CNN: Children should get vaccinated. Period.

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 5, 2011
    3,530
    48
    Vaccines are medicine, and like all medicine you should weigh the risks vs. the potential damage of the disease they prevent or treat. The old joke about a simple headache medicine that causes "bleeding, vomiting, lung collapse, and death" stems from that sort of "better the medicine with side effects or better the disease without the side effects" conflict.

    I personally had all the major childhood shots and had 0 adverse effects, while others (as even the article acknowledges) could suffer severe damage from allergic reactions etc. So long as everyone can freely choose, the potential results both positive and negative are on them and all is well. My children will probably receive more vaccines than an anti-vaxxer would recommend and fewer than the "get every shot they tell you to" crowd would want. The glories of free choice and the ability to do my own research.
     

    rambone

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    18,745
    83
    'Merica
    Its a commercial advertisement disguised as news. One that is repeated often. Take drugs or die, we've heard it 1000 times. Per season. Seriously.
     

    IndyDave1776

    Grandmaster
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    27,286
    113
    Vaccines are medicine, and like all medicine you should weigh the risks vs. the potential damage of the disease they prevent or treat. The old joke about a simple headache medicine that causes "bleeding, vomiting, lung collapse, and death" stems from that sort of "better the medicine with side effects or better the disease without the side effects" conflict.

    I personally had all the major childhood shots and had 0 adverse effects, while others (as even the article acknowledges) could suffer severe damage from allergic reactions etc. So long as everyone can freely choose, the potential results both positive and negative are on them and all is well. My children will probably receive more vaccines than an anti-vaxxer would recommend and fewer than the "get every shot they tell you to" crowd would want. The glories of free choice and the ability to do my own research.

    I will start with this excellent post and continue to say that while I am not anti-vaccine as a matter of religious principle with 'religious' being used to describe a person's worship of God/god/gods/higher power or simply their anti-vaccine fervor, I am highly skeptical for two reasons. As previously mentioned, the medicine, even from the most well-meaning of suppliers, may be deeply flawed and cause more harm than help. The medicine may well be the product of people who really don't care about your well-being but rather are laser-focused on making a profit. Your 'pusher' may well be a do-gooder who believes that because its suppliers say it is for your good, it is, much in the same way they would support rounding up half the adult population and putting them in concentration/extermination camps if the brochure said that it is 'for the children'. As Rock of Strength said above, do your own homework.

    My next concern is that we have a number of people in positions of influence (i.e., pulling the puppet strings and programming the teleprompters for our Senators, Presidents, et.al.) who believe that the maximum world population should be ~500 million people. That means that for every person left to reach that target, you have to kill off ten or eleven people. What better way than artificially truncating lives with 'vaccines' received by people who are convinced they are necessary for their own good? This may sound pretty far fetched to the INGO population which, to the best of my knowledge, is made up of non-sociopaths, but all said and done, I believe that Reinhard Heydrich was simply and astute and practical man who was presented with a problem and solved it in the most efficient way possible with the means he had available. I do NOT believe he was some once in a thousand years prodigy the likes of which never will again emerge on the public stage of world history. The sheep were easy enough to slaughter when they had to board rail cars and be hauled off alive. How do we expect them to be less so when they are taking treatments they honestly beleive to be for their own good and subsequently die of apparently natural causes. I have a hard time believing that the 500million crew has failed to think this through.

    Using Heydrich as an example will most likely prompt some snide reference to Godwin, which itself is a very disingenuous tool to shut down a merit-based argument with ridicule, so I will remind such a person before he speaks up that Hitler very publicly stated exactly what he intended to do when he was no more than a local rabble-rouser. He was pretty open about it throughout his climb to power (albeit declaring that he never would have written 'Mein Kampf', presumably on account of having offered the rest of the world a step-by-step manual of his intentions, fact notwithstanding that they never took it seriously even after he rose to power) but no one believed him. Today, we have people who are at least secretly in positions of power who are fairly open about their intentions, and, again, no one takes them seriously. Deja vu all over again.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,118
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Childhood vaccines are safe. Seriously. - CNN.com

    Thoughts? I imagine there's a non-zero number of anti-vax members here on INGO. That, and some can cause issues, albeit rare.

    I don't get flu shots... but that's just because they tell me I have to. I'm a rebel.

    I don't care. Vaccinate, don't vaccinate. Whatever moves you. It's a product. Buy it if you think you need it or want it, don't buy it if you don't.
     

    ArcadiaGP

    Wanderer
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Jun 15, 2009
    31,726
    113
    Indianapolis
    I don't care. Vaccinate, don't vaccinate. Whatever moves you. It's a product. Buy it if you think you need it or want it, don't buy it if you don't.

    That's fine and all, but what of the argument that an unvaccinated kid could affect your kid? Schools forbidding kids from attending without vaccinations.

    I don't like or agree with that sentiment... but I'm also not sure how I feel about it as a whole. Again, my big thing is people telling me I have to do something. That's just the sort of thing that'll make me not want to.
     

    IndyDave1776

    Grandmaster
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    27,286
    113
    I don't care. Vaccinate, don't vaccinate. Whatever moves you. It's a product. Buy it if you think you need it or want it, don't buy it if you don't.
    While I agree in principle, the problem is that this is teh prelude to required vaccinations, eventually at actual or implied gunpoint.
     

    avboiler11

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    13   0   0
    Jun 12, 2011
    2,950
    119
    New Albany
    While it is true that some have side effects from certain medicines including vaccines, and sometimes those side effects can be severe...their incidence is brutally small and the benefits way, way, WAY outweigh the downside risk.

    Because science.

    I got the flu every year in middle and high school until my freshman year of college, when I got my first flu shot. Since then, I have gotten the flu ONE TIME - H1N1 the year when it was going around and the vaccine hasn't been designed with that particular strain in mind, and even then it was a fairly mild case as virulent influenza goes.

    Modern science and medicine are far from perfect, but they are the best they've ever been..and as a parent, I cannot fathom putting one's children or self at unnecessary risk from disease when there is a 99.9% safe, low-cost option available to prevent it.
     

    KLB

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Sep 12, 2011
    23,003
    77
    Porter County
    That's fine and all, but what of the argument that an unvaccinated kid could affect your kid? Schools forbidding kids from attending without vaccinations.

    I don't like or agree with that sentiment... but I'm also not sure how I feel about it as a whole. Again, my big thing is people telling me I have to do something. That's just the sort of thing that'll make me not want to.
    If vaccinations stop the disease, how could an unvaccinated child put yours at risk?
     

    d.kaufman

    Still Here
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    128   0   0
    Mar 9, 2013
    14,715
    149
    Hobart
    Vaccines are a bunch of crap. They actually suppress your immune system from functioning as it should. The reason certain diseases have been eradicated is do to the fact that running water in homes along with better sanitation. Not to mention the vaccines they push and in some instances force upon you are loaded with mercury. This has been directly related to autism and a lot of other condititons. Take them at your own risk! I will not
     

    BogWalker

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Jan 5, 2013
    6,305
    63
    If vaccinations stop the disease, how could an unvaccinated child put yours at risk?
    Like all medicines vaccines are not 100% effective. As well, there are certain segments of the population (those with immune deficiencies such as AIDS) that often can not make use of vaccines but instead must rely on "herd immunity" to avoid such illnesses.

    Not campaigning for mandatory vaccinations here. I'm just laying out a few facts.
     

    BigBoxaJunk

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Feb 9, 2013
    7,314
    113
    East-ish
    Vaccinations, for the most part, play the role of reducing the incidence of disease in a population. The trade-off is that the population is protected from sometimes virulent out-breaks with a potential to cause harm to many, while within the vaccinated population, a predictable few individuals will be harmed by the vaccine.

    The benefit and the risk for the population is real and most times quantifiable, while the benefit and risk for the individual is not as easily quantifiable.

    I can't imagine any industry that wouldn't want use of their product mandated by law. And I also can't imagine that attention to quality control would be as good for an industry after they know that use of their product is mandated.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,118
    113
    Gtown-ish
    That's fine and all, but what of the argument that an unvaccinated kid could affect your kid? Schools forbidding kids from attending without vaccinations.

    I don't like or agree with that sentiment... but I'm also not sure how I feel about it as a whole. Again, my big thing is people telling me I have to do something. That's just the sort of thing that'll make me not want to.

    While I agree in principle, the problem is that this is teh prelude to required vaccinations, eventually at actual or implied gunpoint.

    I know. I was just stating my opinion on how it should be rather than how it is.
     

    strokin7.3

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Jun 23, 2012
    578
    18
    Hancock County
    Vaccines are medicine, and like all medicine you should weigh the risks vs. the potential damage of the disease they prevent or treat. The old joke about a simple headache medicine that causes "bleeding, vomiting, lung collapse, and death" stems from that sort of "better the medicine with side effects or better the disease without the side effects" conflict.

    I personally had all the major childhood shots and had 0 adverse effects, while others (as even the article acknowledges) could suffer severe damage from allergic reactions etc. So long as everyone can freely choose, the potential results both positive and negative are on them and all is well. My children will probably receive more vaccines than an anti-vaxxer would recommend and fewer than the "get every shot they tell you to" crowd would want. The glories of free choice and the ability to do my own research.

    [video=youtube;eSdNMRtvq5g]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSdNMRtvq5g&feature=youtube_gdata_player[/video]
     

    MisterChester

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 25, 2013
    3,383
    48
    The Compound
    Childhood vaccines are safe. Seriously. - CNN.com

    Thoughts? I imagine there's a non-zero number of anti-vax members here on INGO. That, and some can cause issues, albeit rare.

    I don't get flu shots... but that's just because they tell me I have to. I'm a rebel.

    Statistically they are pretty safe. I will be vaccinating my children. I get my flu shot because I work in healthcare (regularly in contact with potentially sick people) plus my employer gives it to me for free.
     
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 5, 2011
    3,530
    48
    Haven't seen many cases of polio lately, weird.

    You picked a disease primarily spread by fecal-oral transmission to demonstrate the effectiveness of vaccines in a first world country. A disease which also displays few obvious symptoms or causes much damage in 90% of those infected by it.

    Smallpox might be a better example since vaccine use has apparently wiped it out aside from the samples stored by various world governments.
     
    Top Bottom