No Jab - No Pay!

Forums › Off topic › No Jab - No Pay!

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10

2096 posts

Uber Geek

#1282278 13-Apr-2015 16:03

toprob:
wasabi2k
...
Do the benefits of the currently mandated vaccines massively outweigh the risks? By a mile.
...

You are right, my kids are a lot safer than kids in the past, and I appreciate that. But as a parent I want to be able to gauge the risk for each jab, for MY child. My oldest reacted badly to one vaccination, I remember it being a very scary time, and I suspect that without medical intervention it might have been very serious. So when no 2 came along, it was more difficult to make the decision -- after all, even if I know that there is a huge benefit to the country overall, here we are talking about the health and safety of my child.

In the end we were offered a lower-strength version, which seemed a good compromise. by kid No 3 it was easier to make the decision to have her vaccinated, as we had learnt a lot by then.

It's all very clever to know what's right, and there are a lot of clever people here, but nobody should be forced to do anything which may harm their kid without weighing up the pros and cons. Personally, the health of any one of my kids outweighs all the rest of the kids in NZ.

You are not the person I am disagreeing with. You have a legitimate, medical reason to be concerned. You made an informed decision based on your past experience. Were you affected by this policy I would say you have an entirely legitimate reason to be excluded.

My issue is with people without any such reason not vaccinating their kids - and I believe this is who such a policy would target.

Dratsab

3946 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1282280 13-Apr-2015 16:04

I've posted this before - it seems appropriate to post it again. NSFW.

wasabi2k

2096 posts

Uber Geek

#1282284 13-Apr-2015 16:10

nunz:
please - if you are going to comment on my post - do so in context of my entire argument as a cohesive whole, not pieces of it out of context. My argument it mostly against discrimination and for the rights to make sensible choices for our children - no matter what the PC erroneously crowd think.

Point taken - I did read your last statement out of context and conflated you with the anti vac biggots.

Is HPV really offered to 6 year olds? - MOH only mentions girls under 20.

I was unaware of the HPV stuff - I have boys.

nunz

1421 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1282285 13-Apr-2015 16:11

Dratsab: I've posted this before - it seems appropriate to post it again. NSFW.

I think that myself and other parents on this forum are not advocating no vaccines but the right to make sensible choices.

Neither of the parents (myself included) who have owned up to being parents who worry about vaccines and want choice have ever said we are anti vaccine - quite the opposite, we both have had our kids vaccinated - BUT reject any govt interference in our choices we make for our kids as responsible parents.

Our aguments are simple:
I dislike certain vaccines as being un-necessary.
The other parent is cautious becuae they have been provenly dangerous to at least on of his / her children.

I do not understand why pro responsibility and anti discrimination arguments are being cast as anti vaccnine arguments - as neither of us seem to ahve made anti vaccine arguments.

nunz

1421 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1282289 13-Apr-2015 16:15

wasabi2k:
nunz:
please - if you are going to comment on my post - do so in context of my entire argument as a cohesive whole, not pieces of it out of context. My argument it mostly against discrimination and for the rights to make sensible choices for our children - no matter what the PC erroneously crowd think.

Point taken - I did read your last statement out of context and conflated you with the anti vac biggots.

Is HPV really offered to 6 year olds? - MOH only mentions girls under 20.
I was unaware of the HPV stuff - I have boys.

There is a movement around to introduce HPV for boys and HPV is given to school age girls - pre-pubecent and non-sexually active. My daughter has had the opportunity to be immunised with it.

Year 8 is 13-14 years old.

from the health.govt.nz site:

The HPV immunisation is free for girls and young women up to their 20th birthday. It is free for non-residents who are under the age of 16 and are living in New Zealand for nine months or more.

It is available through participating schools or from family doctors, local health centres and some Family Planning clinics.

All girls who are in year 8 at school are offered the vaccine either through a school-based immunisation programme or through their family doctor if a school programme is not available.
Women over the age of 20 can still have the vaccine, but they will need to pay for it.

The HPV Immunisation Programme aims to protect young women from HPV infection and the risk of developing cervical cancer and a range of other HPV diseases later in life. Currently, around 150 women are diagnosed with cervical cancer and 50 women die from it each year in New Zealand.

nunz

1421 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1282290 13-Apr-2015 16:16

wasabi2k:
nunz:
please - if you are going to comment on my post - do so in context of my entire argument as a cohesive whole, not pieces of it out of context. My argument it mostly against discrimination and for the rights to make sensible choices for our children - no matter what the PC erroneously crowd think.

Point taken - I did read your last statement out of context and conflated you with the anti vac biggots.

Thank you - I appreciate you saying this. We all make mistakes. It takes a big man / woman to say so.

toprob

126 posts

Master Geek

#1282318 13-Apr-2015 16:35

Dratsab: I've posted this before - it seems appropriate to post it again. NSFW.

A couple of things I took away from watching this video -- first, I wouldn't want to be be parent of that one little red person run over by the shield... and secondly, when Penn throws the empty container at the end, and the vaccination shield starts mowing down kids, it seemed to represent a future event where everyone who is vaccinated is wiped out in a single unpredictable disaster... :)

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

NZtechfreak

4649 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1282319 13-Apr-2015 16:42

nunz: Some of those reactions will include death or non recovery( approx 7/35 = 20% of all adverse reactions)

Ah, I think this is where your worked example falls down - that figure is extraordinarily high and not reflective of reality at all. Death and non-recovery make up a tiny fraction of all adverse reactions, certainly not 20%. If that figure was 7/35,000 that would sound more plausible to me. Jesus, if it was 20% we'd have kids dying every week from vaccinations in NZ, which would certainly make the news regularly.

EDIT: Fact checking - 2014 had 1737 reports of serious adverse events of the kind you describe - that is for all vaccinations in the States (a much larger group than you postulated would result in 48,000 of these events). Worth also pointing out that the monitoring that produces these reports does not verify any causal link to the vaccination in question, in the words of the CDC themselves "When evaluating data from VAERS, it is important to note that for any reported event, no cause-and-effect relationship has been established. Reports of all possible associations between vaccines and adverse events (possible side effects) are filed in VAERS. Therefore, VAERS collects data on any adverse event following vaccination, be it coincidental or truly caused by a vaccine. The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event."

Twitter: @nztechfreak
Blogs: HeadphoNZ.org

Sideface

9363 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1282320 13-Apr-2015 16:49

nunz: ... from the health.govt.nz site:

The HPV immunisation is free for girls and young women up to their 20th birthday. It is free for non-residents who are under the age of 16 and are living in New Zealand for nine months or more. It is available through participating schools or from family doctors, local health centres and some Family Planning clinics.

All girls who are in year 8 at school are offered the vaccine either through a school-based immunisation programme or through their family doctor if a school programme is not available.
Women over the age of 20 can still have the vaccine, but they will need to pay for it.
The HPV Immunisation Programme aims to protect young women from HPV infection and the risk of developing cervical cancer and a range of other HPV diseases later in life. Currently, around 150 women are diagnosed with cervical cancer and 50 women die from it each year in New Zealand.

also from www.health.govt.nz:

Why should girls be immunised at 12 to 13 years of age?

The HPV vaccine only prevents against HPV infection, it does not treat infection. Therefore, for best protection girls need to be immunised before they are likely to be exposed to HPV, which means before they start having any sexual contact. There is also good evidence that younger girls develop a stronger immune response from the vaccine compared to older girls.

This vaccine is expensive for adults who do not qualify for the government subsidy.

Sideface

Batman

Mad Scientist
29769 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1282361 13-Apr-2015 17:35

nunz:
richms: IMO the govts job is to run the most affordable healthcare system possible. If getting a jab for all reduces the overall cost of the system then do it. People are too wound up about individual rights forgetting that they are part of a society.

IMHO it is the govts job is to run the most affordable healthcare system possible. If NOT getting a jab for all reduces the overall cost of the system then do it. People are too wound up about THE LATEST SCARES AND FADS forgetting that they have a brain and should use it.

if only it were that simple. people who think they know stuff actually don't know stuff.

your statement already shows that. how can it be cheaper for the govt not to vaccinate - does anyone think for ONE SECOND that governments will do something that is more expensive, ie enforce vaccination?

i propose that vaccinating everyone is cheaper for the govt, if there is no other reason for doing it than laughing at protestors' kids getting scarred for life.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29769 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1282362 13-Apr-2015 17:36

nunz:
Doctors are bombarded by the medical profession and are as humanly vulnerable to influence as the rest of us.

Dairyxox: I'm not claiming to be more qualified, I'm claiming to be most the most interested in my offspring's well-being.
I'm all about making an informed decision

I refuse to trust any qualified professional at face value. Who knows what payoffs they get. Think for yourself, question authority.

I'm not worried about the old school vaccinations, but the new ones. Don't want my kids to be guinea pigs.

vaccines don't make drug companies rich. PERIOD. they prevent illnesses, how is that of any benefit to the drug companies?

will give an example. nobody wants to make a vaccine for ebola. what's the benefit in there for drug companies? they concentrate on making super expensive anti cancer treatment that doesn't work that pharmac won't pay for that gets social media buzzing like crazy .... now that's called profiteering

Batman

Mad Scientist
29769 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1282370 13-Apr-2015 17:48

nunz:
old3eyes:
Dairyxox: I'm not claiming to be more qualified, I'm claiming to be most the most interested in my offspring's well-being.
I'm all about making an informed decision

I refuse to trust any qualified professional at face value. Who knows what payoffs they get. Think for yourself, question authority.

I'm not worried about the old school vaccinations, but the new ones. Don't want my kids to be guinea pigs.

Ok if you don't want your kids jabed and they get sick because of it you should pay the full cost of their medical care and not the taxpayer..

Okay, if you GET your kids jabbed and they get sick because of it you should pay the full cost of their medical care and not the taxpayer.???

35000 reported adverse affects to vaccines in the USA last year and possibly up to 700 000 adverse affects, mostly not reported - according to the CDC and FDA

There are 318m people in the USA
23-25% of them are under 20 = 80m
Assuming a standard age spread (which is incorrect as there are more under 16 as a percentage than under 20)
remove under 5s and over 15s to give us school age kids in the 5-15 age bracket (innoculation age) =40 million

Around 1 to 2% will have an adverse reaction to vaccination.

If vaccination is also on kids under 5 then the figure goes down to 0.6 to 1.5% will have an adverse reaction.

Some of those reactions will include death or non recovery( approx 7/35 = 20% of all adverse reactions)

Which equates to 60million (0-15 years), * 0.8% (median figure) * 20% =
960 000 adverse reactions with permanent / long term effect or death possible and

48 000 reported adverse reactions per year with LONG TERM EFFECT, PERMANENT EFFECT OR DEATH

Compare that figure to deaths from what we are vaccinated against - it makes for an interesting fiscal comparison when you realise long term effects mulitply with each years LTEs adding onto the cost of previous years LTES support and maintenance.

granted, every treatment has side effects. that will always be true.

if you give 1000 people a sugar pill and tell them to report side effects around 20% will report stuff like - nausea, headache, diarrhoea, you name it. probably even memory loss. that's why side effect reporting needs to be compared to sugar pills to know the actual rate of effects.

in terms of causing serious harm, some people will have a serious allergic reaction to the stuff in the vaccine, not the vaccine itself. that is unfortunate. i don't know the actual rate, i will try to find out.

what does a vaccine do? it attempts to stimulate you body to become clever. if you get live measles virus, eventually your body will produce anti measles (ie it will vaccinate itself). but your child might have brain damage before your body gets clever enough to clear it. if it can't clear it (failure to vaccinate itself) your child dies.

so a vaccine gives a very very weak virus that is harmless, tbhikn guns with no bullets, pirated game of thrones, rambo with no hands or legs, etc. your body will eventually produce immunity, but at the cost of say a mild "illness". this illness is caused by things called "cytokines", which help your immune cells get clever to kill the limbness rambo injected into your body. you won't die from it. unless your body has no capability of immunity. eg you are also limbless fighting rambo that has a single finger, rambo can still kill that person. so these guys shoudn't be vaccinated. but know that as soon as they meet the real rambo ... kiss kiss bang bang bye bye

P/S - just to satisfy the skeptics, it IS possible that the completely disarmed virus causes a reaction with the person that received a dose of that virus. that's because in this world anything is possible. but here's more. our body interacts with foreign stuff (bacteria, virus, non living entities) every second of every day. whether that dose of virus causes a reaction is irrelevant, if it didn't something else would have. like the bacteria in your mouth, private parts, gut. like the viruses in your nose (the ones that cause the common cold), gut, the HPV that you contract when having sex. so yes, it is possible to react with the virus, but anything to worry about? if you answer yes then you should be on antibiotics to kill all the bacteria in your gut but that still won't get rid of the radiation from your cellar, the UV rays from the sun, the other viruses in your office/nose/childcare centre, etc

Batman

Mad Scientist
29769 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1282375 13-Apr-2015 17:53

so - vaccinate or not?

well this world is a free world. if you were in china and you want more than 1 kid when the govt says no, well tough, they will remove your unborn child (i think, i could be wrong)

in NZ, if you want to not vaccinate, and kill yourself or others, well, go for it.

vaccinate against everything? well - we have no certain diseases here - so NO. not everything. but if there is a risk of contracting something and you don't feel like fighting the real rambo and there is a limbless rambo for my child's body to take on. yeah bring it on baby.

what about adverse reactions? i think we report them. what do the numbers say, anyone?

NZtechfreak

4649 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1282401 13-Apr-2015 18:24

MOH INFO: Overall, between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2009 more than 1.9 million doses of scheduled vaccines are recorded on the National Immunisation Register. The doses administered are undercounted because not all vaccines given are recorded on the register. For example, seasonal influenza immunisation is not recorded on the National Immunisation Register and in the 2010 season over 1 million doses have been distributed. For childhood immunisations, the register only captures information on the children who were born after the register was started. People can also choose not to have their immunisations recorded on the register. Between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2009, the Centre for Adverse Reactions Monitoring received 4,757 reports of adverse events following immunisation of which 174 (3.6%) were considered to be serious, as set out in table 2. More than one vaccine may be given at the same time. Therefore some reports appear more than once in table 2. The numbers of reports and the number of events described within those reports may change over time due ongoing quality control by the Centre for Adverse Reactions Monitoring such as the identification of duplicate reports or the provision of follow up information resulting in the addition, removal or change to the events reported.

So, in that period, the number of serious events out of all vaccinations is 0.0009%. Do bear in mind that this is an overestimate, as they acknowledge that the 1.9m figure is too low (vastly too low if you include flu vaccinations, which contribute something like a million doses a year above that figure), and additionally some reactions are counted multiple times against vaccinations given simultaneously.

Twitter: @nztechfreak
Blogs: HeadphoNZ.org

Sideface

9363 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1282437 13-Apr-2015 19:08

NZtechfreak: ... Between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2009, the Centre for Adverse Reactions Monitoring received 4,757 reports of adverse events following immunisation of which 174 (3.6%) were considered to be serious, as set out in table 2. More than one vaccine may be given at the same time. Therefore some reports appear more than once in table 2. ...

Interesting. Can we have an image or link to "table 2" please.

Sideface

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10