Vaccinating children - choice by parent or state?

[Pangur Bán]

Routinely doesn't (or shouldn't be understood to) mean 'common' or numerically large, it means regularly and implies that its occurrence is expected.

 

[warpus]

If you shoot 500 million rockets up into the air and 500 of them blow up, "Rockets routinely blow up when we perform this test" is a false statement.

 

[Pangur Bán]

Not at all. How about 'I routinely kill spiders'? I kill one once or twice a week, but the world's population of spiders is barely affected.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

But do you kill the spiders with rockets?

 

[warpus]

Not at all. How about 'I routinely kill spiders'? I kill one once or twice a week, but the world's population of spiders is barely affected.

Routinely means common. As in, out of 500 attempts, it happens 10 times. Or whatever.

Why are we arguing about wordplay anyway? Let's see some numbers.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Why are we arguing about wordplay anyway? Let's see some numbers.

They are going to be negligible. Just like the effects of the anti-vaccination fad have been.

 

[warpus]

Yeah, it's just that man, when you read "Children are routinely harmed" - it seems to imply something other than negligible. That's all I've been trying to say - but no, you guys have to argue about it ad nauseum, instead of actually providing hard data that backs up what you're trying to say.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Yeah, it's just that man, when you read "Children are routinely harmed" - it seems to imply something other than negligible. That's all I've been trying to say - but no, you guys have to argue about it ad nauseum, instead of actually providing hard data that backs up what you're trying to say.

I'm going to store this for the next time the 'routine major outbreaks' are discussed.

 

[Pangur Bán]

Routinely means common. As in, out of 500 attempts, it happens 10 times. Or whatever.

It's used in that way too I suppose, I tend to use terms more etymologically. I suppose 'part of the course' is less ambiguous than 'routinely' ... not absolutely certain further discussion of this will be helpful.

Why are we arguing about wordplay anyway? Let's see some numbers.

Not sure what you mean, but see response to Cheetah above.

 

[warpus]

Okay, so.. I read that response to Cheetah, and

Are you seriously saying there are no numbers? What are you basing your "this happens routinely" on then?

 

[Pangur Bán]

Apparently you didn't...

 

[warpus]

I did, and my question remains: If there is no data and/or it is hard to come by - how would you know what this data might be?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

According to the CDC, MMR vaccination results in seizure 1 in 3000. Approximate US annual number of births four million. 90% vaccination rate (it's higher, but we'll use that) 3.6 million vaccinations. At one in 3000 that is twelve hundred seizures per year, or about three per day.

Is that "routine"? Beats me. I'm going with negligible...but I call 112 people with measles negligible, so what do I know.

 

[Pangur Bán]

No you didn't Warpus, because you missed a link with lots of numbers. Anyway, you might get some sense of the numbers from reading comments and estimates in journals, press articles, charity groups, medical groups and so forth--vaccines always come with side-effects, but like I said accurate numbers are difficult.

Anyway, it's quite time consuming for me to respond to every inaccurate reading/ misunderstanding of things I've posted or any irrelevant side-distractions therein (like the meaning of 'routine'). Maybe if you indicate what your own position is it would be better for all of us.

 

[bhavv]

I give up. Add pangur to my list of people that need executing.

Moderator Action: Advocating the death of other posters is extremely inappropriate. This and two other inappropriate content infractions have collectively earned you a one-week ban for accumulated points.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[illram]

No you didn't Warpus, because you missed a link with lots of numbers. Anyway, you might get some sense of the numbers from reading comments and estimates in journals, press articles, charity groups, medical groups and so forth--vaccines always come with side-effects, but like I said accurate numbers are difficult.

Anyway, it's quite time consuming for me to respond to every inaccurate reading/ misunderstanding of things I've posted or any irrelevant side-distractions therein (like the meaning of 'routine'). Maybe if you indicate what your own position is it would be better for all of us.

Disputing your use of the words "routine harm" is not a side distraction. It's calling attention to your primary claim.

Here are numbers for common vaccines given to children in the US from the CDC. There is a ton of stuff on this page, I edited it down to the ones I remember my daughter getting, i.e. the usual regimen:

Top of Page
DTaP vaccine side-effects
(Diphtheria, Tetanus, and acellular Pertussis)
What are the risks from DTaP vaccine?
Getting diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis disease is much riskier than getting DTaP vaccine.
However, a vaccine, like any medicine, is capable of causing serious problems, such as severe allergic reactions. The risk of DTaP vaccine causing serious harm, or death, is extremely small.
Mild Problems (Common)
• Fever (up to about 1 child in 4)
• Redness or swelling where the shot was given (up to about 1 child in 4)
• Soreness or tenderness where the shot was given (up to about 1 child in 4)
These problems occur more often after the 4th and 5th doses of the DTaP series than after earlier doses.
Sometimes the 4th or 5th dose of DTaP vaccine is followed by swelling of the entire arm or leg in which the shot was given, for 1 to 7 days (up to about 1 child in 30).
Other mild problems include:
• Fussiness (up to about 1 child in 3)
• Tiredness or poor appetite (up to about 1 child in 10)
• Vomiting (up to about 1 child in 50)
These problems generally occur 1 to 3 days after the shot.
Moderate Problems (Uncommon)
• Seizure (jerking or staring) (about 1 child out of 14,000)
• Non-stop crying, for 3 hours or more (up to about 1 child out of 1,000)
• High fever, 105 degrees Fahrenheit or higher (about 1 child out of 16,000)
Severe Problems (Very Rare)
Serious allergic reaction (less than 1 out of a million doses) Several other severe problems have been reported after DTaP vaccine. These include:
• Long-term seizures, coma, or lowered consciousness
• Permanent brain damage.
These are so rare it is hard to tell if they are caused by the vaccine.
MMR vaccine side-effects
(Measles, Mumps, and Rubella)
What are the risks from MMR vaccine?
A vaccine, like any medicine, is capable of causing serious problems, such as severe allergic reactions.
The risk of MMR vaccine causing serious harm, or death, is extremely small.
Getting MMR vaccine is much safer than getting measles, mumps or rubella.
Most people who get MMR vaccine do not have any serious problems with it.
Mild Problems
• Fever (up to 1 person out of 6)
• Mild rash (about 1 person out of 20)
• Swelling of glands in the cheeks or neck (about 1 person out of 75)
If these problems occur, it is usually within 7-12 days after the shot. They occur less often after the second dose.
Moderate Problems
• Seizure (jerking or staring) caused by fever (about 1 out of 3,000 doses)
• Temporary pain and stiffness in the joints, mostly in teenage or adult women (up to 1 out of 4)
• Temporary low platelet count, which can cause a bleeding disorder (about 1 out of 30,000 doses)
Severe Problems (Very Rare)
• Serious allergic reaction (less than 1 out of a million doses)
• Several other severe problems have been reported after a child gets MMR vaccine, including:
o Deafness
o Long-term seizures, coma, or lowered consciousness
o Permanent brain damage
These are so rare that it is hard to tell whether they are caused by the vaccine.

Meningococcal vaccine side-effects
What are the risks from meningococcal vaccines?
A vaccine, like any medicine, could possibly cause serious problems, such as severe allergic reactions. The risk of the meningococcal vaccine causing serious harm, or death, is extremely small.
Brief fainting spells and related symptoms (such as jerking or seizure-like movements) can follow a vaccination. They happen most often with adolescents, and they can result in falls and injuries.
Sitting or lying down for about 15 minutes after getting the shot - especially if you feel faint - can help prevent these injuries.
Mild Problems
As many as half the people who get meningococcal vaccines have mild side effects, such as redness or pain where the shot was given.
If these problems occur, they usually last for 1 or 2 days. They are more common after MCV4 than after MPSV4.
A small percentage of people who receive the vaccine develop a fever.
Severe Problems
Serious allergic reactions, within a few minutes to a few hours of the shot, are very rare.

Polio vaccine side-effects
What are the risks from IPV?
Some people who get Inactivated Polio Vaccine (IPV) get a sore spot where the shot was given. The vaccine used today has never been known to cause any serious problems, and most people don’t have any problems at all with it.
However, a vaccine, like any medicine, could cause serious problems, such as a severe allergic reaction or even death. The risk of a polio vaccine causing serious harm is extremely small.
This information was taken directly from the IPV VIS

Varicella (Chickenpox) vaccine side-effects
What are the risks from chickenpox vaccine?
A vaccine, like any medicine, is capable of causing serious problems, such as severe allergic reactions. The risk of chickenpox vaccine causing serious harm, or death, is extremely small.
Getting chickenpox vaccine is much safer than getting chickenpox disease. Most people who get chickenpox vaccine do not have any problems with it. Reactions are usually more likely after the first dose than after the second.
Mild Problems
• Soreness or swelling where the shot was given (about 1 out of 5 children and up to 1 out of 3 adolescents and adults)
• Fever (1 person out of 10, or less)
• Mild rash, up to a month after vaccination (1 person out of 25). It is possible for these people to infect other members of their household, but this is extremely rare.
Note: The first dose of MMRV vaccine has been associated with rash and higher rates of fever than MMR and varicella vaccines given separately. Rash has been reported in about 1 person in 20 and fever in about 1 person in 5. Seizures caused by a fever are also reported more often after MMRV. These usually occur 5-12 days after the first dose.
Moderate Problems
• Seizure (jerking or staring) caused by fever (very rare).
Severe Problems
• Pneumonia (very rare)
Other serious problems, including severe brain reactions and low blood count, have been reported after chickenpox vaccination. These happen so rarely experts cannot tell whether they are caused by the vaccine or not. If they are, it is extremely rare.

I would not call any of that "routine harm." Quibble with the words all you want, based on the above I think most would agree you are misusing them as basically anyone commonly understands them. None of the figures above would to me lead to the conclusion that vaccines "cause routine harm."

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Illram, do you see the contradiction in saying that 1200 kids having seizures is 'negligible and no problem' while a hundred kids catching measles (which out of a hundred cases is very unlikely to produce any lasting damage) is a 'huge problem worthy of draconian solutions'?

Again, a one in 3000 chance of a seizure doesn't stop me from vaccinating for the general good, because I consider it negligible risk...but I also consider that the number of people refusing vaccination is so small that they are also presenting a similarly negligible risk so I think there is no particular reason to try to add any further measures to force them to comply.

 

[Bootstoots]

So, Tim and Pangur, let's see if I understand your arguments. I'm basing this more on Tim than Pangur but I think both would agree with at least the majority of the following:


1. Most of the participants of the anti-vaccination fad are not behaving rationally; they may believe that vaccines cause autism or other discredited claims. Vaccines are likely to be good public health measures on aggregate.

2. The effect of (1) is overall very minor. A few childhood diseases are more common, but the costs are low and MMR are three diseases that aren't on average very serious anyway.

3. The risks of vaccines are significant enough that rational parents may well decide not to vaccinate their children, especially if the diseases are relatively minor (including the MMR diseases) and herd immunity already greatly reduces the chances of contracting the diseases.

4. In any case, the risk of contracting diseases for which vaccines are available is not great enough to justify forcing parents to have their children vaccinated whether they want to or not. And it is certainly not serious enough to consider this a reason to take children away from their parents - parents make voluntary decisions that have a much greater impact on their children (I'll suggest getting a swimming pool is a good example) all the time without controversy.

5. The reason for all the moral outrage about this is not because of risks to children. It is because many people who consider themselves knowledgeable base their identities around beliefs considered "scientific" to the exclusion of "non-scientific" beliefs. Vaccines are considered a "scientific" practice and antivaxxers are espousing a heresy. The reason vaccination has become a major issue has little to do with a cost-benefit analysis of vaccination; instead, True Believers are attempting to squash heretics. If this were all about health and didn't have this quasi-religious aspect to it, it wouldn't be interesting enough to command so much attention.


Is this an accurate portrayal of what both of you are arguing? If not let me know where I have your positions wrong. But if I am on the right track, this is a more interesting argument than I would have originally given it credit for. The role science plays for modern secular people as a surrogate source of values does really seem to be behind a lot of the arguments you'll see on a forum like this, and this issue is a good example of one where it comes to the surface.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

So, Tim and Pangur, let's see if I understand your arguments. I'm basing this more on Tim than Pangur but I think both would agree with at least the majority of the following:


1. Most of the participants of the anti-vaccination fad are not behaving rationally; they may believe that vaccines cause autism or other discredited claims. Vaccines are likely to be good public health measures on aggregate.

2. The effect of (1) is overall very minor. A few childhood diseases are more common, but the costs are low and MMR are three diseases that aren't on average very serious anyway.

3. The risks of vaccines are significant enough that rational parents may well decide not to vaccinate their children, especially if the diseases are relatively minor (including the MMR diseases) and herd immunity already greatly reduces the chances of contracting the diseases.

4. In any case, the risk of contracting diseases for which vaccines are available is not great enough to justify forcing parents to have their children vaccinated whether they want to or not. And it is certainly not serious enough to consider this a reason to take children away from their parents - parents make voluntary decisions that have a much greater impact on their children (I'll suggest getting a swimming pool is a good example) all the time without controversy.

5. The reason for all the moral outrage about this is not because of risks to children. It is because many people who consider themselves knowledgeable base their identities around beliefs considered "scientific" to the exclusion of "non-scientific" beliefs. Vaccines are considered a "scientific" practice and antivaxxers are espousing a heresy. The reason vaccination has become a major issue has little to do with a cost-benefit analysis of vaccination; instead, True Believers are attempting to squash heretics. If this were all about health and didn't have this quasi-religious aspect to it, it wouldn't be interesting enough to command so much attention.


Is this an accurate portrayal of what both of you are arguing? If not let me know where I have your positions wrong. But if I am on the right track, this is a more interesting argument than I would have originally given it credit for. The role science plays for modern secular people as a surrogate source of values does really seem to be behind a lot of the arguments you'll see on a forum like this, and this issue is a good example of one where it comes to the surface.

Can't answer for PB, but you have understood my position with spot on accuracy, as you usually do. I would add to (2) that by all indications the fad has already peaked so there is even less reason to feel compelled to 'do something about it'.

 

[Bootstoots]

Cool. I would still advocate mandatory vaccinations for at least the subset of vaccines where the diseases are serious enough and the risks are well understood and quite minor, especially because of the Tragedy of the Commons outcome that could result if a large proportion of the population started not to vaccinate their children.

The anti-vaxxer fad may be receding for now, but we don't have any idea what will happen in the future. If vaccination rates were to fall overall much further than they have today, herd immunity may break down so much that the costs could climb way above anything that was seen before the era of vaccines for childhood illnesses. The costs Commodore cited are pretty trivial in light of an expensive healthcare system. But an actual breakdown of herd immunity, which we're already seeing in miniature, would be vastly more costly.

I wouldn't advocate that children be taken from parents just for this, but fines or suspension of tax credits would be in order IMO. Anyway, I am starting to understand this as an issue that Reasonable People (TM) could disagree on without one side having to consist of New Agey people with pseudoscientific beliefs. The role of scientific beliefs in generating values that secular people hold, in the same way that religious people hold their values, is interesting as well. I can definitely see how this sort of thinking has affected many of the arguments for mandatory vaccines.