose organs the majority medical establishment would have us harvest despite the fact that "brain dead" was a term created for the express purpose of sanctioning such a harvest) is not cold and dead.
1
Most of these irresponsible parents denying vaccination protection to their children were too young to have lived under the constant threat of polio like my generation did, or did not have parents or grandparents such as mine who endured and survived smallpox outbreaks before that. If these idiots were subjected to trials such as those they would quickly become supporters of universal vaccination.
4
There is not a single piece of credible medical data that shows that vaccines cause autism. It is mind-blowing that these supposedly "enlightened" parents put their children and others at risk by refusing to vaccinate them. Here's a real-life example of what happens when you don't vaccinate your children: in 2009, my wife had taken our infant son to a birthday party. All of the kids were running around, yelling and screaming like, well, kids. All except one. She was clinging to her dad and appeared lethargic. Three days later, all parents were notified that she had bacterial meningitis and the CDC was involved. It turns out that her irresponsible parents were anti-vaccine nuts and she had not received Hib shots. Due to his age, my son had only had the first of the HIB shots and was theoretically at risk according to our pediatrician. The girl survived but has permanent hearing and speech problems. How they were not charged with a criminal offense is beyond me.
5
It's an important old constitutional issue.
Justices/judges have their role to play.
Both Christian Science and Jehovah Witness religions have been over-ridden by legal precedent, so far as I know.
Meanwhile: I suggest the media/public know about actual incidents where (anonymous) unvaccinated children contracted pertinent disease including eventual death.
People certainly do have their criticisms/fears about the issue, and the general public may not realize there are actual negative consequences.
And I also concede that (anonymous) incidents of bad reactions also be media/publically reported.
.
Justices/judges have their role to play.
Both Christian Science and Jehovah Witness religions have been over-ridden by legal precedent, so far as I know.
Meanwhile: I suggest the media/public know about actual incidents where (anonymous) unvaccinated children contracted pertinent disease including eventual death.
People certainly do have their criticisms/fears about the issue, and the general public may not realize there are actual negative consequences.
And I also concede that (anonymous) incidents of bad reactions also be media/publically reported.
.
Is there an value in teaching more widely about what a vaccine is, and what it does? A lot of people opposed to vaccines probably believe in natural living, avoiding chemicals, keeping their kids away from danger, etc. But they certainly favor exercise, of muscles and brain! Our immune systems like a little workout too, its what its made for. What a magnificent cascade of natural events happens as our immune system is challenged by a new antigen. Is there another biological system so little appreciated for its awesome power and intricacy as the immune system? A vaccine is a brilliant invention, but its just a nudge really, that sets in motion a spectacular response. Maybe knowing more about this glory we all possess, including little kids, would help overcome some of the skepticism around what is probably for many a rather mysterious act, of injecting something into a child.
1
I have written my elected officials and Senator Carol Liu (Chair) (D) of the committee that is considering this law. I encourage everyone else in CA to make their voices known to their elected officials.
It is time to stop pretending that every issue has two equal sides. This issue and so many others do not have two equal sides. When it comes to vaccinations there is science and modern medicine and then there are those who have tightly held but erroneous views on the "dangers" of vaccinations. Vaccinations have risks, as does everything else in life. BUT those risks are minute when compared to the real dangers of diseases like measles, whopping cough, and polio.
Parents who refuse to vaccinate DO NOT have the right to endanger the health and lives of my kids and especially lives of the most vulnerable - those who are too ill or young to be vaccinated.
If you want to live in your "fact-free" fairyland that is devoid of science, then you must be willing to take the consequences. That is, those of us who are rational do not want your unvaccinated kids in OUR schools.
It is actually quite simple, no vaccination no public school.
I am a Mom who loves her kids (and yours too!), a scientist with a PhD in Biology and a Professor of Biology. The science is irrefutable, vaccines are safe and childhood diseases are a scourge that in the recent past killed and maimed millions of children. Lets go forward, not back.
No vaccines- no Public School!
It is time to stop pretending that every issue has two equal sides. This issue and so many others do not have two equal sides. When it comes to vaccinations there is science and modern medicine and then there are those who have tightly held but erroneous views on the "dangers" of vaccinations. Vaccinations have risks, as does everything else in life. BUT those risks are minute when compared to the real dangers of diseases like measles, whopping cough, and polio.
Parents who refuse to vaccinate DO NOT have the right to endanger the health and lives of my kids and especially lives of the most vulnerable - those who are too ill or young to be vaccinated.
If you want to live in your "fact-free" fairyland that is devoid of science, then you must be willing to take the consequences. That is, those of us who are rational do not want your unvaccinated kids in OUR schools.
It is actually quite simple, no vaccination no public school.
I am a Mom who loves her kids (and yours too!), a scientist with a PhD in Biology and a Professor of Biology. The science is irrefutable, vaccines are safe and childhood diseases are a scourge that in the recent past killed and maimed millions of children. Lets go forward, not back.
No vaccines- no Public School!
5
This commentary is, unfortunately, lacking any sort of nuance I have come to expect of the NYTimes editorial board. Instead of looking at what the bill would actually require, it mentions Measles and proceeds by generalizing and including all other vaccine requirements in their recommendation to "protect the community". How does it protect other children or the community at large to require Hepatitis B vaccinations, when carriers of the disease are allowed to attend school? It doesn't. Yet every child in kindergarten would be required to receive a vaccination for Hepatitis B, a disease which is transmitted through unprotected sex or intravenous drug use. How does requiring a tetanus shot protect others, if it is not a communicable disease? Or the flu shot, which isn't very effective to begin with and actually becomes less effective the more regularly on gets one? Some vaccinations on the schedule make sense, some may make more sense to some people than to others, but requiring everyone to receive all of them is about something else than protecting children or the community. Unfortunately, the NYTimes editorial board doesn't find it necessary to parse out the details and swallows the pharmaceutical industry line including hook and sinker.
4
Universal vaccination is logical. But, like it or not, state compulsion is a compromise of individual rights. That a child should have to be vaccinated to protect others is not the way it usually works. Moreover, those who benefit are the small minority who cannot be immunized. Because this minority can be purposely infected to create natural immunity with minimal risk, the anti-vaccination crowd endangers very few. Requiring this crowd to compromise their admittedly irrational beliefs for the benefit of a very small % of the population (tiny babies, who are also vulnerable, have little reason to venture out where infection is a risk) may well violate due process. And please remember that even the irrational have due process rights.
1
What is the critical percentage putting children at risk? All children should be vaccinated but they never will. The reasons can vary and are listed in the article. What seems to be simple is actually not that simple.
I have no children, grandchildren or great grandchildren. I obviously do not remember my very early years, almost 80 years ago. I do not think we had ANY exemptions from vaccination but, of course, I do not have the statistics at hand. The principle of 'faith' exemptionsa is completely irrational, that I know.
I have no children, grandchildren or great grandchildren. I obviously do not remember my very early years, almost 80 years ago. I do not think we had ANY exemptions from vaccination but, of course, I do not have the statistics at hand. The principle of 'faith' exemptionsa is completely irrational, that I know.
1
The problem with personal belief is that it's too personal. It would be one thing if "personal belief" involved some serious research of medical literature and had a well-reasoned basis involving verifiable scientific knowledge.
But too often it's not, it's based on unverified paranoia, social attitudes among narrow peer groups. I hate to indulge in stereotypes, but why do I get the feeling that a lot of kids in California aren't getting vaccinated because of idle chatter at mom's yoga class between uncontrolled doses of herbal remedies?
Worst is religious belief. It should never trump any known science and its frustrating that in this country a set of unverifiable metaphysical notions is treated as a superior justification of behavior than any known science, even if it is in direct opposition to well-proved science.
But too often it's not, it's based on unverified paranoia, social attitudes among narrow peer groups. I hate to indulge in stereotypes, but why do I get the feeling that a lot of kids in California aren't getting vaccinated because of idle chatter at mom's yoga class between uncontrolled doses of herbal remedies?
Worst is religious belief. It should never trump any known science and its frustrating that in this country a set of unverifiable metaphysical notions is treated as a superior justification of behavior than any known science, even if it is in direct opposition to well-proved science.
1
Many people posting seem to be mistaking the issue: It is not the government forcing vaccines on people or taking away parents' rights to determine the health care of their children. Rather it is whether unvaccinated children can attend public school. As many children who attend public school have health conditions preventing immunization and thus rely on 'herd immunity' to remain healthy at school, it seems a more than reasonable requirement that healthy children become vaccinated before entering school. And who knows, maybe this will spur the establishment of private schools for unvaccinated kids? It's not any weirder than some of the other niche private schools that are out there.
2
Don't let the kids get a passport w/o proof of vaccination. Some of the recent cases of measles here were caused by returning Typhoid Mary's and Marty's.
There was no mumps vaccine when I was a kid, and as a male there was always this specter of possible infertility hanging over my early decades. I was, however, protected against polio; I was a Salk Polio Pioneer having received the vaccine in the blind tests.
It appears to me that there are valid issues about the timing of this now huge load of vaccines, and those matters need to be further explored. However, there should be no exemptions for any reason other than medical sensitivity. None. Jesus never advised not getting vaccines.
There was no mumps vaccine when I was a kid, and as a male there was always this specter of possible infertility hanging over my early decades. I was, however, protected against polio; I was a Salk Polio Pioneer having received the vaccine in the blind tests.
It appears to me that there are valid issues about the timing of this now huge load of vaccines, and those matters need to be further explored. However, there should be no exemptions for any reason other than medical sensitivity. None. Jesus never advised not getting vaccines.
4
During the recent measles outbreak in California they discovered that half the kids who got sick were vaccinated. But no one ever explained why they got measles when that had been give the measles vaccine?
I do not support science because it is Democratic. I support Democrats (sometimes reluctantly) because they are more scientifically-minded than the Republicans. But vaccination denialism is as bad as evolution denialism and both would equally disqualify a political candidate or a party in my eyes. No politician who gives in to ignorant nonsense, on either side of the political spectrum, will get my vote or my money. And the shrill cries to hold "Big Pharma" accountable for putting "poisons" into vaccines are particularly infuriating because they are coming from people who have no scientific training, no respect for the peer-review process, and would not know statistical data from a restaurant check. It is just populist sloganeering, no different from "God, guns, and grits" of the other side.
5
Those who are against having their children immunized, have never experienced the diseases they prevent. Measles can be very destructive to the organs and hearing and can even be fatal. Whooping cough is awful to experience and can be fatal. Tetanus is often fatal or can lead to brain damage. Chickenpox can be extremely unpleasant, especially when older, possibly leaving scarring. Polio shouldn't need to be described, it's terrible! I could go on. The immunizations have a very good track record. Side effects are relatively rare. For those who have medical reasons not to be immunized need the rest of us to protect them. There is no equivilance between the diseases and the shots. Why would a parent want to gamble their children's welfare with such a high cost of failure?
36
Living in conservative Orange County, I know a handful of parents who have opted not to vaccinate their children for personal beliefs. I didn't realize how widespread anti-vaccination sentiments were, however, until I learned that my daughter's own elementary school has a vaccination rate of only 89%. As someone who believes very much in the efficacy of vaccines and the problematic claims of the anti-vaccination movement, this is highly disturbing. Where does personal choice end, and responsibility for the community begin?
32
Yes, and 89% is not a high enough vaccination rate to ensure herd immunity. I was shocked to learn that my excellent local public elementary schools have vaccination rates of only about 85%--in a community where many parents have college degrees and ought to know better.
My son and daughter-in-law are expecting my first grandchild in the Fall. Babies can't be immunized against many diseases early in their lives, but they are protected by herd immunity when vaccination is universal or nearly so. But knowing that a significant minority of children in my community are unvaccinated, must I cope with the anxiety that taking a newborn into public places might expose him to polio? measles? diphtheria? Evidently so, and that is unacceptable to me.
My son and daughter-in-law are expecting my first grandchild in the Fall. Babies can't be immunized against many diseases early in their lives, but they are protected by herd immunity when vaccination is universal or nearly so. But knowing that a significant minority of children in my community are unvaccinated, must I cope with the anxiety that taking a newborn into public places might expose him to polio? measles? diphtheria? Evidently so, and that is unacceptable to me.
I'm continuously baffled by the underlying assumptions in this debate. Every single parent that I knows vaccinates in order to protect his/her own child. This is a personal decision made on the behalf of the child, not a choice motivated by social responsibility, however laudable that would be.
The same is true of those parents who choose not to vaccinate. Although I don't know a single family that avoids vaccinations altogether, I know many families who weigh risk/benefit for each vaccine before making a decision. And I know that they value that decision-making power.
Both decisions carry both benefits and risks to the child but the recent measles outbreak in California was a pretty compelling argument in favor of the vaccine, considering how few people (even fewer children) were actually infected. Let the facts speak for themselves. The majority of parents will continue to choose vaccinations. And they will continue to appreciate the fact that they are trusted to make that choice.
The same is true of those parents who choose not to vaccinate. Although I don't know a single family that avoids vaccinations altogether, I know many families who weigh risk/benefit for each vaccine before making a decision. And I know that they value that decision-making power.
Both decisions carry both benefits and risks to the child but the recent measles outbreak in California was a pretty compelling argument in favor of the vaccine, considering how few people (even fewer children) were actually infected. Let the facts speak for themselves. The majority of parents will continue to choose vaccinations. And they will continue to appreciate the fact that they are trusted to make that choice.
1
No, there shouldn't be any exemptions, like this ridiculous home-school exemption. Just like taxes, people should be legally forced to vaccinate or suffer the consequences (including paying a hefty fine). Like taxes, vaccinations are for the common good of all and the benefits don't just redound to those who are vaccinated. But unlike failure to pay taxes, if there's failure to vaccinate innocent people will suffer completely preventable serious injuries or deaths. In other words, the consequences for failure to vaccinate are far worse and much less diffuse than failure to pay taxes. Enough is enough--let's not coddle or tolerate this dangerous, rabidly anti-scientific and anti-communal fringe. It's for our own good as well as theirs.
1
Part of the problem is that many parents risk analysis of the issue is skewed. Parents understand autism. Most of us have come into contact with a child with autism at some point in our lives but very few of us even remember the diseases for which we receive vaccinations. As a result we focus on whether or not the vaccine is safe, will it cause our child harm, instead of fully appreciating the harm being prevented by vaccinating our children. We as a society need to regain some of that lost collective memory to fully understand the implications of going down a road where ever larger percentages of parents chose to not vaccinate their children. We don't have to look too hard. There are parts of the world where many of the diseases still run rampant and in our increasingly connected world could reach our shores at anytime.
1
What has happened to this country? When I was growing up, parents couldn't wait to get their children vaccinated. People flocked to their doctors to protect their children from disease. People waited with the greatest anticipation with the news of a new vaccine. Vaccinations couldn't happen fast enough.
The facts are that vaccinations have done more to prevent disease than any medical advance of the last 100 years. Nothing else comes remotely close.
Now fast forward to today. Society has invented this thing called a "personal-belief exemption." Want the hell is that? I don't believe onions are healthy to eat. Fine. No one else is harmed. I don't believe I should have to always stop for red lights, big problem. That belief will hurt others and might even kill them.
Same goes for vaccines. No one's belief gives them the right to hurt someone else, make them get sick, or even kill them. Likewise, no parent has the right to allow a child to become sick because of an idiotic belief.
Children are not property. Parents are not just custodians of children. They are their protectors, first and foremost.
Denying food to a child is against the law. Why is denying vaccination any different? This whole issue is revolting.
The facts are that vaccinations have done more to prevent disease than any medical advance of the last 100 years. Nothing else comes remotely close.
Now fast forward to today. Society has invented this thing called a "personal-belief exemption." Want the hell is that? I don't believe onions are healthy to eat. Fine. No one else is harmed. I don't believe I should have to always stop for red lights, big problem. That belief will hurt others and might even kill them.
Same goes for vaccines. No one's belief gives them the right to hurt someone else, make them get sick, or even kill them. Likewise, no parent has the right to allow a child to become sick because of an idiotic belief.
Children are not property. Parents are not just custodians of children. They are their protectors, first and foremost.
Denying food to a child is against the law. Why is denying vaccination any different? This whole issue is revolting.
In spite of the foot stomping and hollering of the anti-vaccinationists, there is no research showing the long term health benefits of vaccination of any kind. Those who wish for an exemption are knowledgeable about the science and those who want to crush them as "loudmouths" and "ignoramuses" are ignorant of the science and loud in voicing their scientifically baseless opinions. Their victory in suppressing health freedom will be a victory for the vaccine industry, anti-science, profiteering, misinformation, and small-mindedness in general. If there is any benefit to health from vaccination, the research needs to be produced, and it should not be the kind of flawed research done by the vaccine companies. It needs to be objective and replicated. Ex cathedra proclamations are not sufficient.
As a footnote, a considerable amount of research has already been done on the safety and efficacy of vaccination, and it consistently shows decidedly mixed results. Do your homework. The science is out there. Read it. If you still believe it is safe and efficacious, you've been reading the wrong studies.
As a footnote, a considerable amount of research has already been done on the safety and efficacy of vaccination, and it consistently shows decidedly mixed results. Do your homework. The science is out there. Read it. If you still believe it is safe and efficacious, you've been reading the wrong studies.
2
There really is not a lot of room for the public to let unvaccinated people, primarily children, run around unless they have a legitimate medical excuse.
What is the alternative? Put the unvaccinated in a isolation unit like the bubble boy of decades ago?
For those parents that do not want their children vaccinated, an alternative is to expose the unvaccinated children to the host of childhood diseases that all of the vaccinated children have been immunized for before they can mingle with the general public. If the unvaccinated children survive, then we can assume they now have immunity and accept them into the general public. I suspect the vast majority of parents of unvaccinated children would quickly cast aside their objections and have their children immediately vaccinated.
Otherwise, the vast majority of unvaccinated children are nothing more than a public health menace.
What is the alternative? Put the unvaccinated in a isolation unit like the bubble boy of decades ago?
For those parents that do not want their children vaccinated, an alternative is to expose the unvaccinated children to the host of childhood diseases that all of the vaccinated children have been immunized for before they can mingle with the general public. If the unvaccinated children survive, then we can assume they now have immunity and accept them into the general public. I suspect the vast majority of parents of unvaccinated children would quickly cast aside their objections and have their children immediately vaccinated.
Otherwise, the vast majority of unvaccinated children are nothing more than a public health menace.
I agree with the scientists: vaccinations seem to be effective and "safe;" they have done more good than harm. I agree with policy makers that universal vaccination is a worthy policy goal, and that therefore the government has an interest in promoting it. To persuade, convince and educate parents, to provide and pay for vaccinations, to make sure they are safe and easily available; these seem like roles for government.
But to COMPEL parents who disagree with LAWS backed by FORCE? This is not the role of government. The logical consequences point to scenarios where children are forcefully inoculated (drugs administered into their bloodstreams with steel needles forced under the skin and into their tissues) at gunpoint. All because of a failure to communicate the benefits, and because of a militaristic world-view that condones the use of force to control the behavior of those whose who dare to disagree.
In short, the health benefits to society are not nearly worth the loss of liberty that compulsory inoculations represent, especially considering that voluntary compliance is already so high.
But to COMPEL parents who disagree with LAWS backed by FORCE? This is not the role of government. The logical consequences point to scenarios where children are forcefully inoculated (drugs administered into their bloodstreams with steel needles forced under the skin and into their tissues) at gunpoint. All because of a failure to communicate the benefits, and because of a militaristic world-view that condones the use of force to control the behavior of those whose who dare to disagree.
In short, the health benefits to society are not nearly worth the loss of liberty that compulsory inoculations represent, especially considering that voluntary compliance is already so high.
2
It was 1937 and my father and mother were discussing marriage. Between the crushing effect of the Depression and the spate of "usual childhood diseases" including polio (which my father referred to as "the scourge of the mountains" as its victims could do little required physical work), measles, mumps, chicken pox, scarlet fever, etc. they decided to have four children. He told me later that was "so that two might live".
We had our share of trouble with infectious disease including polio, intrauterine rubella and influenza, but we all lived save my grandfather who succumbed to the 1919 flu epidemic.
As a (now retired) physician, I can understand why we properly moved away from the paternalistic doctor-patient relationship but the pendulum has swung too far. Patients are now customers and doctors are "providers".
The rise of the vaccine deniers is a sad echo of throwing the baby out with the bath water, marching us back to the past of 80 years ago. No thank you.
We had our share of trouble with infectious disease including polio, intrauterine rubella and influenza, but we all lived save my grandfather who succumbed to the 1919 flu epidemic.
As a (now retired) physician, I can understand why we properly moved away from the paternalistic doctor-patient relationship but the pendulum has swung too far. Patients are now customers and doctors are "providers".
The rise of the vaccine deniers is a sad echo of throwing the baby out with the bath water, marching us back to the past of 80 years ago. No thank you.
2
If I decide not to vaccinate my child against HepB when they are born or HPV at age 11, these choices do not impact your child at school AT ALL. If the playing field were equal where vaccine manufacturers were held accountable for any adverse events, we would continue to research safer and improved efficacy of vaccines. As of 1986, US citizens cannot sue vaccine manufacturers and now there is a sudden increase in recommended (required) vaccines. There are numerous lawsuits in various countries suing Merck for Gardasil (HPV) serious adverse events (see http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/gardasil-vaccine-spain-joins-growing-li.... Merck would not be in the vaccine business if government laws and subsidies didn't favor the industry. Meanwhile, in US, Merck has paid over a million dollars to politicians and not surprisingly these are the same politicians authoring and supporting SB277 bill. There is a huge conflict of interest with this policy.
There are many more viruses and bacteria causing infectious diseases for which we have no vaccines. We certainly aren't hearing about all the ways to protect our health and prevent diseases. Why are we hearing only about vaccines? $
There are many more viruses and bacteria causing infectious diseases for which we have no vaccines. We certainly aren't hearing about all the ways to protect our health and prevent diseases. Why are we hearing only about vaccines? $
4
I'm one of those doctors who believe in vaccination, but as I have written before, I believe in and recommend only some of what is available. The science on some vaccines that are available is weak, or the public health benefit is negligible (for example, there is substantial evidence that the acellular pertussis vaccine is not very effective--rising cases in the US since it was licensed and recommended--or persistent), but on the basic, school required vaccines, there is essentially no controversy. I agree there is a medical-industrial complex, and we must be wary; the legislatures should require only those vaccines where the public health benefit of vaccination versus no vaccination can be demonstrated and exceeds certain thresholds (e.g. prevention of 1 death/disability (net) per 10,000 vaccinations, or reduction in disease incidence of 95% or more). Let's fight over what makes vaccination worthwhile (the thresholds above), and let the science determine if those thresholds are met. Drugs (and vaccines are drugs) are supposed to be safe and effective, but it is the job of the people to define what is safe (acceptable number of adverse events per X administrations) and effective (thresholds above). Then hold the scientists feet to the fire to prove they meet those thresholds in replicated studies.
1
These parents worry about infinitesimal risks involved with vaccinations but do they drive the speed limit, come to a full stop at stop signs, refuse to run red lights, and never text or use their phones while driving. Probably not. Yet all these activities put their children, themselves, and other people at higher risk of injury and death than vaccinations. A world without vaccines is a world in which we can expect 10% of our children to die before adulthood. These parents can exercise these personal beliefs because the vast majority of parents subject their children to the small risk of a bad outcome from vaccination.
32
Strike another blow for common sense in the United States, should this bill fail to pass. Vaccines have stood out as one of the major milestones of medicine. That diseases long ago conquered would be making a comeback in a modern society due to the self-absorption and fears of an aggressive upper middle class contingent seems ludicrous. Until you see it's true.
I blame the proliferation of scare stories on the Internet as well as celebrity activism and influence. California is the perfect petri dish for such confluence of factors conspiring to instill in average Americans the fact that they know more than an entire body of medical science.
Let's hope the California bill passes. Allowing the fear of "personal choice" to replace common sense and data-driven science creates a dangerous trend that could spill over to other areas of public health, damaging America's ability to contain deadly diseases.
I blame the proliferation of scare stories on the Internet as well as celebrity activism and influence. California is the perfect petri dish for such confluence of factors conspiring to instill in average Americans the fact that they know more than an entire body of medical science.
Let's hope the California bill passes. Allowing the fear of "personal choice" to replace common sense and data-driven science creates a dangerous trend that could spill over to other areas of public health, damaging America's ability to contain deadly diseases.
29
The more I learn about vaccinations, the more concerned I become:
The CDC recommends 49 doses of vaccinations by age 6, they contain different ingredients including lab altered live or inactivated viruses and bacteria, chemicals, metals including mercury and aluminum, proteins, antibiotics and human, animal and insect DNA and RNA. Why are there so many cases of childhood cancer, mental disabilities, and food allergies than ever before? What does a fever of 105 do to a baby? How much money does big Pharma make when a new vaccination is recommended?
Remember when we were told that cigarettes were "completely safe" until the truth came out.
Don't silence the whistle blowers and those who questions.
Where there is risk, there must be choice.
- a concerned grandmother
The CDC recommends 49 doses of vaccinations by age 6, they contain different ingredients including lab altered live or inactivated viruses and bacteria, chemicals, metals including mercury and aluminum, proteins, antibiotics and human, animal and insect DNA and RNA. Why are there so many cases of childhood cancer, mental disabilities, and food allergies than ever before? What does a fever of 105 do to a baby? How much money does big Pharma make when a new vaccination is recommended?
Remember when we were told that cigarettes were "completely safe" until the truth came out.
Don't silence the whistle blowers and those who questions.
Where there is risk, there must be choice.
- a concerned grandmother
13
There is a significant gap between actual and perceived risk. And your list exemplifies the type of misinformation that proliferates on the internet. Go talk to your grandchildren's pediatrician instead of reading scare stories on the internet.
4
I think it is important to note that you, as a grandmother, grew up in a time where vaccines were revered, and were probably vaccinated yourself, as well as your immediate children. To now question those vaccines that kept you and your family healthy is nothing but biting the hand that feeds you. When we talk about vaccines for the whole of society, and making them basically mandatory, we're not discussing the flu vaccine, or a recently tested ebola vaccine. We're talking about vaccines that have been around and almost unchanged since the 40s, 50s, and 60s. Minor tweaks to some of the compounds, but for the most part, these vaccines have not changed. Are you going to deny the newest generations something you yourself have had the benefits of? That is extremely selfish, and not really showing "concern" at all.
1
And yet child mortality is at record low. And life expectancy is at record high.
Vaccinations of children is necessary and be grateful we have them. Think about the past - Polio, the break through to eliminate this scourge worldwide was a miracle. My child, now a grown strapping and healthy male had numerous vaccinations when he was an infant and healthy since. I am not for mandatory seasonal flu shots - I personally reject it and I rarely had the flu in the past but wholeheartedly endorse all the major vaccinations in childhood that is available. I grew up in an era when there was no measles vaccinations available ; I contracted measles in my 20s which was debilitating and so did all my coworkers where it spread. Luckily I bounced back, but more elderly workers were hospitalised for a long spell before recovering their health. With that said I urge folks to not prevent their children from vaccinations and for those who cannot afford it to visit their health Dept for these shots. We should support mandatory vaccinations for preventive public health safety.
15
This is a tough one if you have seen the timing of a family member's descent into autism strongly correlate with her vaccination schedule. My niece, once a bright responsive kid, received 6 vaccines (with the MMR) in one day as she approached her 2nd birthday, developed a raging fever for 3 days, and then never again recovered the quickness and responsiveness she once had. Her descent was pretty rapid after that and very steep - and typical of autistic kids who seem to react negatively to vaccines. My niece's mom is a developmental psychologist and my dad - her grandfather - is a chilld psychiatrist. Neither is ant-vax, but both think there is an undiscovered, unexplained correlation between vaccines and autism on the part of some kids.
Vaccines do a lot of good for most people. But not everybody's system is exactly the same, so how is it possible that one vaccine schedule is perfectly fine for absolutely everybody?
When I asked our doctor what the rationale is for giving multiple doses of vaccines at a time, she replied: "It's not convenient to schedule multiple appointments." This talking point is echoed in the marketing materials that Big Pharma produces - and while it may be true that it's hard for a lot of parents to take the time to space out vaccines, it's not a very convincing argument.
What I'd very much like to see is a study showing the rate of autism in unvaccinated kids. No idea when that will come out - but it could help settle a lot of this debate.
Vaccines do a lot of good for most people. But not everybody's system is exactly the same, so how is it possible that one vaccine schedule is perfectly fine for absolutely everybody?
When I asked our doctor what the rationale is for giving multiple doses of vaccines at a time, she replied: "It's not convenient to schedule multiple appointments." This talking point is echoed in the marketing materials that Big Pharma produces - and while it may be true that it's hard for a lot of parents to take the time to space out vaccines, it's not a very convincing argument.
What I'd very much like to see is a study showing the rate of autism in unvaccinated kids. No idea when that will come out - but it could help settle a lot of this debate.
10
The explanation is not so much undiscovered and unexplained as it is ignored and covered up. For example, in 2011 Mary Holland wrote of 83 cases of severe encephalopathy (autism-like symptoms) in children compensated by the VICP. And in 1999 the secret Simpsonwood meeting was convened to determine how to handle the increased risk for neurological disorders found to be dose-dependent on the amount of thimerosal a child received. Tellingly, after the meeting minutes were obtained from a FOIA request, the original data was "lost," and the published report was a whitewashed version of the original findings. You can look all this up and read the meeting minutes for yourself. The Amish have low vaccination rates and also very low autism rates, and all along Dr. Mayer Eisenstein has claimed that out of 35,000 pediatric patients who weren't vaccinated, none had autism. Dr. Eisenstein is considered a quack mostly because he opposes vaccines-- anyone can be the paragon of sanity and scientific reason, but if you oppose vaccines, you're automatically labelled a quack. That's how it works. As for the science on the mechanisms of potential vaccine-induced injuries in a subset of children that might be susceptible to mercury or aluminum overload, it's out there in spades, although the CDC, backed by pharma, prefers that you don't go there. But here it is: http://www.cmsri.org/published-research/
This study has been done numerous times. Just Google "autism in unvaccinated populations" and you'll find lots of data. Here's just one example, which found that autism was actually LESS common in unvaccinated children.
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa021134
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa021134
Correlation does NOT equal causation, no matter what you may think. There is a Ton of research coming out now that shows that children with Autism and on the Spectrum had preconditions to this in their very genes. They were born with Autism, which on average begins to show around age 2, which does happen to coincide with the first big round of vaccines. I am sorry for your niece, but her vaccines did not cause her autism. There is No Link to them.
1
These selfish arrogant parents who want to claim "personal" exemption even tho they don't have a child who should *not* be vaccinated due to a terminal/infectious illness, make me furious!
If Jerry Brown and the State Senate don't support a mandatory vaccination in California, I hope it goes to a State Vote and shuts up these ignorant, selfish parents. My understanding is that less than 2% of the population are open to the idea of not vaccinating their kids.
If Jerry Brown and the State Senate don't support a mandatory vaccination in California, I hope it goes to a State Vote and shuts up these ignorant, selfish parents. My understanding is that less than 2% of the population are open to the idea of not vaccinating their kids.
1
The answer is simple:
You don't vaccinate your children.
Then you must educate your children at home at your own expense...and you must pay taxes to support public education.
Hopefully your stupidity doesn't kill your children. But if it does, it's on you.
You don't vaccinate your children.
Then you must educate your children at home at your own expense...and you must pay taxes to support public education.
Hopefully your stupidity doesn't kill your children. But if it does, it's on you.
2
I'm 100% for vaccines. The benefit of uniform vaccination is incontrovertible. But how i see it, this issue is not about whether or not to vaccinate. Its about accountability. The fight is really about knowing exactly what is being administered to you and your family. Anti-vaxers should be questioning the pharmaceutical element, not tempting polio or whooping cough. But, for vaccines to contain mercury or formaldehyde is NOT safe, this is equally incontrovertible. Injury from state-supported vaccination, where a person is caused bodily harm from a vaccine who's ingredients may have contained known toxic compounds is UNACCEPTABLE. And we the people need to vote on, write letters, speak openly in hospitals, doctors offices, anywhere privileged with the right to administer you or your family a shot and support those who would firmly regulate pharmaceutical companies. Because the truth is, nearly 1 billion dollars are slated to be paid out by the federal govt over ~1200 cases for injuries sustained from vaccinations for fy 2014. I blame reagan-era republicanism (republicans) for gutting the regulatory efficiency of our elected government at every opportunity, including this field. So as for CA forcing school kids to be vaccinated, I'm for it. But God forbid big-pharm is allowed continued operation unchecked, allowed to deem satisfactory any fraction of potential injury to children. How thin can our rights be drawn before revolt? And thats what "anti-vaxer" is really about.
5
How about an alternative to required vaccination: medically verified proof of having had the disease. I bet if controlled, medically-supervised exposure to and contraction of each and every disease currently vaccinated against were the only other option presented to anti-vaxxer parents, they'd be lining their kids up for shots.
2
It's my understanding that having disease antibodies is adequate proof for immigration into the US. Surely not as handy or inexpensive as simple proof of vaccination, but at least it's an alternative in countries with spotty record keeping.
What is fascinating is that the anti-vaccine movement was essentially started by a former Playboy model, with little to no medical training/background, and yet legitimate science (Danish studies) which has effectively debunked the idea that vaccinations are responsible for autism is dismissed by that minority -which poses a real threat to the rest of the population.
7
@Peter C
You nailed that one! Marin County residents will queue en masse to vaccinate their poodles and silky terriers [I mean- emotional support animals], but scorn at the thought of child vaccinations. Hubris has reached a new plateau.
You nailed that one! Marin County residents will queue en masse to vaccinate their poodles and silky terriers [I mean- emotional support animals], but scorn at the thought of child vaccinations. Hubris has reached a new plateau.
3
Not so, veterinarians are also questioning dog vaccine schedules and our puppy was unvaccinated when we got her and we delayed her vaccines and only did the most essential (rabies) and spaced those out more.
I don’t advocate exempting children from required vaccinations, but I can sympathize with concerned parents.
My son was born in 1992 about the time the # of vaccines administered to children increased. He was a happy and gregarious child, but around two, he became less so, failed to attempt normal speech and confined himself to uttering a few words. The radiant face that turned heads was still the same, but the smile that lit up the room was not quite as bright. When bored or left alone, he would rock violently, like one possessed.
We worried that he might be autistic, but a neurologist dismissed our concerns and said, “Just because he doesn’t talk and has some idiosyncrasies doesn’t mean he’s autistic. Einstein was a late talker, too, you know.”
As she suggested, we gave him speech therapy, but he was almost placed in special ed because of his still delayed speech. He eventually overcame his issues and excelled in high school and college.
I didn’t think vaccinations contributed to my son’s condition, until I read “The Not-So-Crackpot Autism Theory” (Times Magazine, 11/10/2002). My son was fine by then, but I wondered if thimerosal containing vaccines (TCV) contributed to his problem. I have since read about multiple studies that have disproved any connection between neurological disorders and TCV.
Allaying parents’ fear about vaccination cannot be done just by passing laws, but by educating them. Then they’ll realize they have “nothing to fear but fear itself.”
My son was born in 1992 about the time the # of vaccines administered to children increased. He was a happy and gregarious child, but around two, he became less so, failed to attempt normal speech and confined himself to uttering a few words. The radiant face that turned heads was still the same, but the smile that lit up the room was not quite as bright. When bored or left alone, he would rock violently, like one possessed.
We worried that he might be autistic, but a neurologist dismissed our concerns and said, “Just because he doesn’t talk and has some idiosyncrasies doesn’t mean he’s autistic. Einstein was a late talker, too, you know.”
As she suggested, we gave him speech therapy, but he was almost placed in special ed because of his still delayed speech. He eventually overcame his issues and excelled in high school and college.
I didn’t think vaccinations contributed to my son’s condition, until I read “The Not-So-Crackpot Autism Theory” (Times Magazine, 11/10/2002). My son was fine by then, but I wondered if thimerosal containing vaccines (TCV) contributed to his problem. I have since read about multiple studies that have disproved any connection between neurological disorders and TCV.
Allaying parents’ fear about vaccination cannot be done just by passing laws, but by educating them. Then they’ll realize they have “nothing to fear but fear itself.”
It is unconscionable that hysterical science deniers set the public health standards and laws in California.
6
The problem with allowing home schooling to be an excuse to avoid vaccination is that the kids don't stay at home 100% of the time. They go out into shopping malls, playgrounds, etc. where they can either pick up or transmit a disease; if they pick it up, they then bring it back to the group of kids in their home school who haven't been vaccinated.
5
Boy - there is no room for any sort of measured conversation on this, is there? What is the sense in mandating a vaccine for Hep B in an infant? We did MMR, we did not do Hep B. Does this mean every single vaccine that comes down the pike is now mandated and required to be part of our society? This is not selfishness as some would contend. This is a parent being responsible for the health of their child. I can get so upset by this conversation and the nasty attitude surrounding it. Fortunately, my children are 20 and 16. Reading the vile comments below further upsets me. We really have lost sight of any capacity for sensible, thoughtful conversation and so quickly descend to insult - even here in the NYT!!
5
Perhaps you also advocate "sensible reasoned conversation" on such subjects as evolution, and is the earth round?
My kids were fully vaccinated when they were small and I think all parents should get their kids immunized as soon as they are able. But, there is something extreme about the government taking the responsibility of ones children away from the parent and mandating that the child be injected with with a drug or they will not be allowed to go to public school!
This anti-vaccination movement is a fad which will blow over with education and information and I don't believe we should allow some state legislator to sow panic and make political hay out of a virtually non-existent problem.
This anti-vaccination movement is a fad which will blow over with education and information and I don't believe we should allow some state legislator to sow panic and make political hay out of a virtually non-existent problem.
6
It is not a "virtually non-existent problem", CalBergenser. Witness the Measles outbreak starting in California, and the recent Pertussis (whooping cough) outbreak in Montgomery County, PA.
I remember, all too vividly, when my oldest son started showing symptoms and was diagnosed with Rubella (German Measles). This was before the Rubella vaccine. Unhappily, three days before we had spent the day with a group including a woman in early pregnancy, before my son was showing symptoms. I told her immediately, of course. She had to endure a series of gamma globulin shots. Thank all the powers that be, the baby was perfect when it was born.
But if my son had exposed other pregnant women while he was contagious and before he was symptomatic, their children would have been at risk from the disease.
Consider also children under a year old and people whose immune systems are compromised, who cannot be vaccinated. If they are exposed to unvaccinated and symptomatic children with measles, mumps, etc., they are seriously at risk. It would not be a non-existent problem to them.
Oh, and there has been a plethora of education and information, and the anti-vaccination movement is not blowing over, as demonstrated by the hundreds of objectors at the hearing.
I remember, all too vividly, when my oldest son started showing symptoms and was diagnosed with Rubella (German Measles). This was before the Rubella vaccine. Unhappily, three days before we had spent the day with a group including a woman in early pregnancy, before my son was showing symptoms. I told her immediately, of course. She had to endure a series of gamma globulin shots. Thank all the powers that be, the baby was perfect when it was born.
But if my son had exposed other pregnant women while he was contagious and before he was symptomatic, their children would have been at risk from the disease.
Consider also children under a year old and people whose immune systems are compromised, who cannot be vaccinated. If they are exposed to unvaccinated and symptomatic children with measles, mumps, etc., they are seriously at risk. It would not be a non-existent problem to them.
Oh, and there has been a plethora of education and information, and the anti-vaccination movement is not blowing over, as demonstrated by the hundreds of objectors at the hearing.
Public health has been recognized a a government responsibility since the founding of our country. Back in 1936. before there sere antibiotics, I was under mandatory quarantine because I had scarlet fever. The quarantine law was certainly more intrusive on my freedom than a supposed freedom from compulsory needle sticks.
2
The Common Good...it's about the common good. Why have we lost this concept in our culture.
8
It seems clear that the "personal beliefs" of the opponents of vaccination include the notion that they are alone on the planet. They are not; they live in a community with a lot of other people, including me. Their manner of implementing their "personal beliefs" threatens my health, along with that of many, many others. How on earth can they justify that?
5
Unfortunately, most comments here choose sides, while ignoring the very real plight of those who have been vaccine injured. 99% of those injured by vaccines are irreparably harmed. Only a very few are allowed recourse that Americans are typically afforded in our legal justice system. In fact, legislation in 2002 made it assured that the largest number of claims pending with NIVCP in the USCFC would never see the light of day. Despite the fact that most states provide for equitable tolling in the case of minors, petitioners here were denied due process. Later, the SCOTUS refused to hear the pleas challenging it on a constitutional basis. When surrendering your freedom, be careful what you wish for. 'Safe" vaccines are an oxymoron.
5
So you still believe that vaccines are linked to autism, etc.? No further comment is necessary.
Refusing to vaccinate your children is child endangerment. Let's not call it "personal belief exemption." It also endangers the rest of us. The only reason self-involved parents can get away with not vaccinating their child is that there is still widespread herd immunity — something those same parents are fast undoing.
Congratulations on weakening one of the greatest human achievements in human history: the brilliant invention of vaccines and radical decline of death by infectious disease.
I have said it before: it is another example of the vanity of privilege. The upper middle class Caucasian mother who surfs the Web and thinks her three hours on Google and her BA in Communications are worth as much as forty years of scientific research and the intense education that physicians go through. She's so superior that her "gut feeling" overrides all of these things.
Congratulations on weakening one of the greatest human achievements in human history: the brilliant invention of vaccines and radical decline of death by infectious disease.
I have said it before: it is another example of the vanity of privilege. The upper middle class Caucasian mother who surfs the Web and thinks her three hours on Google and her BA in Communications are worth as much as forty years of scientific research and the intense education that physicians go through. She's so superior that her "gut feeling" overrides all of these things.
8
If, like me, you are old enough to remember the disaster that was polio there can be no discussion. Let's not go there again.
13
Been there, Bill. My mother contracted polio early in 1942. She spent months sin the hospital, a couple of years on crutches and then a cane, and suffered permanent muscle dystrophy in her left leg. Because her right leg bore the burden, she needed an artificial knee in her 60s.
My mom was lucky. Many of her hospital friends left the hospital in wheelchairs, if they left at all.
I remember the closed swimming pools and movie theaters, and the constant fear every summer.
When my city began distributing the Salk Vaccine, I was one of the first in line with my three children. Yes, I remember the disaster that was polio.
My mom was lucky. Many of her hospital friends left the hospital in wheelchairs, if they left at all.
I remember the closed swimming pools and movie theaters, and the constant fear every summer.
When my city began distributing the Salk Vaccine, I was one of the first in line with my three children. Yes, I remember the disaster that was polio.
Vaccines are safe and effective. PASS THE BILL.
2
Except for polio and small pox, there weren't vccinations when I was a kid. Getting sick with measles. mumps chicken pox, etc, were part of growing up. We missed school, spread the disease around, and frequently ended up with uneven skin surfaces. When I had kids I got them vaccinated and never once heard of any child getting sick from them. Whyy? It didn't happen! I don't want to say it's a lie, but... Please, if you have a baby start him or her on the path to wellness instead of misery. Getting them vaccinated will not cause them serious health issues. An alergic reaction is possible, (ingredients like gelatin and latex (not common anymore) are the two possible allergens) but that's rare, and the alternative is a miserably, infectious, and sad child. What kind of parent allows a child to get sick????
7
This is getting positively scary. Now the CA legislature is going to force kids to get vaccinated? The fact is, though many vaccinations take place without problems, the opposite occurs often enough for parents to be cautious before buying into this police action. No amount of shaming and calling troglodytes those who hesitate before exposing their children to these hugely profitable products of Big Pharma will change the reality. Vaccines can and do cause major complications. I am not just theorizing. It took a year and a half for me to recover from a yellow fever vaccination. I was sick. My liver enzymes were elevated. I had low energy. I will never get another vaccine again, no matter how loud the p c shamers in our increasingly hysterical society get. If you're concerned about your children getting chicken pox during a rare outbreak of that disease -- or any other -- keep them at home for a week or two. Which is all it will take. Remember the outbreak in California a few months ago, causing columnists and letter writers to foam at the mouth? It's gone. But believe me -- if some of those kids were to react to vaccines the way I did, their parents would not be happy. In fact, they're the ones who would be furious.
6
Reactions to yellow fever vaccines not rare. At a minimum, fever and some aches and pains are to be expected. Local and systemic reactions to small pox also are the routine. We know this.
This is NOT the case for the usual childhood immunizations such as polio, DPT, and measles.
Of greater importance it is bad science to equate association with causation based on a single episode. The fact that "free range" became ill after a vaccination does not necessarily imply that the vaccination was the cause.
This is NOT the case for the usual childhood immunizations such as polio, DPT, and measles.
Of greater importance it is bad science to equate association with causation based on a single episode. The fact that "free range" became ill after a vaccination does not necessarily imply that the vaccination was the cause.
1
So many foks are 'anti-science' these days! From the anti vaccinators who sign 'personal belief' exemptions that suggest their understanding of science is tenuous at best and risk their kids (and their neighbors kids) lives through their own 'beliefs'. To the folks who argue that global warming is a hoax by the left to hurt business.
I believe in science and keeping my kids safe. To keep the 'human herd' safe, we need fewer than 7.0% of folks to not vaccinate their kids. This number is so small that it is concerning given the percentage of folks who are not comfortable with science and doctors.
I believe in science and keeping my kids safe. To keep the 'human herd' safe, we need fewer than 7.0% of folks to not vaccinate their kids. This number is so small that it is concerning given the percentage of folks who are not comfortable with science and doctors.
7
What's with all the hysteria about unvaccinated children being vessels of death? I hope every person demanding forced vaccination is just as vociferously demanding stringent gun controls. Every four hours, a child is killed by a gun in the U.S. I can't find any record of number of deaths due to an unvaccinated child but I'm pretty sure it is rare.
3
Well, when that unvaccinated child contracts the measles and then spreads it to an infant (who is too young to be vaccinated) or to a child with an immune system problem (also not able to be vaccinated) and those children get the measles and die, then that unvaccinated child has certainly become vessel of death.
According to the "The Journal of Infectious Disease" about 450 children died from the measles every year between 1956 and 1960. Another dangerous complication of measles is encephalitis (which can also kill you), not to mention that measles is also a leading cause of childhood blindness.
Unvaccinated children are a threat to public health.
According to the "The Journal of Infectious Disease" about 450 children died from the measles every year between 1956 and 1960. Another dangerous complication of measles is encephalitis (which can also kill you), not to mention that measles is also a leading cause of childhood blindness.
Unvaccinated children are a threat to public health.
1
It's for real. Here is an example. In Germany (an industrialized nation with a bunch of "educated" parents like California has) 6 children in a pediatrician's waiting room caught measles from one un-vaccinated child and two of them died. See: http://www.thelocal.de/20130614/50305
2
You should check the statistics for Africa, where vaccines are not available.
1
Funny how the manipulative masses are only a problem when they step out of line. Its fine when they are your sheep, swallowing every bit of poison when the powers want to push for war, but that ability to be manipulated is not so nice when the powerful are not doing the manipulation.
The greatest, by far, threat to humanity is overpopulation, so will we force sterilization? I relish in the extremes, they signify what is driving our society, in this case, a most just distrust of our government.
The greatest, by far, threat to humanity is overpopulation, so will we force sterilization? I relish in the extremes, they signify what is driving our society, in this case, a most just distrust of our government.
1
I would bet that the large majority of those who refuse to vaccinate their children for non-medical reasons devoutly believe in the reality of catastrophic, anthropogenic global warming, unperturbed by the fact that the evidence for the collective danger of non-vaccination is at least as strong and probably stronger than that for such global warning.
Vaccination is much like drinking alcohol. If you want to get drunk, if you want to not vaccinate your kids, go ahead, just do it on your own piece of turf. Keeping non-vaccinated kids out of public places is really akin to laws against drunk driving.
Vaccination is much like drinking alcohol. If you want to get drunk, if you want to not vaccinate your kids, go ahead, just do it on your own piece of turf. Keeping non-vaccinated kids out of public places is really akin to laws against drunk driving.
5
So, we had a big outbreak that originated in California and a tragedy ensued where thousands of children died. Wait, was it hundreds of children who died? Dozens? One? Oh, that's right, no one died.
The FDA, other government agencies, and many medical organizations all promote vaccines with good reason as they help the majority of the population. However, isn't it these same entities that said fen-phen was safe among numerous other drugs that cause horrible complications and death? Before we give the medical establishment a pass, we need to take a less biased look at the potential damage of these vaccines that we are giving to infants and kids.
The FDA, other government agencies, and many medical organizations all promote vaccines with good reason as they help the majority of the population. However, isn't it these same entities that said fen-phen was safe among numerous other drugs that cause horrible complications and death? Before we give the medical establishment a pass, we need to take a less biased look at the potential damage of these vaccines that we are giving to infants and kids.
5
Just pass the law and be done with it! This is a public health matter. The ignorant few against it can leave the state or better leave the country. This is amazing we are still talking about this after so much data has been released showing how good vaccination is!
5
Children who are home schooled should not be exempt. Home schooled children are just as likely to visit Disneyland and other public venues as any other kids.
9
So are they keeping the religious exemption?
2
Someone, the purpose of the law is to remove all exemptions except for medical reasons. That would include removing religious exemptions. The medical exemption would apply only to those who have compromised immune systems or other sound medical reasons why a child should not be vaccinated.
Do they have a choice?
Few parents decide against vaccination without giving serious consideration to this issue. It's time the NY Times gets real. The bill pending in the California legislature is the product of corporate pressure from amusement park giant, Disney, and from Big Pharma. Before all children and their families are coerced into vaccination, the public is entitled to guarantees against the use of dangerous neurotoxins and similar additives in vaccines and the lumping of all vaccines into the same category as "the greater good." A polio vaccine is one one thing. Measles, mumps and chicken pox are quite another. Will everyone over 55 soon be forced to get a shingles vaccine? Will we all be forced to get the latest flu vaccine? A hallmark of medical practice is the requirement of "informed consent" before the administration of potentially hazardous treatments and procedures. A blitzkrieg of propaganda does not lead to informed judgment. Coercion never constitutes consent.
16
I understand that some parents thing hard about the decision to not vaccinate their children.
That being the case, they need to consider the extra burden that it places on themselves. All of the extra burdens that it places on themselves. It is not only the increased risk of their children getting measles, mumps or rubella. After all, most of the children so afflicted will survive without complications. However, they must accept the burden of responsibility for the added risk that they are subjecting others to. Measles, mumps and rubella are not simple childhood diseases for anyone with a compromised immune system, they are potentially lethal diseases and capable of causing permanently disabling conditions.
The right to exercise personal choice does not confer the right to place others' lives and wellbeing at risk. If you accept the risk for you and your children, accept the obligation to not harming others. Accept the burden of having to homeschool your children.
This is a public health issue as well as a personal choice issue. One issue cannot be allowed to trump the other. Make your choices and live with the consequences and subsequent burdens. All of them.
That being the case, they need to consider the extra burden that it places on themselves. All of the extra burdens that it places on themselves. It is not only the increased risk of their children getting measles, mumps or rubella. After all, most of the children so afflicted will survive without complications. However, they must accept the burden of responsibility for the added risk that they are subjecting others to. Measles, mumps and rubella are not simple childhood diseases for anyone with a compromised immune system, they are potentially lethal diseases and capable of causing permanently disabling conditions.
The right to exercise personal choice does not confer the right to place others' lives and wellbeing at risk. If you accept the risk for you and your children, accept the obligation to not harming others. Accept the burden of having to homeschool your children.
This is a public health issue as well as a personal choice issue. One issue cannot be allowed to trump the other. Make your choices and live with the consequences and subsequent burdens. All of them.
1
RNW should "get real." There'd be no reason for mandatory shingles vaccines for two reasons: it's not an infectious disease AND if one has had the chicken-pox vaccine, one is immune to shingles as well. It's a win-win. Amateur parent-"scientists" endanger all of the public when they decide to opt out for their (special) children. How many MDs or epidemiologists opt out of vaccinations for their kids?
1
RNW, according to the Mayo Clinic, shingles is not contagious except by direct contact with an open shingles sore. If a person does touch an open shingles sore and is infected, s/he will have chicken pox, not shingles.
Your comparison of shingles to provably contagious diseases is ridiculous.
http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/shingles/basics/causes/con...
Your comparison of shingles to provably contagious diseases is ridiculous.
http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/shingles/basics/causes/con...
2
Each parent struggles with making a choice that is best for their family. Resources spent educating parents might help more than dividing folks into groups. I say listen to the concerns folks have and try to create a solution that will ultimately be to the benefit of all. ( I vaccinated my kids but I understand that some folks have doubts.)
2
" try to create a solution that will ultimately be to the benefit of all."
This really isn't an issue on which compromise is a solution.
This really isn't an issue on which compromise is a solution.
Something is messing up the kids, and it isn't just old sperm. The medical community needs to provide some answers.
3
I have no problem with vaccines, but I sure have a problem with the government FORCING them on people, particularly when that very government is illegally and irresponsibly allowing children to enter our country laden with diseases of all sorts. Put our citizens first, Mr. Obama. Stop importing diseases we have conquered only to force true citizens to take actions they fear. Our country is no longer free if parents can be forced to vaccinate their children.
2
Eh what? Vaccinations have been required for schooling in the U.S. for about four generations now. "no longer free" makes little sense in this context. Virtually everyone now alive in the U.S. has benefited from required vaccination for our entire life spans. We take it for granted that, for instance, there are no longer entire hospital wards full of children in iron lungs--the polio vaccine put a stop to that, when I was a kid. It appears you are more interested in the appearance of argumentation than you are actual reasoning.
7
Is refusing to allow people to falsely shout "FIRE" in a crowded auditorium a restriction of free speech? Is denying you the right to drive at 70 mph in a school zone a limitation on your freedom?
Of you are against illegal immigration that is fine, but let's not confuse the issues.
Of you are against illegal immigration that is fine, but let's not confuse the issues.
3
Parents now have the right to opt out if they have medical doubts. That, my friend, is called "freedom." I know very little about this and vaccinated my kids without fear or problem. This issue is NOT about MY choice or yours for that matter. It is about freedom.
1
Public health and welfare trumps "personal belief", "religious belief", and whatever other "belief" enables the ignorant and superstitious to endanger other citizens. Home schooling unvaccinated children allows those children access to parks, stores, and public transportation where they can spread contagion.
12
From reading The New York Times, I don't get the impression that there is less disease in the world because of medical doctors. I DO see a lot of full-page advertising for them.
1
The antivax lobby in CA is fierce, organized, and well-funded. Money flows through family foundations and the organizational infrastructure is kept in place and redirected as the leaders turn their attention to killing bills in each state in turn. They use tactics including harassment and intimidation to dissuade legislators - Dr. Pan, author of the CA bill, has received death threats.
If you would like to help CA win this fight, please visit Vaccinate California's website (dot org). If you're local, use the site to contact your representative. The fringe is loud and noisy, and while science supports the views of the silent majority who vaccinates, we must all step up and take action in support.
If you would like to help CA win this fight, please visit Vaccinate California's website (dot org). If you're local, use the site to contact your representative. The fringe is loud and noisy, and while science supports the views of the silent majority who vaccinates, we must all step up and take action in support.
15
"The antivax lobby in CA is fierce, organized, and well-funded."
Oh come on. I am not anti-vax, but other than maybe military contractors, no lobby is fiercer, better organized or more richly funded than the pharma lobby.
Oh come on. I am not anti-vax, but other than maybe military contractors, no lobby is fiercer, better organized or more richly funded than the pharma lobby.
2
I still do not understand this exemption thing.
when my stepdaughter showed up at college for her first semester, during registration, she was called to the registrar's office because an awake and astute assistant noticed that her date of birth was 6/12/73. BUT her MMR vaccination was 6/10/73. Guess what? They did not let her register until she received another vaccine.
Stupid? Analysis Paralysis? Possibly. But the point is, had she not had any vaccines, she'd not have been able to attend college (SUNY system.) until fully vaccinated.
Excellent decision on their part.
when my stepdaughter showed up at college for her first semester, during registration, she was called to the registrar's office because an awake and astute assistant noticed that her date of birth was 6/12/73. BUT her MMR vaccination was 6/10/73. Guess what? They did not let her register until she received another vaccine.
Stupid? Analysis Paralysis? Possibly. But the point is, had she not had any vaccines, she'd not have been able to attend college (SUNY system.) until fully vaccinated.
Excellent decision on their part.
14
The controversy in CA is a microcosm of the failure of politics at all levels. The great majority of the CA public, like citizens nationwide, support mandatory vaccination with few exceptions. Courts have held this is legal.
Yet a comparative handful of activists and demagogues (including RFK Jr) have held almost 40 million people hostage to their demands. The bill is stalled and is likely to die or be so watered down that it means nothing.
Yet a comparative handful of activists and demagogues (including RFK Jr) have held almost 40 million people hostage to their demands. The bill is stalled and is likely to die or be so watered down that it means nothing.
9
I am really looking forward to the headline announcing that parents and grandparents of children with Chickenpox are suffering from nerve pain caused by shingles.
4
I'm looking forward to anti-vaxxers' victims suing them into the poorhouse--or forcing them to pay lifetime medical bills of those left lame, unable to breathe, or brain-damaged.
You don't catch shingles from someone else's chicken pox - you get it from your own varicella virus. There is a theory that exposure to chicken pox reduces risk of shingles by boosting immune response to varicella. The NIH in Britain does not require varicella vaccine for children for that very reason (so I have read).
1
Certainly a form of mass hysteria is going on here among ill-informed parents. With no evidence from a non-quack source, they believe what they wish, and then others irrationally join them, for no apparent reason.
13
"Your fists' rights end where my face begins." Seems some of the parents in California have forgotten that personal liberty is only desirable insofar as it harms no one. And as epidemiology teaches us, getting vaccinated is not a binary question of whether or not you get the disease—mass immunity plays a critical role in containing outbreaks. Public health issues are truly "poplicus"—of the people—because they need to be adhered to by all, not those who wish to.
13
This editorial would have been better if it hadn't framed vaccinations and something the medical establishment "believes" in. That vaccinations save lives and prevent the reestablishment of once-prevalent diseases are facts; the only beliefs in this debate are those of selfish, un- or misinformed parents who put the delicate balance of public health at risk.
California needs to clean up this mess and set an example for other states. They tend to be movers of trends and pushing back against these parents is a good trend to push. I hope the committee does the right thing.
California needs to clean up this mess and set an example for other states. They tend to be movers of trends and pushing back against these parents is a good trend to push. I hope the committee does the right thing.
18
So the Senate Education Committee caved when "hundreds" of anti-vax parents "voiced their concerns"? It's time for the hundreds of thousands of parents who do vaccinate their children to demand that the Education Committee approve this legislation and that their reps and senators vote it into law.
17
One persons freedom ends where another persons freedom begins. A parent's choice not to vaccinate their children ends when their children risk the health of someone not living with them.
I guess the only way for these parents to learn is to shun their kids from school and any activity outside the home, including going to the grocery store with the parents. Sounds harsh, but in no time every kid that can be vaccinated will be vaccinated.
I guess the only way for these parents to learn is to shun their kids from school and any activity outside the home, including going to the grocery store with the parents. Sounds harsh, but in no time every kid that can be vaccinated will be vaccinated.
12
These parents are very opinionated...you can not reason with them. It is worse than bringing up politics or religion. Nothing will change their mind.
11
I love listening to these parents who want a personal exemption. "I meditated about it and decided it wasn't right for my child." They would rather depend on their own ignorance than depend on scientific studies that vaccines save lives. They don't mind if other people's children are vaccinated to protect their kids but they won't take the risk themselves.
Many of these "great thinkers" listened to some actress, politician or their preacher tell them vaccines are dangerous. You don't have a walking and talking child who suddenly becomes autistic from a vaccine. Unless your child has compromised health from some other condition they are usually safe. Children with health issues should receive an exemption.
Mississippi has the strictest rules in the country, perhaps they know their population is not expert in scientific theories. Whatever their reason they have the right idea. More states should follow those same rules or prevent the unvaccinated from receiving a free education. They should also be banned from after school activities or inter-mural sports. You can't have it both ways, vaccinate or stay home. This shouldn't be an argument for the 21st century. This is already old science.
Many of these "great thinkers" listened to some actress, politician or their preacher tell them vaccines are dangerous. You don't have a walking and talking child who suddenly becomes autistic from a vaccine. Unless your child has compromised health from some other condition they are usually safe. Children with health issues should receive an exemption.
Mississippi has the strictest rules in the country, perhaps they know their population is not expert in scientific theories. Whatever their reason they have the right idea. More states should follow those same rules or prevent the unvaccinated from receiving a free education. They should also be banned from after school activities or inter-mural sports. You can't have it both ways, vaccinate or stay home. This shouldn't be an argument for the 21st century. This is already old science.
14
The trend where I am in Southern California is the wealthier the area, the higher the rates of exemption. This says to me that these kids are just representative of the preciousness with which affluent parents now handle any issues in their children's lives. The slightest bit of information that might indicate imperfection is adhered to fanatically. The study which linked autism to vaccinations has been discredited, but it does not stop these parents from jeopardizing their children's health. In short, many of these people are more interested in perfection than reality. The special pre-school primer for Yale is on the shopping list also.
13
Maybe thats the answer; have the Ivy League Colleges say they won't take anyone who has not been vaccinated fully. Aim at their 18 year away dream (that likely won't happen, but they don't know that yet).
That makes a lot of psychological sense. It sounds like these parents don't fear their child being ill as much as they do the disease making their child mentally ill and therefore too "imperfect" to meet their never-high-enough performance standards. It doesn't matter if other children are stricken so long as their "achievement" remains pristine. As if this situation wasn't selfish enough...
Vaccines have saved lives - true.
Also true: people should not be expected to blindly follow what is posed as beneficial by pharmaceutical companies and a medical establishment that have many financial reasons to promote unnecessary treatments, and to hide liabilities.
It seems entirely possible that some vaccines are worth the risk and some are not.
Also true: people should not be expected to blindly follow what is posed as beneficial by pharmaceutical companies and a medical establishment that have many financial reasons to promote unnecessary treatments, and to hide liabilities.
It seems entirely possible that some vaccines are worth the risk and some are not.
6
Based on what? Entirely possible? You got any facts? The risk is incredibly small. The risk you take putting kids in the car every day is hugely greater. You are substituting your "seems" for the evidence of 200 years of science. That seems arrogant.
Bravo! Only medical exceptions for vaccinations should be legal. And home schooling shouldn't be an out. It's about the safety of children -in spite of their parents' superstitions. In Pakistan there are people are against vaccination, not because they think it leads to autism (which they may not have heard of) but because they think it causes infertility. Perhaps the anti-vaccination parents should be encouraged to move to Pakistan.
12
Vaccinations administered by the WHO/Gates foundation in third world middle east and African countries have been found laced with infertility drugs.
"Tetanus vaccines given to millions of young women in Kenya have been confirmed by laboratories to contain a sterilization chemical that causes miscarriages, reports the Kenya Catholic Doctors Association, a pro-vaccine organization."
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/047571_vaccines_sterilization_genocide.html#i...
"Tetanus vaccines given to millions of young women in Kenya have been confirmed by laboratories to contain a sterilization chemical that causes miscarriages, reports the Kenya Catholic Doctors Association, a pro-vaccine organization."
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/047571_vaccines_sterilization_genocide.html#i...
It's my personal belief that people who refuse vaccines for their children are secretly ISIS terrorists. Now, while there is no criminal or scientific evidence of this, that doesn't mean there isn't a a connection. My belief should therefore be acted upon by the authorities.
See how fun it is to try to disprove a negative?
See how fun it is to try to disprove a negative?
17
Forcing parents to vaccinate children is wrong.
I'm a scientist. My research includes modeling drug resistant pathogens. So it is not like I am anti-science or uninformed.
The reason I am against the forcing of vaccinations is because non-compliance is a relatively minor problem. Forcing compliance could save a few lives each year. However, freedom is more important than a few lives. We can't live free and be afraid of risk.
The best policy is to allow opting out, but to make the process difficult enough that only those who seriously oppose vaccination will bother going through the opt-out process.
Finally, readers need to understand that vaccinations are not completely risk free; the body and the immune system are very complex; and so those who oppose vaccinations do have valid concerns.
I'm a scientist. My research includes modeling drug resistant pathogens. So it is not like I am anti-science or uninformed.
The reason I am against the forcing of vaccinations is because non-compliance is a relatively minor problem. Forcing compliance could save a few lives each year. However, freedom is more important than a few lives. We can't live free and be afraid of risk.
The best policy is to allow opting out, but to make the process difficult enough that only those who seriously oppose vaccination will bother going through the opt-out process.
Finally, readers need to understand that vaccinations are not completely risk free; the body and the immune system are very complex; and so those who oppose vaccinations do have valid concerns.
6
Nothing is completely risk free. That is not the goal.
Its about the amount of risk we can tolerate and the risk of the alternative.
If 1 in 10 babies exploded with vaccinations - thats unacceptable but its not and overall vaccines are incredibly safe while the diseases they prevent are particularly horrible and dangerous.
Its about the amount of risk we can tolerate and the risk of the alternative.
If 1 in 10 babies exploded with vaccinations - thats unacceptable but its not and overall vaccines are incredibly safe while the diseases they prevent are particularly horrible and dangerous.
We've insisted for decades that everybody's values hold equal validity and individual rights trump all. They don't trust big government or big pharma. It's a perfect place for the perfect storm. We're in a tiny length of the historical timeline where the risk from side effects probably is greater than the risk of getting the disease. So, why not use the public for their own benefit while they can? Scary, but not really surprising. And it will solve itself, but probably in a really horrible way because I give the odds of this passing at zero. The inmates run this asylum.
2
It's a bad idea to completely force vaccination. It will just feed the beast that is anti-vaccine hysteria and possibly other anti-government hysterias as well. As we've already seen, public support for vaccinations will erode as the effects of not vaccinating become more hypothetical. But it shouldn't be easy to get an exemption and they should be required to sign a document promising to follow, without hesitation, any public health quarantine asked of them. Home schooling doesn't mitigate the need very much, so they shouldn't get an easy pass either.
For everyone that believes Vaccinations should be mandatory, in spite of pages of stated risks and a national program for compensation, please read the following link and honor those children that have taken the bullet in this War On Disease. It's the least you can do. http://www.followingvaccinations.com/
Also, please read the CDC's own posting if you think medical exemptions are at all possible for the majority of children.
Also, please read the CDC's own posting if you think medical exemptions are at all possible for the majority of children.
6
Parents of today's children have been spared the experience of seeing major measles, whooping cough and polio outbreaks because of the success of vaccination programs. Many were frightened by news arising from the fraudulent paper (now withdrawn) claiming a link between autism and vaccines. The risk of serious side effects from childhood vaccination are about one in one million, a far,far lower rate than the serious complications of measles. It is clearly not about Big Pharma conspiracies since vaccines account for less than 2% of pharma profits worldwide. Parents must be educated and so they can understand the risk/benefits for their children. There must be a formal legal mandate for parents to take the socially responsible action of protecting their children through vaccination and truly caring parents will want to comply.
37
That fraudulent paper didn't link vaccines to autism but to a bowel disorder; the parents, and not Dr. Wakefield, submitted that the MMR preceded autism in many of the children. Dr. Wakefield's results have been replicated so I'm not sure how we get scientific "fraud" out of this; Dr. Lewis does a good job of debunking the whole myth about Wakefield and the 1998 paper. And we don't know the real risk for serious adverse events after vaccination; the VAERS database is essentially voluntary and it's estimated that maybe 10% of cases are reported. In any case, there is widespread bias for vaccine safety among physicians, largely due to the fact they the information they receive comes from medical journals that are closely tied to the pharmaceutical industry, an industry with a record of falsifying or distorting research. The Vaccine Safety Database (VSD) data might shed light on the true extent of vaccine injuries but this is for all practical purposes closed to researchers and not subject to the FOIA. There are numerous websites out there that link to a great deal of published science questioning vaccine safety, and that may be why we're often told that the "internet" is a bad place to look for vaccine information.
1
I wasn't "spared" the experience of getting measles, mumps, german measles, and chickenpox -- I had them all, as did my siblings, neighbors, and schoolmates. I never heard of anyone in this circle with lasting effects though I know some people did have them. The polio vaccine is in a class by itself and was available back then. I delayed vaccination for my child, and she did not receive the chickenpox vaccine or the gardisil that was pushed on us so fervently.
I know it's tempting for keyboard opinionators to talk about "antivaxxers" like climate change deniers, and to gleefully imagine ways to make them knuckle under. The fact that vaccine injuries do occur, are compensated by the federal gov't, and that the effects on certain individuals of multiple vaccines given early in life cannont be completely known will continue to make some parents wary of them, in spite of being called names by the opinionators.
I know it's tempting for keyboard opinionators to talk about "antivaxxers" like climate change deniers, and to gleefully imagine ways to make them knuckle under. The fact that vaccine injuries do occur, are compensated by the federal gov't, and that the effects on certain individuals of multiple vaccines given early in life cannont be completely known will continue to make some parents wary of them, in spite of being called names by the opinionators.
Yes. All must be educated. A quick look at the numbers prove that vaccines had nothing to do with eradication of disease. For example, the numbers from the US Vital Statistics shows that Measles peaked out in the early 1920's at about 14 deaths per 100,000. By 1963, that number was at about 0.2 deaths per 100,000. The first, (and very poisonous) measles vaccine was introduced in 1964.
This problem with you vaccinators is two fold. You claim to know the numbers when you don't. Proof being you never give them. (reference article) Second, you don't give a single thought to the fact that a healthy body with a healthy immune system is far more effective at eradicating disease than snake venom, monkey puss and now your malignant tumor juice.
This problem with you vaccinators is two fold. You claim to know the numbers when you don't. Proof being you never give them. (reference article) Second, you don't give a single thought to the fact that a healthy body with a healthy immune system is far more effective at eradicating disease than snake venom, monkey puss and now your malignant tumor juice.
In 1952 the measles vaccine was not available. My mother contracted the virus from a neighbor who lost his hearing as a consequence, however, the tragedy did not end there. My then infant Aunt was infected and was brain damaged as a result along with another child in the neighborhood. A fifth child/neighbor died from the measles. The measles was considered a clear and present danger for all American families. Hence, when the vaccine was made available hardly anyone hesitated to vaccinate their children because everyone knew someone affected by measles. Fast forward a couple of decades and we find ourselves in this surreal debate over the right to vaccinate or not regardless of the irrefutable evidence pertaining to the safety and efficacy of the vaccine. One forfeithts a right when that so called right has the potential of harming an entire vulnerable community. I wonder if these same refuseniks would apply the same logic to the Ebola vaccine if an outbreak were to occur in their communities? I bet you not. So, here is what I have to say to those who oppose this bill: move to Waziristan you will find many like minded individuals.
11
Personal belief should be respected, but treating it like religion in this case is going too far. Personal belief is too frivolous to be used as an excuse for bringing back diseases that were eliminated by vaccination. I say frivolous because none of us are completely rational. We believe things for many reasons and few of our beliefs are backed by solid evidence. But when there is solid evidence, phobias must give way, especially when other people and other people's children are put at risk. The risk of serious damage from vaccination is in the region of 1 in a million while the risk of permanent damage or death from disease is much greater. The data is on the CDC website. Even measles, usually harmless, can cause damage to the child of a pregnant woman with measles.
33
It's a good thing my parents generation believed in vaccines and we all got the polio vaccine; otherwise, there would be many people with polio in wheelchairs right now- just like FDR.
Please believe in science- it's a bit more reliable than Jenny McCarthy. I was thrilled when she was fired from the View.
Please believe in science- it's a bit more reliable than Jenny McCarthy. I was thrilled when she was fired from the View.
22
You got two. The children now get 69!
When you set a baby on the ground they first thing he does is cram anything in reach into his mouth. Every second, a babies immune system is reacting to thousands of viruses and bacteria. A parent that barely blinks at a bloody, filth-coated scraped knee, freaks when a sterile needle is used to introduce a controlled amount of a single killed virus. A parent that makes chicken soup when a child develops a fever, headache, swollen muscles and a rash when his immune response tries to keep him from dying from a disease, freaks out if there any symptoms from the same immune response from a vaccination. The anti-vax parent is responding to the illusion of control; by saying "my child has a strong immune system cause I feed him x so he can't get sick and doesn't need vaccinations" the parent creates a feeling of safety by pretending those threats don't exist for his child.
20
All vaccines carry serious risk. In fact they are considered "unavoidably unsafe". This is the reason for the VAERS court. A parent has the right to scrutinize the warning label on a product that will be used on their child. So they shall have the right to read the pamphlet provided to them at the doctor's office and decide whether this "unavoidably unsafe" vaccine is worth the risk.
13
All medical therapies have potential risks and potential rewards. Clinical research is done to weigh one against the other. Perhaps we should have parents who refuse to vaccinate their child against measles, e.g., watch a video of a child who got encephalitis from measles before allowing them to decline. Here's a little self-help decision making chart for measles. Similar charts for other vaccines can be found there as well.
http://www.ncirs.edu.au/immunisation/education/mmr-decision/measles.php
http://www.ncirs.edu.au/immunisation/education/mmr-decision/measles.php
2
The VAERS court exists not to protect vaccine manufacturers per se, but to ensure that they continue to be willing to produce vaccines in the first place.
Yes, there is a small risk associated with vaccines. That the risk is far, far smaller than the risk associated with contracting the vaccine-preventable disease doesn't bring the vaccine's risk down to zero. Furthermore, some people will have some kind of problem following vaccincation which, while not at all caused by the vaccine, might look as though it is.
For these reasons -- to limit the liability of vaccine manufacturers against outcomes that we KNOW will happen so that they'll continue to manufacture the vaccines we need -- the VAERS court exists.
In the VAERS court, if your child is one of the rare ones that is harmed by the vaccine, rather than one of the very many protected by it, you'll get compensation.
Without the VAERS court, no company would be willing to produce vaccines in the first place, and we'd be losing loved ones to measles, polio, and so forth on a regular basis, just as we did before the vaccines were invented.
Yes, there is a small risk associated with vaccines. That the risk is far, far smaller than the risk associated with contracting the vaccine-preventable disease doesn't bring the vaccine's risk down to zero. Furthermore, some people will have some kind of problem following vaccincation which, while not at all caused by the vaccine, might look as though it is.
For these reasons -- to limit the liability of vaccine manufacturers against outcomes that we KNOW will happen so that they'll continue to manufacture the vaccines we need -- the VAERS court exists.
In the VAERS court, if your child is one of the rare ones that is harmed by the vaccine, rather than one of the very many protected by it, you'll get compensation.
Without the VAERS court, no company would be willing to produce vaccines in the first place, and we'd be losing loved ones to measles, polio, and so forth on a regular basis, just as we did before the vaccines were invented.
1
Its about much more than a pamphlet provided you with more advertising from the manufacturer. This is about transparency, standards, and stronger enforcement.
Parents who refuse to vaccinate their children should be arrested as child abusers.
Their decisions harm not only their own children but also everyone else by endangering herd immunity. They should not be allowed to make that choice for society because of their own misconceptions.
Their decisions harm not only their own children but also everyone else by endangering herd immunity. They should not be allowed to make that choice for society because of their own misconceptions.
11
Parents who don't vaccinate their kids are not only making a decision for their kids, but for mine as well. That is not right. Let's stand up to these selfish people, we must do what is right for the entire society, not just one person.
22
If you want to vaccinate, then vaccinate. Who decides the greater good? Once the pharmaceutical companies make it a law that all vaccines are mandatory, then what will you do when you yourself have to get shots every six months to keep your job or to have your kids in college, for example, for diseases that may not be at all communicable to the general public (such as HPV or tetanus are now)? What if the required vaccines increase and increase, and you start getting sick and think that maybe those who warned about aluminum and mercury had something to say after all? Then it'll be too late. Then you'll have to take your vaccines whether you want to or not-- for the greater good. Think about it.
You who refuse to vaccinate your children and put other children in danger are not free to coast long on my child's vaccinations......what kind of country are we turning into! There is a social responsibility that doesn't exempt those of higher incomes who refuse accept science.
19
If vaccines are truly dangerous, then those who believe that should convince the rest of us and we should then stop all vaccinations, otherwise we are harming an entire generation of children. And then we can go back to the 1950s and battle all these diseases the old fashioned way. But this isn't the argument you hear from the anti-vaccine community. Instead, those against vaccines want the rest of society to bear the risk if there is any, while they benefit from everyone else's vaccination. Not very neighborly.
27
No. The anti-vaccine community is trying to warn the larger community that the science that you think supports the safety of vaccines isn't there. You can read the science everywhere-- try here, for example http://www.cmsri.org/published-research/. But your doctor doesn't read this-- his/her views are filtered by the medical journals, which are in turn filtered by the pharmaceutical companies. There's a lot at stake-- hence a very fierce attack on the side that questions vaccine safety. If the real science comes out, then vaccine uptake (and profits) will fall but that's not such a terrible thing, since the whole "vaccine saved us" myth is only true if we ignore the absolutely deplorable sanitary conditions that existed in 19th century London or NYC, for example. It would be surprising if those cesspools weren't the source of any number of diseases, and in fact a contemporary mapping of NYC showed that diphtheria and TB, for example, had their loci in the worst tenements, and from there spread to the general population. No one is opposed to some absolutely necessary vaccines, but enough is enough.
And then there are lawsuits if the truth about vaccines comes out .... the stakes are high indeed.
And then there are lawsuits if the truth about vaccines comes out .... the stakes are high indeed.
1
I suggest that parents whose unvaccinated child brings to school a serious infectious disease normally vaccinated against be charged with reckless endangerment, and child abuse. If another child is fatally infected, then manslaughter at a minimum.
13
As a physician I applaud this sensible bill.
This is not a personal choice issue. You can infect and kill others if you are not vaccinated.
You should be given the choice of accepting the scientifically safe vaccine or not place others at risk.
This is not a personal choice issue. You can infect and kill others if you are not vaccinated.
You should be given the choice of accepting the scientifically safe vaccine or not place others at risk.
20
>
You had me optimistic until you mentioned "optimists".
You had me optimistic until you mentioned "optimists".
2
This is a critical step for the California legislature to take, because ignorance and superstition cannot be the basis of public policy decisions that affect us all. The same is true for arguments against genetically modified crops, where there is no real evidence of any harm but lots of anti-corporate and anti-authoritarian stridency, and, ironically, for arguments against whether global warming is 'real'. There is a backlash against scientific evidence and facts on many fronts, which citizens are entitled to subscribe to if they wish... But this backsliding on the best way we have of knowing the truth should never be allowed to influence the development of our laws and regulations.
8
If you think there is no science against GMOs, you might want to read "Altered Genes, Twisted Truth," which goes into great detail on the science--and the many scientists-- opposed to GMOs.
It's curious that now we are lumping the idea of "anti-science" together with the words "anti-corporate and "anti-authoritarian," as if those who are anti-corporate must also be anti-science and anti global warming to boot. Science is distorted, yes, and that is our greatest danger, but it is being distorted to sell GMOs and pharmaceuticals, for example. The real science does not support unleashing GMOs into the food supply without adequate testing (which doesn't happen) nor does it support the growing push to get people to take pharmaceuticals of all kinds, including vaccines, which have also not been adequately tested for safety despite the public belief to the contrary. Aluminum adjuvant, for example, doesn't get tested because it's GRAS ("generally regarded as safe") which is a curious stance to take for a substance that's a known neurotoxin. Aluminum is not essential in any biological process, despite misleading statements to the contrary; it is ubiquitous as a contaminant, not as a nutrient.
It's curious that now we are lumping the idea of "anti-science" together with the words "anti-corporate and "anti-authoritarian," as if those who are anti-corporate must also be anti-science and anti global warming to boot. Science is distorted, yes, and that is our greatest danger, but it is being distorted to sell GMOs and pharmaceuticals, for example. The real science does not support unleashing GMOs into the food supply without adequate testing (which doesn't happen) nor does it support the growing push to get people to take pharmaceuticals of all kinds, including vaccines, which have also not been adequately tested for safety despite the public belief to the contrary. Aluminum adjuvant, for example, doesn't get tested because it's GRAS ("generally regarded as safe") which is a curious stance to take for a substance that's a known neurotoxin. Aluminum is not essential in any biological process, despite misleading statements to the contrary; it is ubiquitous as a contaminant, not as a nutrient.
I seriously doubt that the climate change deniers, with their I'm not scientist statements are not the same people that mistrust vaccinations. When I was young, there were no where need the number of vaccinations required or the combined shots prevalent today. One size does not fit all.
Having children vaccinated is a matter of social conscience and collective safety. None of us is allowed to opt out of stopping for red lights. The consequences of optional vaccination is actually more dangerous than the traffic analogy
11
But 1994's Playmate of the Year says vaccinations are dangerous.
4
While the "anti-vaxxers" do pose serious public health risks, we must not think that we are "done" when we have addressed that risk.
In a 2013 national study*, only an estimated 13% of undervaccinated toddlers had missed vaccines because of parental choice.
(That study found that nearly half of toddlers were missing a recommended vaccine. Huge problem!)
Now, this 13% may be a bit low because parents may deliberately no-show for appointments to pursue "alternate vaccine schedules". That's a sort of antivaxxer middle ground where you delay vaccines against medical advice — dangerous, but better than not vaccinating. Hard to measure it happening.
But whether antivaxxers contribute 13% or a bit more, the vast majority of incomplete vaccinations could NOT be explained by parental choice. It's about access.
There are serious healthcare access problems like: parents cannot get enough time off work to go to appointments for their kids; parents cannot get a ride to the doctor's office; insurance gets messed up and no one will pay for the child's care; doctors won't accept a non-parent proxy at a check-up.
This California legislation is a great idea and the 10% boost they'll get this way is a good first step. But what about the other 90%?! There are deep social problems involving access to healthcare that need more attention.
(* See March 2013 JAMA Pediatrics "A Population-Based Cohort Study of Undervaccination in 8 Managed Care Organizations Across the United States").
In a 2013 national study*, only an estimated 13% of undervaccinated toddlers had missed vaccines because of parental choice.
(That study found that nearly half of toddlers were missing a recommended vaccine. Huge problem!)
Now, this 13% may be a bit low because parents may deliberately no-show for appointments to pursue "alternate vaccine schedules". That's a sort of antivaxxer middle ground where you delay vaccines against medical advice — dangerous, but better than not vaccinating. Hard to measure it happening.
But whether antivaxxers contribute 13% or a bit more, the vast majority of incomplete vaccinations could NOT be explained by parental choice. It's about access.
There are serious healthcare access problems like: parents cannot get enough time off work to go to appointments for their kids; parents cannot get a ride to the doctor's office; insurance gets messed up and no one will pay for the child's care; doctors won't accept a non-parent proxy at a check-up.
This California legislation is a great idea and the 10% boost they'll get this way is a good first step. But what about the other 90%?! There are deep social problems involving access to healthcare that need more attention.
(* See March 2013 JAMA Pediatrics "A Population-Based Cohort Study of Undervaccination in 8 Managed Care Organizations Across the United States").
7
Vaccination is sensible. CA SB277 is anything but. I ask that adults reading and responding to this thread look into a couple of things 1) They themselves have had only a fraction of the vaccines that the CA Bill is trying to mandate for schoolchildren, and what they have had may or may not still offer them immunity. They are quite possibly as dangerous to our society than the children they want to vaccinate. 2) Not all vaccines are created equal; Some have mercury or aluminum, some don't. They have varying degrees of effectiveness and the diseases they treat are not equally contagious. The state should not be grouping them together. 4) one provision in the bill is a blanket mandate for the administration of any vaccines invented in the future. One must assume that Merck, for example - once they have spent their way out of current litigation against them for falsifying data - might simply choose not to test these future vaccines at all. Why should they? Lastly, in order for legislation like this to become law, we must completely ignore the thousands upon thousands of parents who report alarmingly similar sequences of events leading up to their children's life long illness - beginning with vaccine injections. Are we really ready to do that? Again; I am in support of vaccinating schoolchildren - and adults - for many of the diseases on the CDC schedule; this bill however is poorly conceived and reflects an unacceptable lack of knowledge and understanding by those who wrote it.
8
Thank you for your common sense, which is sorely lacking in the overall debate.
I think it's fine for parents to exempt their kids from vaccines for "personal belief" ... as long as they recognize and accept my "personal belief" that unvaccinated people represent a public health hazard and remove themselves from the public to, say, an otherwise deserted island in the middle of the pacific...
12
The personal belief crowd is relying on those who have been vaccinated to keep the number of hosts/cases very low. Then they can say "see our "natural immunity is good enough." It's the freerider effect in action.
11
Personal belief should not trump science. This is truly a case of people having just enough information to be dangerous. The sole (supposedly scientific) study that linked autism to vaccines was not only debunked years ago, but retracted by the journals that published it. The "scientist" who wrote it had his medical license revoked. There is no link between autism and vaccines, period.
What DOES exist, however, is a direct link between increased rates autism and the ever-expanding definition of autism. Heck, by now I'm probably autistic. The latest statistics say that 1 in 68 people in the United States is now autistic; excuse me - AHEM - has "autism spectrum disorder" (remember, we have to expand the definition as much as possible). Complete and total hogwash. I'm 39 years old. I've traveled the country, lived in half a dozen states, in 15 cities, met tens upon tens of thousands of people in my lifetime. There is ONE person that I've ever met who had a family member with Autism.
This is all about corralling research money. How many people make a living off this newly widespread epidemic? It's a cottage industry. Heck, there are several cottages by now.
And in the last year, polio, a disease we haven't seen in 40 years, has hit over 100 people in the U.S. We have twice as many cases of whooping cough per capita today than in 1990. Ever notice how many of these outbreaks happen in California?
Society needs to be protected from these people.
What DOES exist, however, is a direct link between increased rates autism and the ever-expanding definition of autism. Heck, by now I'm probably autistic. The latest statistics say that 1 in 68 people in the United States is now autistic; excuse me - AHEM - has "autism spectrum disorder" (remember, we have to expand the definition as much as possible). Complete and total hogwash. I'm 39 years old. I've traveled the country, lived in half a dozen states, in 15 cities, met tens upon tens of thousands of people in my lifetime. There is ONE person that I've ever met who had a family member with Autism.
This is all about corralling research money. How many people make a living off this newly widespread epidemic? It's a cottage industry. Heck, there are several cottages by now.
And in the last year, polio, a disease we haven't seen in 40 years, has hit over 100 people in the U.S. We have twice as many cases of whooping cough per capita today than in 1990. Ever notice how many of these outbreaks happen in California?
Society needs to be protected from these people.
10
I couldn't agree more on the ever expanding autism spectrum. Any sign that little Johnny won't be class president or little Suzie won't be most popular must mean there is something wrong with them. Most people are pretty average. News flash, little kids get bored and fidgety in class. Parents have to tell them 20 times to make their beds, brush their teeth and put their clothes away. There's two problems. At some recent point we started marveling at children as though they were some mini vessel of wisdom. They're not and that is perfectly fine. And they're different in many ways, some will be valedictorian or head cheerleader but the majority won't. The second thing is we spend way too much time around them. I once had a parent stay for an entire play date. I didn't realize it was mom's play date too and not my daughter's. if you spend WAY too much time with anyone, you start to see the good and bad. If we actually let these kids out to interact with others kids, we'd all be better off.
Labeling childish behavior as autism hurts the kids who truly have it and need the resources. My pediatrician has no reason to lie to me.
Labeling childish behavior as autism hurts the kids who truly have it and need the resources. My pediatrician has no reason to lie to me.
1
You refer to the Wakefield 1998 paper which did not, by the way, state that vaccines and autism were related. However the 1998 paper by Weibel et al., published in Pediatrics, did find a relationship between measles vaccine and encephalopathy. You might also want to look at Dourado et al. 2010 (American Journal of Epidemiology) and Mary Holland's 2011 paper that found cases of severe encephalopathy is children compensated by the VICP.
I know several people with autism and aspergers. Btw, many people that came down with whopping cough in CA. had had the vaccine.
We are a society that wants to take children away from their parents when the parents allow their children to play unsupervised.
Nominally out of the fear of a possible abduction.
How can we even consider allowing parents to exempt their children from immunization against diseases that could be life-threatening?
Nominally out of the fear of a possible abduction.
How can we even consider allowing parents to exempt their children from immunization against diseases that could be life-threatening?
8
Liberal justice has finally painted itself into a corner. We are currently emptying our prisons of drug dealers so who will be the first Judge to incarcerate a 'personal believer'? Stay at home education is no problem for these folks. The Emporer's new chaos has come home to roost.
A school, an institution with high speed internet gives a parent a vaccination form. The parent misses work to take the kid and the card to a doctor's office, which also has high-speed internet. Alternatively, the parent goes farther from home to get a free vaccination from a clinic. Add in a divorce and a few moves and different schools and not losing the card as well as keeping it up to date becomes difficult. Replacing the card if lost involve tracking down each doctor's office where the kid got his shots.It is difficult to conceive of a system more inconvenient or error prone for parents to deal with.
Of course, if this was a third world country, or the United States 50 years ago, the government would simply send a nurse to the school, line up the kids, and vaccinate them all in one day.
Of course, if this was a third world country, or the United States 50 years ago, the government would simply send a nurse to the school, line up the kids, and vaccinate them all in one day.
8
Valerie in California wrote, "Your right to personal choice stops where someone else's rights to stay healthy begin." In this she echos Justice Holmes, who famously said, "Your freedom ends where my nose begins."
Holmes was right. Valerie was right. If you don't want your child vaccinated, home school them or move out of state.
Holmes was right. Valerie was right. If you don't want your child vaccinated, home school them or move out of state.
11
Not only home school, S.R. Keep your unvaccinated children away from any contact with the public, because if they contract a preventable disease and go to a mall or movie theater or playground when they are contagious but not yet symptomatic, there is a risk of infecting others. Those others include immune compromised people and children under 1 year of age.
Sounds like a good law to me, we have all sorts of laws against personal behavior that would impact public health. People are not allowed to improvise their own sanitary facilities where it can impact other people, nor throw garbage out their window into the gutter as used to be the norm. When people come down with a really badly contagious disease, they can be forced into quarantine even if they'd rather go to the movies; happened to me once when they weren't sure yet what I had (turned out to be Legionnaire's disease of all things, not contagious).
So these parents can be as misinformed as they like, but their behavior must be brought into line with what science and society knows to be the safest practice for the public at large. Measles is better described as a contagious disease rather than infectious; once someone has it, it's easily spread to others, and if nobody has it, nobody will catch it. Same with all the diseases we generally vaccinate for, and it seems logical to reduce the death toll of these easily prevented diseases if we can.
Parents who have an unwarranted fear of vaccines actually still have choices with this law. They can home school, or send their kids to a measles-approving group home school, or they can move to a state like Alabama where they don't believe in science as much. Or they can emigrate, and see just how interesting life can be in countries too poor to vaccinate for public health.
So these parents can be as misinformed as they like, but their behavior must be brought into line with what science and society knows to be the safest practice for the public at large. Measles is better described as a contagious disease rather than infectious; once someone has it, it's easily spread to others, and if nobody has it, nobody will catch it. Same with all the diseases we generally vaccinate for, and it seems logical to reduce the death toll of these easily prevented diseases if we can.
Parents who have an unwarranted fear of vaccines actually still have choices with this law. They can home school, or send their kids to a measles-approving group home school, or they can move to a state like Alabama where they don't believe in science as much. Or they can emigrate, and see just how interesting life can be in countries too poor to vaccinate for public health.
13
The anti vaccine movement reflects a distrust among many Americans that government is not watching out for them and instead bends to the demands of the corporate lobby, in this case the pharmaceutical companies. With the proliferation of commercials pushing medications for anything from sexual dysfunction to sleeplessness, acid reflux, memory, depression, it is no wonder people feel wary of even legitimate reasons to use medications. This is what we reap when we allow so much money to line the walls of our legislative houses. Even our political leaders question the role of government. Is it any wonder that people distrust their government to look out for the health of their families?
Having said that, it would be completely irresponsible for the leadership in California to not do the right thing and require that every child attending a public school be immunized.
Having said that, it would be completely irresponsible for the leadership in California to not do the right thing and require that every child attending a public school be immunized.
3
That's pretty illogical-- we're right to mistrust the government collusion with the pharmaceutical industry, but in the case of vaccines somehow that relationship is pure and chaste? There is a great deal of science, a tremendous amount, that points to hazards of vaccines, and a good place to start would be http://www.cmsri.org/published-research/. Somehow physicians aren't getting the message ... hmmm, maybe the messenger-- the one who visits often, sponsors conferences and continuing education, submits safety studies to the CDC and influences what gets published in the major medical journals-- is from the pharmaceutical companies?
Excellent points. This anti-federal government nonsense started with St. Reagan and has been working very well for the Republicans ever since. Time for the pendulum to start swinging in the other direction and perhaps the fact that some Republican leaders have recently noticed--and are publicly decrying--the gulf separating the super rich from the rest of us is a sign that this is beginning to happen.
The question for many who refuse vaccination is the all-or-nothing requirement in many states. In the state of New Jersey children in pre-school and/or kindergarten are required to have flu shots each year. The flu vaccine has proven to be one of the least safe vaccines from year to year. Yet, a parent has no ability to refuse the flu vaccine and say yes to the others.
I certainly understand the need to protect entire populations from disease but I also understand the need to allow people to make informed decisions regarding their own and/or their children's health care. Vaccines are not without risk. The level of risk vs. benefit to society is central to this question. However, a reasoned debate is lacking because those who are concerned about some vaccines because of legitimate safety risk but compelled to withhold all vaccines because of state policy are not a part of the conversation.
Some policy makers believe It would be in the best interest of society that all adults have a flu vaccine every year. However, a large majority of people do not do so. Some do not because of what they believe is a risk of contracting the flu from the vaccine. Most in our country would say that it is their right to not get the shot despite the risk to society at large. The only difference its that those folks are adults acting in their own interest rather than parents trying to navigate what they believe (rightly or wrongly) is in the best interest of their children.
I certainly understand the need to protect entire populations from disease but I also understand the need to allow people to make informed decisions regarding their own and/or their children's health care. Vaccines are not without risk. The level of risk vs. benefit to society is central to this question. However, a reasoned debate is lacking because those who are concerned about some vaccines because of legitimate safety risk but compelled to withhold all vaccines because of state policy are not a part of the conversation.
Some policy makers believe It would be in the best interest of society that all adults have a flu vaccine every year. However, a large majority of people do not do so. Some do not because of what they believe is a risk of contracting the flu from the vaccine. Most in our country would say that it is their right to not get the shot despite the risk to society at large. The only difference its that those folks are adults acting in their own interest rather than parents trying to navigate what they believe (rightly or wrongly) is in the best interest of their children.
4
Maybe the incentive to have children vaccinated could be enhanced by having higher health insurance premiums for families that don't vaccinate. After all, these families are increasing healthcare costs for themselves and those around them. If their beliefs are contributing to higher costs, they should be invited to contribute more in paying for those costs. The life insurance companies already do this by charging higher premiums to smokers. Why not extend the principle to other high-risk behaviors?
12
Their beliefs are not costing more.
I just brought my son to a well child visit this morning where he received three shots vaccinating him against Diphtheria, Tetanus, Pertussis, Polio, Measles, Mumps, Rubella, and Varicella. What a miracle that I live in an age where my child can be protected against such horrible diseases. How lucky are we that we live in a time where most kids will survive until adulthood, rather than die of contagious diseases. How amazing is it, that with a moment of pain, he can avoid weeks of suffering and possibly long term complications that used to be a normal part of childhood. How lucky am I that my son is healthy, and so he can be vaccinated to increase heard immunity and protect newborns and children who are unable to be vaccinated?
We are so lucky. I have a difficult time understanding why any parent would make the choice to put their own--and others'--children at risk. This is an important bill. I hope that it passes.
We are so lucky. I have a difficult time understanding why any parent would make the choice to put their own--and others'--children at risk. This is an important bill. I hope that it passes.
23
well isn't that nice that you have that choice, but apparently, you don't think every parent should enjoy the same freedoms you have here in America the land of the free.
When I moved from MA to CA in 2008 I could not fathom this vaccine phobia. Most of these parents who refuse to vaccinate come from very wealthy communities. The science is against ALL of their arguments. Most people in CA support vaccinations. This bill needs to be passed. I hope that some day we are not talking about the return of polio due to lack of children vaccinated.
19
"Parents who oppose the vaccine requirement complain that their only recourse under the bill would be home schooling, which many can’t or don’t want to do."
Speaking as a Californian who one month ago became the father of twin daughters, all I can say to those parents is: so what? If you want to make use of public resources, then accept your obligations not to endanger the public; if you don't want to accept such obligations, then quit taking advantage of the relevant public resources. It's your choice. Stop acting like it shouldn't have any consequences.
Speaking as a Californian who one month ago became the father of twin daughters, all I can say to those parents is: so what? If you want to make use of public resources, then accept your obligations not to endanger the public; if you don't want to accept such obligations, then quit taking advantage of the relevant public resources. It's your choice. Stop acting like it shouldn't have any consequences.
22
You can believe anything you want, but you can't go to my kids' schools unvaccinated.
108
I wouldn't dream of sending my child to your school. In 1994 during my MBA program at a well-known university, I went to the student clinic for a routine flu shot. That afternoon I began to itch from head to foot. The itch continued unabated for four months. Doctors could do nothing about it. My life was living hell for those four months.
I hope your children are spared such an experience, despite your aggressively intolerant attitude.
I hope your children are spared such an experience, despite your aggressively intolerant attitude.
Rajiv,
I'm just guessing. Since you live in Palo Alto, you're probably pretty good with the computer and you could be from India where you perhaps admired the way the British ruled before your time? And sure as shooting Momma isn't going to pick your bride or you're past that stuff and here in the USA you're doing quite nicely but don't really know much about rights and freedom and who made this conglomeration of a nation?
Mandatory anything sets our teeth on edge and I don't carry a gun if you have placed me with a group of survivalists holding its own in Idaho or some wild and rugged place where only water is flat and only when trapped.
I'm just guessing. Since you live in Palo Alto, you're probably pretty good with the computer and you could be from India where you perhaps admired the way the British ruled before your time? And sure as shooting Momma isn't going to pick your bride or you're past that stuff and here in the USA you're doing quite nicely but don't really know much about rights and freedom and who made this conglomeration of a nation?
Mandatory anything sets our teeth on edge and I don't carry a gun if you have placed me with a group of survivalists holding its own in Idaho or some wild and rugged place where only water is flat and only when trapped.
Really! I suggest you create your own school and make it elite and exclusive with tough admission standards and a tuition equal to equal ten Wal-Mart annual salaries per semester.
The Academy of the Vaccinated, no unvaccinated allowed.
In the USA we have public schools with the idea behind them, initially anyway, to make possible a free education for Everyone and we don't limit who may or may not attend in order to please Big Pharm.
The Academy of the Vaccinated, no unvaccinated allowed.
In the USA we have public schools with the idea behind them, initially anyway, to make possible a free education for Everyone and we don't limit who may or may not attend in order to please Big Pharm.
1
A few loudmouthed protesters who think their personal feelings are more important then the medical safety of the public, cause several legislators to cower, in fear of losing a few votes.
That these legislators would allow this ignorant self serving group, of scientifically ignorant protestors to make them shelve this legislation, shows us just how cowardly the ones that did so are.
To show the mentality of some of them, they have threatened state senator Dr. Richard Pan with violence. So we can see just what unbalanced mentalities they have.
Their personal beliefs end at their front door.
That these legislators would allow this ignorant self serving group, of scientifically ignorant protestors to make them shelve this legislation, shows us just how cowardly the ones that did so are.
To show the mentality of some of them, they have threatened state senator Dr. Richard Pan with violence. So we can see just what unbalanced mentalities they have.
Their personal beliefs end at their front door.
106
Just like anti-war sentiments and abortion.
Vaccination has become a part of the social contract.
Those who choose to remain unvaccinated should be expected to avoid contact with public environments like schools, health care facilities, airplanes and recreation. A community outside the metro area with its own services would be the best environment to avoid dangerous outbreaks in large population centers.
To have unvaccinated people moving among the general population in dese metro areas doesn't make sense from a public health perspective.
Those who choose to remain unvaccinated should be expected to avoid contact with public environments like schools, health care facilities, airplanes and recreation. A community outside the metro area with its own services would be the best environment to avoid dangerous outbreaks in large population centers.
To have unvaccinated people moving among the general population in dese metro areas doesn't make sense from a public health perspective.
178
This is just part of the overall cult of selfishness, "f...k" everyone else super individualism, that is promoted by our greedy 1% that is contaminating all groups and aspects of our society.
87
Actually, I think it's more ignorance than selfishness. We have a lot of ignorance here in California.
the "greedy" 1% wouldn't be complaining they can't afford homeschooling would they?
It is not only the 1% who are selfish and self-serving. That attitude is far more pervasive.
Once again, the fundamentalist Republican troglodytes cling to their yoga and non GMO trail mix in Marin County.
44
Huh?
Many of the antivax lunatics are Liberal Democrats.
Many of the antivax lunatics are Liberal Democrats.
1
Hate to disappoint you but Marin county is more blue than most anywhere. This is a problem of privilege.
1
Huh?
Let us hope that this bill passes, and passes quickly. There is no excuse for an ignorant parent endangering his child, or, worse, the children of others. None. At the very least, this bill will prevent parents from endangering other children, as well as infants and adults who can't be vaccinated or for whom a vaccine is ineffective, and will help preserve or achieve herd immunity, which is necessary since vaccines don't offer 100% protection.
182
do you know the efficacy and combined impact of every vaccine now up for being mandated? are you willing to just turn your infant over to what the "state" thinks is best, even with no long term studies on the infant of injecting it with all of this at such an early age? And, are you willing to be responsible for another family for any unintended consequences from mandating all of the vaccines at such an early age? this is NOT ignorant. this is a parent being thoughtful and responsible. i did not, and would not again, subject my children to all the drugs our very kind and thoughtful OB/GYN doc wanted to administer.
Vaccine exemptions should be limited to medical necessity. Parents who refuse to vaccinate their children due to personal beliefs that are not substantiated by scientific evidence are selfish and unethical. Their children's ability to live relatively risk-free lives relies on the fact that the vast majority of other people have their children vaccinated. They want to gain the benefit and protection of "herd immunity," a burden they are happy to place on others, but refuse to do their own part to maintain protective levels of immunity in their communities.
420
The problem with anything like a vaccine is that there will be some harmed by it. However, unlike the actual disease, that is a very small percentage.
People are bad at math, like with taxes they don't get it. So if your child has a 10% chance of dying from a disease and a 0.01% chance of being harmed by a vaccine. Which do you choose?
Unfortunately too many choose the 10% because they don't get it.
People are bad at math, like with taxes they don't get it. So if your child has a 10% chance of dying from a disease and a 0.01% chance of being harmed by a vaccine. Which do you choose?
Unfortunately too many choose the 10% because they don't get it.
232
Our family is one of those in the .01% pool, with three of the not so rare side-effects that can be caused by vaccines or repeated vaccination in a child who should not be vaccinated further. This baseless certainty that commenters like you have that the ,01% don't matter is the problem. .01% represents millions of children.
Instead of putting pressure on new parents to vaccinate, why not redirect the pressure on big Pharma to make vaccines that have .0001 chance of injuring a child? While fear rules, more children fall victim to lifelong injuries due to fear-based policies.
Instead of putting pressure on new parents to vaccinate, why not redirect the pressure on big Pharma to make vaccines that have .0001 chance of injuring a child? While fear rules, more children fall victim to lifelong injuries due to fear-based policies.
10
Joe:
Very excellent remarks, particularly about people not getting it, i.e., math.
As a former math instructor I saw it too often.
With respect to the probabilities, by using some elementary Bayesian priors, the probability that a child will contract a disease after a properly administered vaccination is less than 1 in a million.
Very excellent remarks, particularly about people not getting it, i.e., math.
As a former math instructor I saw it too often.
With respect to the probabilities, by using some elementary Bayesian priors, the probability that a child will contract a disease after a properly administered vaccination is less than 1 in a million.
2
Really, those are the numbers? If that's :good math", I'll stick with bad math.
The claim from ignorant parents that such a ruling would force them to home-school their children reminds me of the perennial claim that people will "move to Canada" if so-and-so gets elected to office. Once a ruling is passed (hopefully with an educational campaign to ease irrational fears), opponents will see that the world continues to turn.
I'm thrilled this legislation is moving quickly, as willful ignorance and a preponderance of misinformation are setting the stage for a public health nightmare in this state.
I'm thrilled this legislation is moving quickly, as willful ignorance and a preponderance of misinformation are setting the stage for a public health nightmare in this state.
95
The bill isn't moving quickly enough. It's stalled in the CA Senate Education Committee because anti-vaxxers turned out by the hundreds to protest. They're not only extremists, they're loud extremists. So, those of us who believe that all healthy children ought to be vaccinated for the sake of their own health and public health must speak up before the next hearing on April 22.
3
Will S,
If they move to Canada, they will get vaccinated; it's the law.
If they move to Canada, they will get vaccinated; it's the law.
3
I am not even in favor of letting these parents home school to avoid vaccination. If the state has an interest in fetuses, it surely has an interest in proper education and vaccinations for those born but too young to protect themselves from their parents.
2
For parents who oppose vaccination complain that home schooling is their only recourse, then that's the choice THEY are making. For these parents' beliefs the general population cannot be put at risk. The Science is very precise and clear. Hope, the California bill is passed by the legislators a.s.a.p. and there are no exceptions except for medical necessities. Parents have to be responsible for their own personal beliefs and cannot foster those beliefs on others. If they have a right so do the parents who vaccinate their children!
138
Again - the general population is not at risk. Only those who are not vaccinated are at risk.
If you are vaccinated, what are you hyperventilating about?
You will very likely be, yearly, affected by someone else's cold or virus - as opposed to being affected by someone who is not vaccinated.
Why not pass laws mandating face masks during flu season? Or flu shots for everyone? Or house quarantine for anyone with the flu?
If you are vaccinated, what are you hyperventilating about?
You will very likely be, yearly, affected by someone else's cold or virus - as opposed to being affected by someone who is not vaccinated.
Why not pass laws mandating face masks during flu season? Or flu shots for everyone? Or house quarantine for anyone with the flu?
There is a lot of emotion involved. Combine that with the inundation of information in various forms and quality and you have a potential band wagon effect. The problem with vaccination is that it was politicized and turned into infotainment by people without knowledge or understanding. It is sad that it takes the death of an infant from a disease that has been preventable since the 1950's for common sense to hopefully prevail.
31
the emotion that antivaxxers have is based on lies, deceit, rumor and gossip- nothing more. Pretty embarrassing for people who call themselves "Well-Educated".
4
This has exploded into a big, divisive issue with two camps citing their own studies, facts, evidence, and statistics. In the middle are the vaccine manufacturers, whose silence is deafening.
I'm seeing a lot of people who are starting to question the culture of vaccination, and instead of a reasoned response by a reasonable media I'm seeing embedded messages in popular shows (Jimmy Kimmel's 'Doctors Know it All' skit; Law & Order's 'Bad Anti-Vax Parents' episode; Sesame Street's 'Elmo Vaccinates' piece) that have the effect of bullying and shaming anyone who might question what appears to be vaccine orthodoxy.
Further, I learned since Disneyland's measles cluster is that the vaccine manufacturers -- private corporations -- are now protected from liability when vaccines harm, which evidently happens with great regularity. A sort of extra-judicial court system exists and pays out regularly for injuries but is also quite out of the public view.
Why has the NYT not done a proper objective piece on vaccine ingredients; on their effects on babies' immune systems; on this extra-judicial court; and including reasoned voices from both sides of the vaccine camp? I am hearing highly educated medical professionals speak out against vaccines as they exist now; it's not crackpots and weirdos as the conventional media is having us believe.
Vaccination might once have been a slam-dunk, but it isn't anymore.
I'm seeing a lot of people who are starting to question the culture of vaccination, and instead of a reasoned response by a reasonable media I'm seeing embedded messages in popular shows (Jimmy Kimmel's 'Doctors Know it All' skit; Law & Order's 'Bad Anti-Vax Parents' episode; Sesame Street's 'Elmo Vaccinates' piece) that have the effect of bullying and shaming anyone who might question what appears to be vaccine orthodoxy.
Further, I learned since Disneyland's measles cluster is that the vaccine manufacturers -- private corporations -- are now protected from liability when vaccines harm, which evidently happens with great regularity. A sort of extra-judicial court system exists and pays out regularly for injuries but is also quite out of the public view.
Why has the NYT not done a proper objective piece on vaccine ingredients; on their effects on babies' immune systems; on this extra-judicial court; and including reasoned voices from both sides of the vaccine camp? I am hearing highly educated medical professionals speak out against vaccines as they exist now; it's not crackpots and weirdos as the conventional media is having us believe.
Vaccination might once have been a slam-dunk, but it isn't anymore.
38
@Reader: The TImes has indeed done articles about this and found that all your claims are wildly exaggerated. Every one, including "which evidently happens with great regularity."--it doesn't; it's rare.
130
Vaccine ingredients:
Preservatives: Thimerosal (not in most vaccines anymore): A far-less-dangerous form of mercury. Excreted (urine), not stored. Present in such low amounts, damage is EXTREMELY unlikely. But it was a wonderful preservative that was very good at stopping microbes from growing. Oh well. The anti-vax kooks won that one. 2-phenoxyethanol: Another one that gets excreted. Will your child get autistic from something that's not there anymore?
Aluminium: there's more aluminium in breast milk than there is in a vaccine. Look it up. Will your child get autistic from drinking breast milk?
Phosphate buffers: Described as toxic poisons. In fact, this term means "salt water." Yes, really. As in "table salt." And that phosphatey stuff? Living things --- all the way back to bacteria --- are swimming in it. You would not exist without it. Will your child get autistic from eating salt or swimming in the ocean? Or from something that's been in living things since the dawn of living things?
Surfactants: They help stuff stay suspended in a liquid and prevent clumping. There are WAY more of the SAME surfactants in your shampoo and your toothpaste. Will your precious snowflake get autistic from washing his hair?
I could go on, but anti-vaxxers aren't interested in facts. Trace amounts of surfactants in vaccines are bad, but abundant surfactants in shampoo don't even get noticed --- because vaccines are ee-vil and shampoo comes in pretty colors.
Preservatives: Thimerosal (not in most vaccines anymore): A far-less-dangerous form of mercury. Excreted (urine), not stored. Present in such low amounts, damage is EXTREMELY unlikely. But it was a wonderful preservative that was very good at stopping microbes from growing. Oh well. The anti-vax kooks won that one. 2-phenoxyethanol: Another one that gets excreted. Will your child get autistic from something that's not there anymore?
Aluminium: there's more aluminium in breast milk than there is in a vaccine. Look it up. Will your child get autistic from drinking breast milk?
Phosphate buffers: Described as toxic poisons. In fact, this term means "salt water." Yes, really. As in "table salt." And that phosphatey stuff? Living things --- all the way back to bacteria --- are swimming in it. You would not exist without it. Will your child get autistic from eating salt or swimming in the ocean? Or from something that's been in living things since the dawn of living things?
Surfactants: They help stuff stay suspended in a liquid and prevent clumping. There are WAY more of the SAME surfactants in your shampoo and your toothpaste. Will your precious snowflake get autistic from washing his hair?
I could go on, but anti-vaxxers aren't interested in facts. Trace amounts of surfactants in vaccines are bad, but abundant surfactants in shampoo don't even get noticed --- because vaccines are ee-vil and shampoo comes in pretty colors.
9
In response to.... "A sort of extra-judicial court system exists and pays out regularly for injuries but is also quite out of the public view."
There is a fund to compensate for individuals injured by vaccinations considering the tens, if not hundreds, of millions of vaccines given every year, there's going to be some negative reactions to them. However arguing that "it also quite out of public view" is absurd. http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/index.html
There is a fund to compensate for individuals injured by vaccinations considering the tens, if not hundreds, of millions of vaccines given every year, there's going to be some negative reactions to them. However arguing that "it also quite out of public view" is absurd. http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/index.html
4
I should say unconcerned physician as I have no sympathy for these parents. Be un-vaccinated and when your child gets an infectious disease for which you with held immunizations that is and should constitute child neglect and abuse. It puts us all at risk and parents should go to jail. Harsh but just. Most of these parents think little Johnny or Suzi are going to be brain surgeons when they grow up but let me cue them in they are going to be working on assembly lines and getting these diseases at a much older age which have graver outcomes.
147
Yes. Childhood diseases are usually a lot more serious post-puberty than pre-puberty.
Please see http://www.cmsri.org/published-research/ for science on dangers of vaccine ingredients. The science is clear that both mercury (currently in some flu shots, 25mcg/dose) and aluminum (an adjuvant in many vaccines) can be toxic to a subset of children who can't handle mercury and/or aluminum effectively, or who for whatever reason already have high body burdens of these or other synergistic toxins. These toxins (mercury and aluminum) can be very potent for this subset of children, so are we substituting protection from diseases-- many of which aren't contagious in a normal, walking-down-the-street population (think HPV and tetanus and Hep B)-- for an increase in neurological disorders in children? And the argument that aluminum is everywhere won't fly: it hasn't been shown to be essential in any biological process, and it is present as a toxic contaminant in cells, not as a nutrient.
1
Better yet, if an unvaccinated child gets a disease for which there is a vaccine (and the child was physically able to get the vaccine) the full cost of treating the illness should be borne by the parents - no insurance ever should be paid out for the specific disease that a vaccine protects against. That might move some of them to vaccinate... hospitalizations are costly....
1
I am embarrassed at the Times' lack of objectivity on this issue. Not to jump into the inevitable scrum that will emerge here, but according to the US Govt, pursuant to this report from the US Court of Claims to Vice President Biden, in the calendar year from the 4th quarter of 2013 to 2014, (10/01/2013-9/30/2014) Judgments were entered in the Federally created Vaccine Compensation Claims Board (through the Court of Claims) totaling $935,532,911 for proven vaccine related injuries. This is not some source to be dismissed as unproven, disproven, or merely "Jenny McCarthy." Nearly one billion dollars was awarded by our government for proven vaccine injuries on approximately 1,200 claims. Before merely swallowing the line that vaccines are "safe", look at the facts; there are 935,000,000 reasons to question that statement. Do your journalistic responsibility before you recommend against allowing parents to preserve their right to refuse a medical procedure with this many serious and permanent injuries causally related to it--according to the US Govt itself
http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/FY14%20Annual%20Judgme...
http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/FY14%20Annual%20Judgme...
46
The threshold for proof in these cases, I believe, was very low and not medically justified. Therefore, they are not good reasons to be wary of vaccines. Furthermore, your so-called 935,000,000 reasons are actually no more than 1200 reasons at best; the irrationality of that distortion should be cautionary to readers.
151
What a misleading comment you have made John. This report does not specify ages, harms, and in most cases the specific vaccination. For one year there was 1,200 claims. How many vaccinations were given for the entire United States for all age groups? And the number of claims is 1,200? At the face of it, seems like a pretty low % for all vaccinations for children and adults of all ages. No vaccination or medication for that matter is without risk, but it is clear that vaccinations benefits individuals and communities with a tiny risk. Your 935,000,000 statement is very misleading.
13
They are hardly "proven claims", as the Times recently pointed out
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2014/12/22/us/politics/ap-us-vaccine-cou...
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2014/12/22/us/politics/ap-us-vaccine-cou...
10
A thorny issue.
We all believe in individual rights.
But what to do when one's individual rights can cause harm to others?
Nobody likes the idea of forcing parents to vaccinate their children against their wishes, but at the same time we don't like the idea of increasingly severe measles, hemophilus, or pneumococcus epidemics either.
Perhaps this would be a good use of the Charter School System. Set up vaccine-free schools. People could send their children to these vaccine free schools. This way children of vaccine-deniers can still get an education without putting children of vaccine-believers in as much risk. Parental choice is preserved as well.
We would likely see the problem of vaccine-free schools within just a few years as epidemic after epidemic rolls through them. (such as happened in 1991 in the Faith Tabernacle Congregation school in Philadelphia where 5 children died in 10 days due to Measles). But perhaps it's what we need to show vaccine-science deniers that yes, vaccines really do work.
The only major issue I see with vaccine-free schools is that the children placed into these schools are the ones that would suffer most. But we can only do so much to protect children from their parents.
We all believe in individual rights.
But what to do when one's individual rights can cause harm to others?
Nobody likes the idea of forcing parents to vaccinate their children against their wishes, but at the same time we don't like the idea of increasingly severe measles, hemophilus, or pneumococcus epidemics either.
Perhaps this would be a good use of the Charter School System. Set up vaccine-free schools. People could send their children to these vaccine free schools. This way children of vaccine-deniers can still get an education without putting children of vaccine-believers in as much risk. Parental choice is preserved as well.
We would likely see the problem of vaccine-free schools within just a few years as epidemic after epidemic rolls through them. (such as happened in 1991 in the Faith Tabernacle Congregation school in Philadelphia where 5 children died in 10 days due to Measles). But perhaps it's what we need to show vaccine-science deniers that yes, vaccines really do work.
The only major issue I see with vaccine-free schools is that the children placed into these schools are the ones that would suffer most. But we can only do so much to protect children from their parents.
27
The big flaw here is that kids don't just go to school and then home again. They go to malls, parks, amusement parks etc.
5
We don't allow parents to opt out of schooling because of the harm it would do to their children and by extension, society.
We shouldn't allow parents to opt out of vaccinations for their children for the same reasons.
We shouldn't allow parents to opt out of vaccinations for their children for the same reasons.
6
It is not the case that nobody likes the idea of forciing parents to vaccinate their children against their wishes. I like that idea very much! As should anyone with an appreciation of the science behind public health.
4
The anti-vax trend began with rumors and unsubstantiated claims on the Internet that went something like, "I washed my car in the morning and it rained in the afternoon, therefore washing cars causes rain.", except they would say, "My kid got vaccinated, then he got autism, therefore vaccines cause autism." When the scientific community pushed back, the lefty fringe saw conspiracies between drug makers and the government. So now that these rumors have been dispelled leaving them without a scientific leg to stand on, this group is claiming "freedom" to make medical choices for their kids. Well, they have the freedom to do what they like so long as they don't expose the rest of us to the risks they want to take.
128
Interesting that you see this as having been basically caused by the "lefty" fringe. Funny, I look at this and see culpability on the part of the "righty" fringe, where paranoia of government interference runs rampant. Can't we agree that the fault here doesn't lie with the "lefty" fringe or the "righty" fringe, but with the "gullible" fringe and the "misinformed" fringe and "stupid" fringe. Good God, Mr. Humphrey...! Not every problem in this country stems from our toxic political landscape.
2
Do you recall the Swine Flu vaccine? Google it.
Not all kooks are lefties
Aside from deep religious belief (e.g. Christian Science) or proof that any kind of vaccination would endanger the child's life, all other children attending public school should have the requisite vaccinations.
Parents that absolutely insist that some how the government is intruding yet again into the lives of private citizens should be exempt. That child does not get vaccinated.
Later, then, we might have a scenario where a child exempted comes down with a serious infection that infects another exempted child. Presumably the inoculated kids are safe, and the parents of the second child may have a cause of action against the parents of the first child.
In a country as maginificently litigious as the U.S., this could happen.
Interesting.
Naf, Senior
Parents that absolutely insist that some how the government is intruding yet again into the lives of private citizens should be exempt. That child does not get vaccinated.
Later, then, we might have a scenario where a child exempted comes down with a serious infection that infects another exempted child. Presumably the inoculated kids are safe, and the parents of the second child may have a cause of action against the parents of the first child.
In a country as maginificently litigious as the U.S., this could happen.
Interesting.
Naf, Senior
10
I agree with you about the issue of verifiable risk to the child, but not with the deeply held religious beliefs. If (horribly misnamed) Christian "Scientists" don't want to get their kids vaccinated, let them put together their own parochial schools, where the greatest risk will be to themselves, rather than to other people's children. If they don't want to do that, then don't let them pretend that their choices have no consequences.
1
About those parents of the second child try to sue the parents of the first child: what's to prevent them from being countersued by the parents of the first child? They could claim that their child was infected by the second child. Now we have lawsuits on top of sick children?
I agree with some of the comments telling legislators and parents to get a grip. Do we need another epidemic like polio?
This is just ridiculous.
I agree with some of the comments telling legislators and parents to get a grip. Do we need another epidemic like polio?
This is just ridiculous.
3
No, Fortis, even religious belief should not allow parents to put other peoples' children at risk because their belief is against vaccination. It is just that personal belief that is the subject of the proposed California legislation.
Yes, inoculated children are mostly safe, but not 100% safe. And, any person who comes in contact with a contagious child and who has not been vaccinated because of age (under 1 year) or medical reasons that prevented that person from being vaccinated is at risk if exposed to a contagious child.
Yes, inoculated children are mostly safe, but not 100% safe. And, any person who comes in contact with a contagious child and who has not been vaccinated because of age (under 1 year) or medical reasons that prevented that person from being vaccinated is at risk if exposed to a contagious child.
2
The California legislature is heading down the right path. I just hope most of the comments from California respondents will support this effort. For years we in California have had Florida to point to when people say "crazy state." Let's not try to retain the title.
76
Such a small minority of quite frankly, fear mongering, supposedly intelligent people dictating to and getting their way from State legislatures. Washington and Oregon already caved in to these nuts, and California- has delayed and revised a new bill, we'll see if it ever makes it to the Governor's desk and if he'll sign it. Truly unbelievable, the Stone Age, the Salem Witch trials have returned to modern day 21st Century America.. I still can't believe this is happening. Will some please get a grip and put these crybaby college educated stone throwers in place.
125
Yawn. In other news, it seems the Earth may not be flat or at the center of the cosmos, despite the "personal belief" of some ... in California.
79
Awesome! Probably the best comment yet about this ridiculousness!
While California is dealing with the issue, all but two other states have the same personal belief exemption. This is a problem everywhere in the US.
http://www.cmsri.org/published-research/
Here is science on dangers of vaccine ingredients. Very few will read any of these papers, or even the abstracts, because their minds are made up and no amount of science can change that. But there it is.
Here is science on dangers of vaccine ingredients. Very few will read any of these papers, or even the abstracts, because their minds are made up and no amount of science can change that. But there it is.
2
"Personal belief" and "religious liberty" are the concepts being pushed by the GOP to deny rights to their chosen victim groups (women, LGBTQ people, people of color, etc.). Just look at what went on in Arkansas and Indiana within the past 30 days, not to mention the total callousness of the "47%" comment during the last presidential cycle.
I'm sure that NO GOP politician would want their child to get an unavoidable illness--that's OK for ordinary mortals. And this would even apply to wing nuts like Ted Cruz and Rand Paul.
I'm sure that NO GOP politician would want their child to get an unavoidable illness--that's OK for ordinary mortals. And this would even apply to wing nuts like Ted Cruz and Rand Paul.
85
I think you will find, if you are even at all open to the facts, that the majority of the areas where the unvaccinated of shot up are in left leaning strongholds (Silicon Valley, Berkeley). It is highly likely that those not vaccinating are progressive liberals in the majority of cases.
So, if you care about the facts you will admit your comment is nonsense. Of course, the meme being pushed by the left that the Democrats are the party of science and facts is of course also nonsense, so I don't expect you to admit it.
So, if you care about the facts you will admit your comment is nonsense. Of course, the meme being pushed by the left that the Democrats are the party of science and facts is of course also nonsense, so I don't expect you to admit it.
The people not vaccinating their children in California tend to be rich liberals not conservatives. These are the anti GMO types. Who like their counterpart conservatives lack any understanding of science.
1
Acting like this is only a GOP issue is extremely obtuse and will preclude effective interventions. In addition to extremely conservative, the other mainstay of the antivax group are extremely liberal people - causing some Democratic lawmakers to support misguided laws facilitating vaccine exemptions.
No idea which is worse, the parents who are so arrogant and self-absorbed that they think Jenny McCarthy is a legitimate source of public health information or the politicians who enable and exploit their fears and stupidity.
302
What do you think, they can turn stupidity on and off, they are sheeple, don't blame them. If they had half a brain they would be tearing the corrupt government in California down. And then move onto Washington.
"...politicians who enable and exploit their fears and stupidity."
Pretty much says it all regarding the deterioration of our nation. Those same politicians seem to be gaining more and more control in our government, enabled by the Supreme Court's "Citizens" United ruling that allow a few wealthy individuals to control the fates of the rest of us. So what's the difference whether we're endangered by a few kids running around unvaccinated or a few billionaires who are able to impose their agenda on the rest of us? Individual "freedom" is all, so we might as well forget about the "general welfare."
Pretty much says it all regarding the deterioration of our nation. Those same politicians seem to be gaining more and more control in our government, enabled by the Supreme Court's "Citizens" United ruling that allow a few wealthy individuals to control the fates of the rest of us. So what's the difference whether we're endangered by a few kids running around unvaccinated or a few billionaires who are able to impose their agenda on the rest of us? Individual "freedom" is all, so we might as well forget about the "general welfare."
Or the people who just blindly accept that vaccines are incredibly safe, despite considerable evidence to the contrary.
How many children will have to die before something is done? This is Public Health 101. It's beyond belief that a loud, misguided few can jeopardize the health of millions. And it's perplexing when those few seemingly lack the backing of an entrenched, monied interest (like the NRA). Craven politicians need to get a grip.
188
Far more American kids will die from poverty than lack of vaccines. But I don't see anyone fighting the trade deals that have decimated America's wealth, or called for stopping the flood of illegal workers.
Funny how myopic some perspectives truly are, as long as they serve a higher cause, the elite.
Funny how myopic some perspectives truly are, as long as they serve a higher cause, the elite.
2
Not a single person has died during the recent measles "epidemic" which is was not more than 130 cases. Many have died or been irreparably damaged with a vaccine injury and I don not hear anyone here pleading for their cause.
2
Would it allow the people to sue the vaccine manufacturer for any problems resulting from the vaccine or the administration of the vaccine?
24
In 2008, a rider was added to an unrelated bill. That rider made lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers impossible and the only recourse, an obscure vaccine court in DC that few parents with vaccine-injured children can afford to sue in.
A few families with sufficient means to sue have done so successfully and were awarded millions in compensation. Any new California law removing personal exemptions would not affect the ability to sue, which is set at the Federal level and a state law cannot supersede.
A few families with sufficient means to sue have done so successfully and were awarded millions in compensation. Any new California law removing personal exemptions would not affect the ability to sue, which is set at the Federal level and a state law cannot supersede.
6
That's why we have the VAERS system as well as the indemnification program; they're Federal law, so unless there's direct negligence, no.
2
You already have that right.
The right we do not have, unfortunately, is to seek compensation from those who willfully expose others to infectous disease, when they cannot themselves be vaccinated, such as those with medical conditions or who are too young.
Perhaps if there were some recourse against the vectors in diseases that used to be essentially eliminated from this country, such as measles and whooping cough, people who choose not to vaccinate would also choose to keep their kids out of public places so the rest of us would be safe.
The right we do not have, unfortunately, is to seek compensation from those who willfully expose others to infectous disease, when they cannot themselves be vaccinated, such as those with medical conditions or who are too young.
Perhaps if there were some recourse against the vectors in diseases that used to be essentially eliminated from this country, such as measles and whooping cough, people who choose not to vaccinate would also choose to keep their kids out of public places so the rest of us would be safe.
5
Every state in the country should draft, debate, and pass similar legislation. Parents have to understand that their personal beliefs do not supersede the health of other children. They have to understand that some children, for legitimate medical reasons, cannot get vaccinated, *even if their parents would quickly choose to vaccinate them if they could do so without harming them*. It is not that these are children of privilege; they don't have a choice. This is a good example of a state legislature doing what it is supposed to do, reacting not merely to the Disneyland outbreak but to the clear trend that suggested more parents were choosing to exempt their children. That is a very dangerous trend as hopefully many people now realize.
119
Three cheers for common sense.
94
Once again, our legislators are acting craven in the face of foolish people who crow lies and distortions about the false dangers of vaccines, while ignoring the very real dangers of scary diseases like measles and pertussis.
Personal choice doesn't trump the needs of public health. We've banned smoking in public places for just that reason, just as we've banned drunken driving. I wonder how many anti-vax parents support those two particular laws, and how many will claim that "they're different."
No, they're not. Your right to personal choice stops where someone else's rights to stay healthy begin. Infants and cancer patients are examples of people who can't be vaccinated for medical reasons, and the choice anti-vaxxers inflict on their offspring affects other people.
I also fear the inevitable if this lunacy continues: eventually, some of the grandchildren our anti-vaxxers will end up with congenital rubella syndrome and other completely preventable (but permanent) birth defects. I wonder how those people will be feeling about their "choices" then.
And for those who complain about the nanny state, I say, bring it on. Sometimes we need grownups who force children (or adults who act like children) to do what's right. This is one of those times.
Personal choice doesn't trump the needs of public health. We've banned smoking in public places for just that reason, just as we've banned drunken driving. I wonder how many anti-vax parents support those two particular laws, and how many will claim that "they're different."
No, they're not. Your right to personal choice stops where someone else's rights to stay healthy begin. Infants and cancer patients are examples of people who can't be vaccinated for medical reasons, and the choice anti-vaxxers inflict on their offspring affects other people.
I also fear the inevitable if this lunacy continues: eventually, some of the grandchildren our anti-vaxxers will end up with congenital rubella syndrome and other completely preventable (but permanent) birth defects. I wonder how those people will be feeling about their "choices" then.
And for those who complain about the nanny state, I say, bring it on. Sometimes we need grownups who force children (or adults who act like children) to do what's right. This is one of those times.
328
It was apparently time for a DPT booster for my 12-year-old (recovered from autism/mercury poisoning) "Mom, if I get the shot and it makes me autistic again, will Dr. John be able to fix me?" Not all kids can flush the preservatives from their bodies. Some can, not all. What would you do if it was your baby, child, teen? The vaccinated vs un-vaccinated studies have not been done. We want vaccines that prevent dangerous illnesses for our children and your children. But we don't want any of them to be unintentionally damaged in the process. Please don't paint parents who are fighting for safety as lunatics. Don't ask me to set my child on fire to keep yours warm.
1
The possibility of congenital rubella syndrome is not the only reason why the anti-vaccine movement angers (and scares) me but it is the reason that hits closest to home. My only biological aunt was born with extreme intellectual disabilities - she was never able to communicate or recognize or respond to others or function in any way. I hope to God this never happens to a parent because other parents are listening to myths about vaccines.
8
Pretty dangerous thinking-- just let the state take care of us and tell us what to do. Here are numerous studies--published in mainstream, peer-reviewed journals-- that give evidence of the dangers of vaccine ingedients: http://www.cmsri.org/published-research/. Unfortunately what we hear instead is misinformation about vaccine safety and efficacy.
1
As the mother of a child who is both allergic to the pertussis vaccine and on immune-lowering chemo, I strongly believe that my child's right to be able to walk freely in public spaces trumps a flat-earth-er parent's right to impose sickness, pain, and even death on their innocent children. We who disagree with the anti-vaxxers are not as noisy as they but we far outnumber and you better believe we outvote them. Pass that bill. Sign it, Governor Brown.
441
Alison please don't lump us all together as anti-vaxxers , this is American we are not talking about seat belt as law and proper thing to do . I am not against vaccines but with prudent use for real problems , you have a choice if your child is protected why is there a problem with some amount that prefer not to ? In the past ten years there have been no measles deaths in the US, but there have been 108 deaths from the measles vaccine according to the CDC. The issue being used by the bill proponents to strip you of a basic human right is the outbreak of measles earlier this year. We know no one has died.
So far in the US there are a reported 150 cases of measles. To put that in perspective, about 500 people per year in the US are hit by lightning.
So far in the US there are a reported 150 cases of measles. To put that in perspective, about 500 people per year in the US are hit by lightning.
1
petussis vaccine is shown to infect not onlykids like yours, but vaccinated kids as well. Should we bar from school recently vaccinated kids who might spread vaccine strain disease to your child? If you follow the science we should do exactly that.
another example of state over-reach. Ted Cruz understands. Why don't most liberals?
6
Ted Cruz's understanding is questionable or certifiable. He understands one thing alone: he'll do or say anything to keep him in the headlines and to try to get elected: once he's in office two terms, he's set for life. He can go into lobbying or corporate boards and live better than ordinary folks.
58
The state has to deal with the public health hazard and all of the costs associated with it.
Cruz understands how to make money by ranting and raving and appealing to people's ignorance and bigotry.
Cruz understands how to make money by ranting and raving and appealing to people's ignorance and bigotry.
10
Good point. When the behavior is victimless, that it. In this case, it's not. Let's let people remain free to not vaccinate, but let them pay for the increased cost to society by raising their health insurance premiums.
2
My son was vaccine injured. I watched it happen before my eyes. While mercury has been reduced to "Trace Amounts" in many vaccines, in its place is aluminum. Combining a trace amount of mercury with aluminum is quite dangerous. Both are neurotoxins. There was a day when individual vaccines were made with a limited shelflife. While costly, neurotoxic preservatives were not part of the ingredient list. Let's stop arguing pro- versus con- when we really need safety for all children. Parents who have watched their children develop symptoms of mercury poisoning only want to save the next child from the struggles theirs endures.
Please read below from a doctor with a PhD in immunology and count your blessings if you have not yet been personally affected by this situation.
http://thinkingmomsrevolution.com/an-open-letter-to-legislators-currentl...
Please read below from a doctor with a PhD in immunology and count your blessings if you have not yet been personally affected by this situation.
http://thinkingmomsrevolution.com/an-open-letter-to-legislators-currentl...
29
Having a PhD means very little and your source has been discredited by others: https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/why-does-this-immunologist-reject-v...
I'm sorry your son was injured, but the greater good must govern in a properly run society.
I'm sorry your son was injured, but the greater good must govern in a properly run society.
121
While that is a quest that should of course be pursued, it still shouldn't minimize the suffering of those parents who were forced to see their children's agony who got infected with something that an immunization could have eliminated.
Part of what has to be considered is from which the greater threat is posed.
Part of what has to be considered is from which the greater threat is posed.
30
I frankly do not believe that you watched your son become "vaccine-injured" before your eyes. You also need to cite credible evidence that any children have ever developed symptoms of mercury poisoning from vaccination. The web site you link to is a quack web site that pushes all kinds of quack remedies as anyone who visits there can see. The author herself is a quack practitioner whose claims have been refuted on any number of reputable web sites.
142
Those parents who refuse to follow logical, proven science, and therefore ignore proven vaccinations, need to pull their kids out of public school.
Amazing that they think their unsubstantiated personal "beliefs" should usurp the common good.
Sign the bill.
Amazing that they think their unsubstantiated personal "beliefs" should usurp the common good.
Sign the bill.
192
Please see some logical, proven science. http://www.cmsri.org/published-research/
1
A sensible bill indeed. "Personal belief" has no place in the public marketplace of ideas, which has demonstrated repeatedly that vaccines are safe and necessary. Any parent refusing to vaccinate their child on the basis of "personal belief" does an enormous disservice to the brave public health experts and scientists that not only produced and disseminated the vaccines in question, but also accomplished incredible feat such as eradicating smallpox. These parents should consequently not be able to use other public goods, including public schooling. Vaccinate now.
234
you are incorrect re vaccine safety across the board. general statements from either side of these vaccine debates are dangerous and misleading. Small pox and polio are different categories of risk and societal harm vs some other vaccines. Even that is too general a statement!
what seems to be missing from the discussion is the question of which vaccines are absolutely necessary for infants/children and which can be delayed until the child's immune system further develops. All vaccines are not created equal. Our doctor actually recommends delaying certain non-critical vaccines such as hep B (typically given at birth) which is primarily a sexually transmitted disease. Vaccines are good. Some are absolutely necessary for children and for public safety (but not all of them). At the same time, questioning big pharma and the medical establishment, which have misled the public in the past, can also be good. In the end, we chose to follow the advice of our trusted family doctor and implement the most critical vaccines while postponing the rest - I'm glad to have had this choice
1
The liberal courts in California have indeed painted themselves into a corner. Governor brown is playing catch and release with thugs, what judge is going to incarcerate a personal believer. Please NYT, list all vaccines and their corresponding NNT & NNH, and print the CDC data on msm HIV transmission (no pun intended) and other stds with an upward spiraling epidemic, nation-wide trend.