Anti-Vax Movement

[Dalish]

What I am most confused by is why there is the right to refuse your child vaccinations on 'philosophical' grounds. Religious grounds are almost always abused to get a form by the vegan hippies and the ultra fundies, but what is 'philosophical' right to refuse to get vaccinations for your kid?

 

[Dudeofteenage]

To the anti-vaxxers corporations are inherently bad and out to hurt us. Sometimes to make money, but usually just because they're evil for evil's sake.

Corporations who don't agree with them, that is. They will quite happily believe that corporations that produce products that they view as vaccination alternatives are entirely altruistic and would never lie to make a profit.

 

[Vitriol]

@Miraak its an argument about peoples choice over their own bodies and rights over their children.

its also bullshit, as several posters have already pointed out, as such reckless behavior leads to the spread of disease and direct harm to others. Ones personal rights do not extend to cover harming others or potentially harming others.

 

[mooooo]

Kinda reminds me of the AI scaremongering about how Furbys are in your house, watching you and "learning".

It's clear these attitudes come from ignorance. AI that can actually learn is cutting edge stuff, pretty experimental. Conventional programming in a thing like a toy is no more than "if this happens, do this, or else do this". It's not "thinking" for itself, it's basically just a mindless drone that you've implanted with an image of your own thinking, that it echoes. That's why it's Artificial Intelligence. It doesn't work things out for itself, or learn in a conventional sense. It could potentially record information, but it's not going to start plotting to kill you in your sleep on its own lol.

@Miraak its an argument about peoples choice over their own bodies and rights over their children.

its also bullshit, as several posters have already pointed out, as such reckless behavior leads to the spread of disease and direct harm to others. Ones personal rights do not extend to cover harming others or potentially harming others.

But... wouldn't the disease only spread to the unvaccinated people? That's a self-limiting movement if I saw one, kinda sorts itself out.

But yeah, our right to harm ourselves (in so much as we actually have that right, considering the war on drugs etc) doesn't extend to the right to harm our children.

 

[Vitriol]

unvaccinated people includes those infants too young to have been vaccinated yet.

 

[100 Whole Bepis]

There's also the concept of herd immunity. Even if one individual isn't vaccinated, you can't catch a disease if there's no one to catch it from. For a while this kept anti-vaxxers safe. But as more and more idiots buy into it the group immunity is fading and the diseases are making a comeback. But I'm sure they'll have some sort of excuse for that. Or be like that crazy Australian bitch who wrote the book about how totally rad measles is guys.

 

[SpessCaptain]

When you're vaccinating your kid, you're not doing it only for the sake of your child, but for the sake of other people's children and society.

What would you feel if you knew your child infected another's child and they died? You know how you hate the person who gave you the flu or cold? Well, now imagine that hate in a grieving parent ten fold.

 

[Dalish]

When you're vaccinating your kid, you're not doing it only for the sake of your child, but for the sake of other people's children and society.

What would you feel if you knew your child infected another's child and they died? You know how you hate the person who gave you the flu or cold? Well, now imagine that hate in a grieving parent ten fold.

On the motherhood thread posted, someone asked a mother that question. Her response:

"As long as it's not my child, that's their fault."

 

[mooooo]

On the motherhood thread posted, someone asked a mother that question. Her response:

"As long as it's not my child, that's their fault."

What context was this asked in? This question was phrased such that a mother's child with a disease that should have been vaccinated against was spread to another child, but the question, without context, could also be asking about if your child who is too young for the vaccination, catches the disease, then gives it to an older child who should have been vaccinated by then, in which case I'd agree.

 

[Dalish]

What context was this asked in? This question was phrased such that a mother's child with a disease that should have been vaccinated against was spread to another child, but the question, without context, could also be asking about if your child who is too young for the vaccination, catches the disease, then gives it to an older child who should have been vaccinated by then, in which case I'd agree.

Okay, aside from the fact immunocompromised people (like me! while measles is in chicago) can't get vaccinated...

http://www.mothering.com/forum/443-...d.html#/forumsite/20454/topics/1358483?page=9

Starts here. 'i would lie to protect my kids at the expense of everyone else.'

 

[Pine Tar]

People compare the anti-vaxxers to people who deny a human link to climate change. Honestly, I think the anti-vaxxers are a hell of a lot worse. One idiot who drives a massive Hummer and keeps their lights on can't do nearly the same level of damage that one parent who refuses to vaccinate their kid can. Just saying.

 

[mooooo]

Okay, aside from the fact immunocompromised people (like me! while measles is in chicago) can't get vaccinated...

http://www.mothering.com/forum/443-...d.html#/forumsite/20454/topics/1358483?page=9

Starts here. 'i would lie to protect my kids at the expense of everyone else.'

I think they might have deleted those posts, the topic linked to only goes up to page 5.

 

[Dalish]

I think they might have deleted those posts, the topic linked to only goes up to page 5.

 

[Vitriol]

What context was this asked in? This question was phrased such that a mother's child with a disease that should have been vaccinated against was spread to another child, but the question, without context, could also be asking about if your child who is too young for the vaccination, catches the disease, then gives it to an older child who should have been vaccinated by then, in which case I'd agree.

its not just older children of anti vaccers that would be at risk though. Those with immunodeficiency/allergies may also be unable to be vaccinated. these people are only kept safe by herd immunity. As the pool of non vaccinated increases due to anti vacc the diseases return and the herd immunity decreases. This leaves people who are vulnerable due to a medical condition vulnerable. Anti vaccination is utterly stupid, selfish and reckless.

Edit: Miraak beat me.

 

[mooooo]

Doesn't make much sense. They can't protect people who can't get vaxxed from their kids that they choose to not get vaxxed? Then their kids could be protected by getting vaxxed, and then the other kids might not even need vaxxed so badly.

 

[Vitriol]

Doesn't make much sense. They can't protect people who can't get vaxxed from their kids that they choose to not get vaxxed? Then their kids could be protected by getting vaxxed, and then the other kids might not even need vaxxed so badly.

its almost like these people are lolcows or something.

 

[mooooo]

its almost like these people are lolcows or something.

I would have expected them to have a consistent internal logic to their ideas, at least. But if they openly admit that not getting vaxxed could be dangerous, it directly contradicts the premise of the movement, which is that getting vaxxed is more dangerous than not. Maybe their stance is that it's worth a few kids getting infected if thousands avoid autism or something, that kinda makes sense if you accept that only a few will suffer from a lack of vaccinations (and that they cause autism)

 

[Pine Tar]

I would have expected them to have a consistent internal logic to their ideas, at least. But if they openly admit that not getting vaxxed could be dangerous, it directly contradicts the premise of the movement, which is that getting vaxxed is more dangerous than not. Maybe their stance is that it's worth a few kids getting infected if thousands avoid autism or something, that kinda makes sense if you accept that only a few will suffer from a lack of vaccinations.

Except for the whole hundreds of scientific papers proving that the link between autism and vaccines is bullshit. Plus, for as bad as autism can be, it's better than your kid dying of a horrible and preventable disease.

 

[Cuck Norris]

I would have expected them to have a consistent internal logic to their ideas, at least. But if they openly admit that not getting vaxxed could be dangerous, it directly contradicts the premise of the movement, which is that getting vaxxed is more dangerous than not. Maybe their stance is that it's worth a few kids getting infected if thousands avoid autism or something, that kinda makes sense if you accept that only a few will suffer from a lack of vaccinations (and that they cause autism)

As someone that's buried a child all I can say is I'd rather have an autistic child over a body in a box any day....

 

[mooooo]

Except for the whole hundreds of scientific papers proving that the link between autism and vaccines is bullshit. Plus, for as bad as autism can be, it's better than your kid dying of a horrible and preventable disease.

That's the external interface of the movement, where information enters the loop. I would expect something to be flawed at this boundary, but the inner processing of the flawed data to follow somewhat logical paths, nevertheless leading to an incorrect outcome/conclusions.

With regards the autism, how much worse do you think death is than autism? We hold death in a kind of superlative state, where it's worse than anything ever, but our actions contradict this. We drive cars, knowing it will kill several people each day, because we value the collective value of driving more than we see ourselves as disadvantaged by the collective deaths arising from it.