Thursday, September 13, 2012

Security State Tightens the Noose Again

Bill toughens vaccine opt out option - Proposed law could make obtaining immunization exemptions harder for parents

Headline in the Thursday, September 13, 2012, newspaper.

VACCINATIONS: 'Most vaccines are not 100 percent effective'.

Vaccination are supposed to immunize a child entering kindergarten from communicable diseases. That means the child is protected from the diseases that might come from some child that did not get vaccinated.  Does that make sense? You would think so.

So, how do you justify this statement by Susan Buckley, Humboldt County Department of Health and Human Services' Public Health Director:
"Exemptions contribute to low vaccination rates, which put all students at risk." [Emphasis added]
That would mean getting vaccinated is a waste of time and money if you're still "at risk."

Melinda Whareton, deputy director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases at the Centers for Disease Control make the most inane and asinine argument for why EVERYONE must be vaccinated:
"Most vaccines are not 100 percent effective. People can still become infected, even if they have been vaccinated, if they are around someone who is not immunized and has the disease."
That's a clear cut argument for NOT getting vaccinated if I ever heard one.

This is the typical moronic thinking that a "father knows best" form of government uses to brainwash people into submission. Vaccinations typically make you a little sick, so as to build your resistance to getting  really sick. Nothing like filling your body full of crap that makes you sick so that you don't make someone else sick. When I was in school they used to tell us that a hitch in the Army would make us men. That is if you didn't get killed in the process. And a lot of us did too.

Yeah! Good thing for the "herd." Good thing for parents alright. What's next, artificial insemination?


  1. HUH? What?

    Something about the logic that you can't follow?

  2. Joe -- and so you know I looked into your weblog, besides speaking for it getting noticed.

    The medical logic these people are speaking to begins in that vaccination lowers the number of persons who can get the disease. Not perfectly, as you mention.

    If not everyone is vaccinated, then the disease has a higher chance to crop up within the group.

    Now those persons for whom the vaccination is less than 100% effective stand also to get the disease. Each person that gets it then has their germs try to pass it on -- and so the disease gets a foothold. More in the group yet get it, than with the maximum number taking the shot.

    Vaccination is never perfect (though I think some like smallpox for practical purposes are). The medical people just want to get the best result they can.

    Less people getting the disease also lessens the chances for mutation, which is important for illness like flu. Public health people are always worried that something will develop like the deadly one that swept the world in 1917.

    There will always be some who won't get the shot, for their reasons of medical nature, religion, or opinion. That adds to the logic of why the public health people want to have the shots go to all the people they can who will.

    You can see it's kind of a multiplying thing. And by the way, somebody did a great job on your pic with the blog and posts. I like the way it kind of expresses what's in your words.