11

The New Religion

Posted by khalling 9 years, 4 months ago to Culture
175 comments | Share | Flag

from the article:
Certainly, that is the tactic of choice at the prestigious, exclusive Hayground School in Bridgehampton, where an astonishing one-third of typically secular, sophisticated, ultra-liberal parents have, it seems, a “genuine” religious objection to vaccination of their children.

To parents who send their kids to local public schools that doesn’t cut it. A long-established local pediatrician, Gail Schonfeld, now refuses to accept patients the children of parents who won’t permit immunization. She believes in vaccines—in fact, considers them just plain good medical practice—and says if “parents don’t trust me with this, we won’t have a good working relationship.”


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 7.
  • Posted by wiggys 9 years, 4 months ago
    Parents who chose to NOT give their children these vaccinations are doing their children a disservice.
    when i grew up i experienced all of these illnesses as did almost every one i knew. yes we lived through them but if there was a vaccine I am quite sure my parents would have given it to me and my siblings and i believe all of the other parents would have done the same. i had several friends and cousins that had polio, and unfortunately the vaccine was not available then. I didn't get it until i was in the Army.

    Maybe some of the parents will think differently as the are attending to their child who is miserable while having the disease.

    so far the history of the vaccine is pretty outstanding with its success.

    one more reason to avoid religion.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 9 years, 4 months ago
    Maybe people are just tired of being told what to do, and they are rebelling. After the rebellion, it needs to be considered what is the right thing to do based on facts, not government edicts. I pretty much dont want to do whatever the government tells me to do, and I have to specifically put aside that emotion and evaluate for myself what is best.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by WDonway 9 years, 4 months ago
    There is an argument that vaccines weaken our species because the "weak" are not eliminated by disease and so pass on their genes so that the species accumulates vulnerabilities. First, that argument applies to the invention of fire, clothing, hunting weapons, and anything else that makes survival easier so some people who would not have survived do survive. As for vaccines, their effect on the human immune system at large is trivial, laughable. A very interesting site is "Quack Watch" and I recommend it to all quacks and all who must listen to quacks. It says of the "impact" of vaccines in changing our overall immune response to the world: "We have, on and in us, about 100 billion bacteria, which is 10 to 100 times more bacteria than there are cells that make us. That is just our normal flora. These represent about 1,000 separate species of bacteria. Humans are born bacteria-free and acquire a complex and enormous normal bacterial flora in months. In the first year of life, babies ares exposed, for the first time, to all the bacteria of their parents and siblings and some from the family pet and the environment. The resultant antigen exposure is thousands of times greater than the exposure from the vaccine schedule."
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by WDonway 9 years, 4 months ago
    There is no federal law requiring vaccination to attend school, although a 1922 Supreme Court case did declare such requirements Constitutional. States vary considerably in laws about requiring vaccination, but all require; all, also, offer a choice in the sense of medical, religious, or philosophical exemptions. Also many states don't require vaccinations to attend private schools, only public schools; but two states even require vaccination of home schooled children. The fact is that if a parent doesn't want his children vaccinated there are ways legally to avoid it. Some private schools in California caused a national "scandal" at incredibly low rates of immunization of children attending. Many of their parents go to natural healers, faith healers, and other "alternative" practitioners.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by cjferraris 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    When I was in the military, I was forced to take the flu shot every year. Since I've been out (30+ years now) I have not taken any flu shot. Some years, I'd have the flu, other years, no problems. But of each of the 4 years I got flu shots in the military, I would contract the flu. I'm not going to say that I got the flu from the vaccine, but they developed the flu vaccines back in the '80s (and I'm sure still today) based on what they're projecting on which strain is going to be prevalent. I vaccinated my kids based on the ones I got as a child and my children had no problems.

    Now, I currently think that you need to educate yourself and not just give into the hype. Get a Dr. that you trust and even then, question him/her, just like you would your financial advisor.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I contend that all these immunizations are making the species weaker, and more susceptible to being wiped out. That isn't any consolation to a mother dealing with a sick child or one who dies. But if they die, it is because they were weaker than the virus. Vaccinating everyone makes them temporarily stronger, but their offspring do not gain that strength. Thus, they also must be vaccinated. Eventually, either the virus mutates to a strain that we cannot vaccinate against quickly enough, or we lose the ability to vaccinate widely, and a plague sweeps the lands.

    As you say, natural vaccination is better, in the long run and from a species survival perspective. Similarly, these anti-microbial hand soaps for children should not be used. Kids need to be exposed to germs to build up their tolerance. For adults, fine, our immune systems are pretty much set, but for children, banish the anti-microbe soap for the good of the children.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Thanks for the advice, mamaemma.
    I assume you mean that you observe the number of patients at your office has not dropped from what you expect.
    You don't know if it has "hurt" you until a patient tells you they didn't come to see you because of it. You can't tell the 'real' reviews from the shills, can you?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by WDonway 9 years, 4 months ago
    On the supposed relative mildness of measles, from my article: "in 1963, some three to four million Americans contracted measles each year. About 500 died each year, 48,000 had a serious enough case to be hospitalized, and 4,000 developed encephalitis (a life-threatening brain swelling) from measles. This caused the CDC to categorize measles as the most deadly of all childhood rash/fever diseases."
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by sumitch 9 years, 4 months ago
    If someone truly believes that they can't support vaccines based on legitimate religious teachings, yes, but they don't have the right to infect others so they should be quarantined, if the child gets seriously sick they do not have the right to free emergency room visits and they don’t get to wail and beat their chests if the child dies.

    A person must live with the consequences of their actions. No blaming others allowed unless it truly is another’s fault such as a doctor prescribing the wrong medicine.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Temlakos 9 years, 4 months ago
    We have an interesting quandary, do we not?

    On the one hand, some members of this community, in memory of the poliomyelitis scourge and how Jonas Salk's vaccine seems to have put it under strict control, now believe all vaccines strike the same balance of safety v. efficacy as does the Salk vaccine.

    On the other hand, Rand never once defined "protecting people from infectious agents" as a proper direct function of government. It might be a matter for a court to decide, and for a legislature to decide whether an individual tort or even criminal harm results when one person transmits a communicable disease to another. But Rand never once supported the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in any quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial character. Nor the Office of the Surgeon General.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Vinay 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The Green nonsense is religion, but not in the sense that is commonly understood. The exemption claimed is the normal-sounding one, which is dishonest, because their God is not Jesus, or Krishna or Buddha, it's a tree.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yep, and there can be a lot of money in it. Hasn't hurt me yet. We will see. Needless to say, I will not reward the person whose job it is to hurt me.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by PeterAsher 9 years, 4 months ago
    There are two flaws throughout this viral debate: (inadvertent word pun)

    1) 100 some odd cases nationwide is not an outbreak or an epidemic. We had more than 100 measles cases in one week in one grade school when I was a kid.

    2) No one seems to be differentiating between deadly and crippling diseases like smallpox and polio and those like measles that statistically may only be a bit more dangerous than the vaccines. (And that, only because there is insufficient data over other long term negative effects of the vaccines.

    I would rather have my next generation of descendants immunized by measles and chicken pox directly than by a vaccine.

    Polio and smallpox though would be a definite yes.


    Flu vaccine is an urban legend IMO.


    Last flu I had was in 1964, the first time I needed every day’s pay just to survive. Went to work with it, suffered through the day with it and then it was gone.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yes, and any concerted effort can be successful - a single person can create numerous userID's.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • 10
    Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 4 months ago
    This doctor has every right to decide what services to provide and what clients to serve. Just as her patients have the right to choose what services to receive.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Careful of healthgrades. I got a bad review, and then, lo and behold, a few weeks later I get an email from someone offering to "clean up" my rating. Had my IIT guy check in to it. He's pretty sure the person who posted the bad review is the one offering to clean it up, for a price.
    Just my experience; has nothing to do with Gail
    Reply | Permalink  
  • 11
    Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 4 months ago
    No government mandates on any medical treatments. Education on each vaccine for rational decision, yes.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Think about it. Gail has done people a big favor. You and I would know not to take our child to her!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 4 months ago
    Drop dead, Gail.
    You haven't a clue of how to be a good doctor.
    You are a perfect example of why medical care costs a fortune, and quality of care is declining.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 9 years, 4 months ago
    What frightens me about mandating, even enforcing inoculation, is the lack of character of the federal government and the people who make it up. Yes, I agree with immunization, but voluntary. I do not and have not ever taken a flue shot. I don't need one, neither do my kids. My wife, working in a hospital, needs to take one because of her exposure. We are seldom, if ever, sickly.

    I would not put it past those in government, particularly nOw, to use mandatory inoculation recklessly to line the pockets of big-pharma to the detriment of the host.

    There simply is no trust. It is up to the individual or the parent to choose what is needed to remain healthy. No tears given, sympathy warranted, or liability granted should a parent choose not to inoculate and illness, or worse, befall their child.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Technocracy 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yes, because the Constitution protects Religious freedom directly, but not any of the other objection types listed.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • 10
    Posted by 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I agree with the article as well. But I still have healthy skepticism of govt telling me what I can or cannot do with regards to the safety of my child. from the article:
    "Iowa asks parents if “immunization conflicts with a genuine and sincere religious belief and that the belief is in fact religious, and not based merely on philosophical, scientific, moral, personal, or medical opposition to immunizations.”
    well that was a little chilling. religious beliefs count but "scientific objection" does not?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Lucky 9 years, 4 months ago
    This is one of those contributions of Walter Donway (via khalling) with which I am for 100%.

    The work of one the founders of anti-vaccination - Dr Andrew Wakefield, has been shown to be fraudulent.
    Words used include- “dishonest,” “unethical,” and “callous.”
    It is appalling that this person has been favorably mentioned on this site.

    As to the validity of religious objections, see the article- “You can raise your child however you want until you are endangering your child and those around you. That right, you simply do not have.”

    No surprise that the objectors are often part of the green movement
    - the natural living, non-GMO eating, and the “nothing artificial” green movement -
    to which I include 'anthropomorphic climate change'- a religion more dangerous than Islamism which it supports.
    Where I may disagree with the article is in the suggestion that religious belief is being faked. No, this nonsense is religion.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo