The news about the return of dangerous “childhood” illnesses gets worse and worse. Columbus, Ohio reports an outbreak of 225 cases—with over 50% students at Ohio State University. It is probably no coincidence that Ohio State recommends but does not require students (outside of those in healthcare settings) be vaccinated in order to attend class. It’s not just Mumps. We are seeing cases of preventable diseases like measles and mumps and whooping cough because of parental decisions not to immunize their children but there is increasing evidence that the immunizations most adults received as infants or young children wear off—leaving the population at large vulnerable to infection once an outbreak occurs. Science Daily just reported a confirmed case of a fully vaccinated young woman contracting measles. The CDC has not yet recommended that adults get booster shots for Mumps and Measles—although they have in some circumstances for Whooping Cough and Polio. But the more likely it is for a person to be exposed to these diseases, the more important it is to be fully vaccinated.
So why is the law to blame here? This piece put out by the Center for American Progress explains how states responding to political pressure from parents have been remarkably lax in enforcing mandatory vaccination laws for school children. The CAP writes that “every state except Mississippi and West Virginia grants some kind of religious exemption, while 17 states allow for “personal belief” or philosophical exemptions.” Unfortunately, many parents have chosen not to vaccinate their child against Mumps because of concerns about the MMR vaccine—that now turn out to be the result of fraudulent scientific data.
As a result, many young adults reading this post may never have been vaccinated. The task now is not to revisit that decision, but to share some specific facts you may not know. What you’ve heard is true– many childhood diseases are much more serious for adults than for children. For a general overview look here. The news is especially bad when it comes to young adults and Mumps—it can impair fertility—even to the extent of causing sterility. There hasn’t been a lot of research done recently and permanent sterility is rare- probably no more than 10%. But why chance it when it can be prevented? We have not yet seen an outbreak of Rubella here in the U.S.—although there was one recently in Japan—this is another disease of special concern to young adults. A case of Rubella early in pregnancy carries with it a 20% chance of serious birth defects. Finally, the risk of permanent hearing loss is highest in children under 5 and adults over 20.
The good news on the public health front is that it’s never too late to be vaccinated. And preventive vaccination (even for childhood diseases) is covered under the Affordable Act. Young adults would be wise to look into their own vaccination status. If pediatric records aren’t available, a blood test can measure antibodies that show the presence (or absence) of vaccination against many serious childhood diseases that are coming back to infect young adults. But if vaccination laws continue to be lax, long after the reason for so many people’s misgivings has turned out to be a fraud, we will not be able to get ahead of what should to everyone be a very frightening trend
The logic here is totally disingenuous. Vaccine failure happens. Is the endgame to turn every man, woman, and child on Earth into a vaccine junkie for life? If so, what are the implications for such a policy to the overall integrity of the human immune system? Do we seek laws which force people over the age of 18 to submit to vaccinations? Isn’t forcing these products, legally classified as “unavoidably unsafe products” for which NO ONE connected with their manufacture, sale, distribution, and administration is financially responsible for the medical harms which they may cause, onto children bad enough, or an egregious enough violation of our rights under the U.S. Constitution? Where is the informed consent to vaccination? What remedies exist in reality for those persons whose health is destroyed for life from vaccination injuries?
Vaccinations do not achieve the ends toward which they are touted. If they did, these issues would not arise. The answer is not more vaccinations. I thank the heavens every day that I was born prior to vaccine mania and when children just had their diseases and life went on. Chidren in the U.S., contrary to the current government propaganda, were well in those days. What is better is that NONE of us have to worry about waning “immunity” to any of those childhood infectious diseases or about giving birth to a child with congenital rubella syndrome.
Given the current state of the laws which apply to vaccinations, it strikes me as miraculous that health authorities are not sued on every front imaginable given how these laws not only violate the U.S. Constitution, but also are causing the creation of countless numbers of new diseases each and every year. But, really who cares if the rotavirus vaccination creates hepatocellular carcinoma in vaccinees, correct, since under current federal law no vaccine ever needs to be studied for carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, and teratogenicity, or assessed for impairment of fertility? Aren’t these just the types of drug products which we have a right to coerce on infants and children under the ruse that they “prevent disease and save lives?”! If a piece of cloth intended for use on an infant has a nanoparticle of formaldehyde detected on it, it is yanked from the market. Yet, a vaccination loaded with formaldehyde may be injected into an infant, and this is alleged to be a “safe and effective” medical “therapy,” just like “DDT, it’s SO g-o-o-d for M-e-e,” was the jingle children had to sing back in the 1950s! NO ONE believes this hypocrisy but for health authorities and their business partners in the vaccine manufacturing business.
Delete Lax from your title to give a smidgen of truth to this article. This is typical of the articles I’ve seen spawning from the supposed field of medical / bioethics; never a mention of the thousands of victims of the vaccines you espouse, or the injuries caused: bowel inflammation, seizures, full body rash so fierce as to be akin to chemical burn, loss of ability to speak, death. All these and many more have been compensated thus far by the vaccine court to the tune of $3 billion. The irony of the omission of such mention should be self-evident, but I’ll point it out: you flaunt the ethical tenet of informed consent.
I’ll not touch on the fundamental reasons vaccination is a palpable threat to every recipient, but the reality speaks for itself. jbard either needs to buckle down and educate, or re-classify this article as dark fiction.
Enforcement is singular, so puts, rather than put, as used in the title, would be grammatically correct. Don’t get me wrong – it’s got nothing to do with the egregious falsity of the article. I’m not one to point to a grammatical error as some sort of unforgivable faux pas, indicative of the intellect of the author; they just rub me the wrong way – even my own. But I’m available as a proofreader, Harvard Law, if ya need one.
Delete Lax from your title to give a smidgen of truth to this article. This is typical of the articles I’ve seen spawning from the supposed field of medical / bioethics; never a mention of the thousands of victims of the vaccines you espouse, or the injuries caused: bowel inflammation, seizures, full body rash so fierce as to be akin to chemical burn, loss of ability to speak, death. All these and many more have been compensated thus far by the vaccine court to the tune of $3 billion. The irony of the omission of such mention should be self-evident, but I’ll point it out: you flaunt the ethical tenet of informed consent.
I’ll not touch on the fundamental reasons vaccination is a palpable threat to every recipient, but the reality speaks for itself. jbard either needs to buckle down and educate, or re-classify this article as dark fiction.
Enforcement is singular, so puts, rather than put, as used in the title, would be grammatically correct. Don’t get me wrong – it’s got nothing to do with the egregious falsity of the article. I’m not one to point to a grammatical error as some sort of unforgivable faux pas, indicative of the intellect of the author; they just rub me the wrong way – even my own. But I’m available as a proofreader, Harvard Law, if ya need one.