That’s fine. Simply pass a bill not allowing unvaccinated children and their parents into public schools and public libraries.
Your right to be stupid and dangerous ends where it impacts my child’s right to be safe from measurable harm.
164
In 2020, opinions based on ignorance trump scientific facts.
One wonders how we were able able to conclude that the Earth is not flat and the Sun doesn’t revolve around it.
And so it goes. The rights of a small number of scientific illiterate trump the need of the many.
71
At 73 glad I will soon be gone. A President who never served his country or should I say dictator. The media gives wide coverage to the groups that now claim the earth is flat. Temperatures in the last decade and year the highest ever and wild fires have killed almost 80% of the animals in Australia, but their prime minister a religious right winger says nothing is happening and he takes his family on vacation to Hawaii. He gives permits to open two giant coal mines while the fires are raging and drought across the country. Has even bold to say very little water will be used and dumping the sludge into the Great Barrier Reef won't harm anything. The nonsense of the some of the comments here about side effects guess what there is always the chance for side effects to anything. Keep your kids at home and away from others. Of course the smoke in the air from the fires is never discussed. As a sidenote to those conservatives electricity made from solar and wind is 50% cheaper than the use of oil or coal, but of course that must be fake news. It will be good to see humans eventually go the way of dinosaurs, at 73 and a vet of a war Trump skipped have come to believe humans are not the smartest on the planet they are the stupids and deserve what they get. i do love the lady who came from Texas to stop the law you know the same conservatives that would have a fit if anyone came to Texas to push for a gun law. Selective in outlook. Good luck. Jim Trautman
57
Why is the vaccine makers the only companies that cannot be held liable? They can’t be sued, at least not in the good ol USA. Yet, there are multiple lawsuits around the world suing them.
Why has there never been a study comparing the vaccinated vs unvaccinated children? By the way the data is available. It just needs to be compiled but that requires access to the databases which are closed and locked down.
Why did the top vaccine scientists in the world recently gathered by the WHO state a lot of concerns about vaccines?? Go watch the video. I’ll wait.
Have any of you looked at the warning labels that come inside the vaccine packages? I have. Go take a look. I’ll wait...
The 4 billion that has been paid out by the vaccine court is only a tiny percentage of the real cases of injured or dead children who suffered from an injection. The rules are very difficult for getting compensation.
How come the top pro vaccine doctors will NOT debate with the top anti-vaccine doctors??
There is not one scientific study done showing unvaccinated spread vaccine diseases to the vaccinated or unvaccinated. However, there is growing evidence that, for example the pertussis vaccine is a complete failure. What it does is suppress the symptoms/expression of whooping cough yet those vaccinated children go to school carrying the disease spreading it all around infecting others. While the unvaccinated stay home since it clearly shows the symptoms until they get rid of it.
Pro Choice!
31
It is a fact that many people just don't want the government to tell them that they must accept medical treatment that has a poor track record for safety.
I am a physician who refuses to provide vaccination for reasons of safety. A local pediatrician who attended a closed-door conference on the subject at NIH told a group of us, her colleagues, that after what she heard there, with statistics that demonstrate the lack of safety of vaccines, she would never allow her own kids to be vaccinated.
Why get so freaked out that people disagree with you?
And, no, we are not going away.
If anything, we are steadily growing in numbers and influence.
30
Do you mind if I doubt that you're a physician who refuses to provide vaccines for reasons of safety? Are you an MD?
84
@Simon Sez
You should not be allowed to practice as a physician.
81
I guess that a family that doesn't want to have their children vaccinated, for a religious or other irrational reason, has that right. However, those children must never be allowed to go among the public, that is, they must never be allowed to go off of the family's property.
68
@Thomas
I agree! As I am from NJ, I just looked up my district's legislators and will be giving them my opinion. I hope others will do the same.
24
@Thomas and what about the people whose vaccines never took or have worn off? Should they be banned from the public that you seem to think you own?
16
This is the medical equivalent of flat-earthers. The sad part is that they'll end-up causing illnesses to children, and without consequences to them.
56
Thank you Sharon for reporting about what is really happening in NJ. Lately most media outlets have been focusing on the officials and doctors that support the proposed bills. There are many, many families, education personnel, nurses, doctors and scientists that question the safety of vaccines due to the inadequacy of studies performed for each vaccination. The injury/death rate is grossly unreported. It’s time to question the science behind mandated vaccines and who will profit from them!
25
Measles outbreaks in Samoa, or anywhere, do not justify mandated vaccination for all diseases there are vaccines for. Some vaccines, such as HPV and HepB, are not airborne so are not even a threat in a school setting. Yet, those who have these diseases, or even HIV, are legally allowed in schools.
Vaccine risks are real and can be serious, even deadly. Forcing students to take these risks in order to attend schools their families pay taxes for is wrong. Forcing anyone to undergo medical procedures of any kind is wrong. Using the alleged protection of other people as the excuse is really good marketing.
Informed consent, anyone?
33
@Winnie HPV and HepV are both preventable and transmittable, and you're saying we shouldn't vaccinate against them? Seriously? Both of those are much more transmittable than HIV, so that's an irrelevant comparison. And if we did have an HIV vaccine, we would be giving it to everyone.
75
@Winnie The risks of vaccines are greatly exaggerated. They are rare. The risks of the diseases they protect against are far more common and severe, and may result in death. Per Wikipedia, last year's epidemic in Samoa cost 79 lives (figures were to Dec. 22) and "61 out of the first 70 deaths were aged four and under and all but seven were aged under 15." Furthermore, many of these vaccines prevent contagious diseases that have no effective treatment once infection occurs; prevention by vaccination gives a person the best chance of avoiding death or disability from these diseases.
As a retired physician I cannot understand why people fear vaccines when they have been the most important advances in the treatment of communicable disease since the discovery of the first vaccine over 100 years ago. Have you seen much smallpox in your lifetime? No, it has been totally eliminated by the first vaccine. Polio may eventually be eliminated by vaccines. And these other diseases can be reduced, if not eliminated, by vaccination. Get yourself and your loved ones vaccinated.
149
@Winnie
Vaccine risks are real? Can you cite any studies, other than "Jennie X's kid got innoculated, and they became autistic". The problem with people like yourself is you can't see the forest for the trees, and have no understanding why. This idea of parents know best doesn't pass muster, and never has. Kid gets into an auto accident and needs a transfusion, and their parents are JW's, their belief goes right out the window, their parents are Christian scientists and the kid has strep throat or been bit by a rabid dog, their objections to treatment are basically a non issue.
And this isn't just about 'airborne transmission". Hep B can be spread if a kid is infected and there is skin to skin contact, and the kid on the other end touches food, they can get it, or if they eat food prepared by someone who has it. HPV is primarily transmitted through sexual contact, and it leads to all kinds of nasty diseases down the road. As much as parents claim their little virgin is gonna be that way until marriage, the reality is different. The other thing anti vaxxers don't think about is the cost of not vaccinating, treating outbreaks of measles and treating cervical cancer and hepatitutis and the mumps and the like and the consequences of those diseases, cost all of us, in the form of high medical insurance costs and in the example of the ultra orthodox, costs of medicaid treatment.
54
I really want to know what is the next previously accepted science that will become fake news?
16
@Brian that the earth is round is probably the next candidate.
11
Out of billions of vaccine doses over decades, only a few thousand cases of proven injuyr have occurred. Vaccines are safe. Not using them is not.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/18/health/vaccine-injury-claims.html
32
Unfathomable how anti-vaccination idiots, without a shred of scientific evidence, can influence legislation. Meanwhile, we have one major party which routinely ignores scientific facts and is given to conspiracy theories.
When did our country go collectively insane?
43
@Mrs Ming What is unfathomable is that lobbyists for pharmaceutical companies influence legislation.
10
Oh the Irony!
The anti-vaxer parents will tar and feather a school principal if the cafeteria isn't a "peanut free zone" .. Heaven forbid their son or daughter suffer anaphylactic shock! But it is perfectly OK for their kids spread a contagion in the school classroom and playground.
45
@Aaron you think it’s unvaccinated children who have the peanut allergies?
11
These anti-vaxxers are among the vilest idiots on earth. Do you know that a prominent A-V leader whose baby dies has lamed it on vaccines when in fact she killed the baby herself--accidentally, or course, but they were sleeping in the same bed and the mother rolled over and suffocated the child. So say all the medical reports. But she blamed it on vaccines. Do you know that people without any legitimate religious exemption make one up, thus teaching their children that it's OK to lie to get what you want? And, as reported in this article, they resort to intimidation and threats to get their way. That the A-V nitwits still hang on the words of Andrew Wakefield, the British physician who completely faked his research article that start the A-V scare? And mistreat his child subjects, and took undisclosed financial payments, and was stripped of his license to practice? Charming gang, no?
26
@Peter Aitken ah. Now the name-calling and false accusations get taken to a higher level. Because that makes vaccines safe and effective. Gotcha.
8
Morons. Lots of them confidently spreading their defiantly ignorant opinions on various topics these days. No big deal. They even have their own channel, Fox News.
But when they start killing innocent kids with their stupidity? They can teach them at home or private havens of stupidity. Put other children at risk and that's where your rights to be serially stupid end. Yes, even for a Kennedy.
31
@Lou Good Please give a specific example with proof that any unvaccinated person ever “killed an innocent kid.” Because throwing out wild accusations isn’t very scientific.
14
We don't let parents decide to hurt their children. Even if they do it thinking they are beating the demons out, or doing an exorcism, or giving a bleach cleanse to wash away the autism, or being a good parent like their own by beating the disobedience out. Parents do not own their children, we are their guardians, their protectors, and they are our responsibility, but NOT our property.
It is not allowed for a well intended parent to hurt a child, even if they are doing so because they are scared because of internet fearmongering. And that is what is happening here. Vaccines are safe, proven so in innumerable studies. The diseases they prevent destroy lives.
I have 2 kids. They are fully vaccinated and always will be. If I was mislead into wanting to do something that would harm them, it would be the state's responsibility to stop me, to protect the children. That is as it should be, no matter how much I plead and insist that the internet told me cyanide is good for kids!
23
@SusanStoHelit Hurting their children, beating demons out, exorcism, bleach cleanses, and cyanide. You’re going off the deep end just a little bit, don’t you think?
I hurt my child when I allowed him to be vaccinated. But that gets praised, defended, mandated—and I’m the crazy one? Sheesh. Read a vaccine package insert and start using some critical thinking.
13
If you don’t want to vaccinate your child, fine. That’s your choice. Please act ethically toward the rest of us who have chosen to vaccinate ourselves and our children and those who cannot be vaccinated due to medical conditions.
Do not send your child to school.
Do not send them to a park to play, etc.
Do not go to places like Disneyland etc.
Tell other parents that you have not vaccinated you children when contact is probable.
It’s your choice. Live the consequences so the rest of us don’t have to.
45
You only need a slim percentage of angry or loud people to convince the crowd that they are the majority. Do we want to wait until they are shouted down by the victims who will see outbreaks and deaths caused by the unvaccinated?
15
Interesting Democrats of which I am one, and liberals of all variety eviscerate Trump and others on Climate change. (I happen to strongly believe the science behind climate change.) Scientists know best! Believe science! Until of course biologists say there are key differences in gender, or they say there is great risks to not being vaccinate. Then of course science is lying.
The left is turning very, very scary since Trump was elected. Maybe Trump isn't so crazy after all.
4
@MCS You are correct about the Left, but recently in Texas a Republican state legislator showed that the Left sewn't the only science-denying anti-vaxxers, and in fact our president himself has skirted the antivaxx line more than once.
2
Embarrassing and shameful that science has been trumped by charlatan politics that undermine the health and well-being of our children.
12
Who'd have thought that in America ignorance would not only be tolerated, but treated as a exalted status? I can just see Flat-Earthers being granted special permissions to have globes removed from classrooms, and Democratic candidates removed from ballots where a majority of residents prefer the absolute rule of their God-Emperor Trump. What's next? Will the anti-vivisectionists have meat banned from every store in their district? White supremacists successfully expelling every minority where they vote? Vox populi vox Deii translates from the Latin as: My God! What have we done?
11
The anti vaccine movement is a public health crisis and should be treated as such on a national level
19
These people are not anti-vaccine. They are pro-government transparency. They are pro-science. They are pro-health. They are pro-pharmaceutical liability. They are pro-truth. 4 BILLION dollars has been paid out in vaccine injury court! 4 billion!!! And that came from taxpayer dollars, not the billions that pharmaceutical companies make! This is so one-sided and ridiculous. It is only a matter of time before the ugly truth is exposed. Then the people standing outside of that building will be seen as heroes, and not villains. It's just a matter of time...
23
@j Where can I locate the “vaccine injury court”?
10
The movement of informed parents who demand any medication or vaccine is safe for their children has indeed grown. Unfortunately due to the increase numbernof injuries and terrible side effects their children are suffering after these toxins are administered and also because of the lack of medical training or knowledge of the medical professionals
10
The article says about anti vaxxers:
"Caught flat-footed, the mainstream scientific community has not yet mobilized a robust response."
Seriously? Anti vaxx rhetoric has gained ground steadily since the late 1990s, the science community has had 20 years at least to formulate a response, and they are still flat footed? It's part of the overall trend towards anti intellectualism.
Why is there not a much more robust mobilization against the growing anti-intellectualism in American politics and policies? Scientists make technological discoveries, but have no voice against the flood of misinformation? Why is this not a priority?
16
Mississippi has the highest vaccine rate in the country, something like 96%. I’m sure this is also a state with many churchgoers, yet somehow parents can’t get a religious exemption for their children.I’d be curious to see, since so many of these anti vaxxers, cling to the debunked idea that vaccinations cause autism, how the autism rate in Mississippi, compared to the rest of the country. I doubt that it is higher there than elsewhere. But even if this was proven and publicized, it probably wouldn’t change the mind of one anti vaxxer.
They’re like a cult, where people like Jenny MacCarthy and Robert Kennedy, and anonymous posters on the internet, know more about vaccines than any medical doctor, particularly a pediatrician. They believe what they want to believe, and facts don’t matter. What’s sad is that liberal parents, who are appalled by what’s happening to the planet because of global warming and believe what scientists say regarding this are aligned with people who thing dinosaurs roamed the earth 6000 years ago and thing climate change is a hoax. Maybe they all need to be sent foe a spell to Mississippi where at least regarding this facts and common sense prevail.
15
The recent analysis by the Times of regional differences in perspective found in educational history books might serve as a model for a similar project examining different sources of information regarding the evidence of the possible benefits and harms of vaccines. Mainstream sources of information, such as the CDC and FDA might be compared to such other sources as Children's Health Defense, Informed Consent Action Network, the National Vaccine Information Center, and Learn the Risks.
6
I wonder if Trump could just once use his position to contribute to the public good by urging these uneducated and spiritually bankrupt people opposing mandatory vaccinations to abide by medical regulations and help us protect ourselves and others.
Nah, never gonna happen.
6
The anti-vaxxer movement spans the right, independent, and (to a somewhat lesser degree) the left.
It goes to show that not all superstition, rumor, scientific illiteracy, and personal greed is the exclusive province of any one political ideology. Not even educational for there are smart, academically accomplished people who are also anti-vaxxers.
What, then, is the common denominator that brings an otherwise quite disparate and diverse group to share a common, however misguided, belief?
Their kids.
1
@Robert
It's fear. Let knowledge replace fear.
4
@Robert No -- it's ignorance. Lots of people have kids. The overwhelming majority of parents vaccinate.
4
@Robert Actually, the vaccine choice contingent tend to be more educated. It goes directly to the point that the pro-vaxxers just need more education/information. I believe that they are still capable of grasping the concepts, despite all the aluminum and mercury in their vaccines...
5
Given that thousands of citizens swarmed the New Jersey Statehouse to oppose this bill, why not allow Del Bigtree or Robert F. Kennedy Jr. the opportunity to write an op-Ed about this topic as you have some pro-vaxxers. Surely if so many citizens feel strongly about this subject then balanced reporting would include hearing from these leaders.
21
@LI
in this age of alternative truth, fake news and virtual reality, everything flies in the name of "balanced views". I suggest that the NYT, and surely, schools and universities allow debate on shape of earth and the Galilean conspiracy as starters. This would be just the beginning of true a Socratic dialogue on the basic question of humanity "red or white wine?".
3
Some simple yes or no questions if you support this bill
Yes or no, Bayer and Johnson and Johnson paid 775 million for downplaying the risks of Xarelto
Yes or no, Merck paid 950 million for "making false and misleading claims" about the cardiovascular safety of Vioxx
Yes or no, Elli Lilly paid a 515 million CRIMINAL fine for Zyprexa when company trained its sales force to unlawfully promote off-label uses and spent resources to promote the drug in nursing homes and to provide rewards for doctors for prescribing them to patients for the unapproved uses
Yes or no, Johnson and Johnson paid 2.2 billion when the company was found guilty of understating the serious health risks related to Risperdal usage, including increased risk of strokes in elderly patients
Yes or no, Takeda paid 2.4 billion when they were found guilty of hiding the bladder cancer risks related to the drug.
Yes or no, Purdue Pharma is being sued because court papers are showing that they knew long before now just how dangerous opioid addiction risk
These are just a few of the lawsuits where they have been caught and sued. Now for the big question
Yes or no, are vaccine producers protected from being sued through the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. Given that they have taken the chance many many times before to keep selling their product when they KNEW there was a problem AND they knew they could be sued if caught, what chances are they willing to take when there is absolutely no risk to them?
21
@Kelly Remember when we had polio? Oh, that’s right, we didn’t, we were vaccinated against this dangerous, highly-contagious disease. I have cared for people in Iron Lungs. I care for immunocompromised people now could die going to the grocery store and standing in line next to someone who prefers the healthcare of The Dark Ages to modern science.
Yes, Big Pharma has done some despicable things, but the science behind vaccinations is solid.
52
@Kelly:
[list of "yes/no" questions elided]
Legal findings of product liability aren't dependent upon indisputable scientific or medical facts. Else, big-ticket judgements such as you cite garner headlines, would not be substantially reduced or vacated on appeal.
The judiciary is composed of "courts of law" and not "courts of science." Sometimes, they're not even courts of law, but "courts of emotion."
I think New Jersey just demonstrated the phenomenon when its legislature caved to the "court of public opinion" — which is often the most emotion-driven of the bunch.
15
@Kelly These are drugs not vaccines there is a difference.
13
What about the rights of the immuno-suppressed, such as RA and MS sufferers and everyone going through chemo, to live without fear of the next measles epidemic? Or will the anti-vaxxers argue that those lives aren't worth as much as their children's lives?
55
@Jack
Hi Jack. I have MS. The MS Society advises against live vaccinations for those with MS on their website. That includes the following:
* Rotavirus
* Measles, mumps, rubella (MMR combined vaccine)
* Smallpox
* Chickenpox
* Yellow fever
I'm terrified of having a required list of vaccines required for the public. What if this could trigger long term chronic illness for those who have auto-immune diseases or genetic markers for auto-immune diseases?
Immuno-suppressed people should also not be around people who have certain vaccines. How do we control that one? For example, household members should not get the nasal mist vaccine if a family member has recently had a stem cell or bone marrow transplant, according to the American Cancer Society.
We don't have all the answers and we have a growing population of chronic illness. It's exhausting, this debate. We have so many people who are so sold they have the answer and we're all so quick to label each other vaxx and anti-vaxx. I think we all have a ways to go to understand this and it's long term impact.
So, what about my rights as someone who has MS who doesn't want to get a live virus vaccination based on the MS Society guidance? The government regulations say it's okay. There is not agreement on what safe is across organizations and that's dangerous.
9
@Jack but what about the many who died due to vaccines? They are as important as everyone else. You can check and see how much our government paid for damages to vaccines. FYI, it's very hard to win the case since is the US government you are fighting against. Still Billions had been paid out.
In NJ look for HOLLY'S LAW. "The antibody titer law" (NJSA 26:2N-8-11) it means you can check for titers and be except from the vaccine if you do. How many pediatricians tell you about that option? None. And yet the next child could be anyone's child.
One other thing. Don't look for that info in wikipedia. It will give you info about 18 year old Holly Patterson. Look for articles about 5 year old girl in NJ. It goes to show how internet is also controlling what you.
4
@Jack This is really a non-argument. If you have an immuno-compromised kid or one going through chemo you are strongly encouraged to keep them isolated until they can get their white blood cell counts up. Even a cold (which is much more common) or a cut on the finger is dangerous.
8
Just so we're clear here, there is no religious reason for Jews to oppose vaccination, and most of us don't. I'm hard put to think of any faith that prohibits vaccination for religious reasons, actually.
49
@Working Mama Christian Science and possibly Witnesses.
1
@Working Mama Right. The "rules" of religion were put into place before vaccines came around, so it's purely a choice not to vaccinate
2
"...parents, not government, should control their children’s health care."
Unless those children are unborn, of course!
37
Controversial public health policy disproportionately favoring loud minority tribal entity, generating majoritarian blowback meaning outrage against favored subaltern then producing bogus bigotry countercharges meaning to silence justifiable outrage truely despicable.
6
There is no vaccine for stupid. Unfortunately, many innocent children and others will be put at risk now for horrible diseases that had a scientifically based cure. The rise of social media disinformation is helping spread this tragic circumstance to gullible people.
52
@Jean E Hayes Actually, you do get stupider with each vaccine dose of aluminum and mercury. You have chosen to keep believing what you have always believed in the face of the rampant devastation of our youth. We have the most vaccinations and the worst outcomes. Yet, you hear someone say, "Vaccines are safe," and you jump on board, and you think you know something. Let me give you a clue: when someone says that vaccines are safe, that is a clue that they are promoting propaganda. No drug is safe. Every drug has risks. The risks vary for each individual. And that is why the decision must be made by the individual. Where there is risk, there must be choice.
5
Good thing no one's religious freedom needs men to marry as many wives as desired.
Oh, wait...
Hmm.
15
When did religious freedom become a suicide pact?
22
Disgraceful.
If you want to send your kids to a religious school where none of them are vaccinated and they can pass around all sorts of diseases that modern medicine has eliminated, fine.
But there should be no "religious" exemption from medical requirements to attend public schools. And any activity that receives public funding or takes place in a public building should also require proof of vaccinations.
It would be one thing if these nutcases kids only infected each other. But there are too many people who can be impacted to allow this to continue.
54
The scope of ignorance in this country is hard to believe.
51
@Col Wagon I'm from a country that allows a prominent anti-vaxxer (a professional chef) to be on television every year and "instragram influencer" wives and girlfriends of rugby players to be given a platform to push their anti-vaxxer views. Ignorance is widespread and growing.
4
Once again, religion is a scourge. These ignorant people do not have the right to endanger the health of others. Why should a rabbi or any other member of the clergy be making medical decisions affecting the health of an entire community? These families who refuse to vaccinate should be quarantined and their children should not be permitted to attend school.
23
@Neil I’m no supporter of religion, but plenty of anti vaxxers are not religious or Republican (in fact, many anti vaxxers are affluent and highly educated and vote Democrat).
7
These anti-vax activists are practicing child sacrifice in the name of religion.
10
Is there an anti-idiocy vaccine we can require? The need is obviously urgent.
18
The research is clear. We will need to scare these people into compliance with photos of sick dying children. More here...
https://pjlehrer.blogspot.com/2020/01/because-of-fake-news-1282-americans-got.html
7
Won’t work. They know the facts: they choose not to believe it.
1
Science really doesn’t care what you believe.
17
@Liz You are right. This is not about belief. Vaccines were deemed "unavoidably unsafe" by SCOTUS at the time that liability was taken away from the drug companies. Vaccines have risks. Very severe risks. The Nuremberg code created the concept of "informed consent." It's called ethics. How dare you promote taking away the rights of people to make the best decision for their children! Shame on you!!!
7
We in the United States seem to be getting more ignorant/stupid by the day.
To the poster Jimmy, as to the right to choose, public health is a much different issue than abortion
6
And I assume that anyone who opposes those anti-vax Orthodox Jews will be accused of anti- semitism.
9
Anti-vax: the nonsense that unites the left and right.
10
Anti-vaxxers.
Flat earthers.
Trumpanistas.
The Enlightenment is over.
20
Come on scientists, let's pony up and erect some billboards with suitable pictures:
"It's my right to risk your health"
"Shelter for my child? That's my choice"
"I personally don't believe that gonorrhea is sexually spread".
"I'm a parent, and I'm a food skeptic. It's my right"
"We're making a dirty bomb in our basement. Government, don't intrude in my family"
12
The country is getting more stupid by the day.
Vaccines cause adults.
Religious extremists of any faith are backwards, ignorant people.
5
We should ask ourselves why the pharma manufacturers have full immunity from any litigation on vaccines. There is a separate vaccine court established that has paid out >$4b to date and is funded by a tax that WE the people pay on vaccines.
If the vaccines work then we should not be worried. If you are concerned about the 0.1% of immunocompromised students in school, then where is the uproar that you can have Hepatitis B and attend school but cannot go to school unless you have 3 vaccinations for it. Vaccine immunity wanes and you can shed the virus once vaccinated for 2 weeks.
I have three words:
Follow the money
15
@Lauren I have two words: herd immunity.
When enough people don’t vaccinate, viruses can still propagate. Herd immunity requires near-complete vaccination of the population.
13
@Lauren
You shouldn't ask yourself those questions, you should go research it. A few milliseconds and Google can give you the good and reasonable answers to those questions.
It's a common fearmongering tactic - ask questions, never look for the answers. So many fall for it.
5
@Lauren Pharmaceutical companies would much rather your kids be sick. They make WAY more money off treating illnesses than they do off preventative care.
8
Perhaps those who don't feel they need the protections of vaccines don't need the protection of law enforcement either.
19
Nobody has the right to inflict disease on other people because of their religious or other unscientific beliefs.
If people don't vaccinate their children, they need to home school them and keep them away from public spaces. That means, no playgrounds, no petting zoos, no grocery stores. No McDonald's. Hey, and guess what? No doctor's offices. No hospitals.
19
@LauraF The problem is that it is literally impossible to keep someone away from public spaces, and also impossible to police it.
The only solution is to require every person be vaccinated.
6
@Dave K. It is not "literally impossible." Quarantine is a venerable and legal action.
4
I doubt most of these religious exemptions are actually based in a religion. I live in Sarasota and most of the "religious" exemptions are parents that are just against vaccines and it is the only thing they can do to not vaccinate and send their kids to school. I am honestly not sure which religion or sect is outright against vaccines. From all the non vaxxers I know its a loop hole not a belief.
22
@Tim You are right. They aren't. The rabbis who are against vaccines think they cause autism or some other nonsense. It's not like the Talmud forbade using doctors or taking medicine.
11
I wonder how many of the parents and grandparents of these anti-vac people got smallpox(they started vaccinating for it in the 18th century) or polio vaccinations back in the 20th century. They would do well to look at the bacterial scourges that have plagued the earth. Depending on where you might travel you might have to have certain inoculations and that should apply from to state to state and town to town. It's pure insanity not to be vaccinated against a disease that can have fatal consequences and is highly contagious.
Depending on your travel itinerary, you might have to have certain inoculations. The military does it routinely. Similarily, IMO vaccinations should be mandatory throughout this country also. It's pure insanity not to be vaccinated against a disease that can have fatal consequences and is highly contagious. I for one, feel that those contracting one of these diseases and have contact with others should be treated just like a human with AIDS and knowingly spreads among the populace.
What do we do with the people who contract diseases like mumps, measles, rubella? You see what happens in Africa and the panic that ensued with ebola in the USA.
13
Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
The government has no right to forcibly puncture someone's skin with an "unavoidably unsafe" (deemed by the supreme court)cocktail. I believe the Nuremberg trials covered this.
10
@Davis - Just as an aside, Benjamin Franklin's son died of smallpox. After this, Franklin was a proponent of variolation (the precursor to vaccination).
Perhaps some anti-vaxxers would similarly change their minds if they had a like experience.
28
The Nuremberg trials. What a fatuous, coarse analogy.
16
@Davis So, you've invoked Benjamin Frankin and the Holocaust, as well as a Supreme Court citation, in one argument.
Heavy stuff.
Still, your position is in favor of death and disease. I'm sure you've got more profound quotations to cite.
17
At least we won’t have to worry about future generations
9
I'm tired of hearing about these fools and the spineless politicians who care more about getting re-elected than doing what is right.
Perhaps it will take for some of their loved ones to be affected before they are able to come around.
By the way, Jesus told me that I don't need to pay taxes so I'll need a religious exemption for that.
19
I have an idea: let's allow "religious exemptions" only for the children of parents who themselves are not vaccinated.
If you yourself are vaccinated, then you clearly don't have an actual religious reason for rejecting them, and are just a terrible parent who wants to expose your children to horrific disease.
12
In a society where every possible issue is polled to death, it's rather incredible that many elected officials fail to grasp that the self-anointed activist mob typically represents only a small fraction of public opinion. The fact that a bunch of stay-at-home moms, a handful of religious hucksters, and home-schooled kids show up at the state capitol is because they don't have any where else to be. "Rabbi" Zwiebel and Jackie Schlegel don't represent the public. Most people don't want their kids harmed for the sake of Zwiebel's bogus religious views or Jackie's "choice."
19
Mr. Singer betrays his oath of office by pandering to fear and mythology instead of science. He is a sellout trying to keep his cushy job instead of serving the public at large. Had the bill been about banning female mutilation would he have opposed it on "religious grounds"?
Religious organizations are hypocrites, they only care about preserving their "power" and will rationalize the unthinkable in that aim. Its what enables men to subjugate girls and women all in the name of "protecting them". Disgusting and totally primitive.
10
Heat maps of anti-vax misinformation show an ironically virus-like spread across social media and community trust networks. It's not the ideology of the communities seemingly causing it — anti-vax includes Hasidic Jews and New Age yoga pant moms — as the infection of pseudo-science and propagand. Not all close-knit or traditionalist religious communities are prone to anti-vax hysteria. They are no particular Torah arguments against vaccination. Anti-vax may, however, take root in conservative or alternative medicine communities owing to the ground being ripe for pseudo-science or skepticism of government medical advice (fluoridation as a communist plot?). These community networks, however, are insular and resistant to education.
Not that the federal government or CDC has adequately countered the anti-vax movement. Millions in funding support anti-vax websites but there's been little organized response.
9
And some infant boys will die from ritual circumcision. Or from the aberration known as mitzvah b'peh. What happens when the state mandates these rituals not be performed as they have a clearly demonstrable risk without clearly established benefits. There's less secure scientific grounds to allow these procedures.
4
@Bruce Jacobson Uncircumcised men in the community would not be at risk of "catching" a circumcision; it's a procedure, not a virus.
7
@Bruce Jacobson A mohel will not circumcise a sick child. Circumcision is also supported by health organizations because it lowers (although it does not eliminate) the likelihood of transmitting STDs.
@Blair
Not my point. These parents who object to the "risk" of vaccines subject their children to the demonstrable risk of circumcision (particularly mitzvah b'peh when boys have died from disseminated herpes virus).
1
Do not vaccinate your children? Do not bring them to any public place. Then we're good.
13
Have you ever noticed that the arguments of the vaccine choice contingent are NEVER represented in the NYT? There's LOTS of implication that it would be fodder for a good laugh-fest for everyone else, but in reality, the arguments are not represented because it would expose how poorly vaccines perform, how limited the immunity bestowed, how GREAT the risks, and how SAFER and MORE EFFECTIVE options to vaccination exist. People would be AGHAST at how poorly government and medical representatives are representing the interests of the american people. Not to worry--the interests of american corporations (BIG PHARMA) are WELL covered!!! Why don't you try it, NYT??? I DARE YOU!!!
10
@OnthePath1 How poorly they preform? You mean in the fact that hundreds of people each year used to die of measles in this country, and then 10 years after the vaccine was invented, it was no one? How polio is a thing of the past? That Gallaudet University downsized its campus, because without measles and rubella far less kids are born and become Deaf?
Why would we not want to keep it that way?
31
@OnthePath1
Do you not realize that childhood vaccinations over the past decades have drastically reduced the number of illnesses?
Why would you expose a child to disease needlessly?
14
@OnthePath1
They are not arguments (which should not be confused with being argumentative). The info that supports not vaccinating is largely opinion with little to no bona fide data to back up the opinions.
One's beliefs do not equate to truth, much less should be used as basis for science.
I'm right with you in respect to Big Pharma, but a vaccine is an effective tool and something that Big Pharma actually gets right (and you don't have to pay tons for it nor take it every day for the rest of your life, as they would prefer).
But I'd be interested in knowing what is safer to combat potential measles than a vaccine. And I'd like to see the data - real data - that supports the point.
I dare you to furnish such.
20
This is a shameful capitulation. Because of it more people will die needlessly.
8
And decrease the surplus population.
If only it were the anti-vaccine fanatics and their offspring alone who perished.
5
The fear of the Block vote and ignorance of the anti-vaxxer's again cows elected officials into folding, exposing the public to measles. How did science and proven effectiveness in combating these diseases get forgotten? At this rate Brooklyn, Lakewood, Rockland and Orange counties will foster the growth of measles, at the same time asking for public assistance to support their ignorance.
6
What I found ironic were the signs some of these so-called religious people carried that stated "My god, my body, my choice." They feel it's their "choice" to be allowed to spread preventable diseases to the young, old and sick among us, but adult women shouldn't be allowed to have a choice in their reproductive healthcare decisions. Apparently these "religious" folks skipped their hypocrisy lessons!
21
There is never a time when Judaism opposes vaccines for religious reasons. The real problem is that the head of the yeshivah in Lakewood is an anti-vaxxer.
20
The other rabbis at Aguda all support and mandate vaccines, but they don't want to go against him in his turf. His objection isn't religious at all. He thinks they cause autism.
7
What raises red flags and sets off loud alarm bells is the antidemocratic role of this ultra orthodox Jewish group overturning this critical public health measure meant to protect the public, particularly children. Does this group have a tax deduction? The IRS must investigate this group for possible political violations of separation of church and state. Doven all you like, but stay out of politics, especially public health measures.
6
These people are a valid menace to our rocky public health. Their special entitlement assures danger to others on a daily basis. Absolutely sickening.
12
I am concerned that by itself, some of the terminology used in this article conveys substantial misrepresentations. For example, "anti-vaccine activists" suggests that the people demonstrating are against the use of all vaccines. However, many are aware that the judicious use of vaccines can promote health, but that the large number of vaccines that are now recommended may be contributing to illness.
In 1983, only 11 vaccines were on the CDC child vaccination schedule, whereas in 2016, there were 69. Rates for chronic childhood illness, including autism, have also gone up over that period, from a rate of about 10% then, to a rate of about 54% now. This information comes from a free downloadable "e-book" titled "The Sickest Generation" with citations to the medical literature, available from Children's Health Defense at:
childrenshealthdefense.org
Similary, the expressions "vaccine skeptics" and "anti-science movement" suggest that these persons are unaware of the science. In many cases they are aware of science that others are unaware of.
16
@Peter Kraus There is no link to autism from vaccinations, if it is increasing it is due to something else, perhaps environmental - insecticides? But it is NOT vaccinations.
19
@willie How can you be so sure? Vaccination IS an environmental factor along with Insecticides, GMO's, Pollution, toxic products and chemical components in processed foods. There are SO MANY environmental factors, how can you say that's not one?
6
@Alli
Because multiple lines of evidence state vaccines have not been found to be causally linked to autism.
Multiple lines of misinformation, including anecdotal (individual story) reports, pseudoscientific proclamations, and intentionally deceptive scientific studies still being touted as the truth, shout to people on social media sites and the Internet that vaccines are evil.
14
What is it about the anti-science movement that I don't understand? I was surprised when I read Dr Hotez's oped in the Times last week. It was so simple and well done. He had graphs to illustrate the science with the outcomes behind vaccinations and what the risks were. Yet here we are.
13
@whs The real risks were damages paid out by the Vaccine Injury Court, over 4 Billion to date. That alone PROVES there is risk to vaccination and where there is risk, there must be choice. Otherwise, you're saying it's ok to sacrifice lives (babies, children or adults) for the lives of others, no?
8
@Alli actually according to the HRSA (the organization which administers the fund (and "Being awarded compensation for a petition does not necessarily mean that the vaccine caused the alleged injury. In fact:
• Approximately 70 percent of all compensation awarded by the VICP comes as result of a negotiated settlement between the parties in which HHS has not concluded, based upon review of the evidence, that the alleged vaccine(s) caused the alleged injury.
• Attorneys are eligible for reasonable attorneys’ fees, whether or not the petitioner is awarded compensation by the Court, if certain minimal requirements are met. In those circumstances,attorneys are paid by the VICP directly. By statute, attorneys may not charge any other fee,including a contingency fee, for his or her services in representing a petitioner in the VICP." And the figure yosited covers the period from 1988 to the present.
9
@Alli Nobody who has studied vaccines claims that they carry ZERO risk. They carry a minimal risk, which is vastly lower than the risk of NOT being vaccinated.
Same as for seatbelts, which are similarly mandatory
15
I'm old enough (76) to vividly remember my school friends who came down with polio, and the summer we couldn't swim in any pools. I contracted measles when I was 20 and in college and ended up in the hospital for a week. These diseases, and others, should not be taken lightly, and all of us must ensure they are not spread.
31
I’m a NJ mom who strongly supported this bill, but I saw many of my smart, well educated, not-that-religious mom friends with vaccinated children of their own come out of the woodwork opposing this bill. Their argument was not religion, but rather choice, a fear of government in control, false science, and a concern that this bill wouldn’t allow them to vaccinate on their own schedules. I don’t even know how to respond or fight this because it’s so unbelievable to me that my friends and neighbors would put the risk of disease over anything else, but perhaps this knowledge would help someone argue better for the bill. In the meantime, my kids and I are vaccinated.
19
@M. Owen I thank your neighbors for standing up and voicing their right to choose what goes into their body and the body of their children. The day our Freedom of Religion and Bodily Autonomy are removed, is the day our founding fathers roll over in their graves.
6
@Alli
"I thank your neighbors for standing up and voicing their right to choose what goes into their body and the body of their children. The day our Freedom of Religion and Bodily Autonomy are removed, is the day our founding fathers roll over in their graves."
I do hope that means you also respect the right of women to decide whether to carry a foetus to term or not.
14
@Alli In many places, for women, their bodily autonomy has already been removed.
7
Among the new bills being introduced in both New York and New Jersey are bills that allow 14 year olds and up to be vaccinated without parental knowledge or consent. How is this even remotely a good idea? Our schools are doing a poor enough job getting students ready for college. Turning them into health clinics with perhaps no information of the child’s medical history and what vaccinations have already been administered is absurd. This is a democratic initiative. I am appalled to see my party become the party of Big Pharma. Why not require all politicians to public declare exactly how much Pharma money they are receiving. Something like this is required for publication in medical journals. We also need it ASAP for politicians.
7
@LI You have fallen victim to idea that one counter example repudiates the whole. This fallacy is at the heart of most of our problems. It takes advantage of the credulity of the ignorant.
In our broken politics, it confounds the logic of doing the most good. It's the embodiment of the seat belt urban legend, "There was this guy whose life was saved because he didn't wear a seat belt. That's why I don't wear a seat belt." People are betting on the least likely outcomes. They are thinking, "What if I am that one out of a million. That could be me." It could be you but it is not your best bet.
8
@LI perhaps these politicians should likewise divulge their vaccination statuses.
And, really, parents who are legally responsible for their children until age 18 should be kept in the dark about one of the most controversial health issues of our time where their children are concerned? These teenagers are better able to make decisions during these formative years than their parents? It’s shameful what the pharmaceutical companies do to try to turn a profit.
5
@LI
Vaccinations re-administered aren't a health risk. There's no reason to allow anti-science parents prevent their kids from making a very simple choice - to be vaccinated.
I think that we have forgotten just how bad these illnesses are. Why? Because the vaccines work and science has made them better and safer. If these anti-vaxxers were around in the early 1900s when polio, measles, and other illnesses were common they would think differently. Whether they admit it or not science and prevention have made their lives better, safer, and longer.
20
@TNM Actually, measles mortality rates had greatly decreased prior to the introduction of the vaccine. , thanks to improvements in hygiene and sanitation. After the vaccine, mortality rates continued to decline, continuing the prior trend. https://www.harpocratesspeaks.com/2014/06/pre-vaccine-declines-in-measles.html
6
perhaps if a few of the opponent's children either die, or suffer life-altering effects, from measles, their view might change. Religious freedom is a very crazed concept when it comes to public health, esp. the health of children exposed to these fanatics. Our elected representatives have ONE paramount duty: keep us safe! Re-election pales in comparison. This is an issue that demands sober, wise judgement based solely on medical facts and NOT on the wishes of constituents.
14
@edward murphy Perhaps if YOUR child either died or suffered life altering effects FROM vaccines, YOUR view might change! What do YOU think is motivating these people? It is KNOWLEDGE of the tremendous harms that vaccinations can bestow, and the desire to protect others from those harms.
10
@edward murphy
Many of the opponents children have died or suffered life-altering effects from vaccines. Why is death from the illness considered more virtuous than death from the vaccine?
4
@OnthePath1 Exactly. We vaccinated. We KNOW what can and did happen.
6
From reading the article, it becomes ever clearer to me that the main driver is NOT so much the opposition to vaccines per se, it is primarily opposition to being TOLD to do something or else.
As we lose more and more control in our lives due to intrusive and unnecessary overregulation, there will be more and more resistance to new regulations people can rally around, even if it does not make much objective sense.
I can understand and sympathize with the psychology behind that, while at the same time I can only shake my head and worry about the consequences of forgoing one of the triumphs of modern medicine, i.e. the ability to protect ourselves and our neighbors from serious diseases that can be avoided with little or no side effects.
So I do believe this is more a consequence of people being fed up with being overregulated by faceless bureaucrats than a real rational fear of vaccines. The reaction by the Jewish community underscores that exactly.
8
@Captain Nemo "As we lose more and more control in our lives due to intrusive and unnecessary overregulation" Can you please provide an example? Most areas of life and government have been increasingly de-regulated since the 1980s. The most intrusive activities are conducted by private businesses, like the social media companies that at one time promoted anti-vaxx propaganda based solely on what an algorithm thought people would click on.
16
@Captain Nemo Your ignorance breaks my heart! Why don't you get out and meet the vaccine injured? It would do you good!
3
@Jarrod Lipshy
I envy you for your blissful life!
You are obviously not in private enterprise or working in any capacity in which you encounter the senseless and costly micromanagement that started in the 90s, accelerated under Bush, really took off under Obama and now goes stratospheric under Trump.
Giving computers to bureaucrats and administrators may well have been the end of society as we know it.
Have you never wondered where our national debt is coming from and why health care is costing so much?
It's probably too hard to explain: If you get vaccinated you protect people who did not get vaccinated. It's like a virtual vaccination.
Fixing the leak in your roof does not prevent your neighbor's roof from leaking. But keeping your grass cut helps your neighbors' property values.
I don't care whether people want to protect their own kids or not. They can do what they please. But it affects the health of other kids. Vaccination is a social activity not just a medical activity.
I don't understand why people listen to advocates who have no idea what they are talking about.
50
This unfortunate loss illustrates two things:
1. Religion is a blight on humanity. Everywhere and always. Idiotic superstitious thinking that we as a species should have moved past ages ago.
2. Even in a "blue" state, knowledge and acceptance of science can be very patchy. Just because people vote D doesn't mean they're well educated, logical, or immune to conspiracy theories.
38
Historical perspective needed here. Cotton Mather was a very important minister during the colonial period and advocated for the use of inoculation for smallpox. Different from vaccination, inoculation used live viruses and more dangerous as it could lead to the person being inoculated coming down with the disease. Puritan ministers back then were very interested in the natural world and in medicine as it existed at the time. Smallpox was so deadly that it was greatly feared and yet using inoculation was considered in defiance of God’s Will. Mather, who inoculated his entire family saw them survive a particularly devastating outbreak of smallpox in Boston in 1721.
What is happening today is a total breakdown of trust in science, and in government, brought about by years of Republican assault on all government institutions. Religion, while playing a small part, has been a tool in the Republican play book for power.
Americans feel powerless in so many ways, to make our lives less a struggle for day to day survival, as all the “rewards” flow to the top. Blaming religion is not the reason for our societal dysfunction. The problem is more systemic than that.
https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/boston-smallpox-epidemicPeople
4
@KM My experience is that the religious exemption is just a loop hole and it is not a religious belief.
5
Which will kill us off first - global warming or global ignorance?
70
Sounds like ignorance is in the lead. If only the people who don’t get vaccinated would get the diseases....
8
@Queenie
Those two go hand in hand.
3
@Queenie I vote for ignorance killing us off first. It is an immediate threat while Global Warming is not.
It is not only anti-vaxxers but the people who believe that cell phone tower signals are deadly, and from my childhood, that fluoridated water was a communist plot to kill o all Americans. Ignorance is the most deadly disease in the world.
5
RFK Jr., your legacy will now be measles and other viral outbreaks that kill people. Is the attention, is the placement on a pedestal by anti-vaxxers that important to you? Is your ego that fragile, and in so much need of adulation, that you're willing to let people die to feed your sense of self-importance? You're not a leader. You're a weakling. Just go away.
30
@NR: I suppose that RFK jr. did not live through the Polio epidemic. I did. One of my best friends dreams was to become a football player but after polio the only way he could stand up was with a metal brace from his hips to under his chin. He was one of the best passer with a football I had ever seen.
I was lucky, as a military dependant, I was required to get all the vaccination that existed.
27
People who fail to vaccinate themselves and their children need to take responsibility for their ignorance and superstition. They should be allowed to do so only if they take out an insurance policy to cover their own selves/kids and anyone who is unable to be effectively vaccinated who is infected in an outbreak involving them or their kids.
Freedom requires responsibility. Pay for the damage if you can't get sanity through your thick skull.
23
Selfish Insanity.
24
What a pack of troglodytes!
14
@Betti: Um, you are using the wrong word. "Troglodytes" are people who live in Caves. Along the Loire River in France thousands of people live in modern homes, shop in moderns shops and stay in modern hotels which are carved out of the limestone bluffs. "Ignorant Fools" is the label you are looking for.
2
For many this boils down to proof positive that vaccines are safe. While there are many studies cited by the AMA and other medical communities that find them safe, there studies in existence that indicate inadequate testing is done on vaccines and additives to the drugs. Maybe the two points of view need to be considered more thoroughly.
8
@Daniel Imagine 99 scientists and doctors on one side of the stage and RFK Jr. on the other. There, you have the two points of view who asked for.
13
@Daniel: Statistics show that the risk of adverse effects of inoculations are miniscule when compared to the risk of death or life long disability of those people who catch the diseases.
14
This is as dumb as flat-earthers defunding NASA.
36
@Sky Pilot: Dumber because not having NASA will not kill or disable our children. while allowing people to avoid vaccinations will.
9
As much maligned as New Jersey is in the national press, we are a progressive state. We are not going to allow the children of our State to suffer debilitating illness and death because a tiny minority of parents and activists have "other" ideas about science, medicine, and safety. This bill will pass when the proponents of the bill (the other 8.9 million of us) have organized themselves.
19
It would be nice if the same amount of effort could be put into lowering NJ's extortionate taxes and curbing Gov. Murphy's ebullient enthusiasm for free giveaways which is encouraging affluent taxpayers to flee the state. Let's not even mention NJ's crumbling infrastructure and the condition of NJ Transit which makes commutation from NJ to NYC a veritable hell on earth.
6
I find it curious that people trash the state that they choose to live in. As far as the vaccination legislation goes, it will eventually pass and New Jersey public school kids will have the protection that science demands. Anti-vaxxers can always "home school" their own children.
3
@NjRN
People don't necessarily have a choice of where they live.
If family wants to change their state of residence they have find new jobs, before they move. That includes finding a new job that replicates their health insurance, don't forget. And others, like the working poor, will never have the financial wherewithal to simply up and leave.
1
@NjRN NjRN, and I'm curious as to why some people are curious about the motives and reasoning of others who choose not to stick their heads in the sand like ostriches, completely oblivious to reality. NJ has the highest property taxes in the US and when it comes to more people moving out than moving in, NY, NJ and CA vie for the top three places. Currently, I believe NJ is in first place. These are all verifiable facts. Why do you suppose that is, NjRN? It's not easy to relocate for a variety of reasons. I've lost three jobs in the past due to my employers relocating to lower cost states. There are certain family obligations which keep me in NJ. If I could relocate I most assuredly would and never look back.
Are we testing the safety of adjuvants...? I have no problem with the antigen in the vaccines...those are probably safe, but the adjuvants need to be tested for toxicity...I am not anti-vax, I just want 2020 science brought to bear on human vaccinations. Thanks
10
Yes, adjuvants are thoroughly tested. Go to the FDA’s website and search on the term vaccine adjuvants for detailed information.
10
@wedge1: Everything that goes into a bottle of immunizations has to be tested approved by the FDA. Well probably not the water since we already know that water is not harmful. Reading the comment to NYT article is not the same as reviewing online scientific research.
7
When at long last will the majority of Americans speak out against religious people foisting their nonsense on the rest of us?
36
These people have blood on their hands. As to those who want religious exemptions, then you should not expect your children to be welcomed into public places. It’s your choice but when it comes to health it shouldn’t be.
15
I look forward to the point where “survival of the fittest” addresses the problems that the ignorant pose to society.
8
@The Dr. is In
Didn’t you hear? They plan to be raptured by then.
1
I skipped the flu vaccine for many years. My reasons had nothing to do with the anti-vax arguments.
About five years ago, I made some important plans and began putting time effort and money towards the goal.
About midway through, I came down with a severe case of influenza. Every symptom went full blast for days on end. No way could I finish my plan. My life was impacted.
Will never skip a vaccine again. Don't learn that lesson the hard way.
24
I think vaccines can be effective. They have played an important role in public health. Still, I more firmly believe that it is a scary thought when the government has the authority to tell individuals what to do with their bodies. Many supporters of mandatory vaccination also support abortion rights and women's right to decide what happens to their bodies, which is puzzling to me. Furthermore, why do individuals get so enraged over people not wanting to vaccinate their children, but just accept the negative effects of bias and the profound effect this has on certain populations? This arguably has a greater impact, both short and long term on health outcomes in these groups. Orthodox Jews are not the only group with a propensity toward anti-vaccination views; so are many African Americans, who have an inherent and reasonable distrust of the medical community (we are not the only group however), but this is rarely explored and undoubtedly has a major impact in the issue. All of the demonizing does nothing but exacerbate individuals' resolve to not do what a doctor may suggest.
7
@KM Yup.
@JoyfulNoise What is so hard to understand about individual vs. mass impact?
3
@JoyfulNoise: Your first fallacy is that you merely "think vaccines can be effective." I was born in 1949 so I lived through the Small pox, Polio, Chicken Pox, Influenza and measles epidemics of my childhood. Many, many people died from these diseases and many more suffered lifelong disabilities. I had a school friend who had to wear a metal brace from his hits to his chin in order stand up---Polio did it. He was not immunized. . Those deadly diseases are practically unknown today solely because of vaccines. There is not such thing as a legitimate "religious exemption" because all religions are based on faith and magical thinking, not science.
2
@JoyfulNoise Please, please stop conflating abortion rights with the right to live in a disease-free society.
2
There is another side to this, and it lies with the medical community and the pharm industry, they haven't done themselves any favors. One of the things that triggers the anti vaxxers is the way kids are immunized, and doctors (heavily influenced by the pharm industry) have a cycle of injections that uses these mega dose, multi disease innoculations. Doctors love them because they 'get it out of the way' in one shot, very convenient, the pharm industry loves it because those mega dose innoculations cost more than doing them individually (from what I have been told, the multi package injections allow the pharm company to apply for a new patent, for 'combining doses in unique ways', a common way to extend patents on innoculations long in the public domain, patented meds are more expensive).
In that I understand, after innoculating kids they are miserable, they often end up in pain or sick, and a lot of that to me seems to be because they hit them with a sledgehammer. When parents bring up alternative schedules, doctors pull the "I know best" and "you don't understand routine". Maybe it is time doctors listened to patients, and the advocates for vaccines acknowledged the concerns, and perhaps came up with gentler series of shots to innoculate the kids, that don't have the brutal side effects? I don't believe innoculations cause autism, but I can understand people making that leap after seeing the reaction kids have to the mega shots.
9
@music observer
So, multiple shots is better than one shot? Do you think doctors are interested in harming kids?
Sick kids take more medications, are in the clinic more often, critically ill more often, etc - all of which makes way more money for doctors and Big Pharm.
Doctors are crazy! They’d be way better off financially not vaccinating anybody!!!
Thank goodness the medical field is not like Big Oil or the tobacco industry.
4
@music observer : The argument that there are brutal side effect from vaccines is no more than ignorant prejudice and propaganda from the anti-vaxxers. It is not supported by the multitude of studies of the effects of the different vaccines.
6
It seems to me that parents, who chose not to vaccinate their children and then whose children subsequently get sick and suffer or die from a preventable illness, should be subject to child abuse charges. I think that would solve the problem fairly.
33
@Greg and I think they parents who vaccinate knowing there are risks and deciding to take them should likewise be subject to child abuse charges.
So should their doctors and the vaccine manufacturers but they are legally protected from liability by our government. What other drug—or any product—would you accept that for?
4
I assume you are completely unaware that every inoculation and medicine developed has to go through very rigorous, time consuming and very expensive testing before the FDA approves it for use.
4
@Jeff Prove it.
I hate to think of how many children and old people will need to become sick and die before the anti-Vaxxers and anti-Science people are banished to Plum Island where they will only hurt themselves.
Let them keep to themselves, stay out of public spaces, parks, schools, train stations and airports, where others of us in the herd are providing them some measure of protection against communicable diseases.
Does TSA need to start checking for immune status?
20
My daughter had pertussis as an infant. That was 35 years ago. Wanna chat, anti-vaxxers?
35
@eyeski
My son suffered neurological damage from vaccination as an infant. Let's have that chat.
10
@eyeski: I had a childhood friend that had to wear a full body brace because of polio before we had a vaccine. I also had an uncle die of Tetanus because my Grandfather was an anti-vaxxer.
5
@Carla And you know that in certainty and you sued the physician and the drug company to boot?
3
If your religion forbids vaccination, fine, but MY religion forbids your unvaccinated kids to endanger other children. Since your religion only considers your own children, while mine considers all children, with a focus on those who cannot get vaccinated because they are immunocompromised or for some other documented medical reason, you lose. But today, NJ loses. BOO.
37
@Dew no your does NOT consider all children. It only considers those who are vaccinated. This is precisely why parents need to be the ones to make medical decisions for their families. No one else is looking out for ours except us.
1
@Winnie For the same reasons that parents who have no teaching experience should not be allowed to home-school their children, parents who have no medical training should NOT be allowed to determine the effectiveness of vaccination.
9
@Winnie Dew's pint is that your refusal to have your children vaccinated make them possible hosts to diseases which can easily infect other people. Your rights do not extend past the points where anyone else's rights are violated.
5
Cultists should not be permitted to set policy which is detrimental to the widely accepted greater good.
48
I'm curious as to exactly what the Jewish prohibition against vaccination is.
Caring for one's own health is an affirmative mitzvah, which would tend to mean that vaccinations are required. Rabbi Yeshayah ha-Levi Horowitz, known as the Shelah, writes that any parent who doesn’t move his children out of a city plagued by an epidemic is held responsible for their fate.
During the 19th century, Rabbi Yisroel Lipschutz, ruled that despite the risk of death from the smallpox vaccine (at that time 1/1000), one should still get vaccinated. And in the 20th century, Rabbi Menachem Schneerson advocated for the polio vaccine.
So what, pray tell, is the religious basis for not being vaccinated given the long-standing historical support for vaccinations from some of the most pre-eminent rabbis?
73
@Matt B asks an excellent question. Anyone? (In addition, I feel that choosing not to vaccinate is like public smoking which presents risk to those inhaling second hand smoke. So too does proximity to unvaccinated children.)
7
@Janet
There isn’t any that I have found in extensive searching. Not sure about Christian Science, but I don’t think they eschew prevention. None of the major faiths have any formal tenets that preclude vaccination.
9
@Matt B
On a more basic level, vaccinating one's children is implicit in the Golden Rule: love thy neighbor as much as one's self.
4
What a sweeping endorsement of the intelligence, or rather, the lack thereof, of New Jersey residents. Shameful behavior on their part. For religious people to have so little concern for others betrays their inner corruption.
26
Please keep in mind that the anti-vaxxers are a tiny minority in New Jersey. Don't trash the state based on their actions. Also, can the anti-vaxxer demonstrators please take public transportation or carpool to Trenton so that people who work in Trenton can park and get to their jobs on time? Thanks to them, local workers can't park in their usual lots because the anti-vaxxers are taking up lots of spaces. Not a surprise, of course, selfishness permeates all they do.
5
This is disgraceful. Vaccination should be mandatory. These con artists who have convinced the public that vaccination is dangerous should be put in jail for child endangerment.
20
@Linda can you please explain then why the lawsuit against HHS was won last september
wherein The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has admitted that, in direct violation of Federal law, it failed to provide a single vaccine safety report to Congress for thirty years.
4
@John Please learn how to work the Internet a little better. You are correct, generally, in the failure to provide reports, but you are implying something greater regarding vaccine safety - which is definitely incorrect. Please read the entire case (as I have) and do some overall fact checking. The case does NOT prove anything about vaccine safety.
5
This is where stupidity is being encoded using 'parental freedom' or 'religious freedom', and that isn't surprising. The Ultra Orthodox as a group are not very well educated, and they are prime for all kinds of misinformation, including that vaccines are not kosher (something rabbincal experts have said time and again is not true). People are trying to use the religious exemption as a stalking horse here, both to cover their own fears, and also to extend the domain of religious freedom and that is dangerous. What is next? Religious parents claiming that schools hiring gay teachers violates their religious beliefs, so they should be fired? Born again Christians saying the school has to teach that evolution is only a guess, because it violates their religious beliefs, or let the kids write on a science test that the earth is 6000 years old?
While I agree that the exemption for private schools was ridiculous, for many reasons, this isn't about vaccinations, this isn't about libertarianism, it is about putting the truth on trial and making it guilty. This is a public health issue, when parents of Christian science faith and Jehovas witness try to stop treatment of their kids that is life threatening, courts have ruled against the parents. When the beliefs of parents, no matter how sincere, violate the rights of others or threaten public health, their beliefs have to take a back seat.
25
Once again, NJ lawmakers show how useless they are. Protect the residents of the state!
20
An unmitigated tragedy for children and public health in general, brought to NJ by pandering, gutless, all I want to do is get re-elected politicians.
19
Science is real. Children will die because people have an enormous capacity to believe anything they choose to.
27
These same groups are responsible for the fact that your dog can get a vaccination against Lyme disease, but you can't. (Thanks a lot, anti-vaxxers!) The human version of the vaccine was hounded off the market decades ago. In the case of Lyme disease, there is no issue of person-to-person contagion, therefore no reason for it to be mandatory, therefore no reason for exemptions, religious or otherwise. Why did it have to go? Because it's a vaccine. That's the bottom line in the array of inconsistent and mutually contradictory theories used to discredit vaccines.
The anti-vaxxers' demands for proof of safety and efficacy disappear as soon as they turn your focus from standard medical care to the multi-billion dollar alt-med industries that support them, (often through direct sales on their informational websites.) They're fighting for your individual right to buy their health scam products. Religious freedom has nothing to do with it.
26
@Ruth The Lyme Disease vaccine was pulled off the market due to problems with it and due to low demand. That’s the way the market works.
If people opposing vaccines for their children had the power to have vaccines pulled off the market, it would be the children’s vaccines that were taken off. In fact, more vaccines and doses of vaccines have been added to the vaccine schedule. But sure, let’s blame those parents for the failure of the Lyme Disease vaccine.
So long as vaccines are a "for profit" industry I will adamantly appose any bill that forces vaccinations. Many medical interventions have been considered "safe" in their time until retrospective studies or further investigation have shown them to be dangerous. I can't fathom forced vaccinations.
6
@jscot
Just FYI: Drug companies actually don't make much of a profit on vaccines. In fact, they are abandoning vaccination research, and fewer of the companies are actually selling them. This is in part what leads to shortages of vaccines.
And most vaccines have been around for 20 years or more, and the rare complications are well known. These complications are MUCH rarer than complications from diseases like measles, HPV, and Hep B, BTW.
3
@jscot Contagious diseases put all of society at risk, can you fathom that? Vaccines are completely safe, and incredibly cheap, compared to hospitalizations and deaths. Maybe when we have a proper polio epidemic again you'll open your eyes.
4
@jscot: Everything in life is "for profit." If you have a job it is for your profit. Do you have a family doctor? That doctor is in it partly for a profit. If you support government roads it is for your profit. Public schools are for your profit. The food you eat exist for someone's profit. That you can buy safe food is for your profit. But if someone develops and markets a new medication that can cure disease they are horrible and cannot be trusted because they do it "for profit." Look up the term "Luddite" and then look in the mirror.
3
It is great to see the uninformed, or ill informed, minority can endanger the health of the broader population. This type of single interest approach is very troubling in terms of how it may shape the future. It is also troubling that politicians would back down to this type of pressure.
47
Herd immunity is what necessitates mandatory vaccinations. Some people can't get immunized (e.g. newborns, people with cancer or other diseases, etc.) and some people do not respond to vaccines. It is to protect ALL of us that vaccines are needed by a very high percentage of us.
If the only ones who got hurt by not receiving vaccines were these people's children, I would still feel it was bordering on child abuse to not give them vaccines. Perhaps, though, I would have more sympathy for people's religious or other (by-and-large uninformed) arguments.
However their approach jeopardizes the most vulnerable and the innocent. Their superstitions and religious beliefs are not sufficient reason to jeopardize the vast majority of us. We would like to reap the benefits of mankind's progress against disease even if they would prefer to see some of their own children succumb; or don't care enough about the rest of us to listen to sound scientific arguments.
35
@Gary A. Most of the anti-vaxxers have not seen the devastation of polio, measles, mumps, Influenza, or any of the other diseases we not longer die from because of vaccines. I was born in 1949. I have lives through the pre-vaccination devastation of the diseases that no one now has to worry about due to vaccinations.
2
I would have posted earlier, but I had to burn my medical school diploma, because it's worth nothing.
Also, I canceled my epidemiology and public health class, and will teach The Role of Hope and Prayer in Infectious Disease.
177
@Jgalt So I ordered all those leeches for nothing? Now you tell me.
25
@Jgalt Geez that's a good post.
6
This is a public health issue.
Why does the religious beliefs of one group usurp the interests of all other groups and public health?
Many of these illnesses can be contracted airborne or by evening touching a door handle in a store.
So unless you are living in a compound isolated from the public interaction, you should comply with laws of public safety, regardless of your beliefs.
51
@Gus Your fear of disease is not greater than my own right to what is injected in my body. Full stop. You have the right to protect yourself the best you want to. If you are that concerned, you can get meal deliveries to your house, work from home and literally never leave your house but you have no right over another humans body.
10
@jscot
You, as an individual, do not have to be vaccinated, even if it’s due to ignorance, but it is you who will need to stay away from others, not Gus.
No right is absolute. If you or your children attend public schools, the rights of others come into the equation. Did you not learn this in the third grade--as I did?
6
@jscot
It is not fear.
It is fact.
And yes, I have a right to it.
And yes, by protecting me I protect you.
And yes, medical science works.
Full stop.
5
If these diseases were rampant as they were when I was growing up, I am convinced that there would be no anti-vax movement. The suffering and danger of complications is exactly that bad.
31
So why weren't the pro-vaccine people who are in greater numbers also a constant presence?
Has it really come down to loudest voice wins? Science doesn't matter in NJ. Public good doesn't matter in NJ. Indeed, public health doesn't matter to the lawmakers in NJ.
70
The one thing every politician fears the most: the defection of large blocks of voters to the other party.
This is how politics works in a large, diverse democracy like the US. NJ is dominated by the Democrats, but when the voters say jump, they jump!
3
These parents aren’t fighting to prevent “government intrusion into our families,” they’re fighting to maintain access to free public education. Their mindset seems to be that government services are their entitled right but government rules and regulations are oppression. The rest of us are tired of selfish, anti-social behavior masquerading as “religion”.
230
You hit the nail right on the head!
Notice religious communities who choose to be, for the most part, economically self-sufficient & physically isolated from the mainstream (ex. the Amish).
You don't exactly see the Amish protesting because they do not insist on accessing taxpayer funds for education.
I've noticed that anti-vaxx parents who are either religious or non-religious - but who otherwise can't/won't afford private or online schooling - are the types who don't grow their own food and have relatively expensive technology-driven lifestyles, thus their ability to post loudly on social media.
Ironically, when an unvaccinated Amish missionary took a rare mission trip to a remote Philippine island (they do use planes for missions), he made a whole bunch of impoverished Filipinos sick w/ measles!
While I agree that irresponsibly administered vaccines cause harm (ex. Filipinos dying from a faulty dengue vaccine), the other extreme of not having enough people vaccinated does lead to preventable tragedies.
Look at the generation of kids who lived in iron lungs & had to use Social Security all their lives due to polio, for instance.
You don't like any form of vaxxing to get your kids into public schools we pay for?
Find the means to homeschool or go private - don't stick the huge lifetime bills & epidemic risks to the rest of us who balance science & faith pragmatically!
32
@MisguidedParenting
Another point is that parents don’t own their children and their is ample precedent for government stepping in when parents do not provider medical care.
Also, there is NO RELIGION that specifically prohibits preventative medicine. Besides, all freedoms have some limitations. Rights are always balanced with responsibilities.
14
@Amanda:
The sorts of ultra-Orthodox Jews who are engaged in this anti-vax movement generally speaking _don't_ send their children to public schools. If anything, they are far more likely to run for school board positions on a platform of de-funding the public schools, as a justification for lowering their property taxes.
The attitude isn't to bend government for their own benefit; they don't want some of those government services. Rather, their aim is to bend government to everyone else's _detriment._
12
This article is so biased. Starting with the quote:" The anti-vaxx movement in America has gained strength because it runs largely unopposed,”
It is not unopposed. Pharmaceutical companies, the AMA are giants opposing it.
And also the quote from someone who wrote a book that vaccines did not cause his daughters autism. How about the case of Hannah Poling whose autism was caused by vaccination? This movement is largely women who have sick children. Why are their concerns being dismissed? I think it's awful how the mainstream media is portraying them. If the mothers are reporting ill effects from the vaccines that should be taken seriously and investigated. Our children are sick. The incidence of neurological disability is skyrocketing among our children. It is common for doctors to dismiss women's health concerns, there was an article in the NY Times not too long ago about it. Doctors also, gaslight and routinely dismiss women's health concerns about their children. Listen to the mothers.
16
@e.w. You make many good points. In the case of African-American mothers and lead paint - their concerns re: their children were ignored for years and in some cases even studied in ways that were unethical akin to the Tuskegee Syphilis experiments.
It is likely that some children due to genetic predisposition and environmental exposure have a higher likelihood of adverse events from vaccinations. I do not know why our medical system has to continue to proceed in this fashion that things are either-or and ignore the voices of those who are directly impacted.
11
@e.w. supply one single piece of empirical evidence to support your contention. You can't because every single scientifically valid study has come to the conclusion that vaccinations cannot be linked increased incidence of neurological disease.
50
@e.w.
This is not the argument here.
The group claimed religious freedom exempting them vaccinations.
8
The only thing that is going to cure all of this anti-vax insanity is the first case of Polio. Which is going to happen. That will be the end of it.
24
@Maureen can you please explain the cutter incident then to us
1
Sorry, but you lose your right to choice when that choice endangers the lives of others.
171
@Brian Sorry, First, there is no such thing as the right to a pathogen-free environment. Second, it is not achievable. One’s right to act on one’s fears about infection stops where it starts forcing medical treatments for others.
10
@Amy Your right to bodily autonomy stops when your actions affect others. You have no right to carry around infectious diseases that put everyone at risk, not when they can be easily prevented by completely safe and easy treatments like vaccines.
33
@Amy We are not asking for a pathogen-free environment -- of course that doesn't exist. Everyone gets colds for example, which rarely affect people's lives significantly.
But due to vaccinations, a smallpox environment DOES exist, and a polio-free environment is very close to existing. No more rampant smallpox death, no more iron lungs. A very good thing, which would not currently exist had there been an anti-vax movement back then.
15
These anti-vaccination people are wrong and selfish. We're talking about the safety of the general public, not the idieosyncratic beliefs of a few individuals. They want to maintain their religious preference? Then quarantine them and keep them away from everyone else.
54
@styleman If the kids are not vaccinated, then keep them out of school. Their parents can home school them.
17
@harry and what about all of the adults who were never vaccinated for most of the diseases children have vaccines for these days? Or whose vaccines have long worn off? Or whose vaccines never worked for to begin with?
Children are only about 23% of the US population. How on earth is vaccinating just them going to provide herd immunity?
WAKE UP.
4
@Winnie
You make a good point about re-vaccinating.
Adults who are traveling or who are members of vulnerable populations should get re-vaccinated.
Children - among the most vulnerable populations - should be vaccinated.
3
"...a libertarian argument that parents, not government, should control their children’s health care."
Like most "libertarian" ideas this does not even pass the straight-face test. Your right to eschew science and modern medicine ends at infectious diseases which, by definition, inflict your "beliefs" on society at large.
70
@Pat
Besides, you do not “own” your children as people like Rand Paul seem to think. You have a responsibility to protect them. Government has a responsibility to step in on the child’s behalf when parents are irresponsible--regardless of “religion”. These people are using religion to try to have their own ignorant way, and there is no religion (as far as I know--not any involved in this protest anyway) that specifically prohibits vaccination.
8
So fear took over New Jersey on Monday.
In today's world there is so much information about immunizations but it's a lot easier to ignore it and let your emotions take over.
Like FDR said the only thing we have to fear is fear itself.
17
Should people be entitled to a religious exemption from an otherwise valid law of general application? That's the question at issue here. No one can deny that public health is a legitimate concern of state governments, nor can there be any doubt that states have the power to require their residents, young and old, to be vaccinated in order to prevent contagion and death. The only question is whether the First Amendment's religion clauses create a special exemption from state laws. The fact that religious groups joined in the effort to block New Jersey's proposed law suggests that they do not think it does. Hence the effort to prevent the law's passage. They are right to be worried that the First Amendment offers them no shield. The freedom to practice your religion does not grant you the right to endanger the lives of others.
38
First the separation of church and state should be headed and be a consideration when it comes to protecting the public health. science and medicine should be the drivers of public policy not misinformed non-science individuals and religious conservatives. The four most important advances in public health in the last 100 years that have been the instrumental in extending live span and improving the quality of our lives are : 1) clean water; 2) sanitation; 3) vaccines; and 4) antibiotics. There should no longer be a debate regarding the scientific validity of any of these advances in public health. Those who argue against any of these are unenlightened, uninformed and are putting their children and the children of others at risk for disease and death. Politicians need to do the right thing and ignore these ignorant and overly religious individuals in the interests of protecting the public.
85
All this talk of anti-vaxxers and rhetoric must be intended to obfuscate the real issues. Those people may indeed exist, although I have yet to encounter them, but the real issue with regards to vaccines is and has always been one of safety. The World Health Organization (W.H.O.) recently acknowledged at their Global Vaccine Safety Summit that they don't have evidence for safety, much as they wish they did. The studies are simply lacking good evidence and many show that there are immediate and long-term problems in some individuals. Nobody wants this to be true. Vaccines still have many benefits as well but the choice can be a tricky one and should be taken by an individual on the basis of risk analysis.
Most of the very vocal "anti-vaxxers" are parents or individuals who have suffered adverse effects. Why do they deserve to be demonized? I think that most rational people are open to discussion on this topic, if we can base that discussion around the facts. If you are one of those people often found in this comment section stating how we should remove everyone's right to make medical decisions for themselves and their families, at least educate yourself before.
15
@Carla , no, most of the anti-vaxxers are not parents or individuals who have suffered ill effects. Remember this movement really got started when that discredited physician from the UK (who now lives in Dallas) claimed vaccines cause autism. He lied.
60
@Carla What discussion is necessary? The science behind immunizations is well-founded and widely accepted. Religious leaders of all stripes have little understanding of communicable disease transmission, as shown in NJ.
Let those avoiding sensible medical advice isolate themselves from the rest of the community and be responsible for all aspects of their own medical care.
23
@Carla "Correlation is not causation", a while back thimerosol was identified as the cause of austism and it was removed and then austism rates continued to rise. Point is nobody knows why austism rates continue to climb, but they do, in the meantime measles is deadly and preventable and we know how to prevent it. There should be no silliness and voodoo when it comes to protecting the public.
14
It is both shocking and tragic that in New Jersey home of Institute for Advanced Study, of Rutger where Selman Waksman lived and worked, a vocal anti science minority armed not with empirical evidence, but myth and hysteria can endanger the health and safety of the entire state. Beyond that, they were so low and despicable as to attack and harass the children of state lawmakers who don't even live in the state in an effort to blackmail their parents. It is time for the pro-science, pro-fact majority to organize and fight back. This is not about choice. This is about the security of our state community. About what it means to be part of a community. About scientific facts and about the danger to that community when those facts are ignored or denied.
136
This is your classic fight between what is perceived as the general good against the individual's right to control their life. Parents who lose a child to, say, the measles after refused the vaccine are often not willing to accept their role in the tragedy. As the same time those whose child experiences an, albeit rare, reaction to the shot also are burdened by their decision.
There is no safe way through life, every day has it's moments of risk - the ones you take and those you avoid - and if you live your full number of years you can count yourself lucky.
6
@xprintman OTOH, when one wants the benefits of living in a society one has the obligation not to damage that society. that is a principle that the Antivaxxers refuse to accept.
Samoa. Doesn't. Have. A. Low. Vaccination. Rate. They were at 92% before the outbreak occurred. Similarly, Fiji had a 95% vaccination rate, as well as American Samoa. But they still had an outbreak. Rendering the herd immunity theory a myth.
9
The deaths years ago from an improperly mixed vaccine led to misinformation about vaccinations resulting in a low vaccination rate and the outbreak.
29
@Betty
"Samoa. Doesn't. Have. A. Low. Vaccination. Rate"
Not true. It did have a low vaccination rate at the time of the measles outbreak.
The reason for that was the death of two infants after nurses accidentally mixed anesthetic into the MMR vaccine.
After that, the vaccination rate plummeted to about 31%
which led to the outbreak.
You can choose to believe that herd immunity is a myth but when the rate of vaccination was 92% in Samoa measles was contained.
48
@Betty Incorrect. Herd immunity is not a myth but proven fact. Samoa suffered a measles outbreak because the vaccine administered was not as effective as it could have been. Just like the vaccine millions of us received in the US in the 60s that required us to get another booster. Still, even with a less-effective vaccine, measles was nearly eliminated, and if you got it, it was not as deadly.
17
If these people want to just have their children face the dangers of not being vaccinated it is fine. However, they demand that their children be in schools around those who are vaccinated and depend on them to avoid a measles breakout. However, if there is a population that is large enough not be vaccinated then they put the whole community in danger. There are also kids who can't get vaccinated due to health issues during the first few years of their life who depend on a vaccinated population.
115
@Dharma You do not have a right over other people's bodies. If you would like to home school your child out of fear that is your choice. But in no way should your fear dictate what others are allowed to do.
5
Jacob, nor do you have the right to infect vulnerable infants with dangerous and highly contagious diseases.
You rights stop at the end of your neighbor’s nose.
7
Vaccination of a population is about herd immunity, nothing else. It only works when the members of the population each do their part by getting vaccinated. That's how small pox was eradicated. And that's how polio is nearly so. Or do you want iron lungs for everyone?
10
I'm all for science because I am old enough to remember what childhood was like before widespread immunization programs. Measles, mumps, rubella and polio are not trivial illnesses. Why should I accept non medical exemptions for children attending school, going to Disneyland or just to the local playground? Come to your senses and protect our children!
216
@365gustafsondr: Our local anti-vaxxers get their medical excuses from a local chiropractor, not a MD.
10
A sad day with fear "winning" over science.
I guess the next logical step is for NJ school districts to keep the un-vaccinated out of public schools.
218
@Hugo
Once again the loud voices of angry know-nothings triumph.
15
@Hugo
Not exactly--at least not with all parties mentioned. Agudath Israel--the Jewish organization mentioned--supports vaccines. According to their website, in a piece titled "NYS Eliminates Religious Exemption for Vaccinations: Agudath Israel Statement", they are very much pro-vaccine. They have even organized free vaccine clinics to bolster vaccination rates in their community and have spoken against anti-vax protests.
So what gives?
The problem they have is the government's weakening of religious freedom protections. They don't want the government to say that religion X's practice of doing Y should be prohibited. For instance, if it was shown that circumcision wasn't as safe as is commonly thought, they wouldn't want the government to be able to ban circumcision.
Many Jewish practices have been outlawed in various places in Europe. Agudath doesn't want to see the same thing happen here. If the same thing happened here, America would no longer be livable for Orthodox Jews. This is a real fear.
4
I am torn by this issue. Personally, I follow the science (see the recent NYT article comparing the 'haves' against the 'have nots') which says getting vacinated makes sense and, as such, I do get them. But I also believe in the right to choose and, as a pro-abortion advocate, believe that the right to choose takes president. So, if these people want to put themselves in harms way, so be it. Ah, but then there is the issue of who pays the medical bills should their gamble not pay off.
5
@Jimmy It's just a bit complicated than that. My understanding is vaccines don't generally work 100% so it's important to vaccinate as many people as possible to prevent an individual case from infecting enough others to cause essentially a chain reaction.
75
@Jimmy
You’re comparing an apple to an orange here - vaccination is key to maintaining health, safety & welfare of all, whereas abortion protections deal with freedoms affecting only the individual mother and her pregnancy.
Would love to see anti-vaxxers explain religious exemption given their sources of inspiration and faith were written long before vaccines ever existed.
73
@edwardc you're correct. The more people vaccinated, the more protection for those vaccinated. The vaccine does not protect a person 100% from getting the disease. The vaccine "wakes up" your immune system and it makes antibodies to the fight the disease if the person should contract the disease. The vaccinated person can still get sick, but the duration and severity will be reduced because your body is prepared to fight the disease. All vaccines work this way. Vaccinations benefits everyone, not vaccinating benefits no one.
41