In The News Today...

Quote: terapined

Vaccination
Majority of health professionals and scientists support vaccination
You have some wing-nuts against

Those not getting it are only hurting themselves. What happened to the right to privacy?

Quote: AZDuffman

Those not getting it are only hurting themselves. What happened to the right to privacy?

Incorrect. Not getting vaccinated lowers the overall immunity (e.g. herd immunity), and can have dangerous effects for those yet to be vaccinated. Lower vaccination levels result in diseases more likely to spread in the population as a whole, making those yet to be vaccinated, or with compromised immune systems far more likely to suffer from diseases that can kill. In short, it's not only harming yourself.

Doctors should have right to refuse clinic treatment to unvaccinated individuals, if not refuse general treatment to those who put the health of their other patients at risk.

Quote: TheCesspit

Incorrect. Not getting vaccinated lowers the overall immunity (e.g. herd immunity), and can have dangerous effects for those yet to be vaccinated. Lower vaccination levels result in diseases more likely to spread in the population as a whole, making those yet to be vaccinated, or with compromised immune systems far more likely to suffer from diseases that can kill. In short, it's not only harming yourself.

Those yet to be vaccinated are the same thing, only harming themselves. Right to privacy trumps it.

Quote:

Doctors should have right to refuse clinic treatment to unvaccinated individuals, if not refuse general treatment to those who put the health of their other patients at risk.

No way. Have to serve who is in front of you, otherwise it is discrimination. By your logic doctors should have the right not to treat gays because of increased HIV infection rates putting others at risk. Are you for that?

Quote: AZDuffman

Those yet to be vaccinated are the same thing, only harming themselves. Only harming themselves. Right to privacy trumps it.

I disagree.
You are putting the community at risk.

Quote: AZDuffman

No way. Have to serve who is in front of you, otherwise it is discrimination. By your logic doctors should have the right not to treat gays because of increased HIV infection rates putting others at risk. Are you for that?

I agree

They have gone after HIV positive people who infected or put other people at risk unknowingly by their behavior. If you could transmit through casual contact, they'd treat it like any dangerous disease. People would be forced in quarantine unwillingly if necessary.

Me, not knowing I'm exposing my newborn to your unvaccinated self is definitely a risky prospect.

Quote: terapined

I disagree.
You are putting the community at risk.

Nope, if someone is vaccinated they are not at risk.

Quote: rxwine

Me, not knowing I'm exposing my newborn to your unvaccinated self is definitely a risky prospect.

Then get him or her vaccinated and leave the people who choose to not risk the vaccine alone.

Quote: AZDuffman

Then get him or her vaccinated and leave the people who choose to not risk the vaccine alone.

The problem with babies, is you can't actually just vaccinate them any old time. Nor can you group all the vaccinations together. Some must be spread out.

Quote: rxwine

The problem with babies, is you can't actually just vaccinate them any old time. Nor can you group all the vaccinations together. Some must be spread out.

So spread them out and stay home until they are all administered if you are that concerned. People have a right not to vaccinate. Right to privacy.

Quote: AZDuffman

Those yet to be vaccinated are the same thing, only harming themselves. Right to privacy trumps it.

Compromised Immune systems mean even though I was vaccinated, I am no longer immune to the disease. Thus I am at increased risk, and when the immunity rates dip below 90%, those with no immunity are at far bigger risk. Vaccinations work in healthy individuals. Unhealthy people can contract secondary diseases. Your lack of vaccination can therefore harm me.

For example, people on heavy doses of chemo have little or no immune system. While they will isolate themselves from the rest of the world as far as possible, they are also reliant that everyone they come into contact with has not come into contact with another person with various diseases. Herd immunity does a pretty good job of that.

Quote:

No way. Have to serve who is in front of you, otherwise it is discrimination. By your logic doctors should have the right not to treat gays because of increased HIV infection rates putting others at risk. Are you for that?

If the person in front of you is a contagion risk, you should be able to isolate them. Doctors already take steps to avoid HIV transfer due to blood, and stop people spreading the disease to others. HIV doesn't spread through waiting rooms. Measles can do, and can kill the tiny baby whose mother has brought them in for their regular check up.

You have a right to privacy. Your right to privacy doesn't trump other people's rights to health. I agree that people can refuse to take a vaccination, but if you have a payer-driven health service, I think you have the right to refuse service to those people. In socialized health care, that's harder.

But in short, it's not true that those who refuse vaccination are only harming themselves, and only putting themselves at risk. Whether that's acceptable or not, and whether right to privacy trumps other people rights and responsibilities is a classic freedom/society debate, and we'll not find common ground. But you axiom as a start point 'it only harms the unvaccinated' is false. Not that I really expect you to respect any of the science behind it.

Quote: TheCesspit

You have a right to privacy. Your right to privacy doesn't trump other people's rights to health. I agree that people can refuse to take a vaccination, but if you have a payer-driven health service, I think you have the right to refuse service to those people. In socialized health care, that's harder.

Doctors take an oath and are supposed to help the patient in front of them. Again, not being vaccinated does not affect other people's health. Your saying it does affect it does not make it so. In any case, our current open-border policy likely lets in far more disease risk than the occasional person choosing not to be vaccinated.

Quote:

But in short, it's not true that those who refuse vaccination are only harming themselves, and only putting themselves at risk. Whether that's acceptable or not, and whether right to privacy trumps other people rights and responsibilities is a classic freedom/society debate, and we'll not find common ground. But you axiom as a start point 'it only harms the unvaccinated' is false. Not that I really expect you to respect any of the science behind it.

The "science" is simple. The diseases have a risk. The vaccination has a risk. The patient has a right to weigh each risk. Not sure why you think I do not "respect science." I do think for myself and don't just but what the scientists are selling. That is just common sense.

This whole line of discussion was already beaten to death in another thread, BTW.