Should state mandate immunizations? New requirements effective in July

May 4, 2011 Read more: Chattanoogan.com 9,604

Immunizations are one of the most efficient and cost-effective ways to protect children against childhood diseases and Tennessee law requires documented immunizations.

Read more
scared

Davidson, NC

#9903 Aug 4, 2014
EBOLA!!!!!
Zeke

Paris, TN

#9904 Aug 4, 2014
Mom23 wrote:
<quoted text>
There was no "write up" this happened before 1982, before the national program to pay for injuries.
His name isn't important to you anyway, your agenda is pretty clear.
You're here to derail this thread, the truth is not your goal.
Tell me, when the ebola vaccine is fast tracked to the market, will you line up for it?
Your trust is unshakeable, so will you be first in line?
Will you?
How about your children?
The estimated first year earning is expected to be 1.8 billion.
An industry with no liability, no...consequences if you are injured. or God forbid, die as a result, so will you?
We need guinea pigs, and since you are so gung-ho...so adamant about all this, volunteer, do the right thing and let the only business in the world who faces no reprisal, test this vaccine out on you.
You are unshakeable in your faith, vaccines are totally safe.
So you go first, and get back to the rest of us on that.
You did not answer my questions asked in my previous post. Until you do this, your comments are to be dismissed as furthering your own agenda.

WTH has respect for evidence--provide scientifically accptable evidence that vaccines are more harmful than good, then he and I might change our opinion. Because you do not understand the nature of scientific evidence it is you who are unshakeable in your faith. The evidence provided vby your claim about your nephew is anecdotal, and you have, not even shown that it was the vaccine (which one?) led to your nephews death--so your anecdote does not stand up to examination.
Mom23

Lexington, TN

#9905 Aug 4, 2014
Zeke wrote:
<quoted text>
You did not answer my questions asked in my previous post. Until you do this, your comments are to be dismissed as furthering your own agenda.
WTH has respect for evidence--provide scientifically accptable evidence that vaccines are more harmful than good, then he and I might change our opinion. Because you do not understand the nature of scientific evidence it is you who are unshakeable in your faith. The evidence provided vby your claim about your nephew is anecdotal, and you have, not even shown that it was the vaccine (which one?) led to your nephews death--so your anecdote does not stand up to examination.
This is my third post in this thread.
My first was a link to nearly 200 studies. I'm sure you've read them all by now, being a rocket scientist and all.

So, dismiss me, dismiss my nephew as "anecdotal" that's your prerogative.
You won't find his name on any federal report, my sibling accepted that medicine isn't perfect, sometimes things just happen.

Then the liability shield came along, the number of injuries began to pour into VAERS and computers in the home became common place.
Information is accessible today that parents didn't have in those days.

I saw the posts here, and WOW (who, I agree, needs to cut back on the caffeine) is correct, exemptions are available in Tennessee,this needs to be explained to people who don't know they have a choice.

Everyone has the right to decide, and if you have a history of autoimmune problems in your family, there are tough decisions to be made.
My eldest siblings have medical waivers, after what happened to their brother.

My children have had all their vaccines. That was my choice.

As it should be.
Guest

Little Rock, AR

#9906 Aug 4, 2014
Haha
Mom23

Lexington, TN

#9907 Aug 4, 2014
My last post might not be clear on the point of the medical waiver.
My eldest sibling has 2 living children, after what happened to the eldest child, their doctor issued waivers to his next 2 children.
They are grown now, with children of their own. They do not give vaccines.

My sibling inherited our mothers genes, autoimmune issues and all.
I, however did not.
After researching libraries and discovering the link between the two, I made the decision to give them to my children.

The lawsuit that brought about the liability shield for vaccine makers wasn't filed against a manufacturer, it was filed against a doctor (Dr. Tayloe Sr.) who gave a second dose of a vaccine to a child who'd had an adverse event after the first shot.

How that translates to immunity for manufacturers (especially after the Cuttler incident) is beyond me.

We know from surveys that doctors report less than 10% of the injuries, which translates to misinformation on the release form parents sign.

People need to understand they do have a choice, and if there are existing autoimmune disorders in their family, there is a definite link.

Now you can shout all you want with your "prove it" thing.

I've seen all I need to see to make my own personal decision, other parents need to understand the risks are under reported and very real.

Do you have a vested interest in vaccine sales?

Oh, I was wrong about the projections for the ebola vaccine.
It's 1.3 billion expected in first quarter sales, not "year" as posted.
Zeke

Paris, TN

#9908 Aug 4, 2014
Mom23 wrote:
My last post might not be clear on the point of the medical waiver.
My eldest sibling has 2 living children, after what happened to the eldest child, their doctor issued waivers to his next 2 children.
They are grown now, with children of their own. They do not give vaccines.
My sibling inherited our mothers genes, autoimmune issues and all.
I, however did not.
After researching libraries and discovering the link between the two, I made the decision to give them to my children.
The lawsuit that brought about the liability shield for vaccine makers wasn't filed against a manufacturer, it was filed against a doctor (Dr. Tayloe Sr.) who gave a second dose of a vaccine to a child who'd had an adverse event after the first shot.
How that translates to immunity for manufacturers (especially after the Cuttler incident) is beyond me.
We know from surveys that doctors report less than 10% of the injuries, which translates to misinformation on the release form parents sign.
People need to understand they do have a choice, and if there are existing autoimmune disorders in their family, there is a definite link.
Now you can shout all you want with your "prove it" thing.
I've seen all I need to see to make my own personal decision, other parents need to understand the risks are under reported and very real.
Do you have a vested interest in vaccine sales?
Oh, I was wrong about the projections for the ebola vaccine.
It's 1.3 billion expected in first quarter sales, not "year" as posted.
You have missed the point of my comments.

Your having seen all. You need to in order to make your personal decision is hardly an argument.

Seems more like a statement of faith.

To say that the pharms are responsible in the case of your nephew is like saying that Planter's is responsible for a person's reaction to peanuts. The doctor mentioned who had seen the reaction to the first shot should have known better and therefore should be held responsible.

Your comment that i have an interest in the big pharms, and the amount of money that the pharms will make from the sales of an ebola vaccine are quite off topic. Such attacks indicate that you have a weak argument.

Again, you have not indicated which vaccine is the culprit.
Mom23

Lexington, TN

#9909 Aug 4, 2014
Zeke wrote:
<quoted text>
You have missed the point of my comments.
Your having seen all. You need to in order to make your personal decision is hardly an argument.
Seems more like a statement of faith.
To say that the pharms are responsible in the case of your nephew is like saying that Planter's is responsible for a person's reaction to peanuts. The doctor mentioned who had seen the reaction to the first shot should have known better and therefore should be held responsible.
Your comment that i have an interest in the big pharms, and the amount of money that the pharms will make from the sales of an ebola vaccine are quite off topic. Such attacks indicate that you have a weak argument.
Again, you have not indicated which vaccine is the culprit.
I don't know which vaccine caused the injury. They give several in one visit.
The doctor wrote "vaccine induced encephalopathy" on the death certificate.

Maybe he should called for your expert opinion.
Zeke

Paris, TN

#9910 Aug 5, 2014
Mom23 wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know which vaccine caused the injury. They give several in one visit.
The doctor wrote "vaccine induced encephalopathy" on the death certificate.
Maybe he should called for your expert opinion.
Why didn't you say this in your first post? That would have cleared some things from the start.

Regarding encephalopathy see

http://www.medicinenet.com/encephalopathy/pag...

Regarding "vaccine induced encephalopathy" see

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2011/08/19/a...

So, using the same standards of evidence as you apparently do, there may be some question as to whether the doctor got the cause of death quite right.
Zeke

Paris, TN

#9911 Aug 5, 2014
Mom23 wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know which vaccine caused the injury. They give several in one visit.
The doctor wrote "vaccine induced encephalopathy" on the death certificate.
Maybe he should called for your expert opinion.
By the way, gow up and refrain from the personal insults in your posts. Including those reveals more about you than me.
Zeke

Paris, TN

#9912 Aug 5, 2014
Mom23 wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know which vaccine caused the injury. They give several in one visit.
The doctor wrote "vaccine induced encephalopathy" on the death certificate.
Maybe he should called for your expert opinion.
I forgot: include sarcasm in my previous.
Not Sassy

Rock Hill, SC

#9913 Aug 5, 2014
You should have asked them yourself
Mom23

Lexington, TN

#9914 Aug 5, 2014
Zeke wrote:
<quoted text>
You have missed the point of my comments.
Your having seen all. You need to in order to make your personal decision is hardly an argument.
Seems more like a statement of faith.
To say that the pharms are responsible in the case of your nephew is like saying that Planter's is responsible for a person's reaction to peanuts. The doctor mentioned who had seen the reaction to the first shot should have known better and therefore should be held responsible.
Your comment that i have an interest in the big pharms, and the amount of money that the pharms will make from the sales of an ebola vaccine are quite off topic. Such attacks indicate that you have a weak argument.
Again, you have not indicated which vaccine is the culprit.
If anyone has missed the point, it's you.

The original poll is "Should state mandate immunizations? New requirements effective in July"

I gave the example of my siblings child, cited reputable studies validating my nephews death, and then cited my own reason for vaccinating my children after having used a risk/benefit analysis.

You post links to blogs, sling insults and inflame anyone who posts here. Well, other than WTH, who seems to be your BFF.

I'm taking my "caffeine" comment back.

YOU'RE AN AZZ!!!!!!

Does your mommy know you're spending all day on the net?
I say "mommy" because anyone as intent on starting an argument as you would get fired from any means of gainful employment.

Good day,
azzhole
WTH

Knoxville, TN

#9916 Aug 5, 2014
Mom23 wrote:
<quoted text>
There was no "write up" this happened before 1982, before the national program to pay for injuries.
His name isn't important to you anyway, your agenda is pretty clear.
You're here to derail this thread, the truth is not your goal.
Tell me, when the ebola vaccine is fast tracked to the market, will you line up for it?
Your trust is unshakeable, so will you be first in line?
Will you?
How about your children?
The estimated first year earning is expected to be 1.8 billion.
An industry with no liability, no...consequences if you are injured. or God forbid, die as a result, so will you?
We need guinea pigs, and since you are so gung-ho...so adamant about all this, volunteer, do the right thing and let the only business in the world who faces no reprisal, test this vaccine out on you.
You are unshakeable in your faith, vaccines are totally safe.
So you go first, and get back to the rest of us on that.
Where did you see that I posted that vaccines were totally safe? Please post that comment number or rescind you statement. You say "we" need guinea pigs. Really who is this "we" you speak of and what is your product. I should know this before I sign on.
So it sounds like you don't really have this "nephew" since you don't have a name and it supposedly took place over THREE decades ago. You do know that there were newspapers in 1982, right?
WTH

Knoxville, TN

#9917 Aug 5, 2014
Mom23 wrote:
<quoted text>
This is my third post in this thread.
My first was a link to nearly 200 studies. I'm sure you've read them all by now, being a rocket scientist and all.
So, dismiss me, dismiss my nephew as "anecdotal" that's your prerogative.
You won't find his name on any federal report, my sibling accepted that medicine isn't perfect, sometimes things just happen.
Then the liability shield came along, the number of injuries began to pour into VAERS and computers in the home became common place.
Information is accessible today that parents didn't have in those days.
I saw the posts here, and WOW (who, I agree, needs to cut back on the caffeine) is correct, exemptions are available in Tennessee,this needs to be explained to people who don't know they have a choice.
Everyone has the right to decide, and if you have a history of autoimmune problems in your family, there are tough decisions to be made.
My eldest siblings have medical waivers, after what happened to their brother.
My children have had all their vaccines. That was my choice.
As it should be.
BTW you had no believable "studies" other than the conspiracy theorists and bigfoot researchers.
WTH

Knoxville, TN

#9918 Aug 5, 2014
Mom23 wrote:
<quoted text>
If anyone has missed the point, it's you.
The original poll is "Should state mandate immunizations? New requirements effective in July"
I gave the example of my siblings child, cited reputable studies validating my nephews death, and then cited my own reason for vaccinating my children after having used a risk/benefit analysis.
You post links to blogs, sling insults and inflame anyone who posts here. Well, other than WTH, who seems to be your BFF.
I'm taking my "caffeine" comment back.
YOU'RE AN AZZ!!!!!!
Does your mommy know you're spending all day on the net?
I say "mommy" because anyone as intent on starting an argument as you would get fired from any means of gainful employment.
Good day,
azzhole
What was your nephews name and what studies weas he mentioned in. Where is the link to these studies with his information? It sounds like you are very frustrated because if your ignorance. Ignorant people behave like you and name call and make false statements.
WTH

Knoxville, TN

#9919 Aug 5, 2014
Mom23 wrote:
<quoted text>
There was no "write up" this happened before 1982, before the national program to pay for injuries.
His name isn't important to you anyway, your agenda is pretty clear.
You're here to derail this thread, the truth is not your goal.
Tell me, when the ebola vaccine is fast tracked to the market, will you line up for it?
Your trust is unshakeable, so will you be first in line?
Will you?
How about your children?
The estimated first year earning is expected to be 1.8 billion.
An industry with no liability, no...consequences if you are injured. or God forbid, die as a result, so will you?
We need guinea pigs, and since you are so gung-ho...so adamant about all this, volunteer, do the right thing and let the only business in the world who faces no reprisal, test this vaccine out on you.
You are unshakeable in your faith, vaccines are totally safe.
So you go first, and get back to the rest of us on that.
If there is an outbreak in America, you damned right I'll line up for it and so will you. People lined up for the Polio immunization and it has been all but eliminated in America. If you aren't 16 years old, which is the sound of your mentality, you lined up for it to0.

Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

#9920 Aug 5, 2014
Well WTH, I see you're trolling for Females , again, to take your anger out on that you have against ALL Females. Get Help!
Zeke

Paris, TN

#9921 Aug 5, 2014
WTSenior wrote:
Well WTH, I see you're trolling for Females , again, to take your anger out on that you have against ALL Females. Get Help!
Just what the hell do you find in WTH's posts indicates that he is trolling for females, and that he is taking his anger out on females?

Just what makes you think that WTH is male?

Mom23 is a fool, and your post suggests that you may be too.
WTSeniors

Big Sandy, TN

#9923 Aug 6, 2014
"Scientists Say Child's Play Helps Build A Better Brain."

Click here:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/ed/2014/08/06/336361...
zeke

Paris, TN

#9924 Aug 6, 2014
This is being reposted
Mom23 wrote:
<quoted text>
If anyone has missed the point, it's you.
The original poll is "Should state mandate immunizations? New requirements effective in July"
I gave the example of my siblings child, cited reputable studies validating my nephews death, and then cited my own reason for vaccinating my children after having used a risk/benefit analysis.
You post links to blogs, sling insults and inflame anyone who posts here. Well, other than WTH, who seems to be your BFF.
I'm taking my "caffeine" comment back.
YOU'RE AN AZZ!!!!!!
Does your mommy know you're spending all day on the net?
I say "mommy" because anyone as intent on starting an argument as you would get fired from any means of gainful employment.
Good day,
azzhole
1. Your example does not constitute evidence. Apparently you don't understand that.
2. Your interpretation of the references, if not the references themselves are questionable at best.
3. It is clear that you do not understand the arguments here at all.
Those for the vaccination requirements base there arguments on the following:
A. That the requirement does much more good than harm.
B. Exemptions to the requirements should be based on evidence that the person whose exemption is sought has a medical condition that indicates an adverse reaction to the vaccine: perhaps your nephew might have qualified.
C. In general, to claim that the decision regarding vaccination of ones children is personal is to suggest that there is no science to medicine--the doctors don't know any more about health than the average high school or college graduate. This is clearly a false claim.
D. The layman does not have the intellectual tools to enable interpretations of research study reports.
If you don't believe that, ask the manager of your local McDonalds for advice regarding your medical concerns.
Those who argue against mandatory vaccinations appear to assume
A. The experts in medicine do not know more than the average person.
B. The decision to submit ones children to vaccinations is an infringement on personal rights
This one presuppose that children are personal property.
C. Rejection of the greatest good for the greatest number principle. In spite of the fact that in the last 100 years, many lives have been saved by vaccinations, if one person is harmed by a vaccine, the vaccine should be banned.
Or
D. Assuming the greatest good for the greatest number principle is not rejected,
Assume, that the vaccines did not do any good. Then search for "evidence" to support that assumption.
E. in relation to D., assume A. applies--and therefore the layman's interpretation of the medical literature is always correct.
As I wrote in a pervious post, your insults and sarcasms reveal things about you.
1. Whether i have a job is irrelevant to this discussion.
2. I see that you are on topics as much as i am these last few days. So, why did you bring this up.
3. I refrain, much more than you from posting personal insults. See especially your last two posts.
4. When i write that you are not qualified to interpret the literature, i am not doing the same thing as to write that you are an azzhole: i am questioning your skills, not your character.
5. It is not my fault that my posts "inflame" you. The fact that they do suggests that you consider your position on vaccinations should not be questioned--any more that your fundamental religious beliefs.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gleason Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Alisha Bell (Apr '14) 3 hr SOHO 15
Muslim training camp? 3 hr SOSO 16
meo mios 4 hr Bunny 16
Man named Darrell Bigham (Dec '13) 9 hr know 39
Who drives a yellow monte carlo 9 hr know one 8
Selena Davison aka (White Trash) 11 hr really 10
girl named Devon at McDonald's? 13 hr No Brainer 2
More from around the web

Gleason People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]