Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row • Hacker News Board

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#161

Post by yucky » Sat, Jan 14, 2023, 1:50 PM UTC

hestefisk wrote: post #127

phpisthebest wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Government agencies have a responsibility not to lie to the public to achieve what they think is a "greater good". The have a responsibility not to just change the definition of words like vaccine to fit their political goals The failure here is not parents it is every single person in power and every single spineless person that unquestionably was regurgitating the dracionian narratives of those in power the last 2+…

What lies, specifically?

Not the person you're responding to, but this is one of the more egregious examples that comes to mind, from the Director of the CDC herself:

"Our data from the CDC today suggests that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don't get sick, and that it's not just in the clinical trials, but it's also in real-world data." ~Dr. Rochelle Wolensky[1]

This was a lie, and it was not only repeated but amplified by those in positions of authority up to and including the President of the United States.

[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/cdc-director-data-vaccinated...

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#162

Post by usea » Sat, Jan 14, 2023, 1:51 PM UTC

generalizations wrote: post #150

usea wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Either parents should be allowed to kill their children on a whim without consequence, or parents are not the ultimate authority over their children. They are mutually exclusive beliefs. Children aren't property. They're human beings that deserve the protection of the state. Sometimes that means protection FROM their parents.

> Either parents should be allowed to kill their children on a whim without consequence, or parents are not the ultimate authority over their children. They are mutually exclusive beliefs. That's either a weird strawman, or you missed the point of what "ultimate authority" means here. The question is who gets the final say in how the child is cared for - if the parent thinks that something is harmful to the child, an…

> The question is who gets the final say in how the child is cared for - if the parent thinks that something is harmful to the child, and the state says it's mandatory, who gets final say?

The state gets final say.

On most parenting matters the state has no opinion, or at least has the opinion "let the parent decide." But that delegation of authority does not mean the state has given it up. We the people have authority in the matter in how you parent your child. We will go to such lengths as taking the child away and raising it elsewhere if that is what's best for them.

People don't get to murder their children and get away with it.

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#163

Post by hutzlibu » Sat, Jan 14, 2023, 2:08 PM UTC

maxerickson wrote: post #158

realjhol wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The vaccines are less risky than infection for children even though the risks from infection are low. Are you somehow assuming that they aren't ever going to get infected?

"The vaccines are less risky than infection for children"

Can you back up that claim with long term studies?

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#164

Post by generalizations » Sat, Jan 14, 2023, 2:08 PM UTC

usea wrote: post #162

generalizations wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Either parents should be allowed to kill their children on a whim without consequence, or parents are not the ultimate authority over their children. They are mutually exclusive beliefs. That's either a weird strawman, or you missed the point of what "ultimate authority" means here. The question is who gets the final say in how the child is cared for - if the parent thinks that something is harmful to the child, an…

> The question is who gets the final say in how the child is cared for - if the parent thinks that something is harmful to the child, and the state says it's mandatory, who gets final say? The state gets final say. On most parenting matters the state has no opinion, or at least has the opinion "let the parent decide." But that delegation of authority does not mean the state has given it up. We the people have authori…

> We will go to such lengths as taking the child away and raising it elsewhere if that is what's best for them

Correction. "if we think that is what's best for them." Maybe it is, maybe it's not. It's kinda like the death penalty - the state can totally get it wrong, and mistakes have lifelong reprecussions.

> People don't get to murder their children and get away with it.

Again, this seems like a weird strawman. And like I implied before, balance that possibilty with the liklihood it's the state doing the murdering. I'd rather have a distributed system of parents putting a majority of their time and attention into figuring out what's best for their own kid -- rather than a bureaucratic state that's playing politics and influenced by lobbyists, deciding what's probably best for the majority of the kids.

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#165

Post by Avamander » Sat, Jan 14, 2023, 2:11 PM UTC

realjhol wrote: post #134

Avamander wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The vaccines were never tested to prevent transmission Because it's an inevitable thing when people are less ill. It's dishonest to demand testing something like "people coughing less spread less" and then use that to pad the rest of your weak arguments with that - like the last sentence about efficacy (straight after the anecdotal). > Sweden never locked down, and their outcomes were better than most of the rest o…

> Because it's an inevitable thing when people are less ill. It's dishonest to demand testing something like "people coughing less spread less" and then use that to pad the rest of your weak arguments with that - like the last sentence about efficacy (straight after the anecdotal). The context of this is that there were voices calling for coercing vaccination. My mother-in-law lost her job because she refused to have…

> Not at all. Again and again, the @realjhol model was far more accurate than the Imperial College model. Many such cases. Sad to see my alma mater fail so badly.

Did you forget to switch to a sockpuppet account?

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#166

Post by dennis_jeeves1 » Sat, Jan 14, 2023, 2:12 PM UTC

Mountain_Skies wrote: post #44

nnx wrote: post #31

This is really sad as it will probably cause unnecessary children deaths down the road. I think public health authorities have serious soul-searching to do, this outcome was clearly warned upon by a lot of doctors and paediatricians who seen first hand parents not understanding why those authorities were pushing so hard novel mrna covid-19 vaccines on healthy children that were basically not at risk from this disease…

It's difficult for the soulless to soul-search, and all too many who lead us here are soulless sociopaths. Beyond the loss of confidence from the public, many of my friends who work at the CDC, and have been there their entire careers, have lost faith in both the organization and its leaders. I expect the CDC will experience a lot of brain drain and loss of institutional knowledge now that the rank-and-file have had…

Excellent observations. As a general rule this is how most organizations devolve. With private organizations they tend to self annihilate by not making profits. But with the government it devolves into totalitarianism.

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#167

Post by dennis_jeeves1 » Sat, Jan 14, 2023, 2:22 PM UTC

nabla9 wrote: post #73

speeder wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my personal experience... you are wrong. I mean, the part about knowing better than someone that works with something. People working in some fields often suffer the "It Is Difficult to Get a Man to Understand Something When His Salary Depends Upon His Not Understanding It" Example: I have Hashimoto's Disease. All endocrinologists I went to, wouldn't help me, some of them burned a lot of my money trying to prove I…

Thank you for sharing your personal experience. Unfortunately sharing personal stories like this in the internet is the source of much grief for three reasons: 1) There is no way to quantify how likely this is from personal stories. If your experience is 1 in 100 event, you are doing more harm sharing it than not sharing it if 1 in 10 becomes too suspicious to follow diagnosis. 2) We really don't know. Either things…

So indirectly what you're saying is protect the masses from 'misinformation'. The masses are too stupid to think for themselves, correct?

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#168

Post by SangareEel » Sat, Jan 14, 2023, 2:23 PM UTC

Nextgrid wrote: post #146

SangareEel wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> A vaccine we know doesn't prevent infection, transmission, sickness or death. The data doesn't support this. Of course you could say that the data has been tampered with, but so could be whatever data you use to "know" that the vaccine doesn't work. The vaccine could work better for sure (and maybe future ones will), but beggars can't be choosers and even if it was only 10% effective it would be better than nothing…

[flagged]

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#169

Post by usea » Sat, Jan 14, 2023, 2:27 PM UTC

generalizations wrote: post #164

usea wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The question is who gets the final say in how the child is cared for - if the parent thinks that something is harmful to the child, and the state says it's mandatory, who gets final say? The state gets final say. On most parenting matters the state has no opinion, or at least has the opinion "let the parent decide." But that delegation of authority does not mean the state has given it up. We the people have authori…

> We will go to such lengths as taking the child away and raising it elsewhere if that is what's best for them Correction. " if we think that is what's best for them." Maybe it is, maybe it's not. It's kinda like the death penalty - the state can totally get it wrong, and mistakes have lifelong reprecussions. > People don't get to murder their children and get away with it. Again, this seems like a weird strawman. An…

It's not a strawman. If the state disallows you from murdering your child, they have authority over you. There are court cases every year where parents who kill their kids get convicted and sent to jail. Who had authority? The people who went to jail, or the people who sent them there?

> I'd rather have a distributed system of parents putting a majority of their time and attention into figuring out what's best for their own kid -- rather than a bureaucratic state that's playing politics and influenced by lobbyists, deciding what's probably best for the majority of the kids.

I would rather have the state disallow murdering children rather than each parent deciding for themselves if they should be able to murder their kid. Maybe you had great parents, but not everyone is so lucky. Sometimes parents don't do what's best for their kid. In those cases, it's better for the state to use their Ultimate Authority to intervene in the interests of the child.

Stopping people from killing their children should be uncontroversial.

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#170

Post by ominous » Sat, Jan 14, 2023, 2:28 PM UTC

eesmith wrote: post #29

ominous wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like a good response only if you ignore the real point being raised: when coerced, a being who thinks of itself as having free will fights back at least a small amount. Do you disagree?

That summary is so high-level and abstract as to be useless. At that level, we face coercion all the time: a traffic light is a form of coercion backed by the threat of state violence. Does fighting back against that coercion explain why people run red lights? Moreover, if it's the expected human response, what explains the 2% difference between now and the 2019-2020 school year? Do more people now think of themselve…

Do you agree with every single traffic light in every single circunstance (place, and your timing)? Moreover, do you agree with every future traffic light that will ever be placed?