CA Vaccine Law - Pt 2 - Now W/arguments about everything!

[Snarkylark]

Or you'll get scarlet fever or quinsy or be more at risk for strep complications, which is why we now treat strep throat.

Yep, strep throat- bad example. Must be treated or one can develop damage to the heart valves.

[Maggie Mae]

Do most of you adults over 26 or so have your chicken pox vaccine?

I was in the first groups of receiving chicken pox vaccine as a child.

My boyfriend it 4 years older and never received.

I plan to vaccinate my child against chicken pox but certainly don't think it should be mandatory.

Maybe we can make the madatory part for things like measles ( the thing most people on here are concerned about)

I need to go get that vaccine. I never had it as a child. Everytime someone's kid gets chicken pox I tend to freak out a little bit and spend a long time googling shingles and chicken pox.

[Snarkylark]

Is it sinful to want to cuddle another poster's dog when you know those desires can't be righteously fulfilled? Do I need time in the Prayer Closet until these cuddly feelings dissipate? What would BinBob, my glorious leader, think if he saw me staring at the puppy all googly-eyed, knowing full well that I'm handing pieces of my heart over to the little furball?!

HA! Too cute

[Maggie Mae]

Did you know Veterinarian students are required to put their hands in places that they should never be placed? My dad's best friend has a niece who works as a Vet and she has all sorts of gross and amazing stories to share. :lol:

Who was the first guy to express a dog's anal glands? And why?

[ILoveJellybeans]

Don't let Steve Maxwell know youre fighting over cats and dogs or he will go out for dinner and make you wait in the car.

[Walking Cat Bed]

Don't let Steve Maxwell know youre fighting over cats and dogs or he will go out for dinner and make you wait in the car.

He ain't the boss of me.

[HarryPotterFan]

Yer mom likes having holes righteously fulfilled.

And that's where babies come from

[Mama Mia]

I have been studying Criminal Law for the bar exam in my state, and I do believe that antivaxxers can and should be charged with depraved-heart murder for failing to vax their kids if one can prove that a disease their kid had, for instance, killed an immunocompromised child who can't vaccinate.

The elements of depraved-heart murder are:

1. Defendant commits an act (taking the sick unvaxxed kid in public, maybe?);

2. Even though they know their act creates an unusually high risk of death or serious bodily harm (perhaps not always true, but could work if you knowingly take your sick kid to see a relative with cancer, HIV, etc. or don't segregate the sick child from an unvaccinated baby- it's quite likely that a sick person or baby would die or be disabled from these very serious diseases);

3. Such an act results in a death (and it does for some who catch the disease).

Depraved-heart murder is considered to be committed with malice even though it's not intentional, since defendant knew of the high risk of harm and still did it. In most jurisdictions, it's considered second-degree murder.

I'm not advancing this legal theory as an overall solution, since it would be hard to prove causation and intent to create the risk of death through contact with the sick child. But maybe, if it were possible to apply it as above to the worst anti-vaccine offenders, it would scare the rest into compliance. Depraved-heart murder is usually for something like dropping something heavy from a roof onto a populated street, or shooting a gun without checking to see whether a person is in the way, and thus killing a person. But fundamentally, I don't believe the failure to vaccinate is any different, to a vulnerable person, than not looking before dropping a piano on them.

Well, I was trying to stay out of this thread--- but----

I really don't think this makes sense.

I'm in the population that can no longer receive vaccines. I am at high risk of getting really, really ill and having serious complications if I did catch a preventable disease. I strongly believe that means that I have a personal responsibility to weigh out the risks and benefits of putting myself in situations where I might be exposed to illness.

If it could be argued that I was only at risk from vaccine preventable diseases AND only people who refused to be vaccinated could pass on those diseases - you might have a point. But neither of those are true.

I am much more likely to get really ill from any of the various common viruses that are passed around in crowds. Just because they are much more common. There are still common childhood illnesses which don't have a vaccine that the vast majority of people get in childhood without incident that can cause disability or death in some people. It's actually complications from one of those that caused some of my more life altering disability - because my immune system was already fucked up. I know that risk when I hug my grandchildren, or go to a family picnic at a park, or go to the mall. Or if I catch a common cold is more likely to turn into pneumonia. So, to use the piano analogy, it's more like I'm choosing to walk down a street that is labeled " watch for falling piano's!" , and happen to get hit by one particular piano, instead of the dozen others being dropped from buildings on the street.

Also, continuing to use measles as the example, there are a fair number of people who could pass on measles despite being assumed to be immune. Measles is about the most contagious disease known - so older adults ( anyone late 50's + ) are universally assumed to have immunity - because virtually everyone had measles whether they knew it or not. But it certainly is possible that there is a number of older people who actually did not have it and are not immune who could spread the disease to others. The measles vaccine is also one of the most effective - 97% have immunity after two vaccinations. But that leaves 3% who don't have that immunity, despite being fully vaccinated. And they aren't aware of it. My daughter discovered she didn't have immunity only because she had to have the serum? test for a volunteer job at a hospital -- otherwise she would have had no idea.

So, using the measles possibility . Suppose I, an immunocompromised Grandmother, takes my too young to be vaccinated grandchild to see Frozen. In the audience you have 10 people carrying various viruses that might make me sick. 1 child who is unvaccinated by choice and 4 other children who are too young to be vaccinated, 3 people who aren't immune despite being vaccinated. And maybe an older adult or two who may not have actually had measles as a child.

If I later get very ill and it turns to pneumonia and because of my weak immune system I die, or my grandchild gets measles , how can I realistically say that I was unaware of any risk? It may have been the unvaccinated by choice child who spread the disease - but it could have been any of the others. Even if you could prove it was that one child - wouldn't you then have to prove how they caught it?

It does all go back to herd immunity. But to " prove" it was murder, when there are many other options for contagion? That makes no sense.

[Terrie]

I didn't ignore it. I was at a softball tournament with not a lot of time to reply and then work for two days. This specifically mentions vaccination. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2841828/ Around page 11 or 12. I looked at the first two links you posted with the time I had as well as the wiki source. If I'm not allowed to use "unreliable" sources then neither are you! I'm not an antivaxxer and I've stated that numerous times. But if you're going to post something on the hygiene hypothesis then you have to accept that decline in infectious diseases (partly due to vaccination) is going to come up!

The only mention of vaccines in that article is as part of a loooong list of changes in our overall health profile. In fact, of the three infections they specifically mention right after that (HepA, childhood diarrhea and parasites) , the only that we vaccinate for is HepA, and that wasn't added to the stndard schedule until late 2005. So please explain, how does this support your contention that vaccination (specficially) could be contributing to rises in auto-immune disorders?

[FundieFarmer]

I swear I didn't create this, but given our dog vaccination debate:

I've got more where that came from...

[nausicaa]

Is it bad my first reaction was to laugh and then immediately want to know more about this Great Corncob Incident?

Exact same reaction over here.

[Snarkylark]

The only mention of vaccines in that article is as part of a loooong list of changes in our overall health profile. In fact, of the three infections they specifically mention right after that (HepA, childhood diarrhea and parasites) , the only that we vaccinate for is HepA, and that wasn't added to the stndard schedule until late 2005. So please explain, how does this support your contention that vaccination (specficially) could be contributing to rises in auto-immune disorders?

I didn't say that vaccines may contribute to the rise in AI disease but that the hygiene hypothesis may indicate that by way of eradicating some childhood infections.

Ever heard of rotavirus? It's another childhood disease that causes diarrhea that we now vaccinate for. All I'm saying is that "potentially" the case could be made to say that there is a "chance" that not getting some of these childhood diseases "could" explain the rise in AI disease. I'm not saying it's fact, just that the hygiene hypothesis could support this theory in some way.

[RosyDaisy]

You're wrong! I read it on the internet! So it must be true!!!!!!!111!!!1!!

No! The LOL Cat Bible is right. Cats are smarter than dogs and humans. The godly thing to do is to submit to their authority.

[nokidsmom]

No! The LOL Cat Bible is right. Cats are smarter than dogs and humans. The godly thing to do is to submit to their authority.

Indeed. The cat is in charge. Always. If you do not follow the feline headship, said feline will make sure you submit.

[RosyDaisy]

I swear I didn't create this, but given our dog vaccination debate:

I've got more where that came from...

Bring 'em on!

[SpeakNow]

I'd have to disagree with that. It's not natural to learn to fight off diseases by being injected with them in some form.

But we get infected by a disease entering the body and fighting it off. That's a natural process. The vaccine just introduced the disease in a controlled manner.

[FundieFarmer]

Bring 'em on!

This one is in honor of VelociRapture...I don't know how you feel about the Illuminati, but it felt in keeping with some of the craziness of the thread :lol:

Anyway, I'll stop now :D

[ShepherdontheRock]

Indeed. The cat is in charge. Always. If you do not follow the feline headship, said feline will make sure you submit.

OMG YOURE ALL WRONG YOU SHEEPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!ELEVENTY!!!!!!!!!!!

[VelociRapture]

Well, I was trying to stay out of this thread--- but----

I really don't think this makes sense.

I'm in the population that can no longer receive vaccines. I am at high risk of getting really, really ill and having serious complications if I did catch a preventable disease. I strongly believe that means that I have a personal responsibility to weigh out the risks and benefits of putting myself in situations where I might be exposed to illness.

If it could be argued that I was only at risk from vaccine preventable diseases AND only people who refused to be vaccinated could pass on those diseases - you might have a point. But neither of those are true.

I am much more likely to get really ill from any of the various common viruses that are passed around in crowds. Just because they are much more common. There are still common childhood illnesses which don't have a vaccine that the vast majority of people get in childhood without incident that can cause disability or death in some people. It's actually complications from one of those that caused some of my more life altering disability - because my immune system was already fucked up. I know that risk when I hug my grandchildren, or go to a family picnic at a park, or go to the mall. Or if I catch a common cold is more likely to turn into pneumonia. So, to use the piano analogy, it's more like I'm choosing to walk down a street that is labeled " watch for falling piano's!" , and happen to get hit by one particular piano, instead of the dozen others being dropped from buildings on the street.

Also, continuing to use measles as the example, there are a fair number of people who could pass on measles despite being assumed to be immune. Measles is about the most contagious disease known - so older adults ( anyone late 50's + ) are universally assumed to have immunity - because virtually everyone had measles whether they knew it or not. But it certainly is possible that there is a number of older people who actually did not have it and are not immune who could spread the disease to others. The measles vaccine is also one of the most effective - 97% have immunity after two vaccinations. But that leaves 3% who don't have that immunity, despite being fully vaccinated. And they aren't aware of it. My daughter discovered she didn't have immunity only because she had to have the serum? test for a volunteer job at a hospital -- otherwise she would have had no idea.

So, using the measles possibility . Suppose I, an immunocompromised Grandmother, takes my too young to be vaccinated grandchild to see Frozen. In the audience you have 10 people carrying various viruses that might make me sick. 1 child who is unvaccinated by choice and 4 other children who are too young to be vaccinated, 3 people who aren't immune despite being vaccinated. And maybe an older adult or two who may not have actually had measles as a child.

If I later get very ill and it turns to pneumonia and because of my weak immune system I die, or my grandchild gets measles , how can I realistically say that I was unaware of any risk? It may have been the unvaccinated by choice child who spread the disease - but it could have been any of the others. Even if you could prove it was that one child - wouldn't you then have to prove how they caught it?

It does all go back to herd immunity. But to " prove" it was murder, when there are many other options for contagion? That makes no sense.

Hmmm. . . I don't know. I can see how a case could be made for depraved heart murder in the instance of a child dying due to another parents' unwillingness to vaccinate. I don't necessarily agree with that route though - not unless the parent is a rabid anti-vaxxer who purposely exposed other children or individuals to their sick child in order to prove a point. But how many parents would that really include? Not the vast majority on either side - I tend to take the idealistic view that most people have good intentions and wouldn't purposely infect others with Measles or Polio.

When it comes to the criminal aspect, I do think people should tread carefully. If a parent knows their child is sick with a very infectious disease (like Measles) and they still take their child to the park or school or somewhere else and an individual becomes sick or dies because of it. . . I could see how that could be charged in criminal court. But I think you're correct that a criminal trial or criminal charges is not the answer in most situations.

I do think a case could be made in civil court for a lawsuit though (which is what I meant when I said I would go to court if this happened to my kid). It doesn't change the fact that my child fell ill or died as a result of someone else's negligence, but it does help to hold those parents responsible for what happened.

This one is in honor of VelociRapture...I don't know how you feel about the Illuminati, but it felt in keeping with some of the craziness of the thread :lol:

[attachment=0]57316204.jpg[/attachment]

Anyway, I'll stop now :D

Damn! I look mighty fine in this picture! :lol:

[RosyDaisy]

How best to describe this thread: You can't fix stupid, and I'm not referring to our funny cats vs dogs discussion.

[FakePigtails]

Here's a new report on the safety of the Gardasil vaccine (spoiler: multiple huge studies have shown that it has no connection to all of the supposed adverse effects, including autoimmune diseases): http://www.forbes.com/sites/tarahaelle/ ... y-to-date/

[VelociRapture]

Indeed. The cat is in charge. Always. If you do not follow the feline headship, said feline will make sure you submit.

Momma says Cats are the Devil! They're so 'ornery because they got all them claws and they don't give a shit about others!

[nokidsmom]

Momma says Cats are the Devil! They're so 'ornery because they got all them claws and they don't give a shit about others!

When they are ornery, they can use their claws. When they are happy, they can still use their claws. The cat we had when I was growing up tore up many knitted blankets and afghans with her claws because she liked to pad them down. Also used the back of the sofa as a scratching post. Oddly enough she never scratched when she was mad and she did have all her claws, my parents refused to declaw her even with the damage she was doing. She had been an outside cat before we got her, she occasionally still made an escape for a day or two and because of that, those claws could be her defense if needed.

[EmmieJ]

My spinal fusion surgery isn't natural, nor are the titanium rods and screws in my back. But I'm thankful for them because without that surgery I would be in debilitating pain and my scoliosis would have kept progressing.

Want to know what is natural? Arsenic.

Whether something is "natural" or not is a terrible indicator of whether or not it is good for you.

Also natural: poison oak

[Terrie]

How best to describe this thread: You can't fix stupid, and I'm not referring to our funny cats vs dogs discussion.

As my uncle puts it "Some people are talking out of their ass. While a talking anus might be amusing in the short-term, long-term the novelty quickly wears off."