My Doctor Told Me I Should Vaccinate My Children, But ...

[kentonio]

Interesting. Where has anyone stated religion as a motivation?

[Ben Kenobi]

None of those things are relevant. Goodbye. You are the weakest link.

Interesting how you don't view the fact that diphtheria, pertussis, measles, mumps and rubella all exhibit airborne transmission as relevant. The folks who pushed for their immunization in the first place certainly thought so!

[Ben Kenobi]

Yes, it's curious. We have religionistas like snoopy who are obsessed with it.

[kentonio]

The only reason you give a **** about this is it's sex related, ironically the one subject on the planet you are least qualified to speak about given that you're a sad lonely virgin. You care purely because in your moronic head people should care more about your imaginary friend than they do about people pointlessly dying of easily preventable diseases. Nothing is new here.

[Ben Kenobi]

The only reason you give a **** about this is it's sex related

I would counter that the only reason some argue it should be mandatory is because it's sex related. If it were not a STD, no one would care.

Is there a HPV epidemic where people are going to die from HPV? No. Odd then we'd be all raised into a froth over the issue.

, ironically the one subject on the planet you are least qualified to speak about given that you're a sad lonely virgin. You care purely because in your moronic head people should care more about your imaginary friend than they do about people pointlessly dying of easily preventable diseases. Nothing is new here.

Once again, we've established that the argument in favor of mandatory HPV inoculations has nothing to do with science and everything to do with feelings. Curiously you would cram your beliefs down the throats of everyone rather than simply permitting people to choose what they will do.

In any case, there are solid scientific reasons for mandatory inoculation for DPT and MMR. Those same reasons do not apply to HPV.

Perhaps I should ask a question.

If you could only inoculate for 1 disease, which would you choose?

[kentonio]

You know the best part about all this? No-one gives a **** whag you think, and what you want isnt going to happen. Sometimes the world is both fair and just.

[Ben Kenobi]

You know the best part about all this? No-one gives a **** whag you think, and what you want isnt going to happen.

Forcing children to endure unnecessary and unneeded inoculations is going to shatter this 'consensus'.

Sometimes the world is both fair and just

Indeed, which is why once this overblown fad passes by we'll wonder why we were so concerned about it.

[kentonio]

Keep dreaming dip****.

[Dr Strangelove]

You're comparing the transmission of Ebola to HPV? Seriously, Doc?

So far HPV related diseases have killed far more people than Ebola.

Tell me, what's the most common vector for HPV transmission.

People. Ditto for all the rest, except for rabies.

[Ben Kenobi]

So far HPV related diseases have killed far more people than Ebola.

I asked if HPV itself were an epidemic killing people. Yes or no, Doc. Is it Ebola related diseases or Ebola itself?

People.

Gee, a dishonest answer. I'm shocked that someone who believes that parents should simply submit to your directions would willingly lie to them.

[Ben Kenobi]

Keep dreaming dip****

Already happening. People get pissed when you lie to them Kentonio.

[snoopy369]

Doc, play nice. Ben didn't know what communicable meant, you really think he knows what vector means?

[N35t0r]

Ilike how somehow advocating for HPV vaccines autmatically means all other vaccines must be abolished.

I would counter that the only reason some argue it should be mandatory is because it's sex related.

'Some'? Very probaby. Nobody cares about what all 10 of them argue.

If it were not a STD, no one would care.

You mean that no one cares about Measels, Diphteria, Tetanus, Robella, Hib, Pertussis, etc? Odd, given current vaccination rates.

Is there a HPV epidemic where people are going to die from HPV? No. Odd then we'd be all raised into a froth over the issue.

So we shouldn't take action against anything until a lot of people start dying? Research on non-life-threatening diseases is useless?

Once again, we've established that the argument in favor of mandatory HPV inoculations has nothing to do with science and everything to do with feelings. Curiously you would cram your beliefs down the throats of everyone rather than simply permitting people to choose what they will do.

lol no.

1) people die / get sick / have their quality of life diminished from HPV
2) Pre-contagion inoculation is effective; post-contagion is not
3) inocculation is relatively cheap, aggregate cost is less than economic loss from 1)

Opposing HPV innoculations has everything to do with scence and nothing to with feelings.

Perhaps I should ask a question.

If you could only inoculate for 1 disease, which would you choose?

And how is this relevant?

[Ben Kenobi]

Doc, play nice. Ben didn't know what communicable meant, you really think he knows what vector means?

Doc can't answer the simple question that it's not transmitted in the same way. I'm not sure why he gets a pass for ignoring the question and then answering in a dishonest fashion.

Funny how you openly challenge dishonesty when it's someone whom you disagree and champion dishonesty when it's someone you agree with.

[Ben Kenobi]

I like how somehow advocating for HPV vaccines autmatically means all other vaccines must be abolished.

You're arguing that how a disease is transmitted is not relevant to whether it ought to be mandatory inoculations. This is just straight up wrong. Public health officials when MMR and DPT were developed argued that the modes of transmission were relevant as to whether or not they should be mandatory.

I'm going to go with the actual public health officials and not you. Odd that. Yes, it is very relevant. The fact that one can avoid contracting HPV through rather simple means means that there's zero impetus for mandatory inoculations. It's a STD, ffs. Let people choose.

.
'Some'? Very probaby. Nobody cares about what all 10 of them argue.

I won't say all, because that's inaccurate, but, some only care because it's a STD. If it wasn't an STD, they wouldn't give two ****s about it. People don't die from HPV.

You mean that no one cares about Measels, Diphteria, Tetanus, Robella, Hib, Pertussis, etc? Odd, given current vaccination rates.

People wouldn't care about HPV if it were not a STD. It's just not that prominent a disease.

So we shouldn't take action against anything until a lot of people start dying? Research on non-life-threatening diseases is useless?

You're arguing HPV is going to somehow mutate and start killing people? Pretty flimsy reason to force mandatory inoculations. Sure, if HPV mutates and starts doing that I can absolutely see the reason for the inoculations.

1) people die / get sick / have their quality of life diminished from HPV

Who dies from HPV? Nobody dies from HPV.

2) Pre-contagion inoculation is effective; post-contagion is not

Again, how does this justify forcing inoculations on children for a STD?

3) inocculation is relatively cheap, aggregate cost is less than economic loss from 1)

Again, there are cheaper ways to avoid infection 100 percent.

Opposing HPV innoculations has everything to do with scence and nothing to with feelings.

The science of HPV transmission notes that the primary mode of transmission is sex. Ergo - refraining from sex is the scientific way to prevent yourself from getting HPV.

If you want to have sex and avoid HPV, then it makes sense for someone past the age of consent to seek the HPV vaccine.

Or you do believe that people should be having sex without consenting to it?

And how is this relevant?

I significantly doubt HPV is the highest priority disease. Why is that?