Why so much mainstream hatred for non-vaxers? - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 07:09 AM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)

Personally I think that many here are missing the point of taximom's post. What I totally agreed with was her historical reference. I think she had some valid and actually quite interesting points and felt it was an interesting perspective - One I had not thought of before. What I find disturbing is that folks take a thumbs up or a I agree with what was posted and twist it into something it's not.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

 

 

It's one person with two "likes" and a reply that says "totally agree."  She's not alone.



 


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  
#62 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 07:20 AM
 
Alenushka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: CA
Posts: 1,893
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)

Please, do not compare anti-vax activist situation to 1939 Germany.

No one is sending you to a camp or killing you. It very insulting.

 

IF you have believes different from mainstream , expect that some people will not like you and write articles about it.

Petronella likes this.
Alenushka is offline  
#63 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 07:22 AM
 
Imakcerka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 4,066
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)

Maybe persecution over vaccine choices makes people feel vindicated?



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alenushka View Post

Please, do not compare anti-vax activist situation to 1939 Germany.

No one is sending you to a camp or killing you. It very insulting.

 

IF you have believes different from mainstream , expect that some people will not like you and write articles about it.



 

Imakcerka is offline  
#64 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 07:24 AM
 
AbbyGrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 741
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Marnica View Post

Personally I think that many here are missing the point of taximom's post. What I totally agreed with was her historical reference. I think she had some valid and actually quite interesting points and felt it was an interesting perspective - One I had not thought of before. What I find disturbing is that folks take a thumbs up or a I agree with what was posted and twist it into something it's not.


Look, you're certainly entitled to your opinion about the post, but just because I and others disagree with the post does not mean we missed the point.  We just disagreed with it and found the reference offensive which Taximom5 was fully aware might happen given her disclaimer at the beginning.  

 

AbbyGrant is offline  
#65 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 07:27 AM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)

No but apparently you are judging me. Since I yeah thated her post. I was shocked when I came on this am and saw how this thread had blown like this (perhaps I shouldn't have been. Shame on me... Ive been around here long enough to know better actually!). I honestly think that her ideas were an interesting historical perspective with valid points I had never thought of before. It was thought provoking for me. As someone who has studied human behavior - I found the general comparison interesting. This in NO WAY means that I'm some Nazi lover who thinks that people who choose to vaccinate their kids feel that they are elitist or that they are brainwashed drones. How that connection was made really is beyond me because this is not how I interpreted Taximom's post. Apparently others interpreted it differently. And that's fine - different interpretations are what make the world go around, but don't presume that someone that agreed with her post has the same interpretation as you. Folks are so hot to jump all over what offends them (Im sure Ive been guilty of this too!) that sometimes they skip the part where it may be appropraite to ask for clarification. It happens when the topic is an emotional one I guess.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AbbyGrant View Post


The comment was liked and yeah thated.  I'm not judging you.  I'm pointing out the irony. 



 


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  
#66 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 07:30 AM
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

 

 


 

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by AbbyGrant View Post

 



I agree that it was their choice, and it should not be put on anyone else.  But do you disagree that those that don't vaccinate benefit from that choice?  


Strictly speaking of diseases….

 

I think non-vaccinators benefit from the choice in a few diseases, but not in others.  

 

I don't think it matters though - vaccinate your kids if you think the disease and likelihood of catching it are lower than the risk of side effects.  Do not vaccinate if you are doing it solely for herd immunity purposes - it is unethical (IMHO) to ask a child to assume a risk for what you believe is a greater good.  

 

 

 

nia82 and thegoodearth like this.
purslaine is offline  
#67 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 07:31 AM
 
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 AbbyGrant View Post


Look, you're certainly entitled to your opinion about the post, but just because I and others disagree with the post does not mean we missed the point.  We just disagreed with it and found the reference offensive which Taximom5 was fully aware might happen given her disclaimer at the beginning.  

 


Must have posted at the same time!  I guess this is kind of what I was getting at - you are absolutlely right. It is not that anyone is missing the point - it is that there may be different interpretations of what the point actually is. Because the point may mean different things to different people. Maybe I'm the one misinterpreting her post shrug.gif. I guess tasximom is the only one who can say what it is that she meant by her own post!
 

 


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  
#68 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 07:34 AM
 
AbbyGrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 741
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

 

Strictly speaking of diseases….

 

I think non-vaccinators benefit from the choice in a few diseases, but not in others.  

 

I don't think it matters though - vaccinate your kids if you think the disease and likelihood of catching it are lower than the risk of side effects.  Do not vaccinate if you are doing it solely for herd immunity purposes - it is unethical (IMHO) to ask a child to assume a risk for what you believe is a greater good.  


It does matter in the context of this thread which was started to try to understand where some of the contempt comes from.  I think some people who choose to vaccinate feel that those that don't are only able to make that choice because the majority is vaccinated.  

 

AbbyGrant is offline  
#69 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 07:37 AM - Thread Starter
 
Slmommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 875
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Quote:
Originally Posted by AbbyGrant View Post


I think those mean/offensive things are part of the history and reason for some of the resentment and contempt.  

 

But I think the Slate article might offer some more clues if you can get past the tone.  I think that some people who vaccinate their children feel like those that don't are getting a free ride because they're benefiting from the majority being vaccinated without taking any of the risk.  They took one for the team so to speak and are irritated that others won't.  

 

Thanks for pointing this out. It is def the main aspect of the article, which I guess the tone was bothering me too much to see...

 

Most people hate it when someone gets a benefit off of the backs of others without paying their dues. I don't really agree with this in the vaccine issue, but I can see where a lot of people would see it this way. 

Probably right now, politically and economically, this sentiment is probably being exasperated. 

 

 

 

Slmommy is offline  
#70 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 07:45 AM - Thread Starter
 
Slmommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 875
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbbyGrant View Post

It does matter in the context of this thread which was started to try to understand where some of the contempt comes from.  I think some people who choose to vaccinate feel that those that don't are only able to make that choice because the majority is vaccinated.  

 


I think maybe this is true if the non-vaxer is ONLY not vaccinating because of low risk for vpds and believes in herd immunity, and sees no other issue with vaccines, (which doesn't seem like it is the case for most non-vaxers). There are a lot of other reasons non-vaxers choose to not vax, but I can see how there would be a lot of contempt if the pro-vax is feeling this way. 

 

I am in a different country with different disease rates than US, some things aren't on the schedule here for everyone, like chickpox and Hep A. I don't think that all non-vaxers are depending on herd immunity, and I know some don't believe in it. 

 

 

Slmommy is offline  
#71 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 07:51 AM
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by slmommy View Post

... I didn't really mean for this thread to be about the mean/offensive things each side says to each other.

 

I wanted to talk more about the history and reasons behind the very strong hatred of non-vaxers, and also where is it going

 

 



disclaimer:  this is an idea I am playing around with, not sold on, so if someone has a different experience than me in this regard I would love to hear it.

 

I think there is a bit of a backlash from the medical community in the last few years over the questioning of their authority.  

 

For years, doctors were unquestioned in their recommendations.  The internet changed this.  Patients began to read more, and questioned what their doctors or health care team was prescribing.  This has happened in other professions - teaching is one.  I thing some professionals  are trying to get the pendulum to swing back the other way - where they are seen as the position of authority.  Some of this comes from the fact that they really do have more education than most of us in science (although not necessarily in vaccines), some has come from the fact that I bet patients have come to them with controversial ideas (and as we all know - the controversial ideas stick in our heads way better than the normal ideas), but some of it stems from the desire to be in authority. 

 

I actually think this move to partnership with professionals as opposed to a hierarchal relationship is a good thing - but I hear rumblings that not all professionals think this way.

 

Some of this may play into the anti non-vax climate.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

purslaine is offline  
#72 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 07:56 AM
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by AbbyGrant View Post

 


It does matter in the context of this thread which was started to try to understand where some of the contempt comes from.  I think some people who choose to vaccinate feel that those that don't are only able to make that choice because the majority is vaccinated.  

 



Agreed.  I think they are wrong - there are only a few disease which would concern me if there were no vaccine for them - but their beliefs around vaccines, diseases and herd immunity might be a cause of the contempt.  

purslaine is offline  
#73 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 08:13 AM
 
AbbyGrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 741
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


*

AbbyGrant is offline  
#74 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 08:14 AM
 
AbbyGrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 741
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

Agreed.  I think they are wrong - there are only a few disease which would concern me if there were no vaccine for them - but their beliefs around vaccines, diseases and herd immunity might be a cause of the contempt.  
 
I don't think the amount of diseases really matters, but if you prefer to think they're just wrong, then have at it.  I was just pointing out one possible explanation not trying to start a debate about the merits of the opinion.
 
AbbyGrant is offline  
#75 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 01:04 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by WildKingdom View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post


My take on this will anger some people, and I apologize in advance for doing so, but this is what I really believe.

 

I believe that it is the same force that drove otherwise good, kind, otherwise-Christian Germans and Austrians to hate the Jews in the 1930's and 1940's , and the same force that drives bigotry of any kind.

 

That force is a combination of fear, herd mentality, and a kind of survival instinct, and it's part of human nature.  It drives one to ignore facts when one feels threatened.

 

It is compounded by the greed of a select few, who play upon these fears. 

 

In the 1930's, there was a massive propaganda campaign launched against the Jews; children's books and adult cartoons depicted Jews as money-grubbing leeches who supposedly harmed innocent children.  Newspapers talked about the horrible threat against the culture from these "outsiders."

I know what I'm talking about first-hand--my father was a Holocaust survivor, and we have a newspaper clipping from 1937, with a picture of him and a schoolfriend (both born in Austria, to Austrian parents)--two little boys with dark curly hair (obviously not Aryan) wearing lederhosen and carrying schoolbooks.  The caption was about how the "Outsiders" dared to wear the Austrian national costume (which ALL schoolboys wore) and were a sign of Jews taking over Austrian culture.  And how it must be stopped.

 

Fast-forward to today.  Children's books and TV cartoons are filled with propaganda of how getting vaccines helps.  Newspapers are literally full of lies--there is article after article about how the "science is in," how vaccines are "proven" to not be linked with autism (no such proof exists), how Wakefield lied in a study to link MMR with autism (it wasn't a study, it was a case series, and it said very clearly, "we have NOT proved a causal association with MMR and autism").  I've even seen SEVERAL newspaper articles saying that Wakefield's study linked thimerosal in the MMR with autism (MMR does not and never has contained thimerosal, and Wakefield's case series never mentioned thimerosal).  

 

The press reports every year that vaccines are safe, and that thimerosal has been "removed.".No mention is made of the 1297 cases of admitted and compensated vaccine-induced permanent brain damage.  No mention is made of the many studies linking vaccines with autoimmune disease, asthma, diabetes, lupus, MS, etc. No mention is made of the fact that 90% of the flu shots available are thimerosal-preserved.  No mention is made of the fact that the adult versions of the vaccines given in the US are still thimerosal-preserved, nor of the fact that the thimerosal-preserved pediatric vaccines are still being made in the US--and shipped to third-world countries, where autism and autoimmune disease rates are suddently on the rise.

 

Flu shots are urged in every news media, in every drug store, on every corner.  Businesses offer financial incentives to "get your flu shot."  No mention is made anywhere of the recent studies showing that the flu shot is as effective as...a placebo.  No mention is made of the possible risks of this vaccine.  None whatever. It even says in the package insert "safety and efficacy not determined in eldery and pediatric populations."  The answer to recent studies showing especial lack of efficacy in the elderly?  Give them a DOUBLE shot.  No mention is made of the increase in reports of severe adverse effects in those getting the double shot.

 

Those who refuse, delay, or even QUESTION vaccines are vilified.  Parents have had children taken by various government services for refusing vaccines. California just passed a bill allowing children as young as 12 years old to be given hepatitis B vaccine, Gardasil, and other "services" relating to sexual activity WITHOUT PARENTAL KNOWLEDGE OR CONSENT.  The press blames each and every outbreak of a "vaccine-preventable disease" on the unvaccinated, in spite of the fact that the vast majority of those come down with these diseases are fully vaccinated.

 

Just like in the 1930's, it's all about fear-mongering, and finding a group to blame, a group whose removal from the situation will result in increased profits to others.

 

So, just like in the 1930's, we need to ask ourselves:  who is threatened by someone turning down a flu shot, Gardasil, Rotavirus vaccine, etc??  What is being threatened?  Not their health, that's for sure. 

 

As always, we need to follow the money trail, because THAT'S what is being threatened, and THAT is what is being used to force compliance.  Vaccines are a multi-billion dollar business.  Money is used as the motivating factor for vaccine compliance rates in medical practices, in businesses (health insurance companies offer discounts for companies with 100% vaccine compliance rates), and health insurance rates.

 

The financial conflict of interest is EVERYWHERE.  The former head of the CDC is now president of Merck's vaccine division.  The head of Reuter's is on the board of Merck.  The Murdochs are on the board of Glaxo, AND own and run their own vaccine testing facility.  The doctors who teach in medical schools are also paid consultants with pharmaceutical companies--usually with SEVERAL pharmaceutical companies.  The CME (Continuing Medical Education) courses required for doctors' board certification are directly run by pharmaceutical companies.

And all the studies that purport to show how "safe" vaccines are are in some way financially tied to the very industry that profits from their sale.  This is known as "tobacco science," for obvious reasons.

 

The really sad thing is, we haven't changed at all in the last 80 years.  Only the group being targeted has changed.  The motivations, the methods--all the same.

 



 

 


Wow. So, a public health campaign is equivalent to targeted genocide?


No, that's not what I said at all.  Please have the courtesy not to misquote me.

 

What I am comparing is the use of propaganda, the methods of propaganda, the involvement of government, school personnel, and the press in the delivery of the propaganda, and the reaction of the general population to the propaganda. I'm also comparing the conflicts of interest within the government, and the vilification of a subset of people, via said propaganda.

 

I did not mention health compaigns, nor did I mention targeted genocide.  But since you bring up the subject of "health campaigns.", perhaps you could answer a question:  what kind of "health campaign" ignores severe adverse reactions in a subset of people who comply with that health campaign, hides the records of those who are compensated for such reactions, prevents them from speaking out, and tells people that such reactions either don't exist or are extremely rare when they clearly do exist, and are not extremely rare?  What kind of "health campaign" lies about the safety and efficacy of the vaccines/drugs being recommended?  And what kind of "health campaign" vilifies those who question it?

 

You can't in any honesty deny that this happens, and happens more and more frequently as the number of recommended vaccines increases.

 

Taximom5 is online now  
#76 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 01:13 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Alenushka View Post

Please, do not compare anti-vax activist situation to 1939 Germany.

No one is sending you to a camp or killing you. It very insulting.

 

IF you have believes different from mainstream , expect that some people will not like you and write articles about it.



True--nobody is sending me to a camp.  Of course, ask anyone in 1939 Germany who was not a member of the Nazi party and they will tell you they knew absolutely nothing about the camps.

 

As far as "no one is killing me"--some children and adults DO die from vaccines, and thousands have been severely injured.  My pediatrician believes that further vaccination WOULD put our health and lives in jeopardy, and has excused us from further vaccines accordingly, but other doctors would disagree with him, and would refuse to treat my children if they are not fully vaccinated, even with their history of reaction.  Why?  Because they believe the propaganda that they've been fed, rather than believing the reactions they've seen with their own eyes.

 

How many times would YOU believe a doctor who says, "vaccine reactions are one in a million" after each of 5 separate, severe vaccine reactions?

 

 

member234098 likes this.
Taximom5 is online now  
#77 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 02:12 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)

http://www.naturalnews.com/034980_vaccinations_family_ambush.html

 

California family ambushed by school officials, TV news crew after they refuse to vaccinate their daughter

 

After you read the article, scroll down and read the comments; obviously, I'm not the only one who sees the similarities.

 

Taximom5 is online now  
#78 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 02:28 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Marnica View Post

Personally I think that many here are missing the point of taximom's post. 

 



 



The point of my post was to note the similarity today with the use of propaganda, the methods of propaganda, the involvement of government, school personnel, and the press in the delivery of the propaganda, and the reaction of the general population to the propaganda in 1937 Germany and Austria. Also frighteningly similar the conflicts of interest within the government, and the vilification of a subset of people, via said propaganda.

Marnica likes this.
Taximom5 is online now  
#79 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 02:34 PM
 
AbbyGrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 741
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

 

After you read the article, scroll down and read the comments; obviously, I'm not the only one who sees the similarities.

 



I can't tell you how many times I've heard someone compare whatever they perceive to be unjust to Nazi Germany.  It's not particularly meaningful or original not to mention accurate. 

DoubleDouble likes this.
AbbyGrant is offline  
#80 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 02:42 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by AbbyGrant View Post


 



I can't tell you how many times I've heard someone compare whatever they perceive to be unjust to Nazi Germany.  It's not particularly meaningful or original not to mention accurate. 



In this case, it is alarmingly accurate.  

 

It is irrelevant how many times you have heard such a comparison of other situations to Nazi Germany.  The lack of accuracy in those comparisons has no bearing on the relevance of this comparison.  That would be like saying, "Oh, my child pretends to be allergic to peanuts all the time, because he doesn't like them.  Therefore, your child cannot be allergic to peanuts."

 

You may have lost your objectivity in this regard, but I'm pretty sure my father has not. He lived it.

 

Let's go back to the original title of this thread, shall we?  "Why so much mainstream hatred for non-vaxxers?"

 

How would you answer the question "Why so much mainstream hatred for Jews in 1930's Austria and Germany?"

green betty likes this.
Taximom5 is online now  
#81 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 02:43 PM
 
AbbyGrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 741
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

The point of my post was to note the similarity today with the use of propaganda, the methods of propaganda, the involvement of government, school personnel, and the press in the delivery of the propaganda, and the reaction of the general population to the propaganda in 1939 Germany and Austria

 

So apparently I didn't miss the point.  orngbiggrin.gif

 

AbbyGrant is offline  
#82 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 02:47 PM
Banned
 
stik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,942
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by slmommy View Post

 

I guess you are right to a certain extent. Although I see some rabid pro-vax attitudes in people who do not even have children. Perhaps a lot of this attitude is based on the fact that a lot of people don't know much about vpd and the vax schedule (like the commentor on the article I mentioned thinking he can contract Hep B from street food).

 

I guess the internet just makes it easier for people to say whatever they want, in relative anonymity, and yeah it feels good when you find a group of people saying things you agree, or think you agree with, and disparaging another group with opposing view just makes you feel better about yourself and your choices. Sure, I realize that this happens on MDC all the time. And it is a cycle, a homebirther gets picked on in real life or another mommy board, and comes here to get some support and feel better and be judgey about whoever. Then that whoever takes offense. 

 

 

Yeah for all the arguing going on in the Research Vaxing forum about unbiased sources and what not, I thought the information straight from horse's mouth would be helpful. I'll have to go back and bump it in the future when it gets bogged down by posts arguing about comparing non-vax hatred to xenophobia.

 

Stik, do you think the language used in the Slate article is warranted (calling non-vaxers elite over-privileged moms with superiority complexes who have special snowflake children that deserve special treatment?) I think I have seen you say you sel/del vaxed, or am I remembering wrong?

 

In your opinion, do advertising and information campaigns actually give appropriate information (especially commercials for flu vaccine)? I don't see many mainstream "information campaigns" giving much information about reactions - other than that they are "extremely rare," or that long term safety and safety of receiving multiple vaccines is unknown. I think there are some ethical concerns in this effort to keep vax rates high. I think this type of thing, the Slate article, is a tactic to not really address any true vax issues and just encourage people to remain pro-vax because it is fun to hate on those crazy nutty non-vaxers who are a threat to society.
 

I also wonder if current political/economic climate does have general population feeling less secure at the moment, so it is easier to demonize some "threats" to society. From what I'm reading there seems to be an increase in pedis refusing alternatively or non vaxed kids, and there seem to be movements to try to remove more state exemptions, the thing in Cali with parental consent not needed, etc.

Maybe this is nothing new though? I haven't paid attention to this for so long. (Miriam are you around? I know you have paid attention to this issue for a long time)



There are a lot of new posts since I checked in this morning.  Wow.  

 

No, I don't think the language in the Slate article is warranted.  But I do see how they got there.  A lot of the out-there stuff got deleted, but if MDC's walls could talk, they would have to mention the convos in which moms lament the impending difficulty of finding unvaccinated wives for their sons, since women who were vaccinated in childhood will mess up their grandchildren.  And the ones where non-vaxers claimed that unvaxed children could be easily identified by their healthy glow, and that vaccinated children can be spotted by their dull eyes.  And the one where non-vaxers affirmed a nervous mom's concern that the funny face her infant had made in the parking lot of doctor's office after her shots quite likely WAS a vaccine reaction that meant that her baby was suffering instant neurological damage.  Sometimes, non-vaxers on this forum have endorsed eugenics, and sometimes they've appeared to embrace Social Darwinism - moms here have sometimes taken the position that disease outbreaks purge the population of the weak (like my kids, apparently, because a number of those diseases carry a high level of risk for people with even mild asthma, but not like their kids, from what I can tell).  Anti-vaxers have sometimes denied germ theory, professed to not believe in polio, and crossed over into AIDS denialism and overlapped with the interests of white supremacists (and sometimes were white supremacists, if you go back to 2002 or so).  This is not the kind of talk that makes a movement look good.  That particular language in the Slate article is an over-the-top response to a movement that has sometimes gone over-the-top itself.    

 

I do sel/del vax, but I'll be honest - over the past few years, I've selected all of them, and only delayed if my kid was sick on the day of the appointment.  My selections were made based on the risk that a particular disease posed to my family if we got it.  We're not fortunate enough to travel a lot, but we have family who do and we see them a lot.  I teach.  I delayed MMR for my older dd, with her doc's support - that was before Wakefield's fraud was revealed, and she was slow to talk - I didn't want to worry that the vax was aggravating a developmental issue.  I also delayed CP for her, because it wasn't a big deal if she got it at that time (I was a student then, and could stay home at will).  I delayed Hep B for both kids.  The population most at risk for Hep B is also most at risk for being lost to medical follow-up, so it makes sense to do that at birth for the aggregate population, but my kids won't be lost to medical follow-up, so we delayed (they've had it now).  My younger dd has gotten everything, plus the flu shot, and my older dd is caught up now (though she's never had Prevnar - my younger dd really benefited from Prevnar, but my older dd has miracle sinuses - she has obvious allergies, but has been infection-free).  My choices have been based on my family's risks and needs, and when I have delayed something, I've hoped that the presence of large numbers of vaccinated individuals in the community would have a protective effect.  I am very pro-vax.  

 

I'm not exposed to a lot of advertising in my life.  I don't watch TV (we have Netflix instead of cable), I don't commute on trains with ads or on roads with billboards (just lucky that way, at the moment).  I've seen vaccines promoted at pharmacies, which I think is awesome because it's easier for people to walk into a pharmacy than get a doctor's appointment a lot of the time.  Those campaigns don't seem excessive to me.  I can't assess anything else because I haven't seen it.  

DoubleDouble likes this.
stik is offline  
#83 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 02:52 PM
 
AbbyGrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 741
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

In this case, it is alarmingly accurate.  

 

It is irrelevant how many times you have heard such a comparison of other situations to Nazi Germany.  The lack of accuracy in those comparisons has no bearing on the relevance of this comparison.  That would be like saying, "Oh, my child pretends to be allergic to peanuts all the time, because he doesn't like them.  Therefore, your child cannot be allergic to peanuts."

 

You may have lost your objectivity in this regard, but I'm pretty sure my father has not. He lived it.

 

Look, you were the one that pointed to an online comment to a natural news article that was all "yeah, man it's just like nazi germany" as some kind of validation.  My point was, it doesn't mean much.   

AbbyGrant is offline  
#84 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 03:07 PM
 
oaktreemama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 402
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

 

Quote:

The point of my post was to note the similarity today with the use of propaganda, the methods of propaganda, the involvement of government, school personnel, and the press in the delivery of the propaganda, and the reaction of the general population to the propaganda in 1939 Germany and Austria

 

Your lack of historical knowledge and context is not improving your argument.

 

I guess if one day MDC's non vaxxing forum goes dark I will wonder for a brief moment if you all have been turned in by your neighbors, rounded up, and shipped off to the camps.

DoubleDouble and AbbyGrant like this.
oaktreemama is offline  
#85 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 03:08 PM
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post


 

No, I don't think the language in the Slate article is warranted.  But I do see how they got there.  A lot of the out-there stuff got deleted, but if MDC's walls could talk, they would have to mention the convos in which moms lament the impending difficulty of finding unvaccinated wives for their sons, since women who were vaccinated in childhood will mess up their grandchildren.  And the ones where non-vaxers claimed that unvaxed children could be easily identified by their healthy glow, and that vaccinated children can be spotted by their dull eyes.  And the one where non-vaxers affirmed a nervous mom's concern that the funny face her infant had made in the parking lot of doctor's office after her shots quite likely WAS a vaccine reaction that meant that her baby was suffering instant neurological damage.  Sometimes, non-vaxers on this forum have endorsed eugenics, and sometimes they've appeared to embrace Social Darwinism - moms here have sometimes taken the position that disease outbreaks purge the population of the weak (like my kids, apparently, because a number of those diseases carry a high level of risk for people with even mild asthma, but not like their kids, from what I can tell).  Anti-vaxers have sometimes denied germ theory, professed to not believe in polio, and crossed over into AIDS denialism and overlapped with the interests of white supremacists (and sometimes were white supremacists, if you go back to 2002 or so).  This is not the kind of talk that makes a movement look good. 

 

I agree that people have said some controversial  things with a capital "C" over the years.   You have been here for 9 years, and through years when MDC was very busy - it is no wonder you have seen some interesting things!

 

I tend to think most non-vaxxers do not hold controversial beliefs.  The 3 non-vaxxers I know in real life do not.  Most people in the world are fairly normal - they do not believe bleach cures AIDs or anything like that.

 

The hyper focus on the controversial figures in non-vaccinating is hardly fair to the silent majority who are not (and skates close to prejudice) and is poor science.  Don't you want people to make an informed choice?  How is that possible when the the pro vax camp does everything in its power to keep anything controversial a non -vaxxers says at the forefront as opposed to focusing on the real issues surrounding vaccines such as  safety, effectiveness, etc?

 

 

 

 

 

 

purslaine is offline  
#86 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 03:12 PM
 
AbbyGrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 741
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:

Originally Posted by stik View Post


No, I don't think the language in the Slate article is warranted.  But I do see how they got there.  A lot of the out-there stuff got deleted, but if MDC's walls could talk, they would have to mention the convos in which moms lament the impending difficulty of finding unvaccinated wives for their sons, since women who were vaccinated in childhood will mess up their grandchildren.  And the ones where non-vaxers claimed that unvaxed children could be easily identified by their healthy glow, and that vaccinated children can be spotted by their dull eyes.  And the one where non-vaxers affirmed a nervous mom's concern that the funny face her infant had made in the parking lot of doctor's office after her shots quite likely WAS a vaccine reaction that meant that her baby was suffering instant neurological damage.  Sometimes, non-vaxers on this forum have endorsed eugenics, and sometimes they've appeared to embrace Social Darwinism - moms here have sometimes taken the position that disease outbreaks purge the population of the weak (like my kids, apparently, because a number of those diseases carry a high level of risk for people with even mild asthma, but not like their kids, from what I can tell).  Anti-vaxers have sometimes denied germ theory, professed to not believe in polio, and crossed over into AIDS denialism and overlapped with the interests of white supremacists (and sometimes were white supremacists, if you go back to 2002 or so).  This is not the kind of talk that makes a movement look good.  That particular language in the Slate article is an over-the-top response to a movement that has 

 

I remember some of that stuff, especially the moms worried about finding suitable wives for their sons that weren't tainted with monkey DNA and about vaccinated children not having that same "sparkle in their eyes."  This place used to be pretty hardcore and full of plenty of propaganda.  Gave me complex for awhile.  

AbbyGrant is offline  
#87 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 03:20 PM
Banned
 
stik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,942
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I know a bunch of non-vaxers in real life, and they mostly have not found that it takes much time or energy or attracts much vitriol.  Most people are not having convos about vaccination with their neighbors.  Most non-vaxers actually find that NOT vaccinating takes way less time and energy than going to the full schedule of mostly-shots doctor visits.  I've claimed exemptions before (because of the time and energy involved in getting the records from the doctor's office) and in AZ it was incredibly easy.  I signed the one-page form that said I was opting out because of my religious convictions (I had faith that it would have been super-inconvenient to drive to the doctor's office right then) and went about my business.  No one batted an eye.  I'm always kind of boggled when people assert that being anti-vax takes time and energy and attracts attention.  

stik is offline  
#88 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 03:23 PM
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by oaktreemama View Post

 

 

Your lack of historical knowledge and context is not improving your argument.

 

I guess if one day MDC's non vaxxing forum goes dark I will wonder for a brief moment if you all have been turned in by your neighbors, rounded up, and shipped off to the camps.



Lets see….in this thread:  bundle of you, you people and now "you all"…..

 

lets define discrimination:

 

treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction infavor of or against, a person or thing based on the group,class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit: racial and religious intoleranceand discrimination.

 

source:http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/discrimination

 

Now before I get accused of discrimination for bringing up discrimination, I would like to point out that I suspect the vast majority of  vaxxers  do not discriminate against non-vaxxers. I just think some people on this thread might want to examine their motive by using language that paints all or many non-vaxxers with the same brush.

 

 

purslaine is offline  
#89 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 03:27 PM
 
AbbyGrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 741
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post


 

Lets see….bundle of you, you people and now "you all"…..

 

lets define discrimination:

 

treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction infavor of or against, a person or thing based on the group,class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit: racial and religious intoleranceand discrimination.

 

source:http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/discrimination

 

Now before I get accused of discrimination for bringing up discrimination, I would like to point out that I suspect the vast majority of  vaxxers  do not discriminate against non-vaxxers. I just think some people on this thread might want to examine their motive by using language that paints all or many non-vaxxers with the same brush.

 

 


Kathy, I don't think she meant "you all" as in everyone agrees with Taximom5, but "you all" as in all the non-vaxers in the forum....it was a joke...if everyone here disappears...hahaha....you don't have to find it funny, but it was not discriminatory.  I laughed. shy.gif

 

oaktreemama likes this.
AbbyGrant is offline  
#90 of 312 Old 02-17-2012, 03:28 PM
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

I know a bunch of non-vaxers in real life, and they mostly have not found that it takes much time or energy or attracts much vitriol.  Most people are not having convos about vaccination with their neighbors.  Most non-vaxers actually find that NOT vaccinating takes way less time and energy than going to the full schedule of mostly-shots doctor visits.  I've claimed exemptions before (because of the time and energy involved in getting the records from the doctor's office) and in AZ it was incredibly easy.  I signed the one-page form that said I was opting out because of my religious convictions (I had faith that it would have been super-inconvenient to drive to the doctor's office right then) and went about my business.  No one batted an eye.  I'm always kind of boggled when people assert that being anti-vax takes time and energy and attracts attention.  



In my case it is a lovely side effect of not-vaccinating - less doctor visits.  It is a side effect and not the cause of non-vaxxing - a fine distinction.  

 

 

Sadly there are a number of members of the non-vaxxing board who have lost friends  or loved ones over their decision - I doubt it is easier for them.  greensad.gif

purslaine is offline  
Reply

Tags
Vaccinations

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