How do you respond to "social responsibility" ? - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 64 Old 03-04-2010, 02:17 AM - Thread Starter
 
asoulunbound's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: MD
Posts: 730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm interested in a thoughtful logical response to things I've read or encountered like the idea that non vaxing only works because so many people vax, etc- herd mentality.
asoulunbound is offline  
#2 of 64 Old 03-04-2010, 10:54 AM
 
CallMeMommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: MN, USA
Posts: 4,318
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'd ask them which diseases they're thinking of. Usually they'll throw out polio or pertussis, to which I respond that those vaccines aren't designed to prevent transmission and you'll still contract the disease even if you're fully vaccinated. That usually throws them for a loop for a while.

Bubba (9) bikenew.gifLukey (5) jog.gif  Fat Baby (2) babyf.gif  Me faint.gif

CallMeMommy is offline  
#3 of 64 Old 03-04-2010, 11:05 AM
 
Emmeline II's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 8,817
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by asoulunbound View Post
I'm interested in a thoughtful logical response to things I've read or encountered like the idea that non vaxing only works because so many people vax, etc- herd mentality.
They are two different ideas. HI is the theory, and social responsibility is whether you are obligated to participate in it.

People that say "non vaxing only works because so many people vax" are assuming that the non-vaxer wishes to avoid VADs, and/or is relying on the herd instead of supporting the child's immune system.

"It should be a rule in all prophylactic work that no harm should ever be unnecessarily inflicted on a healthy person (Sir Graham Wilson, The Hazards of Immunization, 1967)."
Emmeline II is offline  
#4 of 64 Old 03-04-2010, 01:47 PM
 
Sileree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 1,079
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I would reply that I might feel somewhat more inclined to participate in this "social contract" if:
-the risks to vaccination were not systematically downplayed or denied by doctors and those in power and there was open, honest discussion of this
-the risks of the diseases were not made out to be worse than they are, again, open, honest discussion of this
-if the science that is needed to be done urgently was begun immediately by independent scientists
-if the VICP had not turned into the circus it is today, where parents have to fight for up to ten years to get a measly compensation while their children are damaged for life, and nearly all reactions are denied and fought by the HHS

The way the system is today is a crock. I am being lied and bullied to vaccinate, but if my kid got damaged I am basically on my own.

I still don't feel like I would sacrifice my kid for "the common good," but it would be a good start. I think if those in power want us to participate, they have to put just as much effort into it to make it a real "social contract". The responsibility should not be all on the parents' side.

intactivist.gif  ribbonpb.gif RN student, bellycast.gif birth doula since 2006
Sileree is offline  
#5 of 64 Old 03-04-2010, 02:20 PM
 
Arduinna's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 32,562
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
If they are so confidant that vaxing works, then why are they afraid unvaxers? After all they are protected right?
Arduinna is offline  
#6 of 64 Old 03-04-2010, 02:45 PM
 
grumpybear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 923
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
This may be selfish and not the p.c. answer but I feel that I am primarily responsible for (to) my child first. All the rest comes a far second to that.
grumpybear is offline  
#7 of 64 Old 03-04-2010, 02:47 PM
 
a-sorta-fairytale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hangin' with the raisin girls
Posts: 5,136
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
I say that my social responsibility is to keep my kid home when she is sick AND do all i can to keep her healthy so she isnt spreading ANY sickness. Part of how i keep her healthy is by NOT overpowering her immune system with vaccines. So, by not vaxing i am doing my part

I think it is a social responsibility that if you *DO* vax you should know which vaxes your kid gets that shed. Then, YOU should keep your kid home until there is no more risk of spreading that disease. We all know that doesnt happen though, in my dd's pre-k class last year all the kids came right to school after being vaxed.

There is so much to social responsibility i think vaxing is only one small component. But, doing my part, i keep my kids out of public when they have a stomach bug, or measles or anything highly contagious.
a-sorta-fairytale is online now  
#8 of 64 Old 03-04-2010, 02:52 PM
 
4Blessings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: At the arena
Posts: 969
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arduinna View Post
If they are so confidant that vaxing works, then why are they afraid unvaxers? After all they are protected right?
True for healthy "normal" children. However, I've had people come back at me with, "What about children who are too unhealthy to receive vaccinations? Those with allergies or cancer or some other health issue? Aren't you putting them at risk?"


That's one question that I have trouble answering when it comes to my choice not to vaccinate my healthy children (we delay and are selective).

Homeschooling mama of four fantastic kids and wife to one great guy.
4Blessings is offline  
#9 of 64 Old 03-04-2010, 03:13 PM
 
Emmeline II's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 8,817
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proud2BeAnAmerican View Post
True for healthy "normal" children. However, I've had people come back at me with, "What about children who are too unhealthy to receive vaccinations? Those with allergies or cancer or some other health issue? Aren't you putting them at risk?"


That's one question that I have trouble answering when it comes to my choice not to vaccinate my healthy children (we delay and are selective).
You could try "aren't you? When was your last vaccination?"

Ultimately, I am doing my best not to have MY children, be one of those children. Vaccines are drugs that can negative consequences such as allergies, autoimmune diseases, brain damage, and death. My child has the right not to have their healthy body made into a chronically diseased one. Vaccine damage is 100% preventable, all disease (as there are numerous diseases that do not have vaccines) is not; immune compromised people will always be at risk.

"It should be a rule in all prophylactic work that no harm should ever be unnecessarily inflicted on a healthy person (Sir Graham Wilson, The Hazards of Immunization, 1967)."
Emmeline II is offline  
#10 of 64 Old 03-04-2010, 04:44 PM
 
zinemama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: from the fire roads to the interstate
Posts: 6,569
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I honestly don't have a good answer for that.

One of the reasons I am comfortable delaying vaccines is because current rates of these diseases are so low. Looking at the numbers of measles cases last year, for example, I have almost zero expectation that my kid will get it. I'm not specifically looking for my kid to avoid it (we had chicken pox, no problem) but if he were to get measles, I wouldn't be all "Woo hoo! Measles!" But as it stands, I don't think it will ever be an issue.

And yes, I do attribute that to vaccination, among other things.

I do feel that herd immunity is protecting my kids from some VPDs. For me, this is a problematic moral position. But delaying/selective is the choice I am most comfortable with for my particular kid.
zinemama is offline  
#11 of 64 Old 03-04-2010, 07:05 PM
 
claddaghmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,074
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emmeline II View Post
You could try "aren't you? When was your last vaccination?"

Ultimately, I am doing my best not to have MY children, be one of those children. Vaccines are drugs that can negative consequences such as allergies, autoimmune diseases, brain damage, and death. My child has the right not to have their healthy body made into a chronically diseased one. Vaccine damage is 100% preventable, all disease (as there are numerous diseases that do not have vaccines) is not; immune compromised people will always be at risk.


My grandpa was sick and guess who got to see him in his last days? The vaccine free grandkids as they had no symptoms of record of exposure. The hospital wouldn't let the recently vaxed kids go near him.

That spoke volumes to me as a little kid.

As for what to do when someone brings up the herd mentality myth, I usually just dump 3-4 pages of links in their lap. If it's in person, I'd either ask them to show me which disease is eradicated (they always turn to smallpox which I can deflect) or I'd talk about DTaP and Pertussis b/c everyone I ever bump into is always terrified of Pertussis. Or they know someone who died of Tetanus. Never ever without fail.

Mama to expecting Babe 2
claddaghmom is offline  
#12 of 64 Old 03-04-2010, 08:03 PM
 
a-sorta-fairytale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hangin' with the raisin girls
Posts: 5,136
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by claddaghmom View Post


My grandpa was sick and guess who got to see him in his last days? The vaccine free grandkids as they had no symptoms of record of exposure. The hospital wouldn't let the recently vaxed kids go near him.

That spoke volumes to me as a little kid.
This reminds me of when my much younger sister was a baby. They told my mom that after she got her shots she should not be around anyone who was immunocompromised for a week!
a-sorta-fairytale is online now  
#13 of 64 Old 03-04-2010, 08:15 PM
 
lovbeingamommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,919
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arduinna View Post
If they are so confidant that vaxing works, then why are they afraid unvaxers? After all they are protected right?
:

This is exactly the type of statement I'll make when someone brings up the "social responsibility" argument. Most people that "discuss" this issue with me for lack of a better word "shut up" after a few minutes because I'm quite good at debating my viewpoint on vaxes. The people I've encountered that have vaxxed really don't seem ready to defend their stance on vaxxing with any hard evidence other than well everybody I know does it. Ok

Kate, Wife to DH and Mommy to a 5yo lovin' DS; three angels 4/08 9/08 3/10 in Heaven,
waitin' for my baby

lovbeingamommy is offline  
#14 of 64 Old 03-04-2010, 08:31 PM
 
zinemama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: from the fire roads to the interstate
Posts: 6,569
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arduinna View Post
If they are so confidant that vaxing works, then why are they afraid unvaxers? After all they are protected right?
Well, not all of them are protected.

Kids under 12 months haven't gotten the MMR, for instance. My unvaxed 7yo could catch measles and communicate it to an infant. I would feel terrible if that happened. Is it likely, given the prevalence of measles? Not so much. But it's a possibility and a valid point for anyone with an infant to make. I don't understand why some of us non-vaxers are so unwilling to acknowledge that.
zinemama is offline  
#15 of 64 Old 03-04-2010, 08:57 PM
 
claddaghmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,074
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by zinemama View Post
Well, not all of them are protected.

Kids under 12 months haven't gotten the MMR, for instance. My unvaxed 7yo could catch measles and communicate it to an infant. I would feel terrible if that happened. Is it likely, given the prevalence of measles? Not so much. But it's a possibility and a valid point for anyone with an infant to make. I don't understand why some of us non-vaxers are so unwilling to acknowledge that.
Well I know for me, the reason I am unwilling to buy it is because everyone is a disease carrier.

The underlying assumption in fearing vaccine-free children is that they are the vectors for disease in our society.

That is not true. Seroconversion and "immunity" are not guaranteed for anyone, and seeing as how the majority of people do not pay attention to titres, and with the adult population at large barely hitting a single digit booster rate, the fear is discriminatory and unhelpful. Furthermore, some vaccines do not even work to prevent transmission.

If I bumped into someone who didn't want vaccinated and vaccine free children near her child until her child was fully vaccinated and tested, then I would admire the consistency.

Mama to expecting Babe 2
claddaghmom is offline  
#16 of 64 Old 03-04-2010, 09:38 PM
 
Arduinna's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 32,562
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proud2BeAnAmerican View Post
True for healthy "normal" children. However, I've had people come back at me with, "What about children who are too unhealthy to receive vaccinations? Those with allergies or cancer or some other health issue? Aren't you putting them at risk?"


That's one question that I have trouble answering when it comes to my choice not to vaccinate my healthy children (we delay and are selective).
I have allergies and I am a cancer survivor. We were no vax before this and we are still no vax. In fact my oncologist made me stay away from the recently vaxed during chemo because they were a risk to ME due to shedding.
Arduinna is offline  
#17 of 64 Old 03-04-2010, 09:43 PM
 
Arduinna's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 32,562
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by zinemama View Post
Well, not all of them are protected.

Kids under 12 months haven't gotten the MMR, for instance. My unvaxed 7yo could catch measles and communicate it to an infant. I would feel terrible if that happened. Is it likely, given the prevalence of measles? Not so much. But it's a possibility and a valid point for anyone with an infant to make. I don't understand why some of us non-vaxers are so unwilling to acknowledge that.
I lean much more to the anarchist than the socialist side of the fence.

Me and mine first, although I do support charitable causes ect not to the point that I will give up my God given freedom of choice on what to put into my body. I don't respond to collective guilt either. So those arguments aren't effective on me.
Arduinna is offline  
#18 of 64 Old 03-05-2010, 12:29 AM
 
SunshineJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: In transition
Posts: 1,837
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Honestly I generally won't bother with a long discussion; it's usually clear they have their minds made up. Instead I answer with something like "You realize many vaccines like the MMR are live virus vaccinations and that any recently vaxxed child is as likely if not more so to give someone something like measles, right? Besides, it's not like unvaxxed children are seething hotbeds of vaccine preventable diseases just waiting to spring out and open up on the unsuspecting public!" Then I laugh, shake my head and walk away leaving the person looking dumbfounded and a bit embaressed.
SunshineJ is offline  
#19 of 64 Old 03-05-2010, 01:50 AM
 
Tracy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: "It's Chinatown, Jake"
Posts: 12,454
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emmeline II View Post
They are two different ideas. HI is the theory, and social responsibility is whether you are obligated to participate in it.

People that say "non vaxing only works because so many people vax" are assuming that the non-vaxer wishes to avoid VADs, and/or is relying on the herd instead of supporting the child's immune system.

yep. bugs the shi-atte out of me.

Check out New Moon on my Astrology Site

http://tracyastrosalon.blogspot.com/

 

Tracy is online now  
#20 of 64 Old 03-05-2010, 02:53 AM
 
member234098's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Behind you.
Posts: 3,348
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
.
member234098 is offline  
#21 of 64 Old 03-05-2010, 03:00 AM
 
Gingercat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Greece
Posts: 297
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by zinemama View Post
Kids under 12 months haven't gotten the MMR, for instance. My unvaxed 7yo could catch measles and communicate it to an infant. I would feel terrible if that happened. Is it likely, given the prevalence of measles? Not so much. But it's a possibility and a valid point for anyone with an infant to make. I don't understand why some of us non-vaxers are so unwilling to acknowledge that.
Here you're assuming that the herd immunity argument is true, but it is not; it is just another scary tactic that vax promoters like to use.

The fact that one is vaccinated does not imply that he/she is not a carrier of the bacteria or the viruses that they have been vaccinated against. There’s a significant difference between natural immunity and vaccination immunity. So anyone could communicate measles to an infant, vax or unvaxed!

The myth of herd immunity has been discussed a number of times here, but I have really understood it when I heard this wonderful interview by Dr. Palevsky on Mercola.com, Expert Pediatrician Exposes Vaccine Myths .
Gingercat is offline  
#22 of 64 Old 03-05-2010, 05:43 PM
 
zinemama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: from the fire roads to the interstate
Posts: 6,569
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gingercat View Post
Here you're assuming that the herd immunity argument is true, but it is not; it is just another scary tactic that vax promoters like to use. [/URL].
I don't subscribe to the theory that herd immunity is a myth, so we'll have to disagree there. (I don't think that makes me a vax promoter, though.) And I prefer to look at scientific sources like those found on PubMed, rather than sites hawking "vitality tanning beds" and other dubious health products, like Mercola.
zinemama is offline  
#23 of 64 Old 03-05-2010, 06:22 PM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by zinemama View Post
I don't subscribe to the theory that herd immunity is a myth, so we'll have to disagree there. (I don't think that makes me a vax promoter, though.) And I prefer to look at scientific sources like those found on PubMed, rather than sites hawking "vitality tanning beds" and other dubious health products, like Mercola.
mercola is irrelevant here....the source is not mercola. It is Dr. Palevsky who IMO is a credible source.

If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

Marnica is offline  
#24 of 64 Old 03-05-2010, 06:49 PM
 
Gingercat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Greece
Posts: 297
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by zinemama View Post
I don't subscribe to the theory that herd immunity is a myth, so we'll have to disagree there. (I don't think that makes me a vax promoter, though.) And I prefer to look at scientific sources like those found on PubMed, rather than sites hawking "vitality tanning beds" and other dubious health products, like Mercola.
I don't see how product marketing has anything to do either with Dr. Mercola's or Dr. Palevsky's scientific views on vaccines!

Both Dr. Mercola and Dr. Palevsky (as well as Peggy O'Mara among other notable speakers) were invited to the 4th International Public Conference on Vaccination put on by the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC). But if you do not find this conference scientific enough either then there's no point to argue any further.
Gingercat is offline  
#25 of 64 Old 03-05-2010, 07:43 PM
 
Jugs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 476
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
At the risk of sounding selfish... after hearing/reading/seeing The Herd's dismissal of the reality of vaccine injuries, I feel no loyalty to The Herd whatsoever after my kid "took one for the team".


 

 

Jugs is offline  
#26 of 64 Old 03-05-2010, 10:56 PM
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,954
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
To the poster whose friends were sick with cancer or had transplants: we were told the same cra*p, that vaccines don't shed and it's not true (military doctor). Even the package insert of Flumist which states it can shed yada yada could not convince her.... Most doctors seem to be very poorly educated about vaccines (another military ped actually said he has never read a package insert!).

As for the question at hand... Everyone can be a carrier of all those diseases, whether vaccinated or not. Vaccines are not foolproof. They wear off, don't work in the first place (some people just don't produce an immune response to a shots, like me with chickenpox for example), etc. Just take a look at the recent Mumps "outbreak" in NY, 77% if I remember correctly were vaccinated. Yet they caught it and passed it on to others. Social responsibility has nothing to do with vaccines for me, but with keeping a sick child at home - as well the recently vaccinated child that received live vaccines (cause they DO shed). I bet that most parents don't do that.

And one could turn the argument around easily. Many vaccines have created even worse problems, such as serotype replacement. Now drug resistant strains of pneumococcus and HI have replaced the vaccine strains, and I'd say that is a worse can of worms than the old one.

And for the measles case.... When mothers still had natural immunity, it wasn't a problem at all as the breastfed infants of naturally immune mamas were protected from measles in the first 12 months (if breastfed for that time).
nia82 is offline  
#27 of 64 Old 03-05-2010, 11:47 PM
 
Arduinna's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 32,562
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Well I'm betting that the false info about vax shedding is coming from GPs and Peds not from oncologists and hematologists ect that are treating the immuno-compromised. Mine was quite adamant that I stay away from the recently vaxed.
Arduinna is offline  
#28 of 64 Old 03-06-2010, 12:24 AM
 
denimtiger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 146
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
How, exactly am I "socially responsible" for using a product invented by someone else?

Breastfeeding saves lives and, if used universally, would create a healthier populace. Formula-fed babies who get sick more often than they would if breastfed pass their germs on to others and diseases are spread -- probably quite frequently illnesses that could be serious or fatal to their elderly or immune compromised contacts. Yet there is no "social responsibility" to breastfeed.

People who consume healthy diets and exercise are also less likely to spread disease to others. Again, no "social contract" exists to fearmonger and guilt those who make "alternative" choices.

Why, again, would a pharmaceutical company have the power to make me socially liable to using their product?
denimtiger is offline  
#29 of 64 Old 03-06-2010, 12:28 AM
 
mamadelbosque's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 6,946
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I ask them, why? Why is it *my* (or my childs') responsibility to keep you/your children healthy? If your kid's immunocompromised, you're probably not going out and hanging out at McDonalds or Burger King or the pool. Not because your worried about unvaxed kiddos giving you the measles or chickenpox, but because you don't want them giving your kid the common freaking cold. Theres a million different virus' and bacteria that we have *NO* vaccine for, and I for one just don't understand the fear and paranoia over the handful for which we DO have a vaccine - they are not neccasarily the most dangerous diseases in this world. And chances are if your paranoid about your kid catching VADs as to refuse to associate with unvaxed kids, your probably just not going out in public very much.
mamadelbosque is offline  
#30 of 64 Old 03-06-2010, 01:51 AM
 
phrogger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,157
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by denimtiger View Post
How, exactly am I "socially responsible" for using a product invented by someone else?

Breastfeeding saves lives and, if used universally, would create a healthier populace. Formula-fed babies who get sick more often than they would if breastfed pass their germs on to others and diseases are spread -- probably quite frequently illnesses that could be serious or fatal to their elderly or immune compromised contacts. Yet there is no "social responsibility" to breastfeed.

People who consume healthy diets and exercise are also less likely to spread disease to others. Again, no "social contract" exists to fearmonger and guilt those who make "alternative" choices.

Why, again, would a pharmaceutical company have the power to make me socially liable to using their product?
Oh I like that one. The formula fed babies who keep getting sick and are around my immune compromised baby always get my baby sick, but my baby ends up in the hospital with respiritory distress. My baby is breast fed so just imagine how sick he would be if he weren't or if he were vaccinated. The RSV he got might have done him in. So that kid having his vaccines, but getting every cold in the world is probably a bigger danger then any unvaxed healthy kid. At least the unvaxed kids are fairly unlikely to get a VPD and not know it. People would keep their kids home then but no one seems to keep someone home who has a cold.
phrogger is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off