http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity

I understand the term Herd Immunity. If you look at the examples on Wiki, you NEVER see a mandate from the Government to have a vaccination. Recommendations only. Yet the herd is safe, and the disease is all but eradicated. So, if you are saying that the government needs to have a mandatory immunization program with an opt out clause, explain why the previous encounters with diseases have been so successful w/o that mandate.

My point is why have the mandate in the first place if you have the opportunity to opt out. Why not just have the opportunity to "opt in"? As long as the FDA does not restrict the use of this vaccine, parents would have the choice to get it. Do you see a difference in what we are saying?

There is a vast difference between opt in and opt out.
Parents opting out have to inform themselves of the reasons why they would opt out and provide those reasons. When challenged with the kind of logic that Danivon has produced, a parent that genuinely cares about their childs well being will make the conservative choice. Protection of their childs well being.
When the matter becomes opt in only those parents who take the time and enrgy to inform themselves will make the choice. Those who remain ignorant will more likely not make the decision . This requires active learning and action.

A state mandate on vaccinations is the only way to effeciently reach the maximum number of people, in the most effective manner. Even then, determined cranks like Jeny McCarthy can create enormous harm by energetically misinforming the public. All she needs is a thoughtless politician repeating unsubstantiated claims. (ala Bachman)
The ideological opposition to "state mandates" falls away when applied to everything... The state mandates you drive on the right side of the road... Shall we let people opt out at their will? Generally even ideologues stop oppossing mandates when the idea that opting out creates harm to others. (seat belts, and flying bodies....) . Opting out of HPV vacination has the potential to harm one's own children... Meaning that making the active dcision to put one's own child in harms way, should at least cause ample reflection.
Choosing not to opt in, can be put down more to laziness and thoughtlessness. Its an easier decision that doesn't cause parents to consider the great impact that their inaction might cause.

Same question to you, RickyP...

How were Polio, Diphtheria, et.al. all but eradicated if there was not a mandate? Is this laziness and thoughtlessness cause for it's success?

danivon wrote: I get the impression that ideology is taking precedence over pragmatic concerns.

Really, because I get the impression it is your ideology taking precedence over personal liberty

How about instead of being obnoxious and saying ideology, we say this is another example of principles being more important.

danivon wrote: ILook, if there is an opt-out, then the shots are not mandatory. So it's not a full mandate.

Yes it is. What happens to the doctor if he doesn't give the vaccination w/o the parent's opt out. It may not be a full mandate but it is mandatory.

Just out of curiousity Dan, do you have any children? I am asking not to be snippy but to see if you have had the experience of your child getting vaccinations?

How were Polio, Diphtheria, et.al. all but eradicated if there was not a mandate?

There wasn't a mandate for Polio? You have evidence of that, because I remember that I had to accept immunization to be able to attend school. ..Maybe that was just Canada.
And many countries dmeanded evidence of vaccination in order to travel into them.
The early 50's saw a huge outbreak of polio in North America and it was such a debilitating disease that there was a great deal of fear and anxiety. The introduction of the vaccine was welcomed with great relief and I suspect that the herd immunity threshold was reached very easily.
Today, fear and anxiety seems to be ramped up by opponents of vaccinations. Unfortunately needlessly.
The CDC information I've seen on HPV showed that 35 million does of the vaccine have been given worldwide with reported and confirmed complications of less than 80 cases..

Is this a federal mandate? That is a condition of schooling.

I know...we make men get the vaccine and then it will only be a disease of lesbians. The Dems get forced vaccines and the Tea Party keeps a scapegoat.

bbauska wrote:Is this a federal mandate? That is a condition of schooling.

It is a State mandate in the USA. Which, coincidentally, is what Rick Perry was trying to introduce.

You seemed to think that a wiki article not mentioning something is good evidence that it does/did not happen. Unfortunately, another wikipedia article suggests that you are being somewhat hasty:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccinatio ... ted_States

wiki wrote: The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices makes scientific recommendations which are generally followed by the federal government, state governments, and private health insurance companies.

Ok, so there are recommendations from a committee to federal government, which tend to be followed. That’s not a mandate, but it’s a bit stronger than just an advisory note to parents. This includes a recommended schedule for vaccinations - as in recommended policy. Polio and Diphtheria (and HPV) were on that schedule for 2010.

wiki wrote:States in the U.S. mandate immunization, or obtaining exemption, before children enroll in public school. Exemptions are typically for people who have compromised immune systems, allergies to the components used in vaccinations, or strongly held objections. All states but West Virginia and Mississippi allow religious exemptions, and twenty states allow parents to cite personal or philosophical objections.

Looks to me like what you dislike – a ‘mandate’ with opt-outs – is already prevalent for many vaccinations. The States base these mandates on the ’recommended’ vaccination schedules that come out from ACIP via the federal government. Some may vary them, and clearly they have different standards of exemption, but that is what they do.

wiki wrote: A widespread and growing number of parents falsely claim religious and philosophical beliefs to get vaccination exemptions, and an increasing number of disease outbreaks have come from communities where herd immunity was lost due to insufficient vaccination[10]

People are apparently resorting to telling lies in order to opt out. Note the link between an increase in opt outs and abuse of opt outs and a loss of herd immunity. It feels ‘safe’ to opt out of a vaccination for a disease that is not common any more, until of course it re-occurs.

wiki wrote: Immunizations are often compulsory for military enlistment in the U.S.[12]

Not a mandate, but certainly another piece of government pressure, and a Federal one at that.

wiki wrote: All vaccines recommended by the U.S. government for its citizens are required for green card applicants. This requirement has stirred controversy when it applied to HPV vaccine because of the cost of the vaccine, and because the other thirteen required vaccines prevent diseases which are spread by a respiratory route and are considered highly contagious.[13]

A mandate for legal immigrants. I note that the same controversy as Perry and we are discussing has arisen, but in the context of the other required vaccines, I think this addresses your point. I haven’t found the current requirement that says what the other 13 vaccines are, but if they don’t include polio or diphtheria I’d be very surprised.

Ok, so there is a mandate, applied at State level. You can opt out for medical reasons (not really an opt out if your doctor says you should not have it), for religious reasons or 'philosophical objectiions depending on the States, and of course you can opt out by not sending your kids to school.

Is this mandate thing new? I don’t think so: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article ... =pmcentrez

NIH wrote: For decades, all 50 states have required that parents vaccinate their children against various diseases, including polio and measles, as a prerequisite to enrolling them in public schools

So, there is a mandate and there has been a mandate for decades. Your premise to try and bash ricky and I is false.

Archduke Russell John wrote:Really, because I get the impression it is your ideology taking precedence over personal liberty

The 'ideology' of herd immunity? The 'ideology' of medical science?

How about instead of being obnoxious and saying ideology, we say this is another example of principles being more important.

It's obnoxious to point out that an objection to something based on an ideological principle is ideology? it's obnoxious to counterpoint that with medical opinion?

I don't think Brad is being 'obnoxious' when he appears to demand we explain why polio was eradicated (pretty much, it can still recur) without a mandate, when the evidence is that there was and still is a mandate. I just think he's wrong.

Yes it is. What happens to the doctor if he doesn't give the vaccination w/o the parent's opt out. It may not be a full mandate but it is mandatory.

Oh, please, tell us what happens. Are they dragged off to FEMA re-education camps? Are they struck off, even? I'm not sure if anything happens to the doctor, to be honest, but I'd love to know. Seems to me that the sanction used in the 'mandates' imposed by the States apply to the child not being allowed to attend public school.

Just out of curiousity Dan, do you have any children? I am asking not to be snippy but to see if you have had the experience of your child getting vaccinations?

No, I don't. But not living in a vacuum, and having family, it's not completely beyond my ken. Also, I was a child myself once.

Mark Twain said something along the lines of "a lie travels halfway round the world before the truth is out of bed".
Misinformation and superstition is often the casue of push back against public health measures.
example? Polio made a come back in Nigeria a decade ago.. Parents opted out of vaccinations because of rumours..

http://www.bmj.com/content/324/7351/1414.2.full

There are only 4 areas where the world still has polio in numbers. 2 states in India, Pakistan and afghanistan. The greatest problems there are communication, education, superstition and cost. Ease of opting out allows all thee problems to grow even in the western world. The Internet and tabloid tv give all of them fertile ground to grow. The HPV vaccination faces the same problems, exacerbated by the attitudes towards education about health and sex that religion and culture propogate.

I have said it before. I vaccinate my children, it is poor parental choice to do otherwise. Is it an over-reach of government authority? IMHO, yes it is.

Military vaccinations: I have seen someone discharged for failure to take malaria preventive meds. This was the person's choice to take or not take. (BTW, they taste horrible...)

Legal immigrants: A choice once again. Get vaccinated or do not enter the US.

Public Schools?: A choice once again. Private and Homeschool options are available.

If little Johnny gets a Chicken Pox vaccination, he will not get Chicken Pox. Good for him! If Billy does not get the Chicken Pox vaccination, then too bad, he could get sick. I have always agreed that it is good for the people to get needed vaccinations. It is just not the Government's job to do more than recommend. Yes, Yes, Yes I will get the response that the "General Welfare" needs to be provided for; but not at the expense of personal choice as long as you do not infringe upon the rights of another. This would be different if Johnny got sick, and the pox spread to Billy AFTER he received an inoculation.

I approve of the Federal Government's position on the Gardasil vaccine. They RECOMMEND! Bully for them! They got it right!

When people like Bachmann spout nonsense about mental retardation from vaccinations, that is foolish. The people in Pakistan, Nigeria, India and Afghanistan are foolish as well. Until there is verifiable and re-creatable evidence about the harm of vaccinations, the science should be what the evidence is based upon. It is called the Scientific Method. (Global alarmists should hold the same standard!)

On a side note: I made myself laugh when I read Danivon's ending line of his previous post. He said he was a kid once. I thought to myself, ans sometimes he still acts that way! (Just kidding, Owen. Your post was articulate and well written.)

Conclusion: The government should make recommendations. The parents should make the choice. A foolish parent puts his/her children at risk.

So, Brad, I am clear on your opinion. You don't like a federal or state mandate. But the point remains that there is one at the State level (which has opt-outs including homeschooling) for most vaccinations other than HPV.

I get that you don't like it much, and that you oppose extending mandates by adding HPV or restricting opt-outs. Do you get that those mandates did help combat polio et al and are still there because States are implementing the recommended vaccination policy?

The thing about herd immunity is that those who have opted out are free-riding on those who do not. What is more, they increase the risk to those who are not immune because they were medically unable to take a vaccine or they have a compromised immune system? This goes beyond the effect on the person who opts out (or for minors, has that choice made for them).

danivon wrote:The 'ideology' of herd immunity? The 'ideology' of medical science?

No the ideology that government it the answer to everything. The ideology that common parents are too stupid to make informed decisions without government experts to tell them what is right. The ideology that personal liberties are always subordinate to every other contingency.

To quote a great American "Those who give up a little liberty for security soon find they have neither."

danivon wrote:It's obnoxious to point out that an objection to something based on an ideological principle is ideology?

Yes. Because of the connotations behind the word ideology. Now before we start getting into the silly argument about dictionary definitions, I think we can all agree that calling a person an ideologue is a perjorative. When you say a person is letting ideology take precedence, you are in essense accusing them of being an ideologue. That is being obnoxious.

danivon wrote:Oh, please, tell us what happens. Are they dragged off to FEMA re-education camps? Are they struck off, even? I'm not sure if anything happens to the doctor, to be honest, but I'd love to know.

suspension and/or revocation of license at a minimum. That seems pretty damned mandatory to me.

danivon wrote:

Just out of curiousity Dan, do you have any children? I am asking not to be snippy but to see if you have had the experience of your child getting vaccinations?

No, I don't. But not living in a vacuum, and having family, it's not completely beyond my ken. Also, I was a child myself once.

I asked because quite honestly, if you haven't been the room when the doctor is talking about vaccinations I don't think you really understand how meaningless an opt out is. The doctor tells you your child is getting 4 shots today. There is no explanation of what the shots are, what they protect against, what possible side effects are. The doctor just jabs the needles in the baby's butt. There is little information given, or time to, make an educated, knowledgable decision to actually opt out. It is de facto mandatory.

If it was an opt in vaccination, then the doctor can propose the vaccination, the parent can then ask questions and get the information to make an educated, intelligent decisions to opt in.

Sigh. Russell, it's not that I think government is the answer, it's that I think following medical advice is the answer to medical issues.

Do you have a link on the doctor licence revoking thing? Or on how it is the government that tells doctors to be as unethical as you claim?

danivon wrote:Sigh. Russell, it's not that I think government is the answer, it's that I think following medical advice is the answer to medical issues.

Which is what I believe as well. But I want the decision to be mine not the government telling me I have to do it.

danivon wrote:Do you have a link on the doctor licence revoking thing?

I am looking for it. The problem is that PA for the most part does not include it's Code online. I have a call into the state medical board to find out if they might be an exception.

danivon wrote:Or on how it is the government that tells doctors to be as unethical as you claim?

I am not sure I have ever said government tells doctors to be unethical? Should I now start screaming and being obnoxious about you putting words in my mouth and calling you you all sorts of names for misrepresenting what I have said?

Yes, I get that the mandate helped fight polio. Does that make it right? There was a mandate for the military draft, but that was not well received in some left leaning circles.

The base question is: Is it the responsibility of the parent or the government to ensure that the child is protected?

If a vaccination protects the one getting the vaccination why is it the responsibility of anyone other than the parent to ensure inoculation? I understand herd immunity. Some say that it protects those who do not get immunized. I am sorry, but that is not my problem.

We had the same discussion concerning SUVs and some people wanting to have everyone in smaller vehicles.

I am responsible for my family's safety and well-being. It needs to be the same with everyone. If they want there kid safe, get immunized. If they want an extra layer of armor on their vehicle... do it.

We do not need the government telling us anything other than recommendations IRT vaccinations.