Forced vaccinations with zero exemptions

[ronburgundy]

(edited to add: Lets assume established medical risks verified by testimony of expert panels are given an exemption, but all religious and philosophical excuses are eliminated.)

Seemingly fueled by the recent measles outbreaks in CA and more recently Disneyland, Penn & Teller created a great new 90 second bit destroying the anti-vaccination thinking, showing that even if their invented claims of 1 in a 100 vaccinations causing autism were true and even if they continued their immorally selfish lack of regard for the life of everyone else's kids, their own kid would still be at greater risk of death from non-vaccination than of autism via vaccination.

They are trying to appeal to the selfish motives of anti-vaccination parents, which is a reasonable tactic to increase compliance. However, their rant prompts me to ask whether opting out should be a legal alternative. Should non-vaccination be treated like a form of engaging in environmental pollution that harms others? Each lack of vaccination increases every other future persons risk of exposure to to the non-vaccinated virus/disease. It is analogous to failing to take measures to keep one's sewage and waste from getting into the river that supplies the town with drinking water. We don't allow people to opt out of such measures, and we do not give religious exemptions for polluting. Like we do with other polluters, should non-vaccinaters be massively fined to force compliance then jailed or deported for continued non-compliance?

Alternatively or in addition, should parents be with a non-vaccinated kid that is found to have the measles in any public setting be criminally charged with reckless endangerment or public endangerment exposing other kids to the virus? (even if those other kids are vaccinated, because the vaccination is only 99% and one such kid got the measles at Disneyland). Note that actual harm to others is not required for such crimes only act or failures to act that needlessly put others at risk of serious harm.

 

[Nexus]

Vaccinations cause my kidneys to stop working. I only had the first round when I was a child. There are other people like me so fuck anyone that wants to impose a death sentence on innocent people. That's what no exceptions means.

 

[Toni]

There are legitimate medical reasons to opt out of vaccinations. This includes having a seriously compromised immune system such as might occur when one is receiving chemotherapy for leukemia, a cancer which occurs in childhood (and adulthood). Other valid reasons would include (but not be limited to) known severe allergy to any component of the vaccine, serious illness present, and more. For a comprehensive look at contraindications for vaccination see:

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/should-not-vacc.htm

 

[ronburgundy]

Okay, so medically established reasons get an exemption, scientifically invalid claims, whether about causing autism or how God feels about it do not. IOW, a panel of expert doctors and medical researchers testify as to the list of medical reasons why a vaccination puts a person at undue risk, and those people whose doctor sign a legal statement that the patient has such a vaccine relevant condition get an exemption.

 

[Toni]

Okay, so medically established reasons get an exemption, scientifically invalid claims, whether about causing autism or how God feels about it do not. IOW, a panel of expert doctors and medical researchers testify as to the list of medical reasons why a vaccination puts a person at undue risk, and those people whose doctor sign a legal statement that the patient has such a vaccine relevant condition get an exemption.

That's a hell of a lot of work for a parent of a child undergoing chemo to have to go through, frankly. And more prohibitively, that's a really expensive proposition you've put forth. MOST people send their children to school and all states have mandates vaccine schedules with some exemptions, especially medical exemptions already outlined. That already serves as a pretty good way to ensure close to universal vaccination. But not all people send their children to school and can avoid vaccination that way. I am sure there are other ways, as well.

IMO, the best and most cost effective way to get compliance is via education.

 

[Sarpedon]

I would say that the best way to do it is with universal healthcare, so every child with an exemption is recognized prior to vaccination time.

But of course, saying that means I'm a communist.

 

[ronburgundy]

Okay, so medically established reasons get an exemption, scientifically invalid claims, whether about causing autism or how God feels about it do not. IOW, a panel of expert doctors and medical researchers testify as to the list of medical reasons why a vaccination puts a person at undue risk, and those people whose doctor sign a legal statement that the patient has such a vaccine relevant condition get an exemption.

That's a hell of a lot of work for a parent of a child undergoing chemo to have to go through, frankly. And more prohibitively, that's a really expensive proposition you've put forth.

No it isn't. While on one of their many doctors visits for that condition, their doctor merely signs an official government form verifying that the child has a medically validated risk if vaccinated. The panel I referred to isn't for each individual case but just a national level panel that gets together to create a list of the conditions that pose notable medical risk if a child is vaccinated. That list is on the form that the child's doctor merely uses to indicate the condition the child has. There is zero additional work or cost beyond getting diagnosed with the condition that puts one at risk.

MOST people send their children to school and all states have mandates vaccine schedules with some exemptions, especially medical exemptions already outlined. That already serves as a pretty good way to ensure close to universal vaccination. But not all people send their children to school and can avoid vaccination that way. I am sure there are other ways, as well.

Nearly all states allow non-medical exemptions that amount to nothing more than parents having to say "No, thanks". Around 10% of the national population is not vaccinated for measles and the same for polio, with many states having between 15% to 20% not vaccinated. That is far from "universal" and offers up a feeding ground for outbreaks to occur.

IMO, the best and most cost effective way to get compliance is via education.

Despite massive education efforts, measles vaccines flattened out about 15 years ago at the levels I mentioned above. Some places are getting higher while in other places the anti-vaccine propaganda is working and rates are getting lower. Pockets of sizeable non-vaccinated kids have created increases in outbreaks in recent years. There has been a sizable increase in measles cases with 3 of the last 4 years having more cases than the 10 prior years combined.

The CDC set a goal of > 95% vaccination in all states by 2020. There is no way that is happening even by 2030 without additional coercion and the elimination of people being able to opt out without any medical reason whatever.

 

[bilby]

People who can be vaccinated should be vaccinated, for the protection of those who cannot.

People no more have the moral right to choose not to vaccinate for philosophical or religious reasons than they have the right to choose to drive while intoxicated for philosophical or religious reasons.

Your freedom to choose a course of action ends where that choice needlessly endangers others.

 

[Toni]

That's a hell of a lot of work for a parent of a child undergoing chemo to have to go through, frankly. And more prohibitively, that's a really expensive proposition you've put forth.

No it isn't. While on one of their many doctors visits for that condition, their doctor merely signs an official government form verifying that the child has a medically validated risk if vaccinated. The panel I referred to isn't for each individual case but just a national level panel that gets together to create a list of the conditions that pose notable medical risk if a child is vaccinated. That list is on the form that the child's doctor merely uses to indicate the condition the child has. There is zero additional work or cost beyond getting diagnosed with the condition that puts one at risk.

Written like someone who has never had a sick child and has zero idea how those kinds of appointments go, much less the amount of bureaucracy this would involve. There's where the expense comes in.

MOST people send their children to school and all states have mandates vaccine schedules with some exemptions, especially medical exemptions already outlined. That already serves as a pretty good way to ensure close to universal vaccination. But not all people send their children to school and can avoid vaccination that way. I am sure there are other ways, as well.

Nearly all states allow non-medical exemptions that amount to nothing more than parents having to say "No, thanks". Around 10% of the national population is not vaccinated for measles and the same for polio, with many states having between 15% to 20% not vaccinated. That is far from "universal" and offers up a feeding ground for outbreaks to occur.

Yes, believe it or not, people are still allowed to be stupid.

I believe in vaccination against childhood diseases. I believe it should be universal with medical exceptions. But I also believe that people have choices in their lives and that without those choices, it is hard to make a case that we live in a free and just society.

For the record, my childhood occurred before most of those vaccinations were around, so I got measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox. All of which I remember. And pertussis (whooping cough) which I contracted as an infant, before an age where I would have been vaccinated had vaccine been available at the time. I don't remember whooping cough but my understanding is that it nearly killed me. I was fucking grateful that there were more vaccines available for my kids. They were too early for the varicella vaccine so I really know what a pain chickenpox can be. And dangerous: the girl around the corner was hospitalized for a week when her chicken pox caused encephalitis. I'm also grateful for greater availability of antibiotics. I remember ear infections pretty well, too. And scarletina.

IMO, the best and most cost effective way to get compliance is via education.

Despite massive education efforts, measles vaccines flattened out about 15 years ago at the levels I mentioned above. Some places are getting higher while in other places the anti-vaccine propaganda is working and rates are getting lower. Pockets of sizeable non-vaccinated kids have created increases in outbreaks in recent years. There has been a sizable increase in measles cases with 3 of the last 4 years having more cases than the 10 prior years combined.

The CDC set a goal of > 95% vaccination in all states by 2020. There is no way that is happening even by 2030 without additional coercion and the elimination of people being able to opt out without any medical reason whatever.

More education, not more coercison is needed to counteract the misinformation. The necessary education is not limited to knowing that vaccines protect against disease and do not cause autism, or whatever the condition of the month is. It starts with basic science education, including understanding what science is, what evidence is, medical science, etc.

When people feel coerced, they try to get around rules. When people don't have the basic tools with which to understand how their bodies work, how vaccines work, they don't make as good decisions. When people feel that that knowledge is somehow beyond them, they turn to woo and conspiracy theories. When people actually understand why something is necessary, they are much more likely to be compliant.

 

[Axulus]

The best and most ethical method to increase compliance is not to force people to be vaccinated but to make such a decision costly: charge them a yearly non-vaccination tax for every member in their household that is not vaccinated.

 

[fast]

People who can be vaccinated should be vaccinated, for the protection of those who cannot.

People no more have the moral right to choose not to vaccinate for philosophical or religious reasons than they have the right to choose to drive while intoxicated for philosophical or religious reasons.

Your freedom to choose a course of action ends where that choice needlessly endangers others.

Just testing the waters here, so don't go crazy on me. Your example of intoxication troubles me. You're comparing a choice of not doing something to a choice of doing something. I'm not entirely sure that matters, but I wanted to throw that out there.

 

[bilby]

People who can be vaccinated should be vaccinated, for the protection of those who cannot.

People no more have the moral right to choose not to vaccinate for philosophical or religious reasons than they have the right to choose to drive while intoxicated for philosophical or religious reasons.

Your freedom to choose a course of action ends where that choice needlessly endangers others.

Just testing the waters here, so don't go crazy on me. Your example of intoxication troubles me. You're comparing a choice of not doing something to a choice of doing something. I'm not entirely sure that matters, but I wanted to throw that out there.

I don't think it does matter in this case - it's not like vaccination is something that needs to be done every time you go out in public.

It's an imperfect analogy - as all analogies inevitably are - but if you prefer, you could compare mixing with the public while unvaccinated with driving solo while untrained and unlicensed.

 

[fast]

Just testing the waters here, so don't go crazy on me. Your example of intoxication troubles me. You're comparing a choice of not doing something to a choice of doing something. I'm not entirely sure that matters, but I wanted to throw that out there.

I don't think it does matter in this case - it's not like vaccination is something that needs to be done every time you go out in public.

It's an imperfect analogy - as all analogies inevitably are - but if you prefer, you could compare mixing with the public while unvaccinated with driving solo while untrained and unlicensed.

I'm gonna have to do some thinkin' on that one.

 

[Togo]

The benefits of vaccination are really up to the level of herd-immunity. Beyond a certain % the disease can't spread easily, and dangerous sweeping outbreaks occur far less often.

However, what you're talking about is using a great deal of expensive and distressing coercion to force EVERYONE to get vaccinated. The level won't be 100% because of medical exemptions. But you want to push it as high as possible. Why? What's the medical benefit of going from the 80-90% or so that you get from a voluntary program to the 99% of a compulsory one? Because it strikes me that your plan here is to kill people (both vaccination and coercion have a non-zero death rate, as the smallpox program showed) in order to get an arbitrarily high vaccination rate. Is the epidemeology really behind you on this one?

 

[TV and credit cards]

What's needed is removing the ability to not get vaccinations simply by checking a box on a form and walking away. It should be a little more difficult than that. This will scoop up the lazy and misinformed. From what I've looked at, we (the US) are not far off from herd immunity but we are off enough to have increased and unnecessary occurrences of preventable diseases.
Education is fine. Education from whom? Certainly not the guy/gal with half a dozen advertisements for pharmaceuticals in his/her waiting room. Perception (rapport) with your family physician is important. They want to sell their souls to the devil, fine but they need to expect to loose a certain degree of trust amongst their patients.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

But a former bubble head MTV personality says that autism is caused by vaccinations. This is proved by her having a child with autism!

I think the only logical and ethical way to do this is to inject the child with the virus instead of vaccine. This way people will see first hand the potential dangers of some of these diseases.

And if the parent was immunized but they don't want their child immunized, they should be smacked in the face with a steel chair a few times by Brock Lesnar.

The best and most ethical method to increase compliance is not to force people to be vaccinated but to make such a decision costly: charge them a yearly non-vaccination tax for every member in their household that is not vaccinated.

Tax deduction for a dependent is dependent on vaccination? Hmm....

 

[Toni]

Education is fine. Education from whom? Certainly not the guy/gal with half a dozen advertisements for pharmaceuticals in his/her waiting room. Perception (rapport) with your family physician is important. They want to sell their souls to the devil, fine but they need to expect to loose a certain degree of trust amongst their patients.

The above sounds like it comes from more than half way to Vaxerville.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Education is fine. Education from whom? Certainly not the guy/gal with half a dozen advertisements for pharmaceuticals in his/her waiting room. Perception (rapport) with your family physician is important. They want to sell their souls to the devil, fine but they need to expect to loose a certain degree of trust amongst their patients.

Doctor: How many people do you know have suffered from polio?

Infant's parent: *shrugs*

Doctor: What about tuberculous?

Infant's parent: *shrugs*

Doctor: How many children do you know died of the measles?

Infant's parent: *shrugs*

Doctor: Do you get what I'm saying about the effectiveness of vaccinations?

Infant's parent: *shrugs* But I read online that it can cause autism and it is better to be safe than sorry and not get the vaccine.

Doctor: Nurse... I need Lesnar in here.

Four minutes later

WHACK!!!!!

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Okay, so medically established reasons get an exemption, scientifically invalid claims, whether about causing autism or how God feels about it do not. IOW, a panel of expert doctors and medical researchers testify as to the list of medical reasons why a vaccination puts a person at undue risk, and those people whose doctor sign a legal statement that the patient has such a vaccine relevant condition get an exemption.

Yeah, medical exemption based on the evaluation of an independent doctor, not the family doctor (although it can be based on things in the family doctor's record.) The problem is too many doctors are pressured to sign off on medical exemptions when there isn't a valid reason.

- - - Updated - - -

More education, not more coercison is needed to counteract the misinformation. The necessary education is not limited to knowing that vaccines protect against disease and do not cause autism, or whatever the condition of the month is. It starts with basic science education, including understanding what science is, what evidence is, medical science, etc.

When people feel coerced, they try to get around rules. When people don't have the basic tools with which to understand how their bodies work, how vaccines work, they don't make as good decisions. When people feel that that knowledge is somehow beyond them, they turn to woo and conspiracy theories. When people actually understand why something is necessary, they are much more likely to be compliant.

You can't make them learn, any more than you can make the horse drink.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The benefits of vaccination are really up to the level of herd-immunity. Beyond a certain % the disease can't spread easily, and dangerous sweeping outbreaks occur far less often.

However, what you're talking about is using a great deal of expensive and distressing coercion to force EVERYONE to get vaccinated. The level won't be 100% because of medical exemptions. But you want to push it as high as possible. Why? What's the medical benefit of going from the 80-90% or so that you get from a voluntary program to the 99% of a compulsory one? Because it strikes me that your plan here is to kill people (both vaccination and coercion have a non-zero death rate, as the smallpox program showed) in order to get an arbitrarily high vaccination rate. Is the epidemeology really behind you on this one?

Measles is not endemic in the US at this point. Outbreaks are due to imports from areas without the high vaccination level.

If you could bring the whole world to a 90% level measles would go extinct, there would be no reason to push vaccination levels higher. Herd immunity doesn't stop imports, though, it just limits the size of the outbreak.

And you can't do it by requiring visitors to show a health card, those are too easy to fake. (It's the same system in use now as in the 80s--and back then I traveled across Africa in a group where everyone had faked health cards. We weren't anti-vaxxers, we only faked the smallpox vaccination--because you could still have trouble with border guards wanting bribes if your vaccinations weren't up to date--never mind that the only people with current smallpox shots at that time were people that worked in level 4 labs.)