Mandating vaccine for children

jive turkey · Sep 27, 2021

1 hour ago, Hannahbanana said:

1.The technology to do this was developed a long time ago, and its researchers realized its application to this virus when it was identified.

2.Millions of people all over the world have received vaccines developed by multiple manufacturers using the mRNA process. That's as big a sample size as you're ever going to get. If it were going to have dreadful sidee effects we would be seeing it by now-- viz to wit., the time frames for side effects from other vaccines, which I will leave it to you to look up in reputable medical and immunological references. Hint: They appear early on, in hours, days. or (rarely) weeks. None declare themselves months or years later.

If "natural immunity" were an effective thing for this, we wouldn't be in this mess now, with as many deaths we have had worldwide, and more all the time, now, would we? Or do we need to kill off a far greater proportion of the population to identify it? No thanks.

1. These vaccines, for this virus, were not developed 30 years ago. We can't fairly argue we have 30 years of evidence regarding how this vaccine will perform. We have 9 months. The airplane was developed over 100 years ago and yet still, a newer, modern Boeing 737 Max was crashing.

2.Previous vaccines you're using for comparison were not mRNA vaccines. Let's not use other vaccines to argue the effects of this one. They aren't the same. Someone could have made the same argument for Zantac noting all the other H2 blockers that have been used safely for years only to later discover there were long term side effects. It is reasonable to say there's more to learn and for that, objections to mandates are reasonable.

3. For clarification, when I say natural immunity I'm referring to the previously infected. I'll leave it to you to research statistics regarding reinfection rates along with hospitalizations and deaths thereafter. And yes, even for the naive the vast majority of people infected survive. Unfortunately ~2% of the population is a large number of people which makes the vaccine relevant.

My argument has more to do with mandates. I get the sense you're countering as if I'm against the vaccine all together. I'm not.

guest1163268 · Sep 27, 2021

1 hour ago, jive turkey said:

"Patiently and with a smile"

Another poster and I argued against mandating a vaccine as new as this one. People often cite the technology was developed 30 years ago failing to mention it was not this vaccine for this virus 30 years ago. Many of us disagree with being coerced in to participating in a demonstration as you described it. It has the opportunity to demonstrate the good it can do and it also has the opportunity to demonstrate what harm it can cause. Natural immunity can also demonstrate what great fruits it can bear too. Time will tell for all.

Does that clear it up for you?

Your basement floods, you use a pump that was invented over thousands of years ago and electricity well over a hundred years ago. Now if you pump the water into the house, will that cause harm?

Or, you can wait a few months for the water to dry up, naturally?

Does that clear it up for you?

listless reads · Sep 27, 2021

6 minutes ago, Curious1997 said:

Your basement floods, you use a pump that was invented over thousands of years ago and electricity well over a hundred years ago. Now if you pump the water into the house, will that cause harm?

Or, you can wait a few months for the water to dry up, naturally?

Does that clear it up for you?

Literally made no sense. The topic is mandating. Even in your scenario, the person has a choice to let it wait to dry up...despite your example being a poor hypothetical of the subject matter.

guest1163268 · Sep 28, 2021

6 hours ago, listless reads said:

Literally made no sense. The topic is mandating. Even in your scenario, the person has a choice to let it wait to dry up...despite your example being a poor hypothetical of the subject matter.

Seriously, did you actually think that it would make sense to you? Does anything actually make sense to you if it's logical?

Name a single invention within the last fifty years that hasn't in some way exploited the design or physics of something before! Just because you have a thought, doesn't actually mean that it might be a good idea to throw it out there.

At least get to know yourself and your limitations before swimming in the pool!

heron, ASN, RN · Sep 28, 2021

15 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

Right now, the pursuit of natural immunity has our health system in near collapse and our economy sputtering...what has time told us so far?

Think about it...

What’s interesting is that neither anti-mandate poster has addressed this question. Why is that? We already know what happens in the absence of a mandate. What is it about the current situation that is so desirable, either for the unvaccinated or for the country as a whole? Desirable to whom?

Who has an interest in seeing so many Americans sick and dying unnecessarily while “natural immunity” somehow increases to provide the herd immunity needed to protect those who cannot be vaccinated, as you claim it will do? How do you propose to deal with the increased risk of mutation into even more virulent strains due to the (probably) extended timeline?

Meanwhile, back at the bank, just who is paying for all the unnecessary morbidity? Not just for those who are voluntarily unvaccinated but for those who cannot access timely care because healthcare systems are overloaded. So far, lack of a mandate has already resulted in rationing of care in two states … is that a desirable outcome and, if not, how do you propose to deal with it? The butcher’s bill is already in the billions … who is paying it?

Last, but not least, if (and it’s a really big “if”) natural immunity does eventually result in effective herd immunity, after using up a huge amount of resources unnecessarily, how do you propose we deal with the next pandemic. It’s pretty much of an inevitability, given the realities of climate change and environmental disruption.

And I’m still asking just who benefits from a USA burdened with the care of an increasing number of chronically ill and dying citizens, drained of resources and bankrupt. Just whose interests are you serving, really?

toomuchbaloney · Sep 28, 2021

23 minutes ago, heron said:

What’s interesting is that neither anti-mandate poster has addressed this question. Why is that? We already know what happens in the absence of a mandate. What is it about the current situation that is so desirable, either for the unvaccinated or for the country as a whole? Desirable to whom?

Who has an interest in seeing so many Americans sick and dying unnecessarily while “natural immunity” somehow increases to provide the herd immunity needed to protect those who cannot be vaccinated, as you claim it will do? How do you propose to deal with the increased risk of mutation into even more virulent strains due to the (probably) extended timeline?

Meanwhile, back at the bank, just who is paying for all the unnecessary morbidity? Not just for those who are voluntarily unvaccinated but for those who cannot access timely care because healthcare systems are overloaded. So far, lack of a mandate has already resulted in rationing of care in two states … is that a desirable outcome and, if not, how do you propose to deal with it? The butcher’s bill is already in the billions … who is paying it?

Last, but not least, if (and it’s a really big “if”) natural immunity does eventually result in effective herd immunity, after using up a huge amount of resources unnecessarily, do you propose we deal with the next pandemic. It’s pretty much of an inevitability, given the realities of climate change and environmental disruption.

And I’m still asking just who benefits from a USA burdened with the care of an increasing number of chronically ill and dying citizens, drained of resources and bankrupt. Just whose interests are you serving, really?

Jive turkey recognized early in his vaccine concern campaign that he was going to need to ignore my questions. That started immediately when he realized that he had no good responses to my questions.

allnurses Guide · Oct 4, 2021

On 9/22/2021 at 4:34 PM, jive turkey said:

Here's what Pfizer had to say about the use of the vaccine for children under 12:

https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-and-biontech-announce-positive-topline-results

It's not impossible mandates may son follow and apply to children, particularly for attending school.

How do you feel about the potential for this vaccine to be required for children?

My state is requiring the vaccine for schoolchildren and I'm fine with it. They already mandate polio, DTP, MMR, Hep B, and varicella vaccinations for children entering kindergarten and they are extremely serious about having those immunization records presented before the child is allowed to start school.

MaxAttack, BSN, RN · Oct 4, 2021

On 9/23/2021 at 11:20 PM, jive turkey said:

That's not entirely true

I wasn't about to sift through pages of you guys debating social contracts. Did you ever link to the study you referenced?