Lame excuses for not vaccinating(133 Posts)
Imagine you go to the quack, because of a slight dizzy feeling? 'I'm afraid medicine can't help you, but you've got it for the rest of your days. Be careful because this will mean you are more likely than average to have a car accident'. 'How much more likely?' you ask. I have no idea he replies. Would you stop driving your DC about?
Imagine your friend works for the govt stats office. She tells you that car manufacturers and govt have been conspiring to under-report car accidents. 'Cor' you say, 'how much are they fiddling the numbers'. 'That's just the problem no-one knows because it's all hush hush'. Would you stop driving your DC about?
I'm guessing most people would carry on driving. In which case, why do people use the exact same reasons for not vaccinating?
The anti-vaxer reasons that uncle Bert gets hay fever, hay fever is hereditary and something to do with immune system, vaccine damage is also something to do with the immune system, DC are related to uncle Bert, and are thus more likely than average to suffer vaccine damage. They thus don't vaccinate them.
The anti-vaxer believes that the evil quartet of doctors, scientists, govt and pharma conspire to under-report vaccine damage. All part of their thirst to play god, and make lots of money by making people ill, not forgetting generous measures of incompetence and stupidity. They reason that vaccine damage is under-reported so they don't vaccinate their children.
I have never seen any attempt to quantify whether either 'the more susceptible than average' or the conspiracy theory could plausibly be sufficient to justify not vaccinating. It's incredible lame. Many anti-vaxer start from a position of prejudice against vaccination. They then compile a long list of selective quotes, mis-quotes, anecdotes, quasi-scientific speculations, and conspiracy theories. They say this list is evidence, and that their prejudice has become a rational analysis. It isn?t. It?s an uncritical list of unquantified elements which are superficially consistent with their position.
So that's 2 balanced, rational and proportionate responses
I will happily give a balanced and rational response if someone posts an intelligent and reasonably worded op. I tend to respond to like with like. And your op is judgemental, il thought out, crass, sneering and goading garbage.
In all honest I don't know of anyone personally who chose not to vaccinate their children but I have spoken to a fair few people about the subject on here.
based on the people I have spoken to the non-vax group have done far more research into health risks, protection rates, ingredients and lasting effects of each vaccine than the vax group who trust and take their child along because they feel they should (me included).
I'm not sure who you are basing your rather short sighted and rude 'theory' in but I'd suggest you delve into their reasoning a bit more before judging!
Perhaps some do just believe vaccines are evil but in my experience there are valid reasons behind the decisions which ultimately leads to the point that vaccination is am individual choice not a compulsory action.
"Imagine you go to the quack, because of a slight dizzy feeling? 'I'm afraid medicine can't help you, but you've got it for the rest of your days. Be careful because this will mean you are more likely than average to have a car accident'. 'How much more likely?' you ask. I have no idea he replies. Would you stop driving your DC about?"
Erm, I think I would, yes.
"The anti-vaxer reasons that uncle Bert gets hay fever, hay fever is hereditary and something to do with immune system, vaccine damage is also something to do with the immune system, DC are related to uncle Bert, and are thus more likely than average to suffer vaccine damage. They thus don't vaccinate them."
Really? Really? On what planet do you live?
OP, your only point seems to be to say people who don't vaccinate their children make lame excuses for not doing so.
In my experience, you are so far from the truth it's just laughable.
Probably one of the most twatish OP's I have ever read on MN.
I clicked on this as it was in active convos. I'm not really interested in vaccine debates. But that OP needs to be deleted for crimes against metaphors.
OP you really are very ill informed and hellava rude!
No OP I think you'll find you miscounted. That was 3 balanced, rational and proportionate responses.
Don't leave yourself out, there's a dear.
Oh yes OP. My great aunt Bertha twice removed
and long dead used to get eye twitches... You are so right.. THAT is exactly why I don't vax my child
OP seems to have caused a reaction in the anti-vaxer camp. Rather than responding to the claims (apparently put in a rude way?), everyone seems happy to diss the OP by being rude.
OP is right in the sense that people in MN world and ime in RL have refused to vaccinate DCs because they themselves have allergies. The logic follows that their DC will inevitably inherit their allergenic natures and thus have much more chance of developing a vaccine reaction...
I am really shocked ther are so many anti-vaxers on MN.
And the fact you think she is thick and not you.
But I would put all anti-vaxers on an island so their choices don't impact me.
Good grief, I got both mine vaccinated but that really is an abysmal excuse for an argument!
And actually if a GP told me I was more likely to have a crash because of a permanent feeling of diziness, I think I probably would stop driving my children about!
And here was me thinking I put out a logical response!
I think the shit slinging is probably the point of the OP tbh so don't be sucked in.
I am not sure who the anti-vac people are to be honest so I am not sure if I am being included in the thick anti-vaccers who need to be put on an island.
I vaccinated my dc. They had every jab right up until the time that I and my dcs doctors and consultants agreed it was a bad idea.
The op is thick because it suggests that there is only one reason not to vaccinate, that people do so in spite of medical advice to the contrary and that they do so for thoughtless whimsical reasons.
All of which is indeed bollocks. And the manner in which it was posted was combative,argumentative and way more suited to 'aibu' than a vaccinations section.
The op got the response it deserved. Those who immediately join in 'anti-vac' snide-fest are choosing to leap on a bandwagon rather than admit that actually there is no insight, debate or question within the op.
It was just shit stirring and the fact that others join in is a bit sad really.
The issues do get discussed in a clam and reasonable way quite often on here. But it is a difficult subject and the subject affects our children and our fears for them. Goading people who are simply trying to protect their children in their own way is pathetic.
I agree that the anti's do give more thought to vaccinating, but stand by my view that they rarely make any effort to quantify whether the risks they find are sufficent to justify not vaccinating.
It was very much not my intent to write such that most of the comment was on the tone of my post. I'd much rather debate the substance. I was probably just releasing pent up frustration at the uncritical nature of some of the anti-vax comment on MN.
Could you possibly re-post with a new op?
It is pretty frustrating for me to read this kind of stuff when my DDs consultant thinks that she probably shouldn't be vaccinated and I have a profoundly disabled son.
A debate is fine. But posting that people who don't vaccinate are all acting blindly is not good.
Fwiw dds consultant is very nice. He should be excellent company on the island
Pag I relaise that your children's medical care is private but why does the face that you have a disabled son mean your DDs consultant is recommending that she is not vaccinated?
Plus, if you are in an unusual situation why are you backing anti-vaxxers who have, to pretty much the entire scientific establishment, no good reason for their choice. not that it should be a choice btw.
You have to have the mmr to get into the states now, what do you all propose to do about that?
When OP was refering to 'the anti-vaxer' I'm sure she wasn't referring to ALL people who choose not to vaccinate, Pagwatch. It would take a brave person to vaccinate the rest of their DCs if they experienced similar to you.
BUT, there remains a majority of people who chose not to vaccinate because of other reasons like they:
1/ have various allergies, and I DO actually remember a poster who knew someone who had hayfever and wouldn't vaccinate.
2/ believe they have strong immune systems that mean their DCs wouldn't be too badly affected if they got the disease
3/ believe there is a conspiracy to hide vaccine reaction numbers.
They never quote the actual risks like: vaccine damage is 1:100 000, risk of damage through getting disease 1: 10 000, my DC is 1000 times more likely than average of developing a reaction, so odds are even either way so I won't vaccinate.
I did not vaccinate one of my DCs. On medical advice. Guess he just a quack then, that immunologist?
* oops, missed a zero: vaccine damage is 1: 1000 000....hopefully, you'll get the point I'm making
Join the discussion
Please login first.