A controversial post

Post Reply New Topic

This is somewhat disingenuous. There are people who cannot be vaccinated because, say, they are immunocompromised.

Here is the German Interior Ministry's side of the story regarding vaccination in Germany:

http://content.time.com/time/health/art ... 66,00.html

Do you ever buy stuff at a grocery store? That's enough exposure to potentially spread illness. Certain illnesses can even linger in the air or on objects a person has touched for days, before getting inhaled or ingested by another person and infecting them.

As I wrote earlier, if I knew that I was infected with an epidemiologically serious disease (which is contagious or communicable), I would self-quarantine according to my state's laws in lieu of vaccination (which would almost certainly involve less than three weeks of isolation for most diseases). But, if I didn't know about such a serious infection, I would need to have known (or should have known) that: 1) I was infected with such a serious infection, and 2) acted or continued to act with indifference to others before the laws of my state could restrict my actions and punish me for the harm I caused others.

For more common infections, the law expects nothing of me but to avoid infecting others to the best of my ability. I suppose the intentional infection of another individual with a common cold could be prosecuted, but I can't remember the last time that happened. It is legally no worse than the common colds I pick up every couple years being out in public (which, by itself, belies the notion that traveling around a metropolitan area is a serious risk)? Do I have the right to make a criminal complaint against the infecting party or the public accommodation in which I was infected or the unknowing witnesses who did nothing to save me from infection? Not likely in my state. Do I have the right to sue civilly for damages? It wouldn't get very far. And why? Because it is asking too much of the law to protect individuals from common, everyday risks on the order of a paper cut or stubbed toe. If others consider the risks too great to bear, they are free to adopt whatever universal precautions they choose to employ in their quest to be germ-free. If and when such a risk rises to the level of criminal intent, however, I give you permission to make a citizen's arrest of my person. Life happens.

#MyBodyMyChoice

AspieUtah,

What about those illnesses that have incubation periods during which you become contagious?

And what about people like Bob Sears, who does not accept insurance making himself available to only wealthy people? Or RFK Jr., who likely has made a good amount of money?

Under a declared disaster or emergency (or, if I notice symptoms), I would immediately self-quarantine for whatever duration is necessary to prove or disprove my own infection. Apart from that, I would adopt certain universal precautions for my own behaviors and, otherwise, carry on with my life. Lawfully, there is no authority delegated in the Constitution for the United States of America to provide for pre-crime prosecution, so my actions would be legal in my state because they wouldn't be (and aren't) illegal.

Having said that, I hope people are already using at least some universal precautions. When I worked in the marketing department of a major Los Angeles-area hospital, I learned how completely, disgustingly contaminated hospital: doorknobs, magazines, elevator buttons, handrails, newspapers, pens and chairs are. Now, they are far more dangerous in terms of spreading disease than individuals going about their lives are.

Seriously, we all need to adopt some universal precautions ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_precautions ). Even if it is just not touching our faces when we are away from home. Doing that has reduced the number of annual colds I have to less than one. Look into it.


First, unless they are earning hundreds of millions of dollars a year while their staffers earn barely above minimum wage (see Disney), I encourage business owners to earn what they can for their work, Sears and Kennedy included. With Sears specifically, I admire his cash-only policy. The amounts about which I have read he charges is actually below what my Medicaid pays for my primary-care visits. My nurse practitioner, on the other hand, accepts cash only at about the same rate as Sears. If I visit them once or twice a year, it is affordable. As for his opinions about vaccination, I agree with him and consider his "delayed vaccinations" idea a good half-step for those whose lives and opinions might not let them avoid all vaccinations.

AspieUtah,

Have fun.

omg the government forces a million things on people, I don't understand why people are all up in arms about 'but those vaccines are eviiil'

Can't drive without a license, can't be naked, can't litter, can't physically harm someone else...but you should be allowed to host diseases that endanger other people do not want because MyBodyMyChoice??? Really...you will be charged with assault if you punch someone, but you cannot be charged with endangering other people's lives by not vaccinating yourself when you have no pressing medical reason to not. That's messed up. Oh, and please, lets give people who have no understanding of statistics or medicine the power determining what's 'safe' or not, because that makes sense.

The only reason people seem to be up in arms about vaccines is because there is a lot of fear about them, most claims of problems with them being unsubstantiated. Most people don't actually know how they work (I don't know how they work I have only a very vague understanding, I know no specifics) and they're 1-time things so they seem like something easy to point to. They are complicated, they're medical, they aren't understood, they don't affect your everyday life in the slightest, so they're easy to make an issue of.

You know what else causes cancer? Tap water. Better not drink that. Bottled water's probably worse. And I absolutely believe that pretty much all foods or substances you touch or ingest are actually to blame for cancer in some miniscule amount of people. But it also is ridiculous to avoid those substances most of the time. Like, you realize that receipt paper probably causes more health issues than vaccines ever have, that that keyboard you're using when you type is putting endocrine disruptors into your body? Don't care to complain about that though, or do research into whether or not you should be touching the plastics you use everyday, because you use them everyday, and that makes things very inconvenient. But when the problem is a nebulous thing that most of the population didn't have to live through or see, infectious diseases that have non miniscule mortality rates, that's not in your mind as an inconvenience. Hell, swine flu kills very few people compared to so many diseases that we vaccinate for. I could care less if people vaccinate for that or even the regular flu every year, because the death toll is tiny and often limited to the already sick/dying people.

It would be one thing if people were citing issues with vaccines and then complaining about the poor standards of measuring safety for medical procedures, because at least then you'd be like 'see, they could make it safer' or be like 'see, they failed to find this problem in their testing because their testing did not involve testing for this specific thing' or 'wow they did no medical safety testing for this thing, that's sketchy'. But no, they instead cite 'I am allowed not to' and defend it with 'because I don't need to'.

Since you do not claim to actually live in the woods and are actually a full-blown hermit utah, growing your own food and shooting game, you are not isolated enough to be someone who would not spread human-born diseases. I suppose if you were to contract something, if you were to then actually isolate yourself and die alone, that would be fine. But that includes barring relatives from visiting, which you may not actually be able to stop from visiting if you actually got that sick if they were hell-bent on getting in for whatever reason. Lol, how many people do you know successfully, fully, isolate themselves when they're in perfect health? Social isolation isn't fully up to the person who wants to be isolated though.

You realize that these overly precautious things we do to reduce germs in our lives have ALSO been implicated in causing autism and various auto-immune issues, right? It's not proven, but it's hardly been a disproven theory.

How is this any of this a valid reason to believe that vaccines cause autism?

It's not messed up but then again, charging people for not getting vaccinated is not even on the table. The comparison to driving is most accurate. You can opt out of getting a license but then you necessarily also opt out of driving. If you opt out of vaccinating your children (unless medical exemption), you also opt out of public school and so must find a private school with no such requirement or homeschool. As an adult you opt out of a job in most hospitals and the military (talking just about the U.S. here). All this talk about the vaccination responsibilities of adult AspieUtah is a red herring because there are no vaccination requirements he is dodging.

I am very pro vaccination and know all about herd immunity but charging people? No. But that's not even on the table.




Red herring. There are no vaccination requirements for anyone of any age to simply live in a community. Nor should there be. I'm not sure how this red herring about AspieUtah working to not spread disease but also not vaccinating got started. There are no vaccines he is required to get.

In medicine and health care, and in particular with chronic symptoms and illnesses, people are talking more and more about bio-psycho-social models of health and illnesses, and if you take that model seriously you have to assume a disposition of some people on the autism spectrum to develop some muscular diseases and all kinds of stress- and anxiety-related diseases (and auto-immune and gastrointestinal diseases are very much related to stress and anxiety), including a higher susceptibility to react badly to vaccination.

Aspies with some alexithymia issue develop illnesses also in a more psychosomatic way. People with an alexithymia issue tend not to react to emotional or half-emotional warning signals like aversion, tiredness or tenseness on time. They might force themselves to continue to do something with always growing efforts till they develop organic symptoms. Similarly primary school children often suffer from diffuse stomach pains that are mostly not (yet) organic (I have heard that it is the most common medical symptom in this age group), actually the reason is often that they cant emotionally sort a concrete anxiety of theirs because it is still unfamiliar to them.

As for the physiologic processes you have to ask the right group of aspies, some are able to developp a very good sense for what is going on in human or animal bodies.

Thank you.

Well, well, well. Tony Abbott, the poster child for forcible vaccination opposed it himself for his own family. And, like former U.S. presidential candidate John Kerry, he "was for [optional vaccinations] before [he] was against [them]." I wonder if Abbott will willingly forfeit his Australian federal support money.

The argument isn't 'the law says you must get vaccinated', the argument is 'Would such a law be acceptable because you are not actually socially isolated'

The driver's licence is probably the least valid comparison because you do not need to ever drive. The overwhelming majority of North Americans are not actually segregated from other people. In order to live in society, one should not endanger that society. Do you ever see someone else? If yes, and you are not vaccinated against communicable diseases for no other reason than 'I do not want to', you are needlessly endangering other people which should be a crime.

If someone is vaccinated, they are, presumably, protected from my being unvaccinated, right? Or, aren't vaccines really "safe and effective" as vaccine makers and mongers claim?

#MyBodyMyChoice