It’s not a herpes vaccine. It’s for genital warts, a different sexually-transmitted virus altogether. That vaccine was rushed to market. I know it’s not very rational to rely on ‘gut-feelings’ but I’m only human and my gut feeling tells me that vaccination is not effective and there could be unintended consequences. It was barely on the market when they passed a law or tried to pass a law in DC-- that all twelve-year-old girls had to be vaccinated. I’m glad my girls were a little older and out of the city at the time.

I got a mild case. My doctor said that if I had not had the vaccination I would probably had a much more severe case.

It is indeed a very strange and unique arrangement, that the manufacturers of these vaccines have such protection against liability. As I say, being a crony means never having to say you're sorry.

Some on this forum seem to think "the science is settled" on this issue, but I wonder how deeply they've looked into it themselves--not just taken the word of their pediatrician--but really, honestly looked into it. There is a woman named Barbara Loe Fisher, whose work on the issue is very thorough, and whose videos on the subject are seriously worth watching. This is her organization:
http://www.nvic.org/about/barbaraloefish...

My sister teaches those kids that are too handicapped, it's rough. Actually, she teaches the ones who are moderately handicapped, but also extremely troublesome kids and uncontrollable, often physically violent. Kids that really should be in another place besides a school with other kids.

I don't know of any companies that require vaccinations. Except the military.

Seriously? You got the the shingles after being vaccinated? Sounds like the flu shot. I’ve been debating whether to get the shot because I have had the chicken pox, but also, my mother got the shingles and I remember how painful it had been for her. I don’t usually get the flu shot because my experience has been every one I know that gets the shot gets the flu. I know that’s not the way it is suppose to work, but there it is.
I don’t understand forcing the chicken pox vaccination on anyone. It’s not usually life-threatening. It does have it’s risk for unborn children, but even so...forcing school-age kids to get vaccinated for chicken pox? My kids had to in our state when the vaccine was new. I grumbled but complied. Too many pregnant teachers if you ask me. Lol.
Measles and mumps on the other hand can have some rather nasty consequences including death in some cases, so...I’m okay with the MMR schedule of vaccinations. Iv’e never been drawn into to this debate so I don’t really have a stance.

I agree.

That's my point! Thank you

I remember, as a child, being taken by my parents to visit friends who had measles, mumps, chicken pox, etc., so I would be exposed early, contract the disease when my resistance was still strong, and then be immune for life. That worked -- until I got a case of the shingles last year (after taking the shingles vaccine).

Objectivists are faced with a dilemna. Scientifically, it has been proven that vaccinations save countless lives. Do I, as an Objectivists, want my children (who have been vaccinated, because I chose to do so) exposed to children who are not vaccinated (because their parents chose to ignore the science)?

I admit there was a bit of shock value to the word. But there is also some truth to it. Someone who avoids vaccination is, to a degree, taking advantage of the herd immunity that the rest of us have paid for by being vaccinated.

This is another variation on the classic problem of free market solutions to problems that government is often used for. Another example would be a private police. If 90% of the people in a neighborhood pay for a police presence to protect them, the other 10% are made safer without expense.

Some deal with this issue by getting the government to force them to contribute. Obviously I don't like that answer.

Perhaps a solution that would be acceptable to both of us is if such a refused individual were given a voucher to use at a school of his choice. That way, the financial aspect of this would make more sense. How is it dealt with if a person is too severely mentally or physically handicapped to attend a public school?

I am biased in favor of vaccinations, but I draw the line at forcing people to have them. Schools are a hotbed of diseases and if there is no threshold for acceptance into them you fail at keeping contagious diseases from propagating through society.

Incidentally, this could also apply to 'work'. I do not know of any company outside of healthcare or biotech that requires vaccinations. Do you?

Jan

I see this the same way I see helmet laws. I don't think it should be a law. I wear a helmet every single time I ride because I choose to, the fact that I'm complying with it as a law is a bit irrelevant. I don't think it should be a law. I also vaccinate my kid for everything under the sun as soon as able, but I don't think it should be a law.
If you want to paint your brain on the highway, or let your kids die of horrible preventable disease, well, I guess it's chlorine in the gene pool.

No, a public institution does NOT have the right to take money from people, and then deny them entrance if they refuse to take part in a medical procedure.

They can suggest it, sure. But you cannot deny them. The ADA would have a field day with this one if it was related to disabled people.

I think so... Why is nobody saying this?

We know the answer, but...

I think a Dr. Mengele answered that a while ago.

I'm not sure if everyone here is aware of the very strange and unique legal situation regarding vaccines, as a consumer product. For every other product, if the manufacturer or maker has been negligent or reckless and caused harm to consumers, those consumers are able to file a lawsuit in the courts and receive compensation if harm is proved.

However, our government has granted immunity to vaccine manufacturers from being sued since 1985. Those harmed by vaccines must go through a government-run special "vaccine injury court." Government lawyers (i.e., taxpayer-funded lawyers) defend the vaccines. The court's fund is composed of "taxes" paid by each person who receives a vaccine. Only a fraction of the people with vaccine damage ever receive compensation, and it often takes many years. This is crony capitalism as its most extreme.

For the government to first shield vaccine makers from normal liability, and then talk about mandating vaccines, can't be said to remotely resemble a free market. For those who acknowledged in the other post that Ann Marie Cox was wrong to use government to force people to behave a certain way, I hope they won't flip-flop on the issue of vaccines. Either Big Daddy government knows best... or else it doesn't.

A few centuries ago, these guys brain brothers would have passed a law requiring forced bleeding with leeches. The hubris of "modern" medicine is getting downright dangerous, especially since there is a difference of opinion about the source and treatment of disease. A la Pasteur, disease is caused by germs, while others say that disease is caused by an imbalance in the body, and the germs are opportunistic organisms showing up AFTER the disease has appeared. In the former, a vaccine is required to fight the disease. In the latter, building one's immune system is required to fight the disease. Until that argument is scientifically settled (not asserted by so-called scientists), this law should be resisted by every means necessary.

Yeah, we've always had that.
Now it's a heck of a lot more.
It would be ironic if the Dimocrap dream of one party rule touched off a pandemic far worse than the Bubonic Plague. .

Never give the state additional powers over you. I think some vaccinations are crucial and others are not. I like to see diseases eradicated and we were mostly doing that. I never want polio to raise its ugly head due to disease coming across the border from lower world countries or because whole populations of people aren 't getting the basics in vaccination. Education is important and stopping the dis information.

Remember context...When we have so much corruption between public officials and corporate cronies, the weaponization of gov't bureaus against people for political beliefs, so many personal, political and corporate agendas, so many mandates that life in the USA is starting to look like a series of toll-booths--Do you really want the Untouchables to have this kind of power over your/your family's health? Really? You trust them that much??

This is not the proper role of government in a free society.

I think that parents should discuss each of the vaccines' necessities and appropriateness for them/their kids as individuals. If they decide to skip a vaccine and the child gets sick, they should keep them away from other children anyway--and not get threatening calls from the school about truancy, which only encourages attendance while sick.

A little research will turn up how many of these diseases were significantly reduced prior to the massive vaccine campaigns, by 1) careful monitoring of immigrants' health, prior to admission to the country; 2) by increased sanitation and nutrition, thanks to capitalism; and 3) by increasing public awareness and gaining a better understanding of how diseases were spread. Kids who get many of these diseases in our country now do not suffer the same long-term effects as those in 3rd world countries, where nutrition is inadequate and sanitation, unheard-of.

One last thing...If the people making these decisions to put something directly into your/your kids' bloodstream really, truly cared about your health, why would they not only be allowing unvaccinated and actively diseased people into our country--but actually knowingly placing them throughout communities, without a care to the rest of us?

"To a degree, those who don't immunize themselves are 'mooching' off of the rest of us."
I agree completely with the science, but mooching is too harsh a word. They're exercising their freedom to make bad decisions in a way that may possibly incur a cost to others. That's the price of liberty IMHO.

If we make the argument they should forgo their rights for our benefit, they can rightly see us as moochers.

Yes, Peter, I have heard of measles parties. Boy, that takes me back!
I hear you that you had them and got through them, no problem, but now we are learning that viruses are not eradicated by the immune system, but only suppressed. So now we have shingles affecting a lot of older people, and it can be quite debilitating. These viruses hang around in the body for a lifetime, and we don't know yet all the later effects they may have.
A good example: the herpes vaccine, which is taken to prevent cervical cancer, which is directly related to genital herpes.
Edit:clarity
I am just saying that the issue is more complicated than you are presenting here.

The problem is, we've lost faith in the institutions we intrusted with our safety.
Is that not what government agencies are for? to weed out fact from fiction.
When we can no longer trust the government, the CDC,FDA, USDA, etc,etc, and the government resorts to force - that's a problem.
I don't think that's a right/left/other argument.

And I could say that the "rest of you's" that send their kids to public petri dishes (er, I mean schools) are responsible for the prevalence and failure to eradicate the existence of the flu virus, the norovirus, chicken pox, etc.

Our kids get sick, none of us go anywhere except me, who goes to work, only if I have no symptoms, and am able to avoid contact with others.

If parents weren't idiots, and didn't have to send their kids to kiddie prison for 7 hours a day so they could go to work to make more money to earn their big fancy house, drive their fancy car, and have their 82" TV, rather than taking primary responsibility for raising their family, then this whole discussion may just be a moot point.

If parents took responsibility for making sure their kids had sufficient nutrition, especially Omega 3 EPA/DHA and Vitamin D, then kids would be much less suceptible to viruses, etc.

Does that mean that my answer is better and everyone should do it? No. But it goes to show, the fact that my kids rarely get any of that crap, despite never getting the flu vaccine, and still being around other kids frequently at gymnastics, and a few days a week at church events, just shows that maybe there's other ways of doing this, and maybe vaccines aren't the full story for why these diseases have become rare. Herd immunity is a good word people use on this topic, and, personally, I think it's a load of crap. Herd immunity can be gained in other ways, and very well may have by the time these vaccines came out, through nutrition, increases in health care, recognition and awareness of symptoms, etc.