The Forum Site - Join the conversation
Forums:
News & Current Events

California Vaccine Bill SB 277 Signed Into Law by Jerry Brown

Reply to Topic
AuthorMessage
Pages: 1 2 · >>
Do you agree with this bill?
Yes
No
View Results
Leon On December 21, 2023




San Diego, California
#1New Post! Jul 01, 2015 @ 13:09:43
https://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_28407108/gov-jerry-brown-signs-californias-new-vaccine-bill

Contrary to belief of some, this law does NOT require all kids get vaccinated, so those who believe that vaccination causes more harm than good (even if these beliefs go against overwhelming study by medical researchers) can breathe a sigh of relief if they thought otherwise.

The law merely states that if you don't want to vaccinate your child you must make the choice of home schooling your child.

In other words, it prevents you from putting other children in danger. This is the most basic role of government - to enact legislation that protects people who make bad decisions from harming others due to the bad decisions they make.

I think this is a great such law, and commend Governor Brown for signing it.
DiscordTiger On December 04, 2021
The Queen of Random

Administrator




Emerald City, United States (g
#2New Post! Jul 01, 2015 @ 13:52:09
It still allows for medical exceptions right? I usually have to rely on that and herd immunity. So having more people that can is a good thing.

Though my reactions are getting worse as I age. So I've had all the basic ones. Though I might need a booster on some, I forget. Anyway, I just avoid the flu one, because for me the reaction does not out way the benifits. I also removed myself from a job feild that required it as employment, even though I have the medical exception on file. So being forced into the second shot was a non-issue. Other vaccines the benifits would outweigh the reaction, so I'd probably just take the time off work and suffer through it if I had too. I at least was lucky to not have as bad of an allergic reaction as a child. I don't have kids, but I'd probably make the same decisions for them. Vaccines are important. Herd immunity is necessary for some.
chaski On March 28, 2024
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#3New Post! Jul 01, 2015 @ 14:55:35
Due to my world travels, I've had just about all of the vaccines available. My doctor says, "it looks like the only thing you are missing is Japanese Encephalitis."

Aside from my own "Chaski is a pincushion" existence, I am a believer in vaccines.

It seems to me that the people who are against vaccines base their opinion on poor science, media fear stories and a not so healthy dose of paranoia. One of the cousins of this fear is the fear of bacteria.

But, as "they" say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Kind of happens a lot....misplacing or cherry picking facts to match one's fears...
Leon On December 21, 2023




San Diego, California
#4New Post! Jul 01, 2015 @ 15:03:56
@DiscordTiger Said

It still allows for medical exceptions right? I usually have to rely on that and herd immunity. So having more people that can is a good thing.

Though my reactions are getting worse as I age. So I've had all the basic ones. Though I might need a booster on some, I forget. Anyway, I just avoid the flu one, because for me the reaction does not out way the benifits. I also removed myself from a job feild that required it as employment, even though I have the medical exception on file. So being forced into the second shot was a non-issue. Other vaccines the benifits would outweigh the reaction, so I'd probably just take the time off work and suffer through it if I had too. I at least was lucky to not have as bad of an allergic reaction as a child. I don't have kids, but I'd probably make the same decisions for them. Vaccines are important. Herd immunity is necessary for some.


Hi Discord, I'm sorry about your allergy issues. My wife is in the same boat, as she cannot take the flu shot due to her allergies with raw eggs.

Yes, as with every medical law, this still exempts those whose doctors determine that administration would result in harm, such as a severe allergic reaction or immunodeficiency risk. And in many cases, this can be determined before administration of the vaccine with a few tests.

This does not exempt those who want to opt out due to other reasons such as religious, so called "troll science", or any other personal beliefs. These people are certainly still free to exercise their beliefs, they just cannot impose the effects of their beliefs onto others by putting others into harm in sending their unvaccinated children to school. But of course there will always be a few who would be adversely affected by vaccination, and, as long as they have doctor proof of this, they should be exempt.

The idea behind mass vaccination is, of course, not only to promote better health against disease, but in hopes of eradicating certain diseases so that it no longer is even an issue to deal with.

I score this one as a victory for science. If only we embraced science more like this, we could better deal with a lot of varying issues in addition to this.
chaski On March 28, 2024
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#5New Post! Jul 01, 2015 @ 15:33:11
Having clearly picked one side of the issue, in and effort to be "fair" I do have a scenario/question on the topic that may or may not support the "other side".

Scenario:

Let's say that there are 1000 people in a given population (call it a school if you like). And, 100 decide that they do not want to take vaccines. The other 900 do take the vaccines, so should be "immune" to the disease in question (lets call it TFS)

One day little Chaski contracts TFS. Little Chaski then goes to school and proceeds to infect some of the 100 who have opted to NOT take the vaccine that would have protected them.

In due, course the school has an "epidemic" on their hands and 80 of the 100 un-vaccinated children get sick; 65 survive with little or no medical attention, 10 survive after having to go to the hospital, 5 die.

So, to recap the 900 that took the vaccine have no problems, the ones who did not take the vaccine had varying degrees of TFS impact on their lives...but it was their "choice".

The vaccine citizens are not in danger. Those that want to take risks get to live or die with those risks.

Question:

What is the problem?


[Yes.. I way over simplified this situation.]
Leon On December 21, 2023




San Diego, California
#6New Post! Jul 01, 2015 @ 15:49:52
@chaski Said

Having clearly picked one side of the issue, in and effort to be "fair" I do have a scenario/question on the topic that may or may not support the "other side".

Scenario:

Let's say that there are 1000 people in a given population (call it a school if you like). And, 100 decide that they do not want to take vaccines. The other 900 do take the vaccines, so should be "immune" to the disease in question (lets call it TFS)

One day little Chaski contracts TFS. Little Chaski then goes to school and proceeds to infect some of the 100 who have opted to NOT take the vaccine that would have protected them.

In due, course the school has an "epidemic" on their hands and 80 of the 100 un-vaccinated children get sick; 65 survive with little or no medical attention, 10 survive after having to go to the hospital, 5 die.

So, to recap the 900 that took the vaccine have no problems, the ones who did not take the vaccine had varying degrees of TFS impact on their lives...but it was their "choice".

The vaccine citizens are not in danger. Those that want to take risks get to live or die with those risks.

Question:

What is the problem?


[Yes.. I way over simplified this situation.]


Add 10 of the vaccinated children contracting TFS, because if the disease is like measles, while 99% of those vaccinated would not get it, 1% would. And measles is extremely contagious - 90% of those exposed get infected.

And that's not even addressing the greater risk of mutation the more we allow the disease to spread.

So, in short, no, vaccinated children are not safe from the dangers of unvaccinated children.
chaski On March 28, 2024
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#7New Post! Jul 01, 2015 @ 15:54:33
@Leon Said

Add 10 of the vaccinated children contracting TFS, because if the disease is like measles, while 99% of those vaccinated would not get it, 1% would. And measles is extremely contagious - 90% of those exposed get infected.

So, in short, no, vaccinated children are not safe from the dangers of unvaccinated children.



Well folks, there you have it: Proof that when Chaski tries to be object, he was sill right the 1st time.
Leon On December 21, 2023




San Diego, California
#8New Post! Jul 01, 2015 @ 16:06:21
@chaski Said

Well folks, there you have it: Proof that when Chaski tries to be object, he was sill right the 1st time.


The above is exactly what happened in Disneyland recently and the very reason why there was a push to get this bill passed.
chaski On March 28, 2024
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#9New Post! Jul 01, 2015 @ 16:11:17
@Leon Said

The above is exactly what happened in Disneyland recently and the very reason why there was a push to get this bill passed.



Wow! It almost looks like we staged this conversation!!


Leon On December 21, 2023




San Diego, California
#10New Post! Jul 01, 2015 @ 16:13:46
@chaski Said

Wow! It almost looks like we staged this conversation!!




Thank George Soros.
DiscordTiger On December 04, 2021
The Queen of Random

Administrator




Emerald City, United States (g
#11New Post! Jul 01, 2015 @ 17:01:09
Yup, it's eggs for me too. I'm allergic and intolerant. Though the intolerance is newer and getting worse. I can't even eat items with baked eggs. (Baking at 350 or above does change the egg proteins enough some people can eat them)

I swell up, have rash and pain at the injection site.
I do have my measles shot though, that one was my last successful one a few years before the flu shot. (Freshman in college.) I think I got it because we moved so much and lost my records rather than not having it before. School policy was not to just "believe" people. I didn't have a bad reaction then, but eggs were barely bothering me then.
shinobinoz On May 28, 2017
Stnd w Standing Rock





Wichita, Kansas
#12New Post! Jul 02, 2015 @ 03:00:41
@Leon Said

Add 10 of the vaccinated children contracting TFS, because if the disease is like measles, while 99% of those vaccinated would not get it, 1% would. And measles is extremely contagious - 90% of those exposed get infected.

And that's not even addressing the greater risk of mutation the more we allow the disease to spread.

So, in short, no, vaccinated children are not safe from the dangers of unvaccinated children.


Also not to forget some diseases are terrible for the immune compromised, the young & the elderly. Some vaccinations are pretty good rates of protection- others not so good. Not to mention spreading disease among the vaccinated increases the odds of mutations or the disease building up resistance. Think MRSA & C-Diff, etc.
But what's a little pox among friends anyway?
Corey On January 25, 2022




Sacramento, California
#13New Post! Jul 03, 2015 @ 05:56:33
There are of course many different ways to look at vaccination, and there are many different types of vaccinations. I remember growing up seeing photos of the endless rows of iron lungs for people and children affected by polio. And I remember we all lined up at local schools to get the vaccine that ultimately stopped the deaths. I remember eating the sugar cube that had my dose of vaccine in it, and how grateful I was for it. We were told that the vaccine itself had some risks, but there was really no other choice for me than to use the vaccine. There may be some allergies or other reasons that prevent a person from getting the medicine. I can also say that the influenza pandemic following World War 1 killed more people world wide that all the deaths resulting from the war. If we had a vaccine for that flu, millions of lives could have been saved.

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-29541235

I do not know how this new law will play out, but but it sounds like it could be a good compromise.

Corey.
Kolene On January 19, 2021




, Arizona
#14New Post! Jul 03, 2015 @ 19:55:37
I think this is great. It may be their right not to vaccinate. But they have no right in putting others at risk. Bravo
Jennifer1984 On July 20, 2022
Returner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#15New Post! Jul 05, 2015 @ 04:29:51
@chaski Said

Having clearly picked one side of the issue, in and effort to be "fair" I do have a scenario/question on the topic that may or may not support the "other side".

Scenario:

Let's say that there are 1000 people in a given population (call it a school if you like). And, 100 decide that they do not want to take vaccines. The other 900 do take the vaccines, so should be "immune" to the disease in question (lets call it TFS)

One day little Chaski contracts TFS. Little Chaski then goes to school and proceeds to infect some of the 100 who have opted to NOT take the vaccine that would have protected them.

In due, course the school has an "epidemic" on their hands and 80 of the 100 un-vaccinated children get sick; 65 survive with little or no medical attention, 10 survive after having to go to the hospital, 5 die.

So, to recap the 900 that took the vaccine have no problems, the ones who did not take the vaccine had varying degrees of TFS impact on their lives...but it was their "choice".

The vaccine citizens are not in danger. Those that want to take risks get to live or die with those risks.

Question:

What is the problem?


[Yes.. I way over simplified this situation.]



A real life scenario about the danger of listening to false science which leads to newspaper scaremongering happened here in 1998.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/timeline-how-the-andrew-wakefield-mmr-vaccine-scare-story-spread-8570591.html Timeline Of How The Scare Story Spread

The MMR (Measles, Mumps and Rubella) vaccine, commonly known as 'Trips' is intended to immunise children for all three diseases with one vaccine but a report issued by a gastroentologist named Andrew Wakefield, who claimed that MMR was linked to Autism and bowel disorders was given massive publicity by the press leading to many parents refusing to have their children immunised.

The Story Behind The MMR Scaremongering

The findings of the Wakefield Report were challenged but aided by lurid press stories, many continued to believe it. By 2006, outbreaks of measles in children across the UK who were not immunised began to occur and in April of that year, the first child died from the disease.

The findings contained in the report were eventually found to be misleading and erroneous. Andrew Wakefield was disgraced and his reputation destroyed. But for many, the damage had been done. Today, Trips is universally trusted in the UK and the immunisation programme is well established.

But it is a sobering tale indeed. How easily groundless fears are inserted into the public consciousness which can lead to tragedy.

I don't know if the vaccine being introduced in California is effective or not. I hope it is. But I hope that no families suffer needless - and preventable - tragedy because they didn't give it to their children for the wrong reasons.

Good luck.
Reply to Topic<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>
Pages: 1 2 · >>

1 browsing (0 members - 1 guest)

Quick Reply
Be Respectful of Others

      
Subscribe to topic prefs

Similar Topics
    Forum Topic Last Post Replies Views
New posts   Law
Thu Jul 15, 2010 @ 02:41
18 6332
New posts   Politics
Thu Jul 16, 2009 @ 06:40
18 1443
New posts   Law
Tue Jun 20, 2006 @ 15:07
81 6176
New posts   Random
Fri Apr 28, 2006 @ 10:03
5 792
New posts   Politics
Fri Dec 22, 2006 @ 06:53
9 924