California Passes SB 277 Forcing All Children To Get Vaccinated

[Steeler Eater]

I for one stand behind this and don't understand why you would put your kids at risk for reasons that aren't ever backed up except with opinions.

http://www.thestandarddaily.com/california-passes-sb-277-bill-forcing-all-children-to-get-vaccinated-before-kindergarten/1985/

[xxlt]

Yeah, if you believe Jeebus or the Easter Bunny is going to protect you from disease and you don't need shots you should go live in Jeebus' tomb or on Easter Bunny Island. There is a cost to live in a society. Want less government intrusion in your life? I suggest you move to Somalia. It is a small goverment paradise.

[Belsnickel]

I always have mixed feelings about this sort of thing. There is the part of me in favor of smaller government that says that this one is okay because it is at the state level, but on the federal level it would be a gross intrusion on the lives of the citizenry.

But there is the part of me that recognizes just how much harm can come from the public health with only a small percentage of children not being vaccinated.

[StLucieBengal]

I oppose forcing anyone to get vaccines. I also allow that schools could not allow children to attend if they did not have the vaccines.

This group is so small that if they choose to not get vaccinated then the onus is on them to home school or find a private school who will allow them to attend.

I feel this is a reasonable compromise that would allow both parties to get what they want, and Im sorry but the minority group should have to jump through more hoops than the majority.

[Benton]

Allowing schools to prevent them from attending doesn't stop the issue of the kids being in the public.

If you want to keep your kid vaccine free because of an unproven link to a condition, go for it. But I think the kids should have to wear a giant red v tattoo on their face.

Problem solved.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

What's next, forced sterilizations for the "Feeble Minded" or euthanasia programs for the terminally ill, old and whatever else you can think of?

How about the government tells you what you and yours has for breakfast, lunch and dinner? We are a fat nation and it's for the betterment of the country.

I'm not saying I'm against vaccinations because I'm not, I believe every child should get their shots, I'm just asking where does it stop?

I know, I know, it will never come to that point and all...until it does and then we'll all be sitting around scratching our heads asking, "How did it come to this?"

[Belsnickel]

(05-16-2015, 06:48 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: What's next, forced sterilizations for the "Feeble Minded" or euthanasia programs for the terminally ill, old and whatever else you can think of?

How about the government tells you what you and yours has for breakfast, lunch and dinner? We are a fat nation and it's for the betterment of the country.

I'm not saying I'm against vaccinations because I'm not,  I believe every child should get their shots, I'm just asking where does it stop?

I know, I know, it will never come to that point and all...until it does and then we'll all be sitting around scratching our heads asking, "How did it come to this?"

Well, it already did come to what you describe in the first part, just about a century ago. We gave Hitler the idea.

But I get the idea that this opens doors. Which is one reason I think that that keeping things like this on the state level isthe way to go.

[Steeler Eater]

(05-16-2015, 03:44 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I  always have mixed feelings about this sort of thing. There is the part of me in favor of smaller government that says that this one is okay because it is at the state level, but on the federal level it would be a gross intrusion on the lives of the citizenry.

But there is the part of me that recognizes just how much harm can come from the public health with only a small percentage of children not being vaccinated.

I agree with the ideas of people should not be told what they have to do by a government with their bodies, but when it can cause an epidemic and effect others in a harmful way they should be able to step in. The smoking in public places laws also sort of fall under this topic because granted it is their body, but it is causing harm to others around them.

[StLucieBengal]

(05-16-2015, 07:34 PM)Steeler Eater Wrote: I agree with the ideas of people should not be told what they have to do by a government with their bodies, but when it can cause an epidemic and effect others in a harmful way they should be able to step in. The smoking in public places laws also sort of fall under this topic because granted it is their body, but it is causing harm to others around them.

It's only harming the ones not getting vaccines.

Vaccinated kids should be ok.

[Devils Advocate]

Anytime government on any level removes your option to say 'no', the motives need to be scrutinized.

It's not about a belief in faith healing.

I haven't read every study concerning the pro's & con's of vaccinations. I've read enough though to understand evidence does exist which should give parents pause, at the very least (parents) should research and weigh their options ( so long as they exist ). I'm a parent. My child has been vaccinated and inoculated. But let's be honest, flu shots are a joke. Are those next in line to be mandatory?

To be clear though this bill is not mandatory. It's only so if you choose to send your child(ren) to public schools and as the bill states '... for other purposes'

[JustWinBaby]

(05-16-2015, 03:44 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: But there is the part of me that recognizes just how much harm can come from the public health with only a small percentage of children not being vaccinated.

Not that I disagree....but, theoretically, what harm can come if most children are vaccinated and some aren't? Isn't that the point of vaccination, to protect you from the virus?

[Belsnickel]

(05-17-2015, 05:17 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Not that I disagree....but, theoretically, what harm can come if most children are vaccinated and some aren't?  Isn't that the point of vaccination, to protect you from the virus?

The object of universal vaccination is eradication of the virus. Eventually it will disappear from the area if not infecting anyone. Even those vaccinated, however, can be carriers of the virus for the lifespan of it (which if not infecting someone is significantly shorter due to not being able to reproduce). So if a small percentage of the population is not vaccinated you can still see a resulting epidemic as immunized people spread the virus all over.

Now, this still leaves the immunized folks immune, for the most part. Immunizations don't always take, and some will decline in effectiveness over the years. I've had to have a booster for my Hep C vaccine a couple of times because my titer test showed that it didn't hold well for me. So while inoculations aren't perfect, they do reduce the number of susceptible people significantly. Then you have the ones unable to be immunized. There will always be these people. Whether it's an allergy to something in it or an immune system that couldn't handle it. Either way, there is a population that legitimately cannot be immunized.

So with all of these things going on around us, even a small population of people that are not immunized could easily be killed off in a short amount of time were something serious to hitch a ride somewhere.

Side note, my aunt is a pediatric nurse supervisor here at the hospital and there is some new research on measles being floated around. Essentially, measles resets the immune system. Meaning your white blood cells lose any recognition memory for other diseases once you have measles, leaving you highly susceptible to all sorts of nasty stuff and making even the common cold a potentially deadly situation.

[GMDino]

(05-16-2015, 08:45 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: It's only harming the ones not getting vaccines.  

Vaccinated kids should be ok.

(05-17-2015, 05:17 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Not that I disagree....but, theoretically, what harm can come if most children are vaccinated and some aren't?  Isn't that the point of vaccination, to protect you from the virus?

Viruses mutate when the have the chance to spread.

[StLucieBengal]

(05-17-2015, 07:26 PM)GMDino Wrote: Viruses mutate when the have the chance to spread.

treatments cause mutation. This is why you don't get a flu shot.

[Belsnickel]

(05-17-2015, 07:32 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: treatments cause mutation.  This is why you don't get a flu shot.

...if you're referring to flu shots not actually providing resistance to the strains of flu going around, that isn't from mutations due to treatment. What happens there is that the health care industry tries to predict what will be hitting us for flu season based on what goes on in the South American flu season. It's a best guess, really. It's not that the strains mutate due to inoculations, but that the people doing the analysis miss the mark on which flu strains will actually make the biggest headway here.

[StLucieBengal]

(05-17-2015, 07:54 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: ...if you're referring to flu shots not actually providing resistance to the strains of flu going around, that isn't from mutations due to treatment. What happens there is that the health care industry tries to predict what will be hitting us for flu season based on what goes on in the South American flu season. It's a best guess, really. It's not that the strains mutate due to inoculations, but that the people doing the analysis miss the mark on which flu strains will actually make the biggest headway here.

Exactly why I don't get that shot.

[Belsnickel]

(05-17-2015, 08:05 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Exactly why I don't get that shot.

So you would rather not be protected at all than be protected against several strains which will likely be the strains that hit us for the flu season, and if there are others that hit the symptoms are less severe with the flu shot?

[StLucieBengal]

(05-17-2015, 08:20 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: So you would rather not be protected at all than be protected against several strains which will likely be the strains that hit us for the flu season, and if there are others that hit the symptoms are less severe with the flu shot?

My girls get their shots but I don't take one. I get the flu maybe one time every other year.... And I only get it when I am going with low sleep for several days. It's not an issue for me? Or hasn't been to this point....

[Belsnickel]

(05-17-2015, 08:39 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: My girls get their shots but I don't take one.   I get the flu maybe one time every other year.... And I only get it when I am going with low sleep for several days.    It's not an issue for me? Or hasn't been to this point....

I used to not get it, never did. Even when working in health care. I've never had the flu before in my life. A few years ago I started getting it because of my father's weakened immune system. The way I see it, there are no negatives to getting it, but there are plenty of potential negatives if you don't.

[Brownshoe]

I think people are crazy to think vaccinations are worse than taking a chace to get a very harmful virus, BUT I think that it's stupid that the government will force people to get it if they don't approve to it. I think that it is an unconstitutional law.