Bill passed in California to make Vaccinations mandatory

[Borgholio]

No, they didn't. That wasn't smallpox, that was another version of the polio vaccine.

Whoops, my bad. Still...it worked, didn't it?

[Broomstick]

Yes, yes it did.

In fact, we've been so successful that people fear vaccines more than the horrible disease those vaccines prevent.

[Borgholio]

Yes, yes it did.

In fact, we've been so successful that people fear vaccines more than the horrible disease those vaccines prevent.

Yeah my wife and I both agree, we're going to vaccinate the hell out of our kids. She's not even pregnant yet and already her motherly "murder" instinct is kicking in regarding people who try to get her babies sick.

[mr friendly guy]

Here's the thing: antibiotics do not work as well as they used to. Thanks to overprescription and a total lack of long-term health planning, the day when they don't work at all is all too near. When - and that's when, not if - that day comes, the only thing standing between us and a repeat of the 1918 flu pandemic will be mandatory vaccination, because left to their own devices too many people will choose to endanger themselves and others to avoid a minor inconvenience.
.

Not necessarily against a major flu pandemic, unless we make some breakthroughs. The flu mutates via two methods, antigentic shift and antigenic drift. The latter is the slow one and is somewhat predictable, allowing drug companies to come up with a vaccine every year. The former is fast which makes it harder for us to adapt vaccines. I have heard people trying to make a vaccine targeting the parts of the influenza virus which doesn't mutate, but that's still in the works.

[Flagg]

I'm really not trying to change the subject into a pro vs anti circumcision thing, so if that breaks out, I take no responsibility, but it's my honest intent to avoid that.

All that said, I wonder how many of the anti-vaxxer lunatics have their male children circumcised, which is a lot more damaging than vaccinations which, you know, help not just the child who gets a fucking painless shot, but public health as a whole. I mean how many of these shits force (these days, I mean only Jews and Muslims(?) do it for religion to my knowledge, and very few are medically necessary) cosmetic surgery on babies, but refuse to shield them from preventable disease?

I also wonder how many babies and children die/have severe complications/are negatively effected for life from vaccinations vs circumcisions. If it's far more from circumcision then you double it since it'd only be less than half the population.

[Flagg]

Here's the thing: antibiotics do not work as well as they used to. Thanks to overprescription and a total lack of long-term health planning, the day when they don't work at all is all too near. When - and that's when, not if - that day comes, the only thing standing between us and a repeat of the 1918 flu pandemic will be mandatory vaccination, because left to their own devices too many people will choose to endanger themselves and others to avoid a minor inconvenience.
.

Not necessarily against a major flu pandemic, unless we make some breakthroughs. The flu mutates via two methods, antigentic shift and antigenic drift. The latter is the slow one and is somewhat predictable, allowing drug companies to come up with a vaccine every year. The former is fast which makes it harder for us to adapt vaccines. I have heard people trying to make a vaccine targeting the parts of the influenza virus which doesn't mutate, but that's still in the works.

Not just that, but it's more the wide scale use of antibiotics on livestock due to poor factory farm conditions, as well as some overuse by doctors for things that don't require antibiotics (My mom was a nurse and I've heard stories of kids coming in with viruses which of course cannot be treated with antibiotics whose parents would not leave without a fucking penicillin script for their brat. That does not happen anymore), but it's just going to get worse unless we start changing the way we farm meat, and really start to lessen our consumption of red meat.

[Broomstick]

A quick google shows somewhere between 100 and 200 infant circumcision deaths per year in the US and about a 5% significant complication rate.

There are about 100-150 deaths from vaccine reactions each year in the US, about 1200 hospitalizations, 400 disabilities as a result, and 288 life threatening cases. However, although based on CDC reporting mechanisms, it is not 100% certain all of those "reactions" are to the vaccine and not some other complicating factor or even unrelated problem. Even so - at worse it would seem that vaccine complications/deaths are comparable to those arising from circumcision even though far, far more vaccinations are performed each year, and children are subjected to multiple vaccinations, not just one.

Thus, I conclude that childhood vaccinations are safer than loping the foreskin off your baby boy.

Could find no stats on injuries/complications for infant ear piercing, which seems to be all the rage the these days, and which to my mind is even less justifiable than circumcision which on rare occasions can be medically justified. There's just no damn good reason to drill holes in a kid's ear.

[Broomstick]

That does not happen anymore), but it's just going to get worse unless we start changing the way we farm meat, and really start to lessen our consumption of red meat.

Enough with the demonization of red meat. Other forms of meat like hogs and poultry are just as subjected to antibiotics.

[Flagg]

That does not happen anymore), but it's just going to get worse unless we start changing the way we farm meat, and really start to lessen our consumption of red meat.

Enough with the demonization of red meat. Other forms of meat like hogs and poultry are just as subjected to antibiotics.

Hogs are red meat. I agree with you on poultry, but they are much easier to "free range" while still giving out good production. There are also health issues with red meat, but because everything dietary seems to change if not flip flop every 6 days or so...

[Flagg]

A quick google shows somewhere between 100 and 200 infant circumcision deaths per year in the US and about a 5% significant complication rate.

There are about 100-150 deaths from vaccine reactions each year in the US, about 1200 hospitalizations, 400 disabilities as a result, and 288 life threatening cases. However, although based on CDC reporting mechanisms, it is not 100% certain all of those "reactions" are to the vaccine and not some other complicating factor or even unrelated problem. Even so - at worse it would seem that vaccine complications/deaths are comparable to those arising from circumcision even though far, far more vaccinations are performed each year, and children are subjected to multiple vaccinations, not just one.

Thus, I conclude that childhood vaccinations are safer than loping the foreskin off your baby boy.

Could find no stats on injuries/complications for infant ear piercing, which seems to be all the rage the these days, and which to my mind is even less justifiable than circumcision which on rare occasions can be medically justified. There's just no damn good reason to drill holes in a kid's ear.

I haven't seen an infant with a pierced ear since leaving FL. I love volcanoes.

But remember, only half the population (48% but let's not split pubic hairs) is subject to male circumcision so you have to double their rate of everything, so the rate of deadly complications due to circumcision is much higher than that of vaccinations.

"Nip the tip, but no Vaxx trip? That aint hip!"

Fuck it, we'll work on it.

[AniThyng]

As far as I am aware Muslims do not circumcise until the child is 10-12 years old.

[Flagg]

As far as I am aware Muslims do not circumcise until the child is 10-12 years old.

Nice that they make such a painful and unnecessary procedure memorable. Does an Imam with herpes suckle on the kids dick to make the foreskin easier to get at to lop off, or is that just a Rabbi thing?

[AniThyng]

As far as I am aware Muslims do not circumcise until the child is 10-12 years old.

Nice that they make such a painful and unnecessary procedure memorable. Does an Imam with herpes suckle on the kids dick to make the foreskin easier to get at to lop off, or is that just a Rabbi thing?

It really is just a rabbi thing, yes.

[Lord MJ]

Out of morbid curiosity, I've been looking at Libertarian blogs about the whole issue of vaccinations and even medical quarantines.

To my surprise there are some libertarians that do support mandatory vaccinations, but the more ideologically pure libertarians do not. And essentially view the risks associated with not being vaccinated as being risks and that nobody should be forced to to do something based on the risk that other people might get sick because someone is not vaccinated.

[Grumman]

Out of morbid curiosity, I've been looking at Libertarian blogs about the whole issue of vaccinations and even medical quarantines.

To my surprise there are some libertarians that do support mandatory vaccinations, but the more ideologically pure libertarians do not. And essentially view the risks associated with not being vaccinated as being risks and that nobody should be forced to to do something based on the risk that other people might get sick because someone is not vaccinated.

I'm a libertarian and I support mandatory MMR vaccinations for the same reason I support mandatory financing of fire departments: because feeding an infectious disease or fire doesn't just let it break even, you allow it to get stronger and more likely to cause harm to your neighbours. I don't support mandatory flu vaccinations yet because they are currently too narrow in scope to have a lasting effect, but once they develop one that is effective for more than a single season I'd support that too.

[biostem]

Out of morbid curiosity, I've been looking at Libertarian blogs about the whole issue of vaccinations and even medical quarantines.

To my surprise there are some libertarians that do support mandatory vaccinations, but the more ideologically pure libertarians do not. And essentially view the risks associated with not being vaccinated as being risks and that nobody should be forced to to do something based on the risk that other people might get sick because someone is not vaccinated.

From my understanding, "Libertarian" encompasses an entire spectrum of beliefs - from just having a smaller government than we have now, to some sort of idealized society where force/coercion is never used as a means of getting goods/resources/capital/labor from citizens. The latter setting seems to just scream for a pandemic to sweep through and wipe the populace out, as even simple things like sanitation, health codes for restaurants, or vaccinations all require "force" in order to be effective.

[Irbis]

Could find no stats on injuries/complications for infant ear piercing, which seems to be all the rage the these days, and which to my mind is even less justifiable than circumcision

Huh?

Not that I like it either, as I am generally against doing anything to kids they might later object on basis of common sense/science, but do you honestly call something that can reverse on its own and is barely more painful than injection worse than permanent (sensory) mutilation? Really?

Maybe child piercings should be banned, especially ones done for religious reasons, but child mutilation needs to be banned.

[Borgholio]

but child mutilation needs to be banned.

Are you referring to circumcision or other non-cosmetic modifications?

[Lord MJ]

Out of morbid curiosity, I've been looking at Libertarian blogs about the whole issue of vaccinations and even medical quarantines.

To my surprise there are some libertarians that do support mandatory vaccinations, but the more ideologically pure libertarians do not. And essentially view the risks associated with not being vaccinated as being risks and that nobody should be forced to to do something based on the risk that other people might get sick because someone is not vaccinated.

From my understanding, "Libertarian" encompasses an entire spectrum of beliefs - from just having a smaller government than we have now, to some sort of idealized society where force/coercion is never used as a means of getting goods/resources/capital/labor from citizens. The latter setting seems to just scream for a pandemic to sweep through and wipe the populace out, as even simple things like sanitation, health codes for restaurants, or vaccinations all require "force" in order to be effective.

The most ideologically pure libertarian would say that the free market would take care of things like sanitation. And that there shouldn't be such a thing as health codes for restaurants (and that the free market would penalize restaurants that do not maintain some level of health standards), and that private institutions are free to require vaccinations for people to be on their premises, and that someone can go without vaccinations and still not get sick or infect others.

[Lord MJ]

Should also note that most of the Libertarians whose statements I've read say it is pretty stupid for people to not get vaccinated, but that getting vaccinated should be purely voluntary.

[Flagg]

but child mutilation needs to be banned.

Are you referring to circumcision or other non-cosmetic modifications?

Circumcision these days is largely done for cosmetic or religious reasons.

[Broomstick]

Could find no stats on injuries/complications for infant ear piercing, which seems to be all the rage the these days, and which to my mind is even less justifiable than circumcision

Huh?

Not that I like it either, as I am generally against doing anything to kids they might later object on basis of common sense/science, but do you honestly call something that can reverse on its own and is barely more painful than injection worse than permanent (sensory) mutilation? Really?

Maybe child piercings should be banned, especially ones done for religious reasons, but child mutilation needs to be banned.

Let me explain this more thoroughly:

Under rare circumstances there can be a medical justification for circumcision. As I said, rare, but such things do happen and can occur even in infants. Paraphimosis, for example, is a medical emergency that if left untreated can result in gangrene and loss of more than just the foreskin of the penis. Other reasons can include repeated infections of the foreskin/penis (rare in healthy children but possible in someone immune compromised for whatever reason) or men susceptible to repeated urinary tract infections. For example, an infant boy with spina bifida who will require urinary catherization multiple times per day to properly empty his bladder will be at significantly greater risk of paraphimosis and UTI's than the average infant boy, and that is a circumstance where circumcision could arguably prevent significant health problems/impairments down the line, and that statistics make it so likely that many would feel it justified for health reasons. It would not be a happy decision, but arguably losing one's foreskin is preferable to losing one's kidney's from multiple UTI's or losing the end of one's penis to paraphimosis, even if it does result in some sensory impairment. I mean, hell, we remove the eyes of kids at a particularly high risk of retinal cancer, that's an even worse sensory impairment as far as functioning in the world but it's medically justified. On the balance, life post-operation will be longer, or less painful, or more healthy in some other respect.

Now, name me one goddamned instance where drilling holes in an infant's ears could possibly be of benefit.

Yes, circumcision is more likely to do harm to a baby than ear piercing, however, the risks of ear-piercing an infant are not zero. There is the risk of infection. There is the risk of a toddler removing her earrings and swallowing them. There is the risk of the earring getting caught on something during play and tearing the ear lobe. Also, it makes the kid higher maintenance - for damn sure the baby won't be doing her own piercing hygiene for the first few years. It would also be a hell of a way to find out your kid is prone to keloid scarring.

Based on potential harms, yes, I can see going after circumcision first, but that doesn't make stabbing your baby's ears any more acceptable in my eyes.

[Batman]

So...are there any actual medical 'benefits' to earlobe piercing? Because so far it looks like circumcision is at least occasionally beneficial while earlobe piercing is entirely decorational.

[Grumman]

So...are there any actual medical 'benefits' to earlobe piercing? Because so far it looks like circumcision is at least occasionally beneficial...

You can say the same about amputating someone's leg. If there are edge cases where circumcision is medically justifiable, that only justifies doing it in those edge cases.

[Batman]

Which was kinda my point?