One child getting sick from the flu does not constitute an outbreak of flu, so no, that will not be an issue.
And when was the last outbreak of measles, mumps, rubella, or diptheria at your local school?
|mentioned about her child having to stay home (because of having a religious exemption on file) while other children who are not vaxed (because of being too young to receive the vax) would be allowed to attend
Now that is irrational but that is not what the original poster posted about. What would be consistent for covertcrunchy's school to do would be to ask all the children to stay home.
|Well, by the time someone physically breaks out with something, they've already exposed everyone around them. Most diseases are most contagious before outbreak.
But, it's not true that vaxed kids have a lesser chance of getting sick. 80% of children who get vaccinated are still likely to still get the disease they were vaccinated for (like rubella and pertussis). Some of the vaxes shed.
The thought that vaxed kids are ""safer" is ludicrous.
1. Just because people have been exposed does not mean it is wise to continue exposing them, as more and more people get sick. As soon as the school knows that children are falling ill, it seems reasonable to order a quarantine. And moreover, the vaccinated kids who were exposed, in many cases, will not be able to carry the disease, whereas the unvaccinated children can. I know this is not true for all diseases but it's true for some. So yes, it does make sense to quarantine people. Your first sentence seems to imply that quarantine in and of itself is useless, which we know is not the case. (Some people against vaccination, in fact, insist that polio is being eradicated almost solely through quarantine! Which is odd, I think, but whatever.)
2. Can you please give a statistic for, 80% of children who are vaccinated are going to get the disease for which they've been vaccinated? Because that would imply that something like 78% of the population under 40 has had measles, mumps, rubella, diptheria, polio, pertussis, tetanus, and so on. I think we know that this is false.
Some of the vaccines shed, but not forever! They shed for a few days, and when we say "shed", we do not mean, fall off the body like stray hairs. We mean, they come out, usually in the person's feces. So if people are not washing their hands, and getting vaccinated at the age of seven, that's an issue. But most of the shedding is long over before kids are at school (MOST, I said, not all) and anyway, it is not likely to infect people in institutions with modern santiation.
Finally, in every outbreak of pertussis and measles in North America and in Europe, a much larger percentage of the unvaccinated population was affected. The evidence is so overwhelming that I'm not even going to post the tens of Pub Med documents here. If you can post a single case of an unvaccinated community coming out of an outbreak better off, from a reputable scientific publication, I'll eat my words.
3. Are you suggested that vaccination confers no immunity for any disease? Go ahead and suggest it, but any cursory examination of studies from around the world, from Libya to Russia to America to Peru, shows that vaccinated children do fare better.