Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Oh please. This has been already argued - and since abandoned by CTS.

---

What? I did NOT abandon it.

This is it, Rue. I told you, stop telling outright lies about what I say or want to say.

There can be no debate when when you make shit up out of thin air.

This is my last post to you. Period.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky
----------
Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so.
--Douglas Adams, "Last Chance to See"

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

all I said was that the severe drop in polio cases was due in large part to the redefinition of polio.

---

Bullshit.

---

Quote:

---

http://awi.vlaanderen.be/documenten/COST_B28_160205.pdf

In the genus Orthhopoxvirus (OPV) camelpox virus (CMPV) is most closely related to variola virus VAR (Gubser and Smith, 2002). Both viruses are host specific. The high frequency of genomic recombination in OPVs or simple mutations in the CMPV genes coding for the virus virulence factors or for virus coat proteins interacting with the cell receptor-binding sites could cause a breakthrough in the host species barrier.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Smallpox historically causing 95 - 99% mortality among Indians.

http://redalyc.uaemex.mx/redalyc/pdf/162/16200504.pdf

---

Quote:

---

A small percentage of unvaccinated can put a number of others at risk.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
I'm really not sure where I ever singled you out Citizen. I'm not sure what you're asking me to do.

---

Quote:

---

Please tell me that you are not one of those Anti-Smoking Nazis.... if you are, then you are no different than Citizen is, and we would just be pitted against each other when that thread comes along.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Just look at CTS' argument about smallpox: It's not that bad. It didn't wipe out 95-99% of the population, it "only" wiped out 80-90%. WTF????

---

Quote:

---

And I still haven't heard a possible mechanism to show how vaccines of ALL types are so very very "dangerous".

---

Quote:

---

Short incubation period: The small pox virus has an incubation period of 10-14 days before symptoms appear. Because it is not infectious in the prodromal stage, containment and surveillance were possible. Vaccination alone would not have been sufficient to eradicate the disease.

No animal reservoir: Because small pox only infects humans, the WHO knew that once the virus had been eliminated from human populations, it had been completely eradicated. There is no danger of humans being infected again by some animal carrier. This is not the case for many other human viruses, which have animal/insect vectors and/or carriers.

High morbidity and mortality: Small pox was described as "the most terrible of all the ministers of death" by the historian Macaulay. It had a high case fatality rate, and survivors were left with permanent scars. To achieve international cooperation in eradicating a disease, it must be widespread and severe enough to be of worldwide concern.

Clinically apparent disease: Small pox is considered an unusual virus in that every infection causes apparent symptoms. This also helped make surveillance and containment possible. This would have been impossible if there were asymptomatic carriers of the virus spreading infection to others.

Mode of transmission: Although small pox is considered highly contagious, it is most commonly spread by person-to-person contact, which makes the spread of disease relatively slow.

An effective vaccine: Just one dose of the small pox vaccine produced life-long immunity in almost all recipients. [CTS note: this has largely been shown to be untrue.] Subsequent shots or boosters were rarely needed. There were few potential side effects, and the risk of complications from vaccination was much smaller than the risk of infection without vaccination. Furthermore, the vaccine was stable and could be transported to remote regions of the world, including tropical areas, without refrigeration. Finally, the small pox vaccine could be delivered with a bifurcated needle, with a minimum amount of training. Vaccines which require injection with syringes would be far too expensive and difficult to administer in less developed areas of the world. (See The Small Pox Vaccine for information about the development of the vaccine.)

Social and economic factors: One of the most crucial factors of any campaign is sufficient funding. Although finances were lacking in third world countries, the more developed nations in the world supplied the necessary funding. It was economically advantageous for the wealthier countries to do this, since the cost of vaccination was much less than the cost of drugs and treatment. And once the disease had been eradicated, vaccines would no longer be needed either. The campaign was not without its difficulties, however, as small pox was considered a normal part of life in some cultures, while others believed in small pox deities. Furthermore, other countries, such as Nigeria and Bangladesh, were engaged in civil wars and had other concerns besides eradicating small pox. To cultivate social support for eradication, the WHO offered financial rewards for reporting cases of small pox, and the reward was increased as the number of cases decreased.
http://virus.stanford.edu/pox/history.html

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Citizen:
Hell lets make everything choice. Why should chefs be forced to washing their hands before preparing food if they don't want to? Maybe their religion bans hand washing....

Sure no mandatory vaccinations, but if YOUR choice leads to YOU getting that disease your health service or medical insurer is under no obligation to pay for your treatment.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Siggy, I really don't think either end of the continuum here is gonna be reasonable enough about it to discuss it rationally, from what I have seen...

The only person around here who even seems to understand my position on the issue is Jack, and that because he holds the exact same one for many of the same reasons.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
1) The unvaccinated becomes a risk once they make up a significant portion of the population.

---

Quote:

---

2)The specific costs of treating a disease that is mainly preventable.

---

Quote:

---

3) The general societal costs of disease including pandemic including lost productivity and so forth. There is simply no way to recoup these costs. But it can be a huge drain on economies, and those with and without malaria demonstrate.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Quit acting like a prat, Cit.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Your tone of ridicule and wanting to put restrictions on choice implied to me that you were anti-choice. Allowing choice under specific conditions that are unlikely to happen is not prochoice.

---

Quote:

---

So citizen, I'll ask you point blank what I asked Rue. If you could vote on it, would you 1) vote against mandatory vaccination for school attendance and 2) vote against any AMA initiative to rescind nonmedical exemptions from all 48 states that have them? No addendums, amendments, or anything. It's come for vote the way it is and you have to decide. If your answer is yes, I will apologize to you for mischaracterizing your position.

---

Quote:

---

Vis a vis school attendance, the small fraction of unvaccinated children do not threaten the public health of the vaccinated population at school. Therefore mandatory vaccination laws for school attendance should be repealed. Short of that, nonmedical exemptions must be granted in all 50 states.

---

Quote:

---

If lawmakers were really concerned about public health at school, they would mandate current vaccination coverage for all teachers and school personnel as well. You can have a never-vaccinated school teacher, but you can't have a never-vaccinated child at school. What kind of double standard is that?

---

Quote:

---

just like you and Frem want.

---

Quote:

---

If someone makes a choice, and it *IS* a choice, financial and other responsibility falls to them, no one is saying otherwise, but what is being pushed here - is the idea that people should NOT have a choice, and when that decision is forced upon them, should ALSO not have one whit of recourse if the results of that decision are harmful.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Quote:

---

just like you and Frem want.

---

Bullshit.

Quote:

---

If someone makes a choice, and it *IS* a choice, financial and other responsibility falls to them, no one is saying otherwise, but what is being pushed here - is the idea that people should NOT have a choice, and when that decision is forced upon them, should ALSO not have one whit of recourse if the results of that decision are harmful.

---

http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=18&t=25494
Posted Monday, November 27, 2006 - 11:32

So how about you just shut your pie hole before you embarrass yourself further, moron.

---

Quote:

---

If someone makes a choice, and it *IS* a choice, financial and other responsibility falls to them, no one is saying otherwise, but what is being pushed here - is the idea that people should NOT have a choice, and when that decision is forced upon them, should ALSO not have one whit of recourse if the results of that decision are harmful.

---

Quote:

---

My argument is that the person in question should have informed consent and the option to refuse if they feel the risks outweigh the benefits, on their own responsibility without any additional consequence beyond their own responsibility for themself

---

Quote:

---

As for responsibility, turn that one on it's head - do you think it's fair for me to pay (cause some of it does indeed come out of my tax dollars here in the US) for the lifelong care of people harmed by vaccinations that are legally mandatory ?
*I* did not make the decision to vacc someone with pre-existing risk factors without seeking alternatives.
So why should I then be stuck with the bill ?
Morally, it works in both directions, or neither.

I am perfectly willing to foot the bills for my own decisions, I am NOT, however, willing to foot the bills for decisions forced upon me by others.

---

Quote:

---

At no time, under no circumstances, did I say that other folks should foot the bill for someones own, personal, medical decisions - all I have ever said, and continue to say, is that I should not have to foot it for decisions forced upon me by others.

---

Quote:

---

You repeatedly, and continually in this entire discussion go on about how I wish to have the decision without the consquences, and I have continually stated in no uncertain terms that this is not the case - and that forcing the decision on me, and the consequences of a decision I did NOT make, or was not legally allowed to me, is idiotic.

---

Quote:

---

You demanded I dig up evidence, much of which has had to be posted twice to you as you ignored it or didn't get around to looking at it.

---

Quote:

---

I stated my position repeatedly, you distorted it, repeatedly, and continue to do so.
...
Either you're as crazy as PN is, or at this point you're just being malicious.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
One of us is nuts.

And you know, I don't think it's me.

I'll be filing you with Zero and Asshat in the future Chit... sorry, I tried to reason with ya, but it just ain't possible.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Summary: getting vaccines is more dangerous than disease.

Conclusion: anti-vaccine argument

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
But what happens if you make vaccination optional and that small fraction becomes a LARGE fraction? Do you re-institute mandatory vaccination if that faction becomes more than X%?

---

Quote:

---

altho I expect the assumption is that most teachers have either been vaccinated or have already had the usual diseases

---

Quote:

---

Sweden suspended vaccination against whooping cough from 1979 to 1996 while testing a new vaccine. In a study of the moratorium period that was published in 1993, Swedish physicians found that 60 percent of the country's children got whooping cough before they were ten. However, close medical monitoring kept the death rate from whooping cough at about one per year during that period.

Boulder, which has the lowest school-wide vaccination rate in Colorado, has one of the highest per capita rates of whooping cough in the United States. .... "At first we called it an outbreak; then we started calling it a sustained outbreak; now we just say it's endemic," Ann Marie Bailey, the county nurse epidemiologist when I visited Boulder last year, told me... From its reservoir in the under-vaccinated population of Boulder pertussis has branched out: neighboring Jefferson and Denver Counties had more cases in 2000 than Boulder did. Some of the people who live near Boulder are angry. "There is a constant presence of whooping cough here, and it's because of Boulder Valley;" says Kathy Keffeler, the chief school nurse for Longmont, a growing city just north of Boulder... In 2000 it killed seventeen people in the United States, including two Colorado babies, both of whom were taken to the hospital too late... Tina Albertson, a pediatric resident who cared for one of the infants, told me "She was a six-week-old girl with a sister and a brother, four and six. The family had chosen not to immunize, and the week she was born, her siblings both had whooping cough. When they're real little, the babies don't whoop--they just stop breathing. This little girl was septic by the time they got her here."

Like most in Boulder, Ann Marie Bailey, the nurse epidemiologist... cedes nonvaccinating parents the right to decide what's best for their children. But she gently points out that they're fooling themselves if they think no one else is affected by their decisions. "We've been able to show very definitely that whooping cough spreads from these pockets in small communities.

---

Quote:

---

The authors measured the impact of children with personal exemptions on community risk. "After adjusting for confounders, the frequency of exemptors in a county was associated with the incidence rate of measles [1.6 times greater risk] and pertussis [1.9 times greater risk] in vaccinated children," they write. Also, "schools with pertussis outbreaks had more exemptors (mean 4.3 percent of students) than schools without outbreaks (1.5 percent of students)," they continue. "At least 11 percent of vaccinated children in measles outbreaks acquired infection through contact with an exemptor."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
I am truly tired, so very tired, of all the personal insults and attacks coming from you and Citizen. I have no interest in that kind of mean-spirited debate.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Canttakesky:
If you could vote on it, would you 1) vote against mandatory vaccination ...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:
I don't get to vote in America...

---

Quote:

---

I'll reiterate I like the system in Britian fine, vaccinations aren't mandatory...

---

Quote:

---

No retraction I see. No quote either.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Hence the phrase, IF YOU COULD VOTE ON IT....

---

Quote:

---

I'm glad to know you like the system in Britain. The question remains, do you like the mandatory vaccination system in the USA? Or would you like to see it repealed and changed to a voluntary system like the British?

---

Quote:

---

I DID quote, and I explained I interpreted those quotes. I already said I'll apologize when I see you favoring choice in America, where choice is prohibited by law.

It is not my fault if you don't read what I quote or what I write.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:
Erm, I think you'd do well to adopt a more British health care system full stop, not just vaccines. Does that help?

---

Quote:

---

So you tell me, is saying my position is something I've flatout said it is not ...
I saw a quote being misrepresented, and I said so, and you bunch of knee jerk reactionaries pulled out the crucifix, then imply I'm a facist, bravo.

---

Quote:

---

Oh good, you decided to be a hypocrite. Hows it up there on your high horse with the rest of the idiot hypocrites?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Well, not really. The issue here is not really health care, but whether children should be prohibited from attending school by law unless they have been vaccinated. Do you support this prohibition, which currently exists in the USA, or do you oppose it?

I have tried several attempts at asking this question, but I feel you still haven't given me a straight answer. Maybe you're only prochoice in Britain, and anti-choice in the States. I don't know.

---

Quote:

---

do you like the mandatory vaccination system in the USA? Or would you like to see it repealed and changed to a voluntary system like the British?

---

Quote:

---

I think you'd do well to adopt a more British health care system full stop, not just vaccines.

---

Quote:

---

As far as the insults go,
...
I cannot find any instance where you flat out said you are NOT anti-choice. You imply you are prochoice (preferably with restrictions on choice), but stop short of saying it outright. I am still not sure I was completely wrong to say you are anti-choice. Then you called me a "knee jerk reactionary" who pulls out a crucifix.

---

Quote:

---

Many of the insults were actually directed at Frem and whoever else you meant. Even if not directed at me, I lose interest in type of insult. There are more quotes, but that gives you an idea.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
CTS- Unfortunately, I don't think that populations always come to the most rational decisions.

---

Quote:

---

Sweden suspended vaccination against whooping cough from 1979 to 1996 while testing a new vaccine. In a study of the moratorium period that was published in 1993, Swedish physicians found that 60 percent of the country's children got whooping cough before they were ten.

---

Quote:

---

From its reservoir in the under-vaccinated population of Boulder pertussis has branched out: neighboring Jefferson and Denver Counties had more cases in 2000 than Boulder did. Some of the people who live near Boulder are angry. "There is a constant presence of whooping cough here, and it's because of Boulder Valley;" says Kathy Keffeler, the chief school nurse for Longmont, a growing city just north of Boulder...

---

Quote:

---

The family had chosen not to immunize, and the week she was born, her siblings both had whooping cough. When they're real little, the babies don't whoop--they just stop breathing. This little girl was septic by the time they got her here."

---

Quote:

---

But she gently points out that they're fooling themselves if they think no one else is affected by their decisions. "We've been able to show very definitely that whooping cough spreads from these pockets in small communities.

---

Quote:

---

After adjusting for confounders, the frequency of exemptors in a county was associated with the incidence rate of measles [1.6 times greater risk] and pertussis [1.9 times greater risk] in vaccinated children,

---

Quote:

---

"schools with pertussis outbreaks had more exemptors (mean 4.3 percent of students) than schools without outbreaks (1.5 percent of students),"

---

Quote:

---

At least 11 percent of vaccinated children in measles outbreaks acquired infection through contact with an exemptor.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:
Where's the problem?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
These are yes or no questions. But you won't answer yes or no.

---

Quote:

---

I asked about a mandatory vaccination system, and you answered about a health care system.

---

Quote:

---

I frankly do not know how to interpret your answers.

---

Quote:

---

or all I know, you may believe in the principle behind mandatory vaccinations, but you are willing to compromise and allow vaccination choice in exchange for nationalized health care. I don't know.

---

Quote:

---

This is what I know. 1) You are prochoice in Britain. 2) You favor Americans having a health care system more like the British.

---

Quote:

---

This is what I don't know. 1) Do you oppose mandatory vaccinations in the USA as a requirement for school entry?

---

Quote:

---

2) Would you support having nonmedical exemptions in order for unvaccinated kids to attend school in all 50 states?

---