Mandatory vaccines for kids in California: no personal or religious exemptions

[Treeshepherd]

Glad my daughter is graduating next year and this rule doesn't effect her. We were able to pick and choose the immunizations we thought were important, and opt out of the ones that weren't, based on our own research. She got the minimum amount of injections of aluminum, thimerosal, formaldehyde, mercury, and GlaxoSmithKlein weirdness propagated in embryonated chicken eggs, while still being immunized against a few diseases that can actually kill a healthy child.

The new law is a typical knee-jerk over-reaction capitalized upon by Big Pharma stemming from the 100 people or so who got the measles at Disneyland, most of whom were vaccinated already. Zero people were seriously injured.

More concerning is that the next generation of vaccines coming down the pike will be DNA vaccines; injecting foreign DNA sequences into your kid's body. Hopefully my future grandkids won't be forced to be the trial guinea pigs for that technology.

 

[OKTexas]

California Legislature passes mandatory vaccination bill - LA Times

About time. Your child has no constitutional right to threaten mine at school because you are to lazy or too uninformed to know the truth. Keep them home, home school them, or get them vaccinated.

End of story.

How would your kid be threatened if they are immunized?

Not all kids can be vaccinated due to medical conditions, and also not all vaccinations result in immunity and it's damn near impossible to tell which ones did and didn't.

And? Why is it no one is worried about the tens of thousands of kids coming in from third world countries who likely brought in the disease it the first place?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The libertarian and religious whining has no impact in California on this issue.

 

[SwimExpert]

Yep! No more small pox vaccines are given out unless you join the military. Now let's move on to getting rid of Measles and Whooping Cough using the same SUCCESSFUL strategy.

Or how about HIV? No? Not so concerned with the AIDS? Well that's weird. If you're so gung-ho about public health and safety, I would think you'd be ready to legislatively take on the AIDS. Wonder why you aren't. Must be that you aren't concerned with public safety, and are just regurgitating the herd mentality talking points.

Oh gee...you have to resort to some hyped up spin on STD's and Condoms and other unrelated things. Is this you giving up?

You should learn how to use logic. The same line of reasoning applies to STDs as with these other illnesses. If you favor legislatively forcing medical procedures as a means to supposedly attempt to eliminate them, why are you so selective with the ones you care about?

Actually that's exactly what we need. Do you know the reason you and your relatives don't have Small Pox? Government Legislatively inserting itself about medical treatments. That's why.

No, my parents had me vaccinated because they chose to do so, regardless of the government requiring it. You liberals always think that the only way something happens is for the government to require it.

Do you know the main reason they're very close this year to wiping out Polio in Africa? The national governments there finally started working with the aid workers to distribute vaccines...no more paralyzed children! Yay!

And that's great. The problem with many places in Africa is accessibility. As you said yourself, the government has had to undertake programs just to get the vaccines distributed. There are thousands of people who want to be protected from polio, but don't have access to vaccinations.

But if someone does not want to be vaccinated, or does not want to vaccinate their children, that is their right. You have the right to get your children vaccinated. You don't have the right to get your neighbor's children vaccinated. Vaccinate your own, and you won't have anything to worry about. Let other people make their own decisions, and take on their own risks for their own selves.

 

[JakeStarkey]

California Legislature passes mandatory vaccination bill - LA Times

About time. Your child has no constitutional right to threaten mine at school because you are to lazy or too uninformed to know the truth. Keep them home, home school them, or get them vaccinated.

End of story.

How would your kid be threatened if they are immunized?

Not all kids can be vaccinated due to medical conditions, and also not all vaccinations result in immunity and it's damn near impossible to tell which ones did and didn't.

And? Why is it no one is worried about the tens of thousands of kids coming in from third world countries who likely brought in the disease it the first place?

You are aware that Mexican children are better vaccinated than Americans, normally. However, I agree that every child coming into the country should have a full immunization proof of record.

 

[JakeStarkey]

swimfrog, you are deflecting.

I agree with need a full out assault on immunization in combating disease in America, from the youngest to the oldest, where possible.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yep! No more small pox vaccines are given out unless you join the military. Now let's move on to getting rid of Measles and Whooping Cough using the same SUCCESSFUL strategy.

Or how about HIV? No? Not so concerned with the AIDS? Well that's weird. If you're so gung-ho about public health and safety, I would think you'd be ready to legislatively take on the AIDS. Wonder why you aren't. Must be that you aren't concerned with public safety, and are just regurgitating the herd mentality talking points.

Oh gee...you have to resort to some hyped up spin on STD's and Condoms and other unrelated things. Is this you giving up?

You should learn how to use logic. The same line of reasoning applies to STDs as with these other illnesses. If you favor legislatively forcing medical procedures as a means to supposedly attempt to eliminate them, why are you so selective with the ones you care about?

Actually that's exactly what we need. Do you know the reason you and your relatives don't have Small Pox? Government Legislatively inserting itself about medical treatments. That's why.

No, my parents had me vaccinated because they chose to do so, regardless of the government requiring it. You liberals always think that the only way something happens is for the government to require it.

Do you know the main reason they're very close this year to wiping out Polio in Africa? The national governments there finally started working with the aid workers to distribute vaccines...no more paralyzed children! Yay!

And that's great. The problem with many places in Africa is accessibility. As you said yourself, the government has had to undertake programs just to get the vaccines distributed. There are thousands of people who want to be protected from polio, but don't have access to vaccinations.

But if someone does not want to be vaccinated, or does not want to vaccinate their children, that is their right. You have the right to get your children vaccinated. You don't have the right to get your neighbor's children vaccinated. Vaccinate your own, and you won't have anything to worry about. Let other people make their own decisions, and take on their own risks for their own selves.

But if someone does not want to be vaccinated, or does not want to vaccinate their children, that is their right.

Sounds good. As long as you keep your kid at home.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Now to think up a new vaccine to become rich on.......

I got a great scheme for you.....how about a vaccine that only works for a year for a common ailment that is only deadly in extreme cases and special circumstances? But since it's the kind of thing that the body would normally fight off on its own, once they take the vaccine their bodies will become more susceptible to getting sick when the vaccine wears off. It'll be great, it'll be like an addiction!

Please I'm trying to do real sna....... science here.......for the good of the people.

 

[Contumacious]

California Legislature passes mandatory vaccination bill - LA Times

About time. Your child has no constitutional right to threaten mine at school because you are to lazy or too uninformed to know the truth. Keep them home, home school them, or get them vaccinated.

End of story.

COMRADE STARKIEV,


THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA NOR ANY OTHER STATE HAS THE CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY TO INCARCERATE AMERICAN CHILDREN IN MINIMUM SECURITY PRISONS.


.

 

[Treeshepherd]

I agree with need a full out assault on immunization in combating disease in America

So you're a proponent of the ever-increasing vaccine schedule?

Some of us would appreciate the freedom to draw the line somewhere.

 

[OKTexas]

swimfrog, you are deflecting.

I agree with need a full out assault on immunization in combating disease in America, from the youngest to the oldest, where possible.

And here you keep claiming you're for liberty, I guess you're a liar.

 

[SwimExpert]

So, if your kids' vaccination doesn't result in immunity, then they're already in danger, regardless.

And the fewer unvaccinated people around, the safer they'll be.

First of all, what Nyvin is saying is mostly poppycock, slathered with poorly misunderstood facts, and speckled with outright lies.

It's true that no vaccine is 100% effective. Everyone's immune system is different. A dose that might produce a super firewall of immune response in me might not produce adequate immune response in you. If that happens, you have the potential to become sick if you encounter that illness.

That being said, the available vaccines for major illnesses have a high effective rate. The full schedule measles vaccine shows over 99% effectiveness. The complete whooping cough series shows 98% effectiveness in children (though it degrades over time, and into adulthood). In addition, even in those cases when the vaccine does not establish full immunity, it still produces partial immunity which is pretty much always sufficient to significantly reduce the severity of illness well out of the deadly range. Nyvin's claim comes off sounding like the small range of ineffectiveness equates to some people getting no immunity whatsoever, which is patently false.

So, do the math. Your child has less than 1% chance of their measles vaccine not producing full immunity. So off the bad, we're talking about a very low risk. Then, factor in the chances of encountering an unvaccinated child. Then factor in the chances of the unvaccinated child actually getting the measles. What you're left with is a very small risk that your child might get a mile case of the measles that keeps him/her home from school for a few days playing video games, while you scratch your head wondering how sick he/she really is. Of course, no parent wants their child getting sick, but how can that risk be reconciled to give a big "fuck you" to the rights of other parents who are concerned about other risks that [they think] might be involved in vaccination? The god's honest truth is that even thought all the Jenny McCarthy blather about mercury is bullshit, the miniscule risk from the mercury really isn't substantially different from the risk involved in opting out of the vaccine.

 

[SwimExpert]

I agree with need a full out assault on immunization in combating disease in America

So you're a proponent of the ever-increasing vaccine schedule?

Some of us would appreciate the freedom to draw the line somewhere.

Isn't funny how the same liberals who decry Big Pharma as being an evil force fleecing the citizens, so quickly and easily swallow the bait on vaccines?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So, if your kids' vaccination doesn't result in immunity, then they're already in danger, regardless.

And the fewer unvaccinated people around, the safer they'll be.

First of all, what Nyvin is saying is mostly poppycock, slathered with poorly misunderstood facts, and speckled with outright lies.

It's true that no vaccine is 100% effective. Everyone's immune system is different. A dose that might produce a super firewall of immune response in me might not produce adequate immune response in you. If that happens, you have the potential to become sick if you encounter that illness.

That being said, the available vaccines for major illnesses have a high effective rate. The full schedule measles vaccine shows over 99% effectiveness. The complete whooping cough series shows 98% effectiveness in children (though it degrades over time, and into adulthood). In addition, even in those cases when the vaccine does not establish full immunity, it still produces partial immunity which is pretty much always sufficient to significantly reduce the severity of illness well out of the deadly range. Nyvin's claim comes off sounding like the small range of ineffectiveness equates to some people getting no immunity whatsoever, which is patently false.

So, do the math. Your child has less than 1% chance of their measles vaccine not producing full immunity. So off the bad, we're talking about a very low risk. Then, factor in the chances of encountering an unvaccinated child. Then factor in the chances of the unvaccinated child actually getting the measles. What you're left with is a very small risk that your child might get a mile case of the measles that keeps him/her home from school for a few days playing video games, while you scratch your head wondering how sick he/she really is. Of course, no parent wants their child getting sick, but how can that risk be reconciled to give a big "fuck you" to the rights of other parents who are concerned about other risks that [they think] might be involved in vaccination? The god's honest truth is that even thought all the Jenny McCarthy blather about mercury is bullshit, the miniscule risk from the mercury really isn't substantially different from the risk involved in opting out of the vaccine.

some people getting no immunity whatsoever, which is patently false.

No one who gets the shot ends up with zero immunity?
I don't believe you.
What about children too young for the shot? Or children who cannot tolerate the shot?
Should they be put at risk because some people believe bs they read online?

Of course, no parent wants their child getting sick, but how can that risk be reconciled to give a big "fuck you" to the rights of other parents who are concerned about other risks that [they think] might be involved in vaccination?

You have the right to not get the shots for your kids. Home school them all you want.

the miniscule risk from the mercury really isn't substantially different from the risk involved in opting out of the vaccine.

The mercury they no longer put in the shots has what to do with idiots like McCarthy and others putting kids at risk?

 

[Treeshepherd]

The complete whooping cough series shows 98% effectiveness in children (though it degrades over time, and into adulthood).

That doesn't align with observable reality. In pertussis outbreaks, many more than 2% of the infected are vaccinated.

Not only that, but children vaccinated against pertussis are still carriers of the disease and spread it around, even if they show no symptoms. Therefore, there is no herd effect of vaccination against whooping cough.

n the 1950s, highly successful vaccines based on inactivated pertussis cells (the bacteria that causes whooping cough) drove infection rates in the U.S. below one case per 100,000 people. But adverse side effects of those vaccines led to the development and introduction in the 1990s of acellular pertussis vaccines, which use just a handful of the bacteria's proteins and bypass most of the side effects. (Currently given to children as part of the Tdap vaccine.)

The problem is, the newer vaccines might not block transmission. A January 2014 study in PNAS by another research team demonstrated that giving baboons acellular pertussis vaccines prevented them from developing symptoms of whooping cough but failed to stop transmission.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/06/150624071018.htm

Bottom line, we're never going to get an even playing field in the United States of Merck when it comes to vaccine research.


When it comes to herding populations like stupid cows, this whole flu shot mania is just hilarious.

The flu hasn't hit Europe as hard as it has the United States, health officials say, but when and if it does, don't expect a call for vaccination of the entire population.

Only the U.S. and Canada actually encourage everyone older than 6 months to get the flu vaccine. -CNN]

 

[HenryBHough]

It's amusing to see an obvious pre-teen worrying about "his" children. Were he to cast it in terms of "If there one day might be children" perhaps the thread could be taken seriously.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Treeshepherd throws out stuff without source.

Ignore it.

 

[SwimExpert]

No one who gets the shot ends up with zero immunity?

For a person to receive a vaccine and have a completely null immune response would mean that the particular dosage they received was faulty. So, unless there was a manufacturing error that resulted in your dosage effectively being a placebo, a vaccinated person will have some degree of immune response.

I don't believe you.
What about children too young for the shot?

Lot of them in the public school system?

Or children who cannot tolerate the shot?

And how are you supposed to determine if someone "cannot tolerate" it? You give them the shot, oh look, they're having a stronger immune response than anticipated, and oh look, they're vaccinated now so your argument fails.

Should they be put at risk because some people believe bs they read online?

You do not have a constitutional right to someone else's vaccination. Once more, I do not condone the decision some people make to not vaccinate their children, but that doesn't mean that the government has any business sticking it's nose into their business either. I also oppose gay butt sex. But as far as government action goes, I firmly support the right of gay people to be married and live their own lives as they see fit.

You have the right to not get the shots for your kids. Home school them all you want.

Better yet, if you can't cope in a world where you don't get to forcibly inject medications into other people, maybe you should home school your own children. Maybe you can save them from the boogeyman while you're at it.

The mercury they no longer put in the shots has what to do with idiots like McCarthy and otFokhers putting kids at risk?

About the same as the non existent risk you are imagining through your own ignorance.

 

[SwimExpert]

That doesn't align with observable reality. In pertussis outbreaks, many more than 2% of the infected are vaccinated.

At what stage in the vaccination schedule? You should be careful because you're tipping your hand to your wikipedia skimmed level knowledge of the subject. Like other vaccines, whooping cough is not a single plug-n-play affair. It is a series of vaccinations, with differing levels of effectiveness at different points along the way. Among completely vaccinated individuals, 98% develop full immunity. At partial stages in the schedule, as few as 3 in 10 individuals will show immunity.

But thanks for highlighting the fact that the even if we mandate vaccines, a great many people will still be susceptible.

Not only that, but children vaccinated against pertussis are still carriers of the disease and spread it around, even if they show no symptoms. Therefore, there is no herd effect of vaccination against whooping cough.

So, Nyvin's previous argument on herd immunity is invalid. Thanks for doing my work for me.

When it comes to herding populations like stupid cows, this whole flu shot mania is just hilarious.

The flu hasn't hit Europe as hard as it has the United States, health officials say, but when and if it does, don't expect a call for vaccination of the entire population.

Only the U.S. and Canada actually encourage everyone older than 6 months to get the flu vaccine. -CNN]

Gee, wonder why that is. I'm not sure what you're trying to get at by posting this tidbit, but all it does is further blow your position to smitherines. The push behind all this mandatory vaccination crap is Big Pharma propaganda. How's it feel to be their useful tool?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No one who gets the shot ends up with zero immunity?

For a person to receive a vaccine and have a completely null immune response would mean that the particular dosage they received was faulty. So, unless there was a manufacturing error that resulted in your dosage effectively being a placebo, a vaccinated person will have some degree of immune response.

I don't believe you.
What about children too young for the shot?

Lot of them in the public school system?

Or children who cannot tolerate the shot?

And how are you supposed to determine if someone "cannot tolerate" it? You give them the shot, oh look, they're having a stronger immune response than anticipated, and oh look, they're vaccinated now so your argument fails.

Should they be put at risk because some people believe bs they read online?

You do not have a constitutional right to someone else's vaccination. Once more, I do not condone the decision some people make to not vaccinate their children, but that doesn't mean that the government has any business sticking it's nose into their business either. I also oppose gay butt sex. But as far as government action goes, I firmly support the right of gay people to be married and live their own lives as they see fit.

You have the right to not get the shots for your kids. Home school them all you want.

Better yet, if you can't cope in a world where you don't get to forcibly inject medications into other people, maybe you should home school your own children. Maybe you can save them from the boogeyman while you're at it.

The mercury they no longer put in the shots has what to do with idiots like McCarthy and otFokhers putting kids at risk?

About the same as the non existent risk you are imagining through your own ignorance.

Lot of them in the public school system?

Lot of them have siblings in the public school system.

And how are you supposed to determine if someone "cannot tolerate" it?

Kids who have compromised immune systems. Kids on chemo.

You do not have a constitutional right to someone else's vaccination.

I already said you're free to keep your unvaccinated kid at home.