Is it time to consider compulsory vaccinations?

You cannot even keep up with your own posts. Here is you admittin that MMR contains nothing directly toxic but you still manage to whine about, well.... Completely irrational. I see later on you admit that it there was no point to your question about sodium bicarbonate, but then what exactly is left in this post complaining about MMR. Just your anecdotes.

I had looked up the ingredients in the MMR because it has been a source of problems as reported by parents of children vaccinated with it.It contains about a dozen ordinarily benign ingredients such as bicarb and MSG; I simply choose those two as examples of the list, but trust someone here to make a big twisted deal out of anything I say. Rant? They aren't toxic under normal conditions but who wants ANYTHING injected into them if their effect isn't known?It seems a reasonable question to me. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

But the effects are known Faith and the effects are that there are no adverse effects.

Your complaint is irrational. The effects of all of those ingredients are known. They just aren't known to you.While I enjoy a back and forth argument, I'm finding that this one has less and less of a point. You have formed your opinion, and as best as I can tell, you've simply chosen the crank side. Again. I've explored that as much as I care to.

Just for the record I don't enjoy arguments with you in general.I seriously doubt the effect of those dozen or so ingredients injected into the blood stream is known. How's about you prove it?The point was to try and find out why some people were having trouble with that particular vaccine. Unless it's the vaccine itself it could be the additives, no matter how supposedly benign. Seems a reasonable thought to me, and I don't care whether it does to you or not. If you aren't enjoying the argument, there is a quick fix for that you know.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Of course the individual components have been tested long before the vaccines were released to the world, but the best tests are studies of the effect of vaccination.A good table: Abstract of the paper from which that table came:

quote:

---

A great deal of controversy has recently been generated over the publication of several articles implicating measles vaccine in the induction of Crohn's disease and autism. The publication of this work has already had a negative impact on measles vaccine acceptance in the UK. These allegations are particularly troubling because they arise in the context of increased use of measles vaccine as global control of measles nears and the international community considers strategies for a drive towards eradication. In 1994, the US Institute of Medicine reviewed the world literature and published a comprehensive review of adverse events associated with measles-containing vaccines. Reviewing the literature published between 1994 and the present day, reveals that there is considerable new data suggesting that modified gelatin rather than egg proteins is responsible for most episodes of anaphylaxis following measles vaccination. New work weakens the possible links between measles vaccine and subacute sclerosing panencephalitis and Guillain-Barr syndrome, but strengthens the rare association of measles-containing vaccines with post infectious encephalomyelitis. The alleged associations between measles vaccination and Crohn's disease and autism are based upon weak science and have largely been refuted by a large volume of stronger work. A review of the data generated in the last 4 years amply demonstrates the continued efforts of the scientific community to monitor and understand true measles vaccine-associated adverse events. The rapidity and clarity of this same community's debunking of the spurious associations with Crohn's disease and autism suggests that those charged with vaccination programmes have learned from past mistakes. During 30 years of worldwide use, measles vaccination has proven to be one of the safest and most successful health interventions in the history of mankind. It is not a 'perfect' vaccine, but the benefits of measles vaccination far outweigh the risks even in countries with low incidence of measles and high rates of measles vaccine coverage.

---

From Serious adverse events after measles-mumps-rubella vaccination during a fourteen-year prospective follow-up:

quote:

---

BACKGROUND:
Several disorders have been attributed to measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccination during the past decade. The aim of this prospective follow-up study was to identify serious adverse events causally related to MMR vaccination.
METHODS:
When the MMR vaccination program was launched in Finland in 1982, a countrywide surveillance system was set up to detect serious adverse events associated with MMR. To obtain detailed case histories vaccinees' clinical charts were reviewed. Serum samples were analyzed to trace concurrent infections.
SETTING:
All hospitals and health centers in Finland from 1982 through 1996.
RESULTS:
Immunization of 1.8 million individuals and consumption of almost 3 million vaccine doses by the end of 1996 gave rise to 173 potentially serious reactions claimed to have been caused by MMR vaccination. In all, 77 neurologic, 73 allergic and 22 miscellaneous reactions and 1 death were reported, febrile seizure being the most common event. However, 45% of these events proved to be probably caused or contributed by some other factor, giving an incidence of serious adverse events with possible or indeterminate causal relation with MMR vaccination of 5.3 per 100,000 vaccinees or 3.2 per 100,000 vaccine doses.
CONCLUSIONS:
Causality between immunization and a subsequent untoward event cannot be estimated solely on the basis of a temporal relation. Comprehensive analysis of the reported adverse reactions established that serious events causally related to MMR vaccine are rare and greatly outweighed by the risks of natural MMR diseases.

---

Be sure to read the "Results" section, above.

The real issue here is the fact that so many self-righteous know-it-alls refuse to believe the honest parents who have experienced adverse effects of vaccines on their children, and even call them crackpots. This is unconscionable.I just saw this story about Bill Cosby's sexual abuse of dozens of women, and it reminded me of this thread: The accusations could have been orchestrated to occur now I suppose, by someone determined to track them down, but how likely is it any of these women would simply have made up their accusation?Why won't some people believe such a large number of people when they describe having had similar experiences? It shouldn't matter what the experience is, when there is a large number of people claiming to have had a similar version of the experience, simple respect for your fellow man should require a willingness to take their testimony seriously.This goes for the bad behavior of a loved comedian (it hurts but you can't sweep it under the rug), or the UFO experiences so many have reported (there may possibly be better interpretations, who knows, but how can you doubt the simple facts of what so many claim to have experienced?), or the many reports of supernatural experiences of any kind; and the hundreds or thousands of problems with vaccines.The real problem here isn't the lack of evidence or any such thing, it's the arrogance of the supposedly "rational" or "scientifically minded" doubters who put themselves above others.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

No. Copy it out if you want me to read it. I now distrust any and all supposed research that proves any vaccine is safe in the teeth of the reports of so many who have had adverse effects from any of them.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I did copy it out. Go ahead and read it. I'll duplicate the most important part below.Study the table and see the differences between "natural" measles and vaccination in terms of adverse effect. The adverse effect of MMR is essentially zero and far, far, far less than the adverse effect of measles.. I.e. your mind is made up and you don't want to confuse yourself with facts. We already know that.The vast majority of people who report problems with MMR are assuming that any bad thing that happens after a shot is due to that shot. They are often wrong.My late wife was absolutely convinced that her problems in 2009 were due to getting a shingles shot just before.Turns out she had a rare and nearly-incurable leukemia, she went through chemo and BM transplant, had horrendous complications, was cured of the leukemia, and died. Nobody knows why.The shingles shot did nothing adverse.As it says above,

quote:

---

Immunization of 1.8 million individuals and consumption of almost 3 million vaccine doses by the end of 1996 gave rise to 173 potentially serious reactions claimed to have been caused by MMR vaccination. In all, 77 neurologic, 73 allergic and 22 miscellaneous reactions and 1 death were reported, febrile seizure being the most common event. However, 45% of these events proved to be probably caused or contributed by some other factor, giving an incidence of serious adverse events with possible or indeterminate causal relation with MMR vaccination of 5.3 per 100,000 vaccines or 3.2 per 100,000 vaccine doses.

---

Which tells us that in this study almost 50% of the reported issues had nothing to do with the vaccine. In other studies the proportion is higher. Go back and read the whole abstract; it was an 18 year study of millions of individuals. Self-diagnosed problem reports are not trustworthyEdited by JonF, : No reason given.

No, the real problem here is people like you who don't see the difference between anecdotal evidence and statistical analysis based on a large ammount of data. Nobody ever said that vaccines are 100% safe, no treatment whatsoever ever will by the way. Did you bother to read the abstracts posted by JonF? When sane people decide what to do, they usually try to choose the best scenario. On the other hand, you're choosing the worst! Congratulations?

Neither is research done by or for interested parties.In fact reports by normal honest people of event-related incidents are more credible.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Yes there are conditions attached to our rights but in what other circumstance is anyone forced to ingest or inject something in order to maintain their rights of citizenship? I can think of a few from history but they are probably not examples that you would like to use.Restrictions against inciting a riot are a specific response to a deliberate malicious behaviour that intentionally causes harm. This is not the same as demanding a prophylactic regime against a nebulous potential threat that originates elsewhere.Think about how we deal with bodily integrity or personal sovereignty in other circumstances. Under what conditions can someone else even touch you let alone inject you with something against your wishes? I have admitted that there is no good reason for me not to be vaccinated and consequently my vaccinations are up to date. I agree that people in general should be vaccinated but I also think that it should be their decision. I have cited several issues that might give someone good reason to pause. I want to retain the right to not do it because I do not want to live in a society whose members do not enjoy personal sovereignty of the highest possible order. Because that is the cost of having the right to decide which medications you will take yourself. Because making the right decision is less important than being able to decide.

Other rights have similar limits. You are insisting that your right has no limits. No rights expand so far.I wanted to attend law school. Among all of the requirements presented by the school, I find that the school has an immunization policy. So I submitted my immunization record.I wanted to join the military. I had to take shots. I was required to have my wisdom teeth removed. I got the shots and I had my wisdom teeth removed.If you elect not to immunize your kids, you may find yourself having to make alternative arrangements for their education. You may find that some doctors won't take your kids as patients, and you may find that people just don't want their kids around your kids.If your kids later want to know whose fault those things were, you are going to have to point to choices you've made. How about you pay the cost for your own choices?Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

As I pointed out upstream, your problem is that common to all of the Christian Cult of Ignorance in that you believe "TESTIFY". You believe SOURCE over CONTENT. You believe that the God character in the Garden of Eden fable told the truth while the Serpent lied.No, the reports by normal honest people of event-related incidents are not more credible.

Sure but these are all costs that we create with our response to what we imagine the threat to be. These are not the costs of the threat itself. I accept full responsibility for all of my choices.