Anti valuers are dumb and pathetic

[Beautifulsiro56]

Anti-vaxxers shouldn’t even consider having children until they develop a basic sense of responsibility.

I’m beyond frustrated hearing about measles outbreaks again and again. I fully understand that some parents genuinely cannot vaccinate their children using live vaccines due to legitimate medical conditions that weaken the immune system, but outside of those rare cases, there is no excuse apart from being totally and utterly DUMB and people that are do dumb and irresponsible should not be reproducing..

Yes, I recall having to lie in a darkened room when I had measles (for fear that my eyesight would be affected).

I missed mumps and German measles somehow, but did have a bad case of Chickenpox. I had shingles twice later on. I've had my first dose of the shingles vaccine this year.

My SGD got her first MMR but apparently her parents failed to organise the required second dose when they moved abroad for seven years.

The result was that SGD got mumps when it hit her university campus.

That's not the same thing as being an anti-vaxxer

And there's a difference between 'not coping well' and having a life threatening reaction to them

Thank you.

@CheesyToes have a read of these.

The Grand Debunk of the antivaxxer book “Turtles All the Way Down” (part 1/10) | Science-Based Medicine

I'm sorry for your loss

But that's not the same thing at all

Turtles All the Way Down?

The book that's been widely condemned for being misleading.

It's been criticised for misunderstanding placebo use, selectively choosing sources, dismissing decades of research.

It's bullshit. Well written and convincing bullshit, but bullshit nonetheless

Don't feel bad you've been taken in by it

Is the recent outbreak related to lack of vaccination? Are the people who have caught it/died unvaccinated?

Genuinely curious

Thank you but I don’t need to. I’m vaccine injured so it’s not recommended for me / my babies to take any vaccines. Guess that makes me an anti-vaxxer 🤡

I'm not entirely sure contracting and entirely preventable disease is as act of God though is it

Of course it is. There are plenty of unvaccinated people who do not go on to contract the disease in question, the only difference between those and the people who do is happenstance.

That's like saying folk that died of cholera or bubonic plague died due to an act of God

Precisely, because they were the unfortunate ones, unlike the other people living in the precise same circumstances at the same time, who didn't contract cholera or plague through sheer good fortune. You can't have it one way and not the other.

At the very least, it has to be child abuse

Well no, because as things stand it is not illegal to opt not to vaccinate children. It might be morally questionable, but while it's still perfectly legal I don't think it's in any way reasonable to term it "child abuse".

I mean Christ, you take your child out of school for five days and your getting a fine

That'll be because the State legally compels you to educate your children, so by withdrawing them from education without reasonable grounds you are in breach of this legal obligation. You are comparing apples and oranges, because again, it is not a legal obligation to vaccinate your child.

Barring a health condition or a legitimate reason not to vaccinated there's absolutely no reason at all children shouldn't be protected. "Mummy thinks you might get Autism, or get a little poorly" or any other crap is not an excuse or a reason not to vaccinate

Then the law needs to be changed to compel this, and by doing so you would also open the way for people who refuse to be prosecuted without the nonsense of the original suggestion, which amounted to "we are going to prosecute you retroactively for doing something which is and was perfectly legal"

The law does not prosecute people because they made morally dubious but perfectly legal choices, it prosecutes people who have acted illegally and broken the law. Although I think there would be issues regarding personal liberty if you compelled people to vaccinate, the State does legally compel Guardians to educate children to a certain minimum standard, so it's not as if there aren't already precedents for the State taking choice out of parents and Guardians hands and mandating that all children have to be subject to a certain stricture.

Are all the other books written by people who push Qanon, MAGA nonsense too?

Indeed I am

And I suggest 'research' on child deaths before vaccinations to those who think it's safer not to have them

Well, they reference the orignal vaccine studies so unless you’re suggesting vaccines are a Q Anon / MAGA thing then I doubt it.

What are the other books then?

If a disease is preventable (e.g., through vaccination, proper safety protocols, or hygiene), it does not meet the requirement of being "impossible to guard against". An event that could have been avoided by reasonable care is not an Act of God.

Start with Turtles, it gets expensive otherwise. But once you read that, you’ll gravitate to other books.

A few on the thread have mentioned bodily autonomy. One poster said that it’s no one else’s business if others don’t get vaccinated. Mostly, it isn’t my business what health care others do or don’t partake in. Vaccines are different because we’re talking about diseases that spread to other people. People who can’t be vaccinated because of their health conditions are reliant on herd immunity- they’re powerless to protect themselves, so they need the majority to choose vaccines to protect them. This is why I view choosing not to vaccinate as selfish (as well as ill-informed).

Agreed.

Suggestion of a book by an anonymous author so far. The book has no scientific accreditation and no peer reviewed claims. Clearly popular with individuals that are anti vax. The author doesn't even use their name, listed merely as 'anonymous'.

"Turtles All the Way Down: Vaccine Science and Myth (2024, by "Anonymous") is a highly critical, independent publication questioning vaccine safety and efficacy. It is not peer-reviewed by mainstream scientific journals, but popular on platforms like Amazon. It argues that childhood vaccine clinical trials lack proper, inert placebos and suggests that vaccine safety data is consistently misrepresented.

Key Arguments and Perspectives

• Safety Trials: The book, also listed on Amazon, highlights studies, arguing that the control groups in clinical trials often use other vaccines or vaccine adjuvants rather than true inert placebos.
• Medical Establishment Critique: It presents itself as a "systematic demolition of the vaccine system," questioning the validity of vaccine science from the perspective of critics who believe they cause harm.
• "19 Polio Mysteries": The book includes a section examining the history of polio, suggesting that some illnesses categorized as polio were not caused by the virus.
• Data Compilation: It cites over 1,200 references from scientific papers, government documents, and manufacturer publications, aiming to consolidate scattered information in a way that is accessible to non-experts.

Critical Reception and Context

• Proponent Reviews: Supporters describe the book as a "must-read" for parents, arguing that it brings necessary attention to vaccine safety issues and provides detailed analysis.
• Skepticism: One review noted that the book may rely on older studies, overlook recent, updated data, or omit the broader scientific consensus that vaccines are generally safe and effective.

Fits the narrative that the reader is looking for.

This is fair enough, but the point still remains - while it is perfectly legal to opt against vaccination and there is no compulsion, the law can not then turn around at some arbitrary point in the future and prosecute you just because you took what was a perfectly legal decision.

What about the others who also took the same decision but did not contract an illness? Should the law just ignore them because they enjoyed good fortune and luck?

No, if you are going to talk about prosecution, then it can only be in the context of someone having committed an illegal act in the first place, not because they made a morally questionable but perfectly legal choice.

Assuming you actually had a side effect of a particular vaccine, that does not preclude you or your family having other vaccines.

Please talk to your GP about it. Ask to be referred to an immunologist. Talk to actual professionals.

Don't just use this "vaccine injury" as an excuse to not vaccinate your children.

The antivax movement is lying to you. It's causing you to put your babies at risk. You can change your mind, you don't need to continue down this route.

Have you similarly read the debunking of said book....and if not, why not?

I don’t understand why people don’t want to vaccinate. Yes of course vaccines carry a -rare - risk of harm. But compared to the risk of the disease it’s worth it overall. My youngest caught measles aged 8 months, before he was old enough to get vaccinated against it. It was absolutely terrifying! We had to be isolated in hospital, public health contacted everyone we had been in contact with the week before, he was very very unwell. I am so so thankful he was ok in the end and doesn’t appear to have any long lasting consequences. But it could have been so much worse. All because someone refused to vaccinate and allowed it to circulate when it was virtually eradicated.

I'm assuming the other books are also by antivax grifters then. When you say 'gravitate towards' What's actually happened is that you've been sucked into a conspiracy black hole.

Go on. Tell us the other books.

I'm not an anti vaccine myself but do think folk should retain the right to refuse to have their children vaccinated. 🫢

It wasn't

Nor was German measles

Or mumps

Or chicken pox

And I can't tell you how thrilled my mother was when the polio vaccination came out. One of my classmates missed it and wore a caliper.
My older sister had eyesight damage from measles

What if the victim had contracted the actual disease?