Herd Immunity?

[Saricharity]

Whether you are pro-vax or anti-vax, the fact remains vaccines are not fool proof. Children have been vaccine injuried and it continues to happen. I realize that science says there are no correlations to autism and the MMR but I also know parents with children who have autism and they have genuine questions. Vaccines are not completely safe. Just as other medications are not completely safe. People have the right to be leery about what is being injected into their child. I have been reading both sides of the debate. This is not a black and white topic. It just isn't. If you get your child vaccinated, you are taking a risk. Some parents do not want to take that risk. I have to ask myself why and the more I think on it, the more unsure I am. I'm glad I'm a long time away from making this decision personally. I'm not content to just do something because science deems it's "safe".

Another thing to consider is how many adults are walking around in our "herd" with expired vaccines? I don't think we can place the blame on the shoulders of parents who don't vaccinate.

I was blessed to watch the movie Veil of tears again. As I was watching the movie, it dawned on me how important education is. Good, unbiased education. People in India in some of the tribes believe it's a good thing to put cow dung on the unbilical cord of a new born. I know we gasp at the stupidity but we are educated. If you are brought up to believe one thing and it has always been done, it seems to be the logical thing to do. People aren't going to believe you because you spout some scientific data. They just aren't.

This topic is not so cut and dried. Parents are not making these decisions thinking their child is more important than their neighbours. It's not a conspiracy. Parents are holding their precious newborns in their arms and being told to inject them with 20 different vaccines in their first year of life. I actually don't blame them for being cautious and unsure and yes, even fearful. Any mother can do a random search online and see all the debate about vaccines....enough to scare her silly.
You can judge her if you want but I won't.

 

[hankroberts]

"You can't be serious...."

Oh, I am absolutely serious, and so were the founders.

"Hey, do you know what you call a whole bunch of people with individual rights? A society."

True but not pertinent. A society has no rights: Individuals have rights.

"Your rights do not outweigh theirs, especially when it comes to things like public health."

Indeed. My right to determine my medical care is exactly equal to every other citizen's right to determine his medical care.

"Your actions by going unvaccinated and therefore posing a threat to others will violate someone else's rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness when you make them sick. In short, you don't have the right to put other people's health and lives at risk."

Sorry, but in this country you cannot presume to deprive a citizen of his rights merely on the grounds that you think they might pose a possible but unidentified threat to some as yet unidentified individual. Maybe where you are, but not here.

"It's the exact same principle though. How is forcing someone into military service not an infringement on personal liberty or freedoms for the good of the society?"

While I am personally opposed to the draft as unreasonable, the argument (made throughout our history) is the military service in defense of the nation is a duty of every able citizen (actually they historically limit that to male citizens, mostly). So your rights are dependent on the survival of the Republic, and therefore military service is necessary to ensure those rights continue.

But historically, even during the most unpopular conflicts, volunteers far outnumbered draftees. (Not that this is pertinent here)

"Disease limits someone's life and their pursuit of happiness. If you are responsible for spreading that disease through your own actions, then you are responsible for attacking the liberties of anyone that you have made ill."

Ah, so since we know what causes diseases like AIDS, and we know exactly how to prevent those diseases, then you would be in favor of taking what action against anyone who engages in an "at risk" activity? Jail? Fines? What? Because these activities are actually positive events, not merely the withholding of something they find unacceptable. This is exactly the same principle: someone acting in a manner that exposes themselves or others to the spread of disease.

""Most states" does not equal "all states". There is nothing illegal about the practice constitutionally, or federally."

Actually, yes, there is: the Constitution. And I said 'most states' because I'm not familiar with the laws of every state. Do you know of a state where that is legally allowed? I do not.

"Then your priorities are screwed up. Public health is always one of the highest concerns for any civilized country."

Heh. Opinion duly noted. Keeping in mind that opinions are like noses: almost everyone has at least one; and most of them smell. Also keep in mind that I've already said that I support vaccination programs and encourage their use, voluntarily.

 

[hankroberts]

Vaccines do not work. THey have one purpose. A billion dollars is made.
Think about this. A vaccine is a synthetic disease.

That is what it is.

THey inject you with this disease your not going to encounter in life while thinking the pre disease will will strengthen your immunity.

That is the foundation of a vaccine, that is the thought and reasoning.

Here is the problem.
The immunity is not strengthened through experience.

Not like muscles,if you work out you get stronger. Immunity is not like this.

Immunity is strengthened through vitamins, minerals, antioxidants and others important nourishments.

No nourishment isofund in a vaccine obviously.

The proper way to strangthen your immunity is not through the money making vaccine scam.

The proper way is to eat lots of natural healthy foods to send your immunity into over drive.

Those natural foods are made by God.

So obviously God made the natural food to suit the natural body he made for us too.

Without going into the details, but merely as a point of interest, nearly every statement you made there is incorrect. The definition of a vaccine; the purpose of vaccines; the way vaccines work; the way vaccines impact the immune system... every one of them.

 

[bhsmte]

Vaccines do not work. THey have one purpose. A billion dollars is made.
Think about this. A vaccine is a synthetic disease.

That is what it is.

THey inject you with this disease your not going to encounter in life while thinking the pre disease will will strengthen your immunity.

That is the foundation of a vaccine, that is the thought and reasoning.

Here is the problem.
The immunity is not strengthened through experience.

Not like muscles,if you work out you get stronger. Immunity is not like this.

Immunity is strengthened through vitamins, minerals, antioxidants and others important nourishments.

No nourishment isofund in a vaccine obviously.

The proper way to strangthen your immunity is not through the money making vaccine scam.

The proper way is to eat lots of natural healthy foods to send your immunity into over drive.

Those natural foods are made by God.

So obviously God made the natural food to suit the natural body he made for us too.

Vaccinations don't work?

Care to explain the data attached, regarding how vaccinations, have impacted certain diseases?

Vaccine Benefits

 

[Dave Ellis]

Well it just takes heaps f reading about nutrition.
You should read the book price wrote in 1930, yes it is very old information this eating healthy concept.
Let food be thy medicine was once said by a ver smart man....

If everything you read is unsupported, and can be shown to be wrong, it doesn't matter how much of it you read, you're still wrong.

Common sense I think, just know...

No, it's not common sense. I'm sure you also went to work around the same time that you got your tumour, or drove your car somewhere, etc. How do you know every other action you performed didn't cause it, while vaccines did?

Can you demonstrate how you know what you claim to know?

It takes much research from many different places, you can put the peices together in time.

That's nonsense, where's the study that shows vaccines cause brain tumours like you had?

If your argument is "well, this is what I claim to know, so it must be true", it's not compelling for anyone, and even you have no reason to accept your own views.

I know it is gone because I know what it feels like and I know what it does to me.
I know when I have it I throw up a lot and it feels like a rock on my brain. I know how it effects my ability to move...


I just know it and i also know how healthy eating make me feel, I have not felt this good my entire life.

No claims, I just know.

That's not what I asked, I asked how you know it's never coming back due to your diet?

 

[Dave Ellis]

Oh, I am absolutely serious, and so were the founders.

I always find it rather strange how people like yourself want to argue from the opinions of people from 250 years ago, and not argue what the actual modern legal code, and all subsequent court findings actually say.

True but not pertinent. A society has no rights: Individuals have rights.

If individuals have rights, then the society made up of those individuals also have rights. You do not have the right to put other peoples health at risk.

Indeed. My right to determine my medical care is exactly equal to every other citizen's right to determine his medical care.

That's a red herring, we're talking about how it's wrong to put the health or lives of others at risk, not their medical options after they get sick.

Sorry, but in this country you cannot presume to deprive a citizen of his rights merely on the grounds that you think they might pose a possible but unidentified threat to some as yet unidentified individual. Maybe where you are, but not here.

Ah, well, in that case I'm sure you're also against drivers licensing. After all, you are not allowed to drive your car unless you are licensed and can demonstrate you won't pose an unreasonable risk to others. This could also be construed as a violation of personal liberty in the interests of the rest of society. In fact, that's a slam dunk example, but yet it's perfectly legal.

While I am personally opposed to the draft as unreasonable, the argument (made throughout our history) is the military service in defense of the nation is a duty of every able citizen (actually they historically limit that to male citizens, mostly). So your rights are dependent on the survival of the Republic, and therefore military service is necessary to ensure those rights continue.

But historically, even during the most unpopular conflicts, volunteers far outnumbered draftees. (Not that this is pertinent here)

So in other words there is another precedent for limiting the rights of the few (or individual) in the interests of the rights of the many.

"Disease limits someone's life and their pursuit of happiness. If you are responsible for spreading that disease through your own actions, then you are responsible for attacking the liberties of anyone that you have made ill."

Ah, so since we know what causes diseases like AIDS, and we know exactly how to prevent those diseases, then you would be in favor of taking what action against anyone who engages in an "at risk" activity? Jail? Fines? What? Because these activities are actually positive events, not merely the withholding of something they find unacceptable. This is exactly the same principle: someone acting in a manner that exposes themselves or others to the spread of disease. [/quote]

This is another red herring. Engaging in unsafe sex with someone who has aids is putting yourself at risk, not others. There's a very important distinction there. You pay the consequences for your irresponsibility, not other people.

On the flip side, people who knowingly spread diseases either through neglect or purposeful actions, (may it be aids or anything else) are usually prosecuted, and usually convicted.

Actually, yes, there is: the Constitution. And I said 'most states' because I'm not familiar with the laws of every state. Do you know of a state where that is legally allowed? I do not.

The Supreme Court has upheld the federal government's power to commandeer private property but imposed strict limits. In United States v. Russell (1871), the court noted:

Extraordinary and unforeseen occasions arise, however, beyond all doubt, in cases of extreme necessity in time of war or of immediate and impending public danger, in which private property may be impressed into the public service, or may be seized and appropriated to the public use, or may even be destroyed without the consent of the owner . . . but the public danger must be immediate, imminent, and impending, and the emergency in the public service must be extreme and imperative, and such as will not admit of delay or a resort to any other source of supply, and the circumstances must be such as imperatively require the exercise of that extreme power in respect to the particular property so impressed, appropriated, or destroyed.

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/80/623/case.html

So, put bluntly, how you think law works isn't how law actually works. It is constitutional.

Heh. Opinion duly noted. Keeping in mind that opinions are like noses: almost everyone has at least one; and most of them smell. Also keep in mind that I've already said that I support vaccination programs and encourage their use, voluntarily.

Just because everyone has an opinion doesn't mean everyone's opinion is right, or equal.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Without going into the details, but merely as a point of interest, nearly every statement you made there is incorrect. The definition of a vaccine; the purpose of vaccines; the way vaccines work; the way vaccines impact the immune system... every one of them.

At least we agree on that

 

[IamNazarene]

"I'm a Medical student at Lunds University.

While I do agree with you that most meds dont cure the root problem I have to disagree that it's impossible. The main issue here is capitalism, Pharma companies such as Astra need to sell drugs that "temporarily" cure said diseases so they can keep their customers. However, I know that there are ways to actually cure diseases from its root with ease, but there's no money in that, so most companies avoid doing that.

"Healing from god", I can't deny nor agree with that as I'm only a human and I know only as far as my brain lets me. I'm in no position to say whether god heals or not, but what I do know is that there's a phenomenom called "Placebo". If you're a believer, a soldier, or someone disciplinned to believe in greater things that could possibly affect your mind in a positive way, you're guaranteed a healthier body as a healthy mind changes our body chemistry.

Also, there are experimental meds out there that actually causes the blood to clot immediately which can stop bleedings in major wounds. Look it up. "

 

[Saricharity]

So Should We Just Round Up the Anti-Vaccine Parents And Ship Them to Guantanamo? | TheBlaze.com

This is one of the many blogs I have tripped across in my travels. There are many many more...

Dear Mom who didn't vaccinate her kid against the measles

And the response....

https://leviquackenboss.wordpress.c...-i-need-to-vaccinate-my-kids-against-measles/

Read them and then read the comments!

This is not a cut and dried topic. People DO NOT know what to believe. Some are very uneducated while some are extremely knowledgeable ....or do they think they are? People are leery and why is that? I'm thinking this is the case of too much media. Too much information? Not enough credible information?

What is the answer? You simply can't force people to do it. That is not the answer. What is?

I'm on winter break from school so I've had time to spend reading. I'm confused to say the least and I don't know what the answer is...you can't simply tell people vaccinate your kids because it's for the good of society.
We have to do better.

 

[IamNazarene]

Vaccine or no Vaccine disease still rears it's fowl head in many ways. These are all symptoms of diet deficiency.
POLIO, measles, birth defects, Peg foot, Colds, flus, cancer, cataracts, ruptured teeth, missing teeth, adult teeth that never came, ruptured, impacted wisdom teeth, teeth infection, heart attacks, blood clots, bad circulation, organ dysfunctions, clumsiness, depression, alzheimer's, Dimentia, mild memory loss, weak bones, diabetes and dystrophy to name a few.

Your miracle vaccine just makes a few billion dollars for the Satanists.

Ultimate true health comes through what you eat.

"Some are very uneducated while some are extremely knowledgeable ....or do they think they are? People are leery and why is that? I'm thinking this is the case of too much media. Too much information? Not enough credible information? "

People do not want truth, that is our narture, we want to be spoon fed the answers.
Then someone dies and the knowledge of natural food hurs to much.

To much Media and oppressed knowledge is correct, that is where the illuminati step in an control the tide. THey nfluence and denounce who they wish to get what they want.

Sorry to bust the bubble but most everyone is hood winked by some rich snake eyed Satanist!

Call me conspiracy theorist or what ever you want but the fact is real health is in GOd and not in Science.

 

[Saricharity]

I have another question. Do vaccines shed?

Something I read online...and this is a quote and not my words.

" Whether they are vaccinated or not it needs to be the parent's choice. I don't appreciate how the media is leaving out the FACT that children/adults will shed a vaccine for so many days after receiving it."

Is this true?

 

[[serious]]

So Should We Just Round Up the Anti-Vaccine Parents And Ship Them to Guantanamo? | TheBlaze.com

This is one of the many blogs I have tripped across in my travels. There are many many more...

Dear Mom who didn't vaccinate her kid against the measles

And the response....

https://leviquackenboss.wordpress.c...-i-need-to-vaccinate-my-kids-against-measles/

Read them and then read the comments!

This is not a cut and dried topic. People DO NOT know what to believe. Some are very uneducated while some are extremely knowledgeable ....or do they think they are? People are leery and why is that? I'm thinking this is the case of too much media. Too much information? Not enough credible information?

What is the answer? You simply can't force people to do it. That is not the answer. What is?

I'm on winter break from school so I've had time to spend reading. I'm confused to say the least and I don't know what the answer is...you can't simply tell people vaccinate your kids because it's for the good of society.
We have to do better.

Bloggers should not be what informs your decision on this regardless of which side those bloggers take. Any moron with a keyboard can spout their opinions to the internet. What you want to do is find subject matter experts and relevant professional organizations and look to them for the data with which to base your decisions.

Now, as you said, their are risks to vaccines. There are also risks to not getting vaccines.

Let's look at MMR:

MMR vaccine side-effects
(Measles, Mumps, and Rubella)
What are the risks from MMR vaccine?
A vaccine, like any medicine, is capable of causing serious problems, such as severe allergic reactions.
The risk of MMR vaccine causing serious harm, or death, is extremely small.
Getting MMR vaccine is much safer than getting measles, mumps or rubella.
Most people who get MMR vaccine do not have any serious problems with it.
Mild Problems
Fever (up to 1 person out of 6)
Mild rash (about 1 person out of 20)
Swelling of glands in the cheeks or neck (about 1 person out of 75)
If these problems occur, it is usually within 7-12 days after the shot. They occur less often after the second dose.
Moderate Problems
Seizure (jerking or staring) caused by fever (about 1 out of 3,000 doses)
Temporary pain and stiffness in the joints, mostly in teenage or adult women (up to 1 out of 4)
Temporary low platelet count, which can cause a bleeding disorder (about 1 out of 30,000 doses)
Severe Problems (Very Rare)
Serious allergic reaction (less than 1 out of a million doses)

Now, there were 4 million babies born last year, and 644 cases of measles in the US last year. Now, it doesn't quite work to do the math based off those numbers, but it gets us in the ballpark as far as risk. That means about a 1:6000 chance of catching measles.

The risks of measles?

Common measles complications include ear infections and diarrhea.

Ear infections occur in about one out of every 10 children with measles and can result in permanent hearing loss.
Diarrhea is reported in less than one out of 10 people with measles.
Severe Complications

Some people may suffer from severe complications, such as pneumonia (infection of the lungs) and encephalitis (swelling of the brain). They may need to be hospitalized and could die.

As many as one out of every 20 children with measles gets pneumonia, the most common cause of death from measles in young children.
About one child out of every 1,000 who get measles will develop encephalitis (swelling of the brain) that can lead to convulsions and can leave the child deaf or mentally [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse].
For every 1,000 children who get measles, one or two will die from it.

Now let's do some beer math on death rates: 1/6000*1/1000 = 1:6,000,000 chance of dying from the measles

and vaccines: 1/1000000*1/5000 = 1/5,000,000,000 chance of dying from anaphylactic shock after a vaccination.

now, this is of course just quick and dirty beer math, but at first pass, non vaccinating looks like the far more dangerous course of action.

if we were to do a similar analysis for small pox, we would see a greater risk of vaccination than not vaccinating. So yeah, no plans for getting the small pox vaccine.

How about Yellow Fever? Well, if you are staying state side, same thing. If you are traveling some where that yellow fever is, that might adjust the math enough to get it.

 

[[serious]]

I have another question. Do vaccines shed?

Something I read online...and this is a quote and not my words.

" Whether they are vaccinated or not it needs to be the parent's choice. I don't appreciate how the media is leaving out the FACT that children/adults will shed a vaccine for so many days after receiving it."

Is this true?

Depends on the vaccine. All inactivated vaccines cannot shed, because they aren't live viruses. So the flu shot, for example, flat out can't shed ever. The nasal mist flu vaccine is an attenuated live virus though. It is possible, but very rare for the weakened virus to make a jump from a recently vaccinated person to an unvaccinated person. Since it would be the weakened strain though, they would not get the full blown flu.

I've heard of an attenuated virus used in one type of whooping cough vaccine making a single jump like this, but only in situations where there is a large unvaccinated population and poor public health services. As I recall, it is not the same type of whooping cough vaccine used in the US.

The Chicken pox vaccine causes a mild rash which can shed some attenuated viruses in about 1:20 people, but successful transmission of those viruses to another person is rare even in those cases where the rash is present.

As far as the MMR vaccine, I don't know of any cases of such a transmission, but I suppose it's at least theoretically possible. It would probably necessitate an immunocomprimised person getting the vaccine and then being in close contact with another immunocomprimised person

 

[Blue Wren]

Whether you are pro-vax or anti-vax, the fact remains vaccines are not fool proof. Children have been vaccine injuried and it continues to happen. I realize that science says there are no correlations to autism and the MMR but I also know parents with children who have autism and they have genuine questions. Vaccines are not completely safe. Just as other medications are not completely safe. People have the right to be leery about what is being injected into their child. I have been reading both sides of the debate. This is not a black and white topic. It just isn't. If you get your child vaccinated, you are taking a risk. Some parents do not want to take that risk. I have to ask myself why and the more I think on it, the more unsure I am. I'm glad I'm a long time away from making this decision personally. I'm not content to just do something because science deems it's "safe".

Another thing to consider is how many adults are walking around in our "herd" with expired vaccines? I don't think we can place the blame on the shoulders of parents who don't vaccinate.

I was blessed to watch the movie Veil of tears again. As I was watching the movie, it dawned on me how important education is. Good, unbiased education. People in India in some of the tribes believe it's a good thing to put cow dung on the unbilical cord of a new born. I know we gasp at the stupidity but we are educated. If you are brought up to believe one thing and it has always been done, it seems to be the logical thing to do. People aren't going to believe you because you spout some scientific data. They just aren't.

This topic is not so cut and dried. Parents are not making these decisions thinking their child is more important than their neighbours. It's not a conspiracy. Parents are holding their precious newborns in their arms and being told to inject them with 20 different vaccines in their first year of life. I actually don't blame them for being cautious and unsure and yes, even fearful. Any mother can do a random search online and see all the debate about vaccines....enough to scare her silly.
You can judge her if you want but I won't.

-

 

[Saricharity]

The point is IT IS an emotional discussion. People are confused. You are talking about their children. And no, adults who are responsible are not ALWAYS getting their children vaccinated. That is actually a very judgemental statement. Many MANY responsible parents are not vaccinating their children. My question is WHY? There is no way I am going to judge them for that because I haven't had to make that decision yet.
Spend some time reading what people are thinking and feeling on the topic and you will see that it is NOT a cut and dried topic. It is not right to call them foolish and irresponsible when you don't really understand their motives. When you talking about people and their precious children, it is not fair to judge them.
Read about the people whose children are injured from vaccines. Feel their pain.
The average parent doesn't give a rats Pajamas what science says. They trusted doctors and had their child vaccinated and their child was injured. Other parents read that and say NO...I don't blame them for a minute.
Yes, this is definitely an emotional topic.

 

[Saricharity]

Bloggers should not be what informs your decision on this regardless of which side those bloggers take. Any moron with a keyboard can spout their opinions to the internet. What you want to do is find subject matter experts and relevant professional organizations and look to them for the data with which to base your decisions.

Actually my point in posting those blogs was to give people an idea of how torn the average person truly is about the topic.
I agree, bloggers are not experts on the topic.
However, that is where people are posting their feelings and emotions.
It's important to know both sides of the debate to understand how complex the issue is.

Now, as you said, their are risks to vaccines. There are also risks to not getting vaccines.

Let's look at MMR:



Now, there were 4 million babies born last year, and 644 cases of measles in the US last year. Now, it doesn't quite work to do the math based off those numbers, but it gets us in the ballpark as far as risk. That means about a 1:6000 chance of catching measles.

The risks of measles?


Now let's do some beer math on death rates: 1/6000*1/1000 = 1:6,000,000 chance of dying from the measles

and vaccines: 1/1000000*1/5000 = 1/5,000,000,000 chance of dying from anaphylactic shock after a vaccination.

now, this is of course just quick and dirty beer math, but at first pass, non vaccinating looks like the far more dangerous course of action.

if we were to do a similar analysis for small pox, we would see a greater risk of vaccination than not vaccinating. So yeah, no plans for getting the small pox vaccine.

How about Yellow Fever? Well, if you are staying state side, same thing. If you are traveling some where that yellow fever is, that might adjust the math enough to get it.

Thanks for the statistics.

 

[SepiaAndDust]

Actually my point in posting those blogs was to give people an idea of how torn the average person truly is about the topic.

The average person doesn't blog. What you've presented may be an idea of how torn the average blogger is about the topic.

 

[hankroberts]

I always find it rather strange how people like yourself want to argue from the opinions of people from 250 years ago, and not argue what the actual modern legal code, and all subsequent court findings actually say.



If individuals have rights, then the society made up of those individuals also have rights. You do not have the right to put other peoples health at risk.



That's a red herring, we're talking about how it's wrong to put the health or lives of others at risk, not their medical options after they get sick.



Ah, well, in that case I'm sure you're also against drivers licensing. After all, you are not allowed to drive your car unless you are licensed and can demonstrate you won't pose an unreasonable risk to others. This could also be construed as a violation of personal liberty in the interests of the rest of society. In fact, that's a slam dunk example, but yet it's perfectly legal.



So in other words there is another precedent for limiting the rights of the few (or individual) in the interests of the rights of the many.



Ah, so since we know what causes diseases like AIDS, and we know exactly how to prevent those diseases, then you would be in favor of taking what action against anyone who engages in an "at risk" activity? Jail? Fines? What? Because these activities are actually positive events, not merely the withholding of something they find unacceptable. This is exactly the same principle: someone acting in a manner that exposes themselves or others to the spread of disease.

This is another red herring. Engaging in unsafe sex with someone who has aids is putting yourself at risk, not others. There's a very important distinction there. You pay the consequences for your irresponsibility, not other people.

On the flip side, people who knowingly spread diseases either through neglect or purposeful actions, (may it be aids or anything else) are usually prosecuted, and usually convicted.



The Supreme Court has upheld the federal government's power to commandeer private property but imposed strict limits. In United States v. Russell (1871), the court noted:

Extraordinary and unforeseen occasions arise, however, beyond all doubt, in cases of extreme necessity in time of war or of immediate and impending public danger, in which private property may be impressed into the public service, or may be seized and appropriated to the public use, or may even be destroyed without the consent of the owner . . . but the public danger must be immediate, imminent, and impending, and the emergency in the public service must be extreme and imperative, and such as will not admit of delay or a resort to any other source of supply, and the circumstances must be such as imperatively require the exercise of that extreme power in respect to the particular property so impressed, appropriated, or destroyed.

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/80/623/case.html

So, put bluntly, how you think law works isn't how law actually works. It is constitutional.



Just because everyone has an opinion doesn't mean everyone's opinion is right, or equal.[/QUOTE]

I did respond to this, but apparently we have been reported to be off topic and it was removed. We'll have to continue elsewhere/some other time.

Meanwhile, I repeat that I agree with the science on the value of immunizations and the importance of getting the key vaccinations in order to protect both one's own family and the community at large.

 

[Saricharity]

The average person doesn't blog. What you've presented may be an idea of how torn the average blogger is about the topic.

I don't think I said the average person blogs did I?
I was just posting links to what people are saying about the debate on BOTH sides. I think it's relevant to see what people are thinking.

 

[selfinflikted]

I think it's relevant to see what people are thinking.

To an extent. But the decision shouldn't be based on anyone's thoughts, but rather the evidence. It certainly appears to be an emotional talking point, but that can make these kinds of discussions dangerous. Emotions, opinions, blogs, etc shouldn't be what sways a person's mind about whether to vaccinate. The evidence should be all that matters. I have never seen any credible evidence that vaccines are dangerous (aside from being dangerous to people who are immunocompromised or dangerous to those intolerant or otherwise allergic to components of vaccines). In fact, all the evidence I have ever seen indicates just the opposite.