Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

catbyte

(34,423 posts)
1. I'd agree except for one thing--the threat they pose to people who because of allergies,
Sun Sep 11, 2016, 12:32 PM
Sep 2016

age, or other medical conditions can't be vaccinated. They are a compromised population to begin with, and the anti-vaxxers are a direct threat to their health. Other than that, I agree.

MineralMan

(146,324 posts)
3. I chose to ignore their threat to people who cannot be vaccinated.
Sun Sep 11, 2016, 12:34 PM
Sep 2016

You are correct, though, of course. If they are sensible, caring people, they will isolate themselves if they become ill from an infectious illness.

Surely they would do that, since they are so concerned about other people's health, right?

catbyte

(34,423 posts)
5. You'd think so, but they are already mentally challenged and selfish, so here's hoping
Sun Sep 11, 2016, 12:37 PM
Sep 2016

they feel too shitty to go outside.


MineralMan

(146,324 posts)
6. But, see, they never get the flu.
Sun Sep 11, 2016, 12:38 PM
Sep 2016

That's how they know the flu vaccine is worthless. They have evidence, see...

Cal Carpenter

(4,959 posts)
9. You can ignore it, but immuno-compromised people or those with certain allergies
Sun Sep 11, 2016, 01:00 PM
Sep 2016

who can't get vaccines and rely on herd immunity can't.

If the body of your post said "as long as they go live on a remote island together away from other people whose lives they are risking" I'd fully agree with you.

Aristus

(66,436 posts)
2. Well, we can't vaccinate them against their will, obviously.
Sun Sep 11, 2016, 12:32 PM
Sep 2016

What I will try to do as a medical provider is deny them a clinical forum for spewing their anti-science nonsense, and then toss them into the oubliette of history.

If a parent brings his/her kids in to me for a well-child check, and I find out they're anti-vaxxers, I cancel their appointment and have them follow up with someone who is not me. I'm not going to validate their quackery by granting them any of my limited time.

lastlib

(23,266 posts)
7. I will take issue with this:
Sun Sep 11, 2016, 12:45 PM
Sep 2016

Whooping cough, measles, rubella and mumps, are no longer a real threat any longer. (sic)


If we do not vaccinate, these diseases and others WILL become a real threat again. They are not a widespread threat now because most of the population is vaccinated against them. Take that vaccination out of the equation, and you'll see s significant resurgence of these diseases. Children and elderly WILL die from them. As will others who have weakening resistance to them. This is a public health threat we cannot accept.

MineralMan

(146,324 posts)
8. But we DO vaccinate against them.
Sun Sep 11, 2016, 12:48 PM
Sep 2016

That's why they remain minor issues. I support childhood vaccinations for all of those illnesses. Anti-vaxxers don't. That's why I want them to STFU. Their misinformation is a real potential problem for millions of people.

However, since that was not clear to you, I have added a couple of sentences to my OP. Thanks for pointing that out.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Posted in wrong forum.