SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
From the (boneheaded) editor: My apologies. I pooched this one in a way that is exceptional, even for me. I humbly beg your forgiveness. The line for torches is on the left, and pitchforks is on the right. Please, move on to the next story and don't waste any further time on this one.
Regards,
cmn32480
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
I'm wearing PAMPERS!!
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @11:27AM
Get vaccinated or you put other people's very young children (less than a year, before they can have MMR) at risk of injury or death.
There is no economic, game theoretic, constitutional or other rational reason not to vaccinate - for the above reason alone.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Capt. Obvious on Tuesday March 15 2016, @03:20PM
There is a game-theoretic reason to not vaccinate. Vaccinations cause a negative reaction in a very small percentage of the population. Herd immunity is almost as good as vaccination if everyone else is vaccinated. Therefore, you benefit slightly from not vaccinating. These kind of "I can benefit if I'm the only one to do it" lends itself to game-theoretic solutions.
That said, it's extremely immoral. And even if TFA is correct and the newly vaccinated are the proximate cause, the unvaccinated are the ultimate cause.
IIRC, people on immunosuppresants, or otherwise with compromised immune systems already have their exposure to vaccines and vaccines in their family.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday March 15 2016, @08:42PM
That said, it's extremely immoral. And even if TFA is correct and the newly vaccinated are the proximate cause, the unvaccinated are the ultimate cause.
Exactly, and how did TFS fail to point out that while still having room to make the totally unsupported statement:
the popular press is mostly owned by companies with large stakes in pharmaceuticals
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @08:39PM
The reason they don't vaccinate until 1 year of age is that the baby is already immune due to maternal antibodies. These antibodies protect the child from the vaccine as if its a virus so it is pointless to give it. They used to but the vaccine effect faded so quickly it was figured to be worthless.
Now, there is an issue with vaccinated mothers having weaker (as in wear off faster) maternal antibodies than those infected naturally. For that reason people have been trying to get the CDC/whoever to move up the recommended age (the 1yr is from a long time ago). Unfortunately, government bureaucracies don't like change. We will just have to wait until enough infant outbreaks are caused by their delay so that the loudmouths who point fingers in random directions happen to get it right.
Anyway, that has to be the worst, most ignorant vaccine argument I've seen yet. I'm going to back away slowly from this thread now...