Quote: NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio has declared that residents do not own their own bodies. The city of New York can demand that all citizens be injected with literally anything the government declares to be a “vaccine,” even when those vaccines contain aborted human fetal tissue cells, toxic aluminum metals, inflammatory adjuvants and other dangerous, deadly chemicals.

This is the latest attempt by authorities in New York to obliterate human rights and roll out a medical dictatorship where citizens have zero rights to defend their own bodies against risky medial interventions that are demanded at gunpoint.

Link

With all due respect, "natural news" is not what I would consider a true source of news. It would be interesting if these statements were verified by real news outlets. This web site has an obvious agenda - a dangerous one IMHO - so it's FAR from unbiased...

I havent heard of "forced" vaccinations. What I have heard is that you may not be out in public in certain locations if you have not been vaccinated. That is a perfectly legitimate request during a health crisis, which this is.

Lol at tagging this anti-vaxxer trash as “news”

You guys are missing the point, NYC is starting a policy of fining folks $1,000 if their kids arent vaccinated with the MMR vaccine. Seems very unconstitutional. They are using government force to require you to get a certain medical treatment (which has serious side effects including death on rare cases) against your will.

(04-13-2019 05:29 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  You guys are missing the point, NYC is starting a policy of fining folks $1,000 if their kids arent vaccinated with the MMR vaccine. Seems very unconstitutional. They are using government force to require you to get a certain medical treatment (which has serious side effects including death on rare cases) against your will.

Its all about regulation. Use a serious situation to get the door open, so later they can tell you what you are allowed and not allowed to do with your body.

Banned the kids from ever going into public because the parents are harming the health of their child which is abuse if they not get vaccinated.

(04-13-2019 05:37 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Banned the kids from ever going into public because the parents are harming the health of their child which is abuse if they not get vaccinated.

Its not child abuse to refuse vaccinations. And I doubt you could find any scientific evidence that failing to vaccinate harms childrens health. That said, I find the extremes of both sides frustrating. Why is it that you must blindly accept all vaccinations without question? And for the other side, why do you think that all vaccines are terrible. A reasonable middle ground is for parents to carefully evaluate the benefits and risk of each individual vaccine and decide what is right for there child. Several vaccines have risks that are at least as probable and serious as the disease they purport to protect against. Look at the vaccine compensation courts table of recognized injuries if you dont believe vaccines can serious harm a child.

(04-13-2019 05:29 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  You guys are missing the point, NYC is starting a policy of fining folks $1,000 if their kids arent vaccinated with the MMR vaccine. Seems very unconstitutional.

Havent heard of them doing that. That would be serious.

But.... what about LIBTARDS mantra, "MY BODY MY CHOICE"? Doesn't De Blasio's statement invalidate abortion rights?

(04-13-2019 05:49 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  And I doubt you could find any scientific evidence that failing to vaccinate harms childrens health.

Polio







You were saying...?

(04-12-2019 06:25 PM)miko33 Wrote:  With all due respect, "natural news" is not what I would consider a true source of news. It would be interesting if these statements were verified by real news outlets. This web site has an obvious agenda - a dangerous one IMHO - so it's FAR from unbiased...

https://nypost.com/2019/04/09/public-hea...-outbreak/

Quote:Mayor de Blasio on Tuesday declared a public health emergency over an outbreak of measles in Williamsburg and ordered mandatory vaccinations in the Brooklyn neighborhood under the threat of $1,000 fines — and even the possibility of forcible injections.

https://nypost.com/2019/04/09/williamsbu...-outbreak/

Quote:Health officials may forcibly inject residents of Williamsburg, Brooklyn, who flout a mandatory vaccination order, a City Hall spokeswoman confirmed Tuesday.

“We will consider [forcible vaccinations] on a case-by-case basis,” said mayoral spokeswoman Marcy Miranda, adding that the drastic measure is “not our first choice.”

That good enough or are you going to question the legitimacy of the NY Post now?

(04-13-2019 07:56 PM)q5sys Wrote:  

(04-13-2019 05:49 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  And I doubt you could find any scientific evidence that failing to vaccinate harms childrens health.

Polio







You were saying...?

My point was that getting vaccinations does not make you "healthier". They don't give you lifelong immunity (only waning) and you can still get the diseases (although rare) even if vaccinated. They can negatively affect your health. Catching a dealy disease is what harms your health, not the failure to get the vaccine. You have to consider the risk of getting the disease and the risks of the vaccine and decide if it is worth it. For example, if your kid got encephalopathy, paralysis, or died from a vaccine would you feel it was worth it considering your risk of catching polio in the US is virtually nil? Notice that you had to use photos from the 50s to show the dangers of polio. I recognize that vaccines generally wiped out the disease, but you've got to consider the risk-benefit analysis of it now. Polio is not ravaging America now. And even if it was, it would be harmless for most people who caught it. If an epidemic flairs up, they risk analysis changes.

I'm not pro or anti vaccine. I fall into whats called "vaccine friendly" which is a category of people who believe that individuals parents should decide whats best medically for their child. I generally am concerned about the number of vaccines that are given to children at a very young age and that there are costs to that. I also recognize the benefits of vaccination and think it is good to get most vaccines, but on an alternative or delayed schedule. I think we tend to fear some diseases too much. I had chickenpox as a kid, does every kid need a chicken pox vaccine? My dad had the measles and mumps as a kid and describes it like having the chiken pox. Annoying, but not especially dangerous for the vast majority of people. We act like any kid who gets the measles will die when the odds of dying from measles in the US are closer to 1-in-a-billion.

I'm torn on the way this is being handled, but I can't agree that the vast majority of parents are smart enough, informed enough, or qualified to know what's medically best for their children. You note the minuscule odds of getting something like polio, but don't mention the minuscule odds of getting sick from the vaccine.

What I do know is that I would not be happy in a world where I had to worry about the odds of my child, or grandchild these days, getting polio because a bunch of parents decided that not getting the vaccine was medically best for their child. When I was a kid parents never thought twice about getting their kids vaccinated. The reason was that our parents grew up seeing the devastating effects of all the things we were being vaccinated for. This is just another case of the new generations never having faced large scale adversity in their lives so they focus on the small first world problems they see and blow them out of proportion.

(04-13-2019 03:12 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  I havent heard of "forced" vaccinations. What I have heard is that you may not be out in public in certain locations if you have not been vaccinated. That is a perfectly legitimate request during a health crisis, which this is.

Unless they repeal HIPAA and force the public to carry around their medical records and require turning them over to the cops before leaving your home, I really cannot think of anything less enforceable.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(04-13-2019 10:07 PM)banker Wrote:  I'm torn on the way this is being handled, but I can't agree that the vast majority of parents are smart enough, informed enough, or qualified to know what's medically best for their children. You note the minuscule odds of getting something like polio, but don't mention the minuscule odds of getting sick from the vaccine.

What I do know is that I would not be happy in a world where I had to worry about the odds of my child, or grandchild these days, getting polio because a bunch of parents decided that not getting the vaccine was medically best for their child. When I was a kid parents never thought twice about getting their kids vaccinated. The reason was that our parents grew up seeing the devastating effects of all the things we were being vaccinated for. This is just another case of the new generations never having faced large scale adversity in their lives so they focus on the small first world problems they see and blow them out of proportion.

Pretty simple stuff... if your child or grandchild get the polio vaccine, you don't have to worry about it. What someone else does really is none of your business.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(04-13-2019 09:35 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  

(04-13-2019 07:56 PM)q5sys Wrote:  

(04-13-2019 05:49 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  And I doubt you could find any scientific evidence that failing to vaccinate harms childrens health.

Polio







You were saying...?

My point was that getting vaccinations does not make you "healthier". They don't give you lifelong immunity (only waning) and you can still get the diseases (although rare) even if vaccinated. They can negatively affect your health. Catching a dealy disease is what harms your health, not the failure to get the vaccine. You have to consider the risk of getting the disease and the risks of the vaccine and decide if it is worth it. For example, if your kid got encephalopathy, paralysis, or died from a vaccine would you feel it was worth it considering your risk of catching polio in the US is virtually nil? Notice that you had to use photos from the 50s to show the dangers of polio. I recognize that vaccines generally wiped out the disease, but you've got to consider the risk-benefit analysis of it now. Polio is not ravaging America now. And even if it was, it would be harmless for most people who caught it. If an epidemic flairs up, they risk analysis changes.

I'm not pro or anti vaccine. I fall into whats called "vaccine friendly" which is a category of people who believe that individuals parents should decide whats best medically for their child. I generally am concerned about the number of vaccines that are given to children at a very young age and that there are costs to that. I also recognize the benefits of vaccination and think it is good to get most vaccines, but on an alternative or delayed schedule. I think we tend to fear some diseases too much. I had chickenpox as a kid, does every kid need a chicken pox vaccine? My dad had the measles and mumps as a kid and describes it like having the chiken pox. Annoying, but not especially dangerous for the vast majority of people. We act like any kid who gets the measles will die when the odds of dying from measles in the US are closer to 1-in-a-billion.

That's anti-science baloney. Any parent who does not vaccinate their child clearly is NOT doing what is best for their child (unless the child has HIV or another genuine medical condition).

These diseases are real, and they really do maim and kill children.

People who refuse to vaccinnate their child not only endanger their own child's life, they also increase the risk for other people who are medically unable to get vaccinated. That is morally repugnant.

Your attempt to find a middle ground is valiant, but ignorant of the facts.

(04-13-2019 09:35 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  

(04-13-2019 07:56 PM)q5sys Wrote:  

(04-13-2019 05:49 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  And I doubt you could find any scientific evidence that failing to vaccinate harms childrens health.

Polio







You were saying...?

My point was that getting vaccinations does not make you "healthier". They don't give you lifelong immunity (only waning) and you can still get the diseases (although rare) even if vaccinated. They can negatively affect your health. Catching a dealy disease is what harms your health, not the failure to get the vaccine. You have to consider the risk of getting the disease and the risks of the vaccine and decide if it is worth it. For example, if your kid got encephalopathy, paralysis, or died from a vaccine would you feel it was worth it considering your risk of catching polio in the US is virtually nil? Notice that you had to use photos from the 50s to show the dangers of polio. I recognize that vaccines generally wiped out the disease, but you've got to consider the risk-benefit analysis of it now. Polio is not ravaging America now. And even if it was, it would be harmless for most people who caught it. If an epidemic flairs up, they risk analysis changes.

I'm not pro or anti vaccine. I fall into whats called "vaccine friendly" which is a category of people who believe that individuals parents should decide whats best medically for their child. I generally am concerned about the number of vaccines that are given to children at a very young age and that there are costs to that. I also recognize the benefits of vaccination and think it is good to get most vaccines, but on an alternative or delayed schedule. I think we tend to fear some diseases too much. I had chickenpox as a kid, does every kid need a chicken pox vaccine? My dad had the measles and mumps as a kid and describes it like having the chiken pox. Annoying, but not especially dangerous for the vast majority of people. We act like any kid who gets the measles will die when the odds of dying from measles in the US are closer to 1-in-a-billion.

Not true. The actual number is about 1 in 1000. The actual number of deaths has been so trivial due to the high vaccination rate so that very few people get it, and outbreaks are extremely suppressed. But when you have larger groups refusing to vaccinate, and you get an outbreak, you will have a larger number of deaths from a disease that was essentially eradicated.

I guarantee you that the death rate from measles is magnitudes greater than death or even issues caused by vaccination. And thats just one disease that the vaccination is fighting against.

If you have a child who died from measles, that was truly a death that never had to happen.

In addition, about 1 in 20 children who get measles also gets pneumonia.

(04-13-2019 10:59 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(04-13-2019 09:35 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  

(04-13-2019 07:56 PM)q5sys Wrote:  

(04-13-2019 05:49 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  And I doubt you could find any scientific evidence that failing to vaccinate harms childrens health.

Polio







You were saying...?

My point was that getting vaccinations does not make you "healthier". They don't give you lifelong immunity (only waning) and you can still get the diseases (although rare) even if vaccinated. They can negatively affect your health. Catching a dealy disease is what harms your health, not the failure to get the vaccine. You have to consider the risk of getting the disease and the risks of the vaccine and decide if it is worth it. For example, if your kid got encephalopathy, paralysis, or died from a vaccine would you feel it was worth it considering your risk of catching polio in the US is virtually nil? Notice that you had to use photos from the 50s to show the dangers of polio. I recognize that vaccines generally wiped out the disease, but you've got to consider the risk-benefit analysis of it now. Polio is not ravaging America now. And even if it was, it would be harmless for most people who caught it. If an epidemic flairs up, they risk analysis changes.

I'm not pro or anti vaccine. I fall into whats called "vaccine friendly" which is a category of people who believe that individuals parents should decide whats best medically for their child. I generally am concerned about the number of vaccines that are given to children at a very young age and that there are costs to that. I also recognize the benefits of vaccination and think it is good to get most vaccines, but on an alternative or delayed schedule. I think we tend to fear some diseases too much. I had chickenpox as a kid, does every kid need a chicken pox vaccine? My dad had the measles and mumps as a kid and describes it like having the chiken pox. Annoying, but not especially dangerous for the vast majority of people. We act like any kid who gets the measles will die when the odds of dying from measles in the US are closer to 1-in-a-billion.

Not true. The actual number is about 1 in 1000. The actual number of deaths has been so trivial due to the high vaccination rate so that very few people get it, and outbreaks are extremely suppressed. But when you have larger groups refusing to vaccinate, and you get an outbreak, you will have a larger number of deaths from a disease that was essentially eradicated.

I guarantee you that the death rate from measles is magnitudes greater than death or even issues caused by vaccination. And thats just one disease that the vaccination is fighting against.

If you have a child who died from measles, that was truly a death that never had to happen.

In addition, about 1 in 20 children who get measles also gets pneumonia.

The 1 in 1000 number is the risk of getting a serious complication once you've caught the measles. The 1 in a billion number I quoted is your risk of catching the disease and dying from the disease in the US.

(04-13-2019 10:21 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(04-13-2019 09:35 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  

(04-13-2019 07:56 PM)q5sys Wrote:  

(04-13-2019 05:49 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  And I doubt you could find any scientific evidence that failing to vaccinate harms childrens health.

Polio







You were saying...?

My point was that getting vaccinations does not make you "healthier". They don't give you lifelong immunity (only waning) and you can still get the diseases (although rare) even if vaccinated. They can negatively affect your health. Catching a dealy disease is what harms your health, not the failure to get the vaccine. You have to consider the risk of getting the disease and the risks of the vaccine and decide if it is worth it. For example, if your kid got encephalopathy, paralysis, or died from a vaccine would you feel it was worth it considering your risk of catching polio in the US is virtually nil? Notice that you had to use photos from the 50s to show the dangers of polio. I recognize that vaccines generally wiped out the disease, but you've got to consider the risk-benefit analysis of it now. Polio is not ravaging America now. And even if it was, it would be harmless for most people who caught it. If an epidemic flairs up, they risk analysis changes.

I'm not pro or anti vaccine. I fall into whats called "vaccine friendly" which is a category of people who believe that individuals parents should decide whats best medically for their child. I generally am concerned about the number of vaccines that are given to children at a very young age and that there are costs to that. I also recognize the benefits of vaccination and think it is good to get most vaccines, but on an alternative or delayed schedule. I think we tend to fear some diseases too much. I had chickenpox as a kid, does every kid need a chicken pox vaccine? My dad had the measles and mumps as a kid and describes it like having the chiken pox. Annoying, but not especially dangerous for the vast majority of people. We act like any kid who gets the measles will die when the odds of dying from measles in the US are closer to 1-in-a-billion.

That's anti-science baloney. Any parent who does not vaccinate their child clearly is NOT doing what is best for their child (unless the child has HIV or another genuine medical condition).

These diseases are real, and they really do maim and kill children.

People who refuse to vaccinnate their child not only endanger their own child's life, they also increase the risk for other people who are medically unable to get vaccinated. That is morally repugnant.

Your attempt to find a middle ground is valiant, but ignorant of the facts.

Its not anti-science to question a medical treatments efficacy and safety based upon actual facts/scientific data. I base my decisions off of infromation from the vaccine claims compensation court, the manufacturers own packaging inserts that acknowledge the risks, and scientific studies that looked dangers associated with the ingredients in vaccines. What I've found is that vaccines are generally pretty effective (other than the flu shot), that your immunity from vaccines wanes over time to the point that in adulthood you are likely no longer immune (you may notice in news stories they often say the measles is spreading mostly in unvaccinated people which means that vaccinated people are catching it too), and that vaccines can cause rare but serious injuries including death. The risk of serious injury is often roughly the same (sometimes higher) than the risk of the diseases themselves. As a society we also over estimate the seriousness of a lot of disease that there are vaccines for, e.g. basically no one in the US needs the rotovirus vaccine and its side effects are worse than the disease (my daughter got very sick from it).

I'm not saying vaccines are bad, I'm saying every medical intervention has risk. If your doctor wanted you to give you infant child 50 prescription pills (more than a dozen different types) over the first couple years of his/her life shouldn't you question the neccessity of that? We've been brain washed in this country to say that vaccines are "safe and effective" and that any criticism is anti-science even if the criticism is based upon scientific data.

As a parent my duty is to protect my child the best I am able. No one cares more about my child than me. The government certainly would risk her safety and health for what it thought was the greater good. My child has probably 80% of the cdc recommended vaccines given on an alternative schedule. We arent getting the others due to the risk factors outweighing the benefits.