• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

The Emerging Republican Advantage

What is the downside of the vaccine in your hypothetical?
 
TownieDeac said:
If it weren't so dangerous, it'd actually be kind of a fascinating sociological experiment.

If you knew a vaccine were only 95% effective, would you still give it to your kids if the disease also only had a 5% mortality rate?
What about 90% effective?
Click to expand...

Let KenPom determine life/death?
 
"In 1986 when the VICP was first created vaccine makers were protected from lawsuit by the public. The VICP insulates vaccine manufacturers from liability and requires that petitioners bring their petitions solely against HHS. They may not sue manufacturers or healthcare practitioners. The rationale for this industry and professional protection was to ensure a stable childhood vaccine supply and to keep prices affordable.

The 1986 Law also permits the vaccine makers the right to not disclose known risks
to parents or guardians of those being vaccinated. Based on something called the “learned intermediary” doctrine, manufacturers bear no liability for giving, or failing to give, accurate or complete information to those vaccinated."


Did not know this.
 
TownieDeac said:
If it weren't so dangerous, it'd actually be kind of a fascinating sociological experiment.

If you knew a vaccine were only 95% effective, would you still give it to your kids if the disease also only had a 5% mortality rate?
What about 90% effective?
Click to expand...

PhDeac said:
You're right. It's just a poorly designed hypothetical.
Click to expand...

It isn't even a hypothetical. It is a reality. Vaccines aren't 100% effective at generating immunity to begin with, not even considering the duration and effectiveness (whether it is sterilizing or simply protective) of said immunity varies. The reason the vaccination schedule works so well (and the reason almost nobody with the knowledge and training to study vaccines focuses on tweaking it to make parents watch fewer shots at one time) is because having a large percentage of a population vaccinated provides population level immunity. Whether any vaccinated individual is actually immune is almost irrelevant, so long as the vaccine is effective in a large enough percent of those vaccinated they will benefit too (this is especially true when you target susceptible populations). Effectiveness of vaccines are all about limiting transmission of the disease at a level much greater than the individual (a concept you point out eludes pretty much ALL anti-vaccine types).
 
haven't read the whole thread.

I think anti-vaccine people are fucking nuts and reckless assholes.

But if my kid is vaccinated against measles, then why should i give a shit if your kid isn't? Can't get my kid sick, he's vaccinated.
 
WakeandBake said:
haven't read the whole thread.

I think anti-vaccine people are fucking nuts and reckless assholes.

But if my kid is vaccinated against measles, then why should i give a shit if your kid isn't? Can't get my kid sick, he's vaccinated.
Click to expand...

Some kids can't get vaccinated due to age or pre-existing conditions. Their only hope is that everybody who can get the vaccine does get the vaccine.

We live in a messed up world in which a kid battling leukemia could die from measles simply because of other kids' selfish parents.
 
PhDeac said:
Some kids can't get vaccinated due to age or pre-existing conditions. Their only hope is that everybody who can get the vaccine does get the vaccine.

We live in a messed up world in which a kid battling leukemia could die from measles simply because of other kids' selfish parents.
Click to expand...

thanks, didn't really know that or think it through. I guess I have been too busy getting my newborn the proper safeguards for infectious diseases.
 
Can someone share the religious angle here with me? I'm having trouble figuring out how I can religiously object to vaccinations but take advil for a headache.
 
Some CA lawmakers are working to get rid of the personal belief exemption.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...nt-to-strengthen-states-vaccine-requirements/

A pair of state lawmakers in California want to make it harder to refuse vaccinating your child.
Democratic Sens. Richard Pan, a pediatrician, and Ben Allen held a news conference Wednesday to announce a bill that would eliminate the state’s “personal belief” exemption.
“We are authoring legislation that will abolish the personal belief exemption that currently allows children who have not received the required vaccinations needed to protect the public health to enroll into our schools,” Pan said. “This legislation also empowers parents by requiring parents to be notified of the vaccination rates at their child’s school.”
As we reported earlier, California is one of 18 states that allow personal belief exemptions, according to data compiled by the Immunization Action Coalition, which is funded in part by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It is also one of five states that do not grant religious exemptions. If Pan’s bill is successful, California would join Mississippi and West Virginia as the only states allowing just medical exemptions.
 
WakeandBake said:
haven't read the whole thread.

I think anti-vaccine people are fucking nuts and reckless assholes.

But if my kid is vaccinated against measles, then why should i give a shit if your kid isn't? Can't get my kid sick, he's vaccinated.
Click to expand...

Even excluding kids that are prevented from getting vaccines due to other reasons, you should still care because your kid getting stuck with a shot doesn't mean they are actually vaccinated against that pathogen. As I said above, vaccines don't work all the time and the level of immunity they provide varies. The idea is that whether your individual child is immune or not, those around them will be for the most part. Take a school for instance. Let us say Vaccine A is effective 95% of the time. That means 1 in every 20 kids would still be potentially susceptible. Even if a kid gets the disease, the likelihood that they transmit it is low because most of the other kids around them are protected. If 10% of people stop vaccinating, now the susceptible population goes up from 5% to 15%. Transmission rates increases because now the sick kid only has to sneeze on 7 kids to have the odds of finding somebody that can be infected instead of 20. I could go on and on but suffice it to say not vaccinating your child is making a decision that negatively impacts other people around you, not just you and your family (the general you, not specifically you W&B).
 
Last edited:
This is actually an area where KenPom type analysis would in fact be helpful since it's about statistics and percentages. Good insight 2&2 you KENPOM lover you!
 
TownieDeac said:
That was kind of my point.

It gets at the talking points of the anti-vax crowd: "I know Susie had her shot and she still got whooping cough, my kid isn't gonna get a needle stuck in his arm just to get sick anyway!"

And there is no downside in my "hypothetical," because there is no (major) downside to vaccines.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. Just wanted to take the opportunity to point some things about. Not really directed at you, more at people who don't understand how vaccination works but think because they googled for two hours they have done their "research". It is just really frustrating to watch all this unfold every year with ignorance being advanced by both sides, though quite clearly to a much larger degree by one side.
 
Probably similar to the frustration when clients disagree with a strategy because they heard from a friend or googled the best way to handle a legal matter. Happens a lot though apparently. Basically people are horrible judges of when to delegate and not delegate duties IMO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top