Page 3 of 46 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 686
  1. #31
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    You don't seem to object that herd immunity mostly helps non-immunised.
    On one level yes. However since we have a lot of public money going into health care in Australia it actually benefits everyone economically.

    Also the population of non-immunised does not include only those whose opt out for reasons of misinformation. As I have mentioned earlier young infants are not yet old enough to be immunised there are also some people who cannot be immunised for medical reasons.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    1. Do you have any statistics on percentage of infants under the age of 2 months contracting decease?
    Only what was contained in the NSW Dept of Health report. Cases (generally) this year are an order of magnitude higher than last year. One infant had died. I don't know how many of the 3,356 reported cases in January/February were infants but I suspect a reasonable percentage were.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    2. Pertussis vaccine lasts for only few years. It means that adults have no immunity and can pass an infection to infants.
    The effectiveness of the vaccine is not an on/off thing. The susceptibility increases with time and the current schedule of immunisation in NSW is (2, 4 and 6 months, 4 years and 15 years). Therefore young adults do have good immunisation levels, older adults may be compromised. However, the epidemics tend the spread between children and so if immunity in the population of school age children this prevent epidemic rates of infection. This is why vaccination is not generally recommended for adults except in times of epidemic (such as now in NSW).

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    Infants under 2 month of age do not generally contact other children, and parents have a good and easy control of that.
    Maybe in your dream world but in the real world young children often have contact with older siblings and extended family members. It is also worth pointing out that the vaccine at 2 months does not provided total and lasting immunisation and booster shots are given at 4 and 6 months. Then again at 4 and 15 years.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    Therefore pertussis immunisation will have zero or no effect on that group.
    Wrong for the reasons I give above your argument is based on flawed assumptions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    BTW I do not remember any doctor (and we so many before and after the birth of children) recommending whooping cough immunisation to me or my wife.
    Ditto here and I suspect that is because the immunisation program for pertussis has been largely successful in preventing outbreak of an epidemic. However if immunisation levels drop then the loss of herd immunity makes this no longer true.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    Any other group that cannot be immunised and thus requires population-wide vaccination?
    Yes. Apart from infants there is also a group who reacts badly to the vaccine who may only receive the first vaccine but none of the booster shots, and there are those who it is thought will react badly due to acute allergic medical condition who are not immunised. I not sure of the exact figures but from what I understand this number is reasonably small (<1% of the population).
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  2. #32
    CC Grandmaster Spiny Norman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,437
    I wonder if any of you saw a program on ABC TV last night, about child abuse in Nigeria. It was focused on a particular region/district where a certain influential church leader, who clearly didn't read her Bible anywhere near enough (or if she did, had comprehension problems), had run off the rails and whipped up the population into a fearful state about witches and wizards. Disgusting. Kids were being abandoned by their parents, some physically attacked, some even killed. It was a mix of good ol' fashioned tribal beliefs with some Christianity thrown in for good measure. Unfortunately the latter was almost completely and utterly lost in the process and the resulting mix was very, very dangerous indeed. As the speaker in the program said quite rightly, Christians watching this program will be disgusted with how its been twisted.
    “As you perhaps know, I haven't always been a Christian. I didn't go to religion to make me happy. I always knew a bottle of port would do that. If you want a religion to make you feel really comfortable, I certainly don't recommend Christianity.” -- C.S.Lewis

  3. #33
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    5,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    On one level yes. However since we have a lot of public money going into health care in Australia it actually benefits everyone economically.
    Well, I haven't seen anything from you showing how immunised benefit.
    Economically it's a problem of socialised medicine, not vaccination.
    Indeed, you have to pay for the flu vaccine, but if you are sick you get paid sick leave and bulk-billed doctor help. Does not make much sense to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    Also the population of non-immunised does not include only those whose opt out for reasons of misinformation.
    Yet it's their fault and they bear the consequences.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    The effectiveness of the vaccine is not an on/off thing. The susceptibility increases with time and the current schedule of immunisation in NSW is (2, 4 and 6 months, 4 years and 15 years). Therefore young adults do have good immunisation levels, older adults may be compromised. However, the epidemics tend the spread between children and so if immunity in the population of school age children this prevent epidemic rates of infection. This is why vaccination is not generally recommended for adults except in times of epidemic (such as now in NSW).
    Hello, we were talking about infants under age of 2 month. They usually don't go to school or kindergarten.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    Maybe in your dream world but in the real world young children often have contact with older siblings and extended family members.
    It's funny to read a lecture from university employee about real world.
    Anyway, it is personal responsibility of parents to make sure that siblings are immunised. Any extended family with non-immunised children would get polite, but firm "No". At that very early age parents have total control.
    Btw, breast-fed babies have a very high immunity in the first few months. And if they are bottle fed, any responsible and sensible parents would minimise babies contacts with outside world until they are 6 month old.
    Did your children socialise a lot in their first two month?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    Yes. Apart from infants there is also a group who reacts badly to the vaccine who may only receive the first vaccine but none of the booster shots, and there are those who it is thought will react badly due to acute allergic medical condition who are not immunised. I not sure of the exact figures but from what I understand this number is reasonably small (<1% of the population).
    There are people who cannot be vaccinated, there are people who think they cannot be vaccinated, there are people who do not want to be vaccinated and say they can't and so on.

    The bottom line is:
    I prefer people to make a decision for themselves.
    You want government to decide who should and should not be vaccinated.

    Advocates of large government love inventing cases and problems that allegedly cannot be resolved by individual action and require huge government programs and intervention. Never mind that their argumentation in 99% cases is bogus and the problem (even if it exists like preventable deceases) can be resolved by each individual action.
    For private coaching (IM, four times VIC champion) call or SMS 0417519733
    Computer tells you what to play. Good coach explains why.

  4. #34
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,570
    Quote Originally Posted by The Snail King
    I wonder if any of you saw a program on ABC TV last night, about child abuse in Nigeria. It was focused on a particular region/district where a certain influential church leader, who clearly didn't read her Bible anywhere near enough (or if she did, had comprehension problems), had run off the rails and whipped up the population into a fearful state about witches and wizards. Disgusting. Kids were being abandoned by their parents, some physically attacked, some even killed. It was a mix of good ol' fashioned tribal beliefs with some Christianity thrown in for good measure. Unfortunately the latter was almost completely and utterly lost in the process and the resulting mix was very, very dangerous indeed. As the speaker in the program said quite rightly, Christians watching this program will be disgusted with how its been twisted.
    No I didn't but if you know of any online coverage of the story I'd encourage you to post the links in this thread.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  5. #35
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    Well, I haven't seen anything from you showing how immunised benefit.
    Economically it's a problem of socialised medicine, not vaccination.
    Indeed, you have to pay for the flu vaccine, but if you are sick you get paid sick leave and bulk-billed doctor help. Does not make much sense to me.
    It's funny how you constantly ask me to justify everything I say but you spout off and when you are found to be wanting you just ignore it and carry on regardless.

    Economically all of society pays for the sick leave and bulk billed doctor as well. There is no free ride.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    Yet it's their fault and they bear the consequences.
    Actually it is the parents decision and the victim may be their kids, it may be the neighbour's kids with a vaccine allergy. It may be the infant down the road who is not immunised for reasons of age.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    Hello, we were talking about infants under age of 2 month. They usually don't go to school or kindergarten.
    As I mentioned in my previous post it is not only under two months who are at risk. Booster shoots are at 2 4 and 6 months and the NSW department of health recommend booster shoots for adults caring for immunised infants under 12 months.

    You may see the world as a black an white entity but it is not that case that the second you get the 2 month jab you are 100% immunue to infection.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    It's funny to read a lecture from university employee about real world.
    It's even funny to be the subject of an ad hominem attack from someone with a weak grasp on logic and the facts. For your future reference, I've only been a university employee for the last 2 years. Prior to that I was employed for more than 20 years in heavy industry, utilities and insurance companies.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    Anyway, it is personal responsibility of parents to make sure that siblings are immunised. Any extended family with non-immunised children would get polite, but firm "No". At that very early age parents have total control.
    Again you are ignoring the fact that immunisation is not an on/off thing. Three years after immunisation the immunity level starts to deteriorate. Therefore a 8 year old sibling could act as a carrier of pertussis from school to an unimmunised infant.

    Wake up out of your dream world. For personal protection to be water tight we would need individuals to be vaccinated four times before starting school and then every four or five years for the rest of their life. The cost of that versus widely administered five shots total is what we are talking about.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    Btw, breast-fed babies have a very high immunity in the first few months.
    Reference please

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    And if they are bottle fed, any responsible and sensible parents would minimise babies contacts with outside world until they are 6 month old.
    Perhaps they can just raise them in a bubble.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    Did your children socialise a lot in their first two month?
    My younger son did socialise quite a lot with his 3 year old brother who was going to day care 2 days a week at the time.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    There are people who cannot be vaccinated, there are people who think they cannot be vaccinated, there are people who do not want to be vaccinated and say they can't and so on.
    I was specifically taking about people with medical conditions for whom vaccination is not recommended based on professional medical advise. There is a small group of people who fall in this category. You asked the question, I was just answering it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    The bottom line is:
    I prefer people to make a decision for themselves.
    You want government to decide who should and should not be vaccinated.
    No I don't want government to decide. Where did I ever say that?

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    Advocates of large government love inventing cases and problems that allegedly cannot be resolved by individual action and require huge government programs and intervention. Never mind that their argumentation in 99% cases is bogus and the problem (even if it exists like preventable deceases) can be resolved by each individual action.
    Again you are ranting about a non issue as far as this thread is concerned. I'm not advocating forced immunisation and I have stated that explicitly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Me to Jono
    No I never said they should be forced. However people should be provided with good information about the benefits and risk of immunisation and people should be taken to task when they promote unsubstantiated risks with no evidence to support them. In the vase of the vaccine/autism link it is worse than there being no evidence, the claim has been repeatedly studied and found lacking.
    Please read what I have said and reply to that rather than your personal bogeyman of "large governments."
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  6. #36
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,500
    Quote Originally Posted by The Snail King
    I wonder if any of you saw a program on ABC TV last night, about child abuse in Nigeria. It was focused on a particular region/district where a certain influential church leader, who clearly didn't read her Bible anywhere near enough (or if she did, had comprehension problems), had run off the rails and whipped up the population into a fearful state about witches and wizards. Disgusting. Kids were being abandoned by their parents, some physically attacked, some even killed. It was a mix of good ol' fashioned tribal beliefs with some Christianity thrown in for good measure. Unfortunately the latter was almost completely and utterly lost in the process and the resulting mix was very, very dangerous indeed. As the speaker in the program said quite rightly, Christians watching this program will be disgusted with how its been twisted.
    Indeed, it must be real Christianity not syncretism. Mike Parris wrote As an atheist, I truly believe Africa needs God: Missionaries, not aid money, are the solution to Africa's biggest problem — the crushing passivity of the people's mindset (Times, UK, 27 Dec 2008):

    ...

    Now a confirmed atheist, I've become convinced of the enormous contribution that Christian evangelism makes in Africa: sharply distinct from the work of secular NGOs, government projects and international aid efforts. These alone will not do. Education and training alone will not do. In Africa Christianity changes people's hearts. It brings a spiritual transformation. The rebirth is real. The change is good.

    I used to avoid this truth by applauding - as you can - the practical work of mission churches in Africa. It's a pity, I would say, that salvation is part of the package, but Christians black and white, working in Africa, do heal the sick, do teach people to read and write; and only the severest kind of secularist could see a mission hospital or school and say the world would be better without it. I would allow that if faith was needed to motivate missionaries to help, then, fine: but what counted was the help, not the faith.

    But this doesn't fit the facts. Faith does more than support the missionary; it is also transferred to his flock. This is the effect that matters so immensely, and which I cannot help observing.

    ...

    Christianity, post-Reformation and post-Luther, with its teaching of a direct, personal, two-way link between the individual and God, unmediated by the collective, and unsubordinate to any other human being, smashes straight through the philosphical/spiritual framework I've just described. It offers something to hold on to to those anxious to cast off a crushing tribal groupthink. That is why and how it liberates.

    ...
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  7. #37
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    5,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    It's even funny to be the subject of an ad hominem attack from someone with a weak grasp on logic and the facts.
    About weak grasp of logic let me remind you your infamous "racist interpretation of Jono's statement is racist"

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    Again you are ignoring the fact that immunisation is not an on/off thing. Three years after immunisation the immunity level starts to deteriorate. Therefore a 8 year old sibling could act as a carrier of pertussis from school to an unimmunised infant.
    That defeats your own claim about herd immunity against pertussis

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    Wake up out of your dream world. For personal protection to be water tight we would need individuals to be vaccinated four times before starting school and then every four or five years for the rest of their life. The cost of that versus widely administered five shots total is what we are talking about.
    You are stating again that population-wide vaccination is not possible. In this case small proportion of those that forego vaccination cannot change the balance dramatically.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    Reference please
    Every literature I saw in the maternity ward stressed the benefit of breast feeding, especially for the infant immunity. You can google "breastfeeding and immunisation" to find a source which you deem credible.
    Try this one for starters:
    http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/b...les.nsf/pages/
    (I assume you are more likely to believe government source).

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    My younger son did socialise quite a lot with his 3 year old brother who was going to day care 2 days a week at the time.
    I assume your older son was vaccinated. Did you have trouble preventing contacts with non-vaccinated?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    No I don't want government to decide. Where did I ever say that?
    Well, you were ranting about people avoiding vaccination and thus endangering everyone else.
    I only pointed out that they mostly endanger themselves and others that do not vaccinate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    Again you are ranting about a non issue as far as this thread is concerned. I'm not advocating forced immunisation and I have stated that explicitly.
    Good.
    For private coaching (IM, four times VIC champion) call or SMS 0417519733
    Computer tells you what to play. Good coach explains why.

  8. #38
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    About weak grasp of logic let me remind you your infamous "racist interpretation of Jono's statement is racist"
    That was entirely logical and I stand by that. You may not agree with the argument but that is your prerogative.

    Let me not remind you about your comprehension problems, for example where you suggested I correct the spelling of a word which I was using in precisely the correct way.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    That defeats your own claim about herd immunity against pertussis
    Not at all. As I have already stated, herd immunity is achieved when immunisation is at some level which is below 100%. The fact that immunisation levels vary for 100% does not matter provided the the combination of the disease and population characteristics, and immunisation levels is such that disease infection level is zero. What it does defeat is your position that the main benefactors of immunisation are the individuals who are immunised. That is only true while ever the immunisation remains effective which in the case of the present pertussis vaccine is years rather than decades.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    You are stating again that population-wide vaccination is not possible. In this case small proportion of those that forego vaccination cannot change the balance dramatically.
    I said that the number that forego for medical reasons is small and given that they are unvaccinatable does not present a barrier to achieving herd immunity. However, the number that forego vaccination for non-medical (and largely spiritual) reasons is much higher.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    Every literature I saw in the maternity ward stressed the benefit of breast feeding, especially for the infant immunity. You can google "breastfeeding and immunisation" to find a source which you deem credible.
    Try this one for starters:
    http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/b...les.nsf/pages/
    (I assume you are more likely to believe government source).
    Sorry Igor your link is broken. I sure hope you don't work in IT.

    Before you bother fixing it what you require is a credible reference (government or otherwise) that shows that a mother who may have had her last pertussis vaccine at the age of 15 and is now is mostly likely in her thirties and so has very little if any pertussis immunity herself somehow passes on pertussis immunity to a child through breast milk. If the page you tried to post qualifies please fix the link or else keep doing your research.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    I assume your older son was vaccinated. Did you have trouble preventing contacts with non-vaccinated?
    He wasn't raised in a bubble and as there were no health epidemics at the time (AFAIK) and so we weren't particularly trying to wrap him in cotton wool for the first year. If he was under 12 months now I would be more concerned given the present whooping cough epidemic. What are you trying to get at?

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    Well, you were ranting about people avoiding vaccination and thus endangering everyone else.
    I only pointed out that they mostly endanger themselves and others that do not vaccinate.
    You try to make the point a couple of times regarding forced vaccination but why is a total mystery to me.

    I see the issues as education and public perception of medical science.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  9. #39
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    5,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    That was entirely logical and I stand by that.
    Your case is much more serious then I thought. BTW, may I ask why don't you say "That is entirely logical"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    Not at all. As I have already stated, herd immunity is achieved when immunisation is at some level which is below 100%. The fact that immunisation levels vary for 100% does not matter provided the the combination of the disease and population characteristics, and immunisation levels is such that disease infection level is zero. What it does defeat is your position that the main benefactors of immunisation are the individuals who are immunised. That is only true while ever the immunisation remains effective which in the case of the present pertussis vaccine is years rather than decades.
    No need to misrepresent my position.
    I stated clearly that individual immunisation benefits that particular individual.
    Mass immunisation only benefits those that are not immunised. I regret that you failed to understand what was expressed pretty clearly and was obvious to other readers. Speaking about lack of comprehension.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    Sorry Igor your link is broken. I sure hope you don't work in IT.
    Cheap shot. Anyway, if you couldn't find anything in 10c of googling, see here:
    http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/b...g_when_to_stop
    or here: http://www.health.nsw.gov.au/public-...key-facts.html

    In case you missed it: I was talking about general immunity level, not immunity to particular illness. Plenty more references to the general benefit of breastfeeding, but I agree it may be beside the point and not apply directly to whooping cough.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    He wasn't raised in a bubble and as there were no health epidemics at the time (AFAIK) and so we weren't particularly trying to wrap him in cotton wool for the first year. If he was under 12 months now I would be more concerned given the present whooping cough epidemic. What are you trying to get at?
    I thought it was clear: at the very early age (under six month) responsible parents have a control who their child contact. It becomes more difficult with older age and completely unpractical when child goes to school/kindergarten/child care etc.
    For private coaching (IM, four times VIC champion) call or SMS 0417519733
    Computer tells you what to play. Good coach explains why.

  10. #40
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,500
    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    That was entirely logical and I stand by that. You may not agree with the argument but that is your prerogative.
    You definitely have a problem then.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    I said that the number that forego for medical reasons is small and given that they are unvaccinatable does not present a barrier to achieving herd immunity. However, the number that forego vaccination for non-medical (and largely spiritual) reasons is much higher.
    Who says? Bill Maher, who produced a crappy atheopathic crockumentary Religulous, is happy to oppose vaccination.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    Sorry Igor your link is broken. I sure hope you don't work in IT.
    Cheap shot.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    I see the issues as education and public perception of medical science.
    That's fine. Lots of anti-vaccinators don't know how vaccination works.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  11. #41
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    Your case is much more serious then I thought. BTW, may I ask why don't you say "That is entirely logical"?
    There is something in English we call "tense" which expresses the time a particular verb is applicable for. While you could say "is" as I take your point that the logic of an argument is an ongoing thing and could be expressed in the present tense. In this case, I chose the past tense because the discussion took place some time ago. As a native speaker I tend not to analyse the tense of what I write that closely. Especially when answering a deliberate attempt to obfuscate a discussion with irrelevancies.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    No need to misrepresent my position.
    I stated clearly that individual immunisation benefits that particular individual.
    Mass immunisation only benefits those that are not immunised. I regret that you failed to understand what was expressed pretty clearly and was obvious to other readers. Speaking about lack of comprehension.
    I was not misrepresenting your position but simply explaining why it is wrong. In the case of whooping cough, those who are immunised have immunity for a limited period of time. So the individual immunity gradually deteriorates and everyone falls into the unimmunised category eventually. However, if the childhood immunise program is widely taken up by a population then herd immunity will protect everyone. Meaning there is no practical difference between an adult who was immunised as a child or an adult who was not unimmunised as a child, they both would enjoy the same benefit of herd immunity.

    Your "position" is true to a degree for the first few years after immunisation but not after that. As the vaccine program stands at the moment the population in that category would roughly be those between the ages of 1 to 9 and 15 to 20. Immunity would be gradually tailing off between the ages 10 to 14 and into the early twenties.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    In case you missed it: I was talking about general immunity level, not immunity to particular illness. Plenty more references to the general benefit of breastfeeding, but I agree it may be beside the point and not apply directly to whooping cough.
    Therefore I assume you concede that whooping cough immunity is not conferred by breastfeeding unless you can provide evidence to the contrary meaning that regardless of the feeding routine of the child, pertussis infection is an issue from birth. Until the infant booster shots have provided immunity (some time in the first 12 months).

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    I thought it was clear: at the very early age (under six month) responsible parents have a control who their child contact. It becomes more difficult with older age and completely unpractical when child goes to school/kindergarten/child care etc.
    Parents can act responsibly or irresponsibly and various levels in between but it is impractical to completely prevent all possible interactions which may provide an infection opportunity when there disease is in epidemic proportions in the general population.

    But it is much less of a risk if the population has herd immunity from easily preventable diseases like whooping cough because then epidemics simply do not occur. Which is where we began.

    I take it from your posts that you are largely in favour of vaccination. If that is the case I don't think we have any real disagreement. I just think the information should be provided to people so that they can make informed decisions on whether to vaccinate their children or not. At the moment the level of misinformation and poor reputation of medical science in some circles is compromising the enterprise of vaccination to levels of herd immunity. I think we need to address the information issue, not enforce vaccination.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  12. #42
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,500
    Approval of inter-racial breeding is predicated on idiotic Christian dogma that God's children must love their enemies (a concept JEWS totally reject); and on LIBERAL/MARXIST/JEW propaganda that all men/races are created equal. These genocidal ideologies, preached from the American pulpits, taught in American schools, legislated in the halls of Congress (confirming TALMUDIC conviction that goyim are stupid sheep), are expected to produce a single, superintelligent, beautiful, non-White "American" population. Eliminating forever racism, inequality, bigotry and war. As with ALL LIBERAL ideologies, miscegenation is totally inconsistent with Natural Law: the species are improved through in-breeding, natural selection and mutation. Only the strong survive. Cross-breeding Whites with species lower on the evolutionary scale diminishes the White gene-pool while increasing the number of physiologically, psychologically and behaviorally deprived mongrels. Throughout history improvident Whites have miscegenated. The "brotherhood" concept is not new (as LIBERALS pretend) nor are the results — which are inevitably disastrous for the White Race — evident today, for example, in the botched populations of Cuba, Mexico, Egypt, India, and the inner cities of contemporary America.

    James Brunn
    , the white supremacist who killed the guard at the Holocaust Museum.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  13. #43
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Cheap shot.
    And Igor's comment that since I work in a university I don't know about the "real world" wasn't?

    In fact mine wasn't anywhere near as cheap as Igor's since his case he assumes that anyone working at a university cannot know about the real world, which is just an infantile generalisation. Whereas in the case of my retort, someone working in IT really should have better than average ability to link a URL to a post.

    Anyway he opened the door both with ad hominem attacks and attacks based on the employment of the opponent so I'm hardly to blame for the degradation of the discussion on those points. I have shown, I think, remarkable restraint.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  14. #44
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    I think this post belongs in another thread unless you can justify it as a case of "spiritual" truth causing the disaster.

    Did he believe he was hearing the voice of Adolf Hitler from beyond the grave?
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  15. #45
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,500
    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    I think this post belongs in another thread unless you can justify it as a case of "spiritual" truth causing the disaster.
    I disagree, since it serves as a counter-example: this scumbag rejected the "spiritual" ideas that all men/races are created equal, for instance.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •