Lazy8 wrote: 
Don't worry, your secret is safe with me. Gary never need know how you rushed to Rand's defense on the intertubes.

 

 kctomato wrote: 
Vaccinating Babies for Rotavirus protects the Whole Family

Herd Immunity

aflanigan wrote:
I mean to say you should go look up what the word "coercion" means.

If either of the Pauls opposes requiring kids attending public school to be vaccinated maybe you should dig that up.

And I'm a Gary Johnson kinda guy, but thanks for the, um, whatever that was.

 aflanigan wrote: 
This is a false statement. It is not "mandatory". There are legal options to exercise one's constitutional rights.

I realize this is purely anecdotal and thus has no real weight as evidence, but it does nicely complement what actual data and evidence on disease and vaccination tell us.

Growing Up Unvaccinated 

 miamizsun wrote: 
I would be all for study to determine who is susceptible and who is not. They have made no effort to do so however. Currently vaccination is a "one-size-fits-all" policy. The HHS know it's a risk and vaccines have been determined by the courts and HHS legalize representation to be "unavoidably unsafe". So much so that Congress passed liability immunity for the manufacturers.

One just has to read a packet insert to see the dangers. However, this information does not state exactly who may be susceptible to harm. It's a "proceed at your own risk" mass policy.

With an "unavoidably unsafe" product with no liability or assurance it will actually protect you, the choice should be the individuals.

We followed the advice of the medical doctors and we now have a son who has been injured for life.

I will forever tell others, think twice.
Learn the risks.

I will not tell them what they should do.

If your child or love one does react to a vaccination, be ready to be denied and ostracized by the medical community and the court of public opinion.

The good thing, that's changing. With more and more vaccinations and thus more and more personal exposure to injury events,  people are realizing the emperor wears no clothes.

This is happening regardless of distractions such as the cult of personality issues and politicizing.

That is why we are seeing this push in the media this year to scare sway public opinion about the flu (which backfired since the vaccines failed) and now measles.

 Lazy8 wrote: 
You're reading the word "voluntary" in a rather tortured way, it seems, for something that is mandatory for public school attendance in all 50 states. Do you mean to say that coercion is fine as long as the federal government is not behind it?

I suppose you have Tammy's admiration, anyway.

 

 aflanigan wrote:
So it was the foaming-at-the-mouth thing. OK.

Do you think it's out of the question that they actually believe what they said—that vaccinations should be voluntary—which is essentially the current legal order?

This ginned-up controversy is pure fluff, an attempt at turning the Pauls into bogiemen and demonizing them for opposition to something that no one is proposing.

 aflanigan wrote: 
i only heard a short clip and gleaned that bloomberg article

are you reading something current that i haven't seen?

 miamizsun wrote: 
If I were naive, I suppose I might believe that this learned, articulate doctor did not mean to deliberately send mixed messages regarding the efficacy of immunization and the importance of vaccinating all children; that he does believe vaccines to be effective and a vital public health tool, and simply has a hard time making his opinions known and clearly understood.

I can't help thinking this was an attempt to "dog whistle" to the anti-vaccination crowd while hedging with the "not anti-vaccination" claim in case he needs to back-pedal at some point. 

 kctomato wrote: 
i don't know enough details about herd immunity to say

however personalized medicine is coming and let's hope that it works more efficiently with our immune system

regards

 Lazy8 wrote: 

I am wondering how someone supposedly as responsible as a doctor of medicine can be so irresponsible as to pander to quacks who suggest that vaccination should be avoided. And why on earth anyone this irresponsible should expect people to vote for him.

Libertarian leaning candidates like the Pauls present themselves as alternatives to the typical politicians that currently run the system, correct? They stick to their principles regardless of how unpopular they are, which would seem to preclude this sort of pandering.

You can belittle my cynicism and scepticism with ad hominems like "foaming at the mouth" all you like. 

 

 miamizsun wrote: 
"anti-vax" is a false flag meant to distract about having any real conversation about the vaccines and their safety issues themselves.

 aflanigan wrote: 
it seems in his conversation that he is for prioritizing and staggering vaccines (children with compromised immune systems may be staggered and some children/parents aren't comfortable with the current schedule)

my guess is that when he says rules he means that those vaccines are mandatory

i'd have to listen again, but i thought i heard him say that he isn't anti-vaccination and that he thought that it was a good idea

 

 aflanigan wrote: 
Herd immunity is merely a "theory" and has not worked in practice.

 aflanigan wrote:
So...are you actually proposing something, or just foaming at the mouth over this?

There is currently no legal punishment—no fine, no prison time—for refusing to be vaccinated or refusing to have a child vaccinated. Are you proposing one?

No, requirements that kids attending public school get vaccinated (even if those requirements have more loopholes than the tax code) don't count. Attendance at public schools is not mandatory either.

I think Drs. Paul weren't being terribly precise in their wording, but maybe you can out do them. What, specifically, are you proposing?

 miamizsun wrote: 
Most? So what diseases do we want the next generation to die of in the cause of the sacredness of individual liberty? I'd like him (or you, or any other libertarians who agree with him) to spell it out specifically. Measles? Rubella? Tetanus?

When it comes to political pandering, like father, like son, it appears.

Dave Weigel on Rand Paul, Ron Paul & Vaccines

 aflanigan wrote: 
i think he says most should be voluntary

and some should have "rules"

Darling of self-proclaimed independents and libertarians (and Ayn Rand fans) Rand Paul, allegedly a trained doctor, demonstrates his grasp ignorance of basic medical concepts such as herd immunity:

Paul-Vaccines should be Voluntary 

 romeotuma wrote: 
A journalist, Bill Moyers giving us medical advice spurred on by a Hollywood (propaganda?) movie he just saw. Neat.