Should Parents Be Forced to Vaccinate Their Children?

[Jenn! 918]

It is incredibly irresponsible not to get your kids vaccinated. That is my opinion anyway.

If mothers can abort their kids they should be allowed not to vaccinate them.

But the difference is that aborting a fetus will not have an affect on the health of other children.

I thought the other kids have the vaccines???

Yeah, you're right.

Ok I made up my mind.

ETA: So what do people care if your child is vaccinated as long as their child is vaccinated?

Edited June 4, 2008 by Jenn!

[Peikko 1,575]

I think the concern about a large number of non vaccinated children boils down to the costs of treating an epidemic via the health service. I could be wrong though.

[Jenn! 918]

I think the concern about a large number of non vaccinated children boils down to the costs of treating an epidemic via the health service. I could be wrong though.

Well if that really is the case, then we should, as someone mentioned earlier, also force people to eat healthy, exercise, make cigarette smoking a jailable offense, etc. That's too much interference from the gov't for me...

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Ok, I'm trying to go back years here to a class back in college. Health and Public Policy, 100-level, elective.

I recall that the spread of communicable diseases in a population can be stymied by having a certain % of the population vaccinated against it. When a very low % of the population has immunity, the pathogen can spread very quickly. As the % having immunity increases, the speed at which the pathogen can spread decreases. At a certain %, the rate of spread of the pathogen hits a floor and then stays there no matter how much higher the % immunized goes.

The difference with obesity is that obesity isn't communicable....

Edited June 4, 2008 by VJ Troll

[Jenn! 918]

Ok, I'm trying to go back years here to a class back in college. Health and Public Policy, 100-level, elective.

I recall that the spread of communicable diseases in a population can be stymied by having a certain % of the population vaccinated against it. When a very low % of the population has immunity, the pathogen can spread very quickly. As the % having immunity increases, the speed at which the pathogen can spread decreases. At a certain %, the rate of spread of the pathogen hits a floor and then stays there no matter how much higher the % immunized goes.

The difference with obesity is that obesity isn't communicable....

But I guess I still don't understand because how can you get the disease if you've been immunized? Or is the concern about mutations that will render vaccines useless?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Ok, I'm trying to go back years here to a class back in college. Health and Public Policy, 100-level, elective.

I recall that the spread of communicable diseases in a population can be stymied by having a certain % of the population vaccinated against it. When a very low % of the population has immunity, the pathogen can spread very quickly. As the % having immunity increases, the speed at which the pathogen can spread decreases. At a certain %, the rate of spread of the pathogen hits a floor and then stays there no matter how much higher the % immunized goes.

The difference with obesity is that obesity isn't communicable....

But I guess I still don't understand because how can you get the disease if you've been immunized? Or is the concern about mutations that will render vaccines useless?

If you're immunized, you can't get it. Think of it this way, if the pathogen spreads from A to B to C and if B is immunized, then B doesn't get it and neither does C (and neither do any of the people who would have gotten it from C). The vax essentially stops the pathogens spread. The public policy benefit is to more than just B.

[HAL 9000 96]

Ok, I'm trying to go back years here to a class back in college. Health and Public Policy, 100-level, elective.

I recall that the spread of communicable diseases in a population can be stymied by having a certain % of the population vaccinated against it. When a very low % of the population has immunity, the pathogen can spread very quickly. As the % having immunity increases, the speed at which the pathogen can spread decreases. At a certain %, the rate of spread of the pathogen hits a floor and then stays there no matter how much higher the % immunized goes.

The difference with obesity is that obesity isn't communicable....

Are you gonna eat those fries?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Ok, I'm trying to go back years here to a class back in college. Health and Public Policy, 100-level, elective.

I recall that the spread of communicable diseases in a population can be stymied by having a certain % of the population vaccinated against it. When a very low % of the population has immunity, the pathogen can spread very quickly. As the % having immunity increases, the speed at which the pathogen can spread decreases. At a certain %, the rate of spread of the pathogen hits a floor and then stays there no matter how much higher the % immunized goes.

The difference with obesity is that obesity isn't communicable....

Are you gonna eat those fries?

Yes, they're mine. Fukc off.

[Jenn! 918]

Ok, I'm trying to go back years here to a class back in college. Health and Public Policy, 100-level, elective.

I recall that the spread of communicable diseases in a population can be stymied by having a certain % of the population vaccinated against it. When a very low % of the population has immunity, the pathogen can spread very quickly. As the % having immunity increases, the speed at which the pathogen can spread decreases. At a certain %, the rate of spread of the pathogen hits a floor and then stays there no matter how much higher the % immunized goes.

The difference with obesity is that obesity isn't communicable....

But I guess I still don't understand because how can you get the disease if you've been immunized? Or is the concern about mutations that will render vaccines useless?

If you're immunized, you can't get it. Think of it this way, if the pathogen spreads from A to B to C and if B is immunized, then B doesn't get it and neither does C (and neither do any of the people who would have gotten it from C). The vax essentially stops the pathogens spread. The public policy benefit is to more than just B.

Ok, right. I'm still missing the point though. Isn't it obvious that if you're not immunized then you will be at risk? And everyone has the choice whether or not to be immunized. So what's the problem?

IOW, C has nothing to worry about if he is immunized!

Edited June 4, 2008 by Jenn!

[HAL 9000 96]

Ok, I'm trying to go back years here to a class back in college. Health and Public Policy, 100-level, elective.

I recall that the spread of communicable diseases in a population can be stymied by having a certain % of the population vaccinated against it. When a very low % of the population has immunity, the pathogen can spread very quickly. As the % having immunity increases, the speed at which the pathogen can spread decreases. At a certain %, the rate of spread of the pathogen hits a floor and then stays there no matter how much higher the % immunized goes.

The difference with obesity is that obesity isn't communicable....

But I guess I still don't understand because how can you get the disease if you've been immunized? Or is the concern about mutations that will render vaccines useless?

I think that applies to cases like certain flu strains. Hence there is ongoing development based on yearly strain-killing.

Ok, I'm trying to go back years here to a class back in college. Health and Public Policy, 100-level, elective.

I recall that the spread of communicable diseases in a population can be stymied by having a certain % of the population vaccinated against it. When a very low % of the population has immunity, the pathogen can spread very quickly. As the % having immunity increases, the speed at which the pathogen can spread decreases. At a certain %, the rate of spread of the pathogen hits a floor and then stays there no matter how much higher the % immunized goes.

The difference with obesity is that obesity isn't communicable....

Are you gonna eat those fries?

Yes, they're mine. Fukc off.

Fine. No scones for you!

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Ok, I'm trying to go back years here to a class back in college. Health and Public Policy, 100-level, elective.

I recall that the spread of communicable diseases in a population can be stymied by having a certain % of the population vaccinated against it. When a very low % of the population has immunity, the pathogen can spread very quickly. As the % having immunity increases, the speed at which the pathogen can spread decreases. At a certain %, the rate of spread of the pathogen hits a floor and then stays there no matter how much higher the % immunized goes.

The difference with obesity is that obesity isn't communicable....

But I guess I still don't understand because how can you get the disease if you've been immunized? Or is the concern about mutations that will render vaccines useless?

If you're immunized, you can't get it. Think of it this way, if the pathogen spreads from A to B to C and if B is immunized, then B doesn't get it and neither does C (and neither do any of the people who would have gotten it from C). The vax essentially stops the pathogens spread. The public policy benefit is to more than just B.

Ok, right. I'm still missing the point though. Isn't it obvious that if you're not immunized then you will be at risk? And everyone has the choice whether or not to be immunized. So what's the problem?

If you're not immunized, then your 'risk' is higher if the % of the population with immunity is lower.

IOW, if everyone chooses to not get immunized, everyones individual risk skyrockets. It is smart public policy to require that everyone get immunized, for that reason.

[Jenn! 918]

Ok, I'm trying to go back years here to a class back in college. Health and Public Policy, 100-level, elective.

I recall that the spread of communicable diseases in a population can be stymied by having a certain % of the population vaccinated against it. When a very low % of the population has immunity, the pathogen can spread very quickly. As the % having immunity increases, the speed at which the pathogen can spread decreases. At a certain %, the rate of spread of the pathogen hits a floor and then stays there no matter how much higher the % immunized goes.

The difference with obesity is that obesity isn't communicable....

But I guess I still don't understand because how can you get the disease if you've been immunized? Or is the concern about mutations that will render vaccines useless?

If you're immunized, you can't get it. Think of it this way, if the pathogen spreads from A to B to C and if B is immunized, then B doesn't get it and neither does C (and neither do any of the people who would have gotten it from C). The vax essentially stops the pathogens spread. The public policy benefit is to more than just B.

Ok, right. I'm still missing the point though. Isn't it obvious that if you're not immunized then you will be at risk? And everyone has the choice whether or not to be immunized. So what's the problem?

If you're not immunized, then your 'risk' is higher if the % of the population with immunity is lower.

IOW, if everyone chooses to not get immunized, everyones individual risk skyrockets. It is smart public policy to require that everyone get immunized, for that reason.

I see what you're saying. But on an individual case, you can avoid the risk altogether by being immunized.

The driving force behind the public policy issue then is as PH stated above.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Note that it's especially important in densely populated areas. It may not matter as much in West Fargo.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Note that it's especially important in densely populated areas. It may not matter as much in West Fargo.

WFFTW!

[Leafgal 3]

It is incredibly irresponsible not to get your kids vaccinated. That is my opinion anyway.

I agree.

I agree as well. I think we don't want to go back to the days when people started dying from preventable diseases, and the more people that don't get immunized the more chance that can happen. As far as schools not letting children attend, if you don't want to vaccinate your kids then you should know you will have to home school them. I understand there are risks but I had both my kids done (luckily nothing happened to them) as I felt the benefits were better than the risks.