Spare Rods, Not Vaccines

to Pelicanwatchcb and others of like mind,

"If a parent denied a child available food or shelter on religious grounds, that parent would be declared unfit and the child would be taken into custody by by the state. Should there be a difference with regard to medicine?"

Don't be ridiculous. This vaccine is a pre-emptive strike against the fear that we could all die from a rapidly mutating viral strain. It is an unexact science at best, a cannon shooting at a moving target, and in my mind doubtless makes the immune system weaker, as with anything that you give artificial props and crutches to so that it is challenged even further to stand on it's own feet.

This vaccine is not comparable to food and shelter by any means, except in the sheeps mentality. It is in no way equivalent to parental requirements to shelter and feed their children.

When do the sheep intend to start baying to insist that all good sheep need to get that microchip behind their ears, (to better locate the sheep-napped innocents and nab the wolves in sheeps clothing), and get the numbers stamped on their foreheads, (Big Brother says all will be better if we do, so we must)? Let's roll up our sleeves. So that we can better bend over...

"Of course, decisions about all proposed vaccinations are generally not as clear-cut as with smallpox or polio."

Okay, try and get a smallpox vaccination.

People who say they will not be vaccinated for the H1N1 flu perhaps are not well acquainted with the 1918 pandemic. Here are some facts from Gina Kolata’s book “Flu”:

“…. there is nothing that can stop the disease’s progress. Your face turns a dark brownish purple. You start to cough up blood. Your feet turn black. Finally, as the end nears, you frantically gasp for breath. A blood-tinged saliva bubbles out of your mouth. You die–by drowning, actually–as your lungs fill with a reddish fluid.”

“…. The plague took off in September, 1918. When it was over, half a million Americans would lie dead. …. More than 25% of the U.S. population became ill.”

“…. humanity had been struck by a disease that killed more people in a few months’ time than any other illness in the history of the world. ….Estimates range from 20 million to more than 100 million, but no one can ever know for sure.”

Fortunately, the current flu pandemic does not appear to come anywhere close to the lethal flu of 1918, but when the vaccine becomes available, I intend to get it as soon as I can. The 1918 flu was mild at first, but then came back with a vengeance. The shot is not just to protect me but also those with whom I come in contact. I consider it my duty to get that shot.

Based on the preponderance of evidence available to me at this time, I would (if it were available to me today) get the H1N1 vaccine. To quote a Republican Senator (and I don't do that often) "That's my vote today."

Here in Wisconsin, the courts recently handed down the sentences for Dale and Leilani Neumann, who prayed over their 11-year-old dotter Kara for months while she was wasting away, puking her guts out, and generally going to hell due to the side effects of diabetes. Easily treatable diabetes.

I've got no problem with people praying for their kids. Heck, pray all you want. Won't do any good, of course, but it won't do any harm either.

Just do it IN ADDITION TO decent medical care, not INSTEAD OF.

Same deal with vaccinations. Pray your little hearts out, but make sure the kids get their shots.

It's my impression that many parents who deny medical care on religious grounds do so because they really believe medical care is harmful to the child's well-being. The fact that a child dies or is disabled as a result may not convince them otherwise, since they define well-being to include the spiritual. I am not disagreeing with Prof. Silverman here; in fact, I wholeheartedly endorse his statement that the reasons for medical neglect don't matter -- all parents should be held to the same standard. Unfortunately, most states privilege religious motivations (either through special exemptions or apathetic/absent prosecution). But the harder problem is reaching parents who actually believe that withholding medical care is the noble path; these are not people who will buy ethical arguments, because they define ethics very differently from others. One of the religious bloggers here simply states that not vaccinating is a "sin." As much as I abhor that kind of pronouncement (particularly since it's the same one used to justify medical neglect), I have to acknowledge that it may be a more effective tactic with believers who rely on authoritarian moral guidance.

My wife and I ALWAYS get the flu shot, and this year will be no different.

If a parent denied a child available food or shelter on religious grounds, that parent would be declared unfit and the child would be taken into custody by by the state. Should there be a difference with regard to medicine?

I agree with you, Herb, that there are no valid religious reasons not to get vaccinated against the flu, or not having children vaccinated against the deadly and crippling diseases we've overcome as a result of vaccination. Yes, there is the rare child or adult that experiences side effects, some, in the case of children, life altering. All that said, the greater good is to be vaccinated.

I do agree with many parents that the number of vaccinations nowadays is way too many in too short a period of time, compared when we were infants. Parents today have the option of having the vaccinations spread out over a greater period of time to allow the baby's immune system, not fully developed, to adapt, and I agree with this format. But to not vaccinate at all? You do your children greater harm in the long run.

Now, am I going to get a flu shot? Do it every year. Since getting them, I haven't gotten the flu. Of course, I'm meticulous about washing my hands, so that helps as well. And I use an allergy nasal spray that locks the nasal cells and prevents the cold/flu that is sneezed around and in the air as a result from locking onto the cells.

Will I get a swine flu shot? No. It's testing has been limited, those of us at a certain age have a built-in immunity based on a previous similar years ago, according to the scientists and doctors, and the swine flu itself is no deadlier than any other flu (pandemic, yeah right) if normal sanitary precautions are taken.

I have had the flu less often since I stopped getting an annual flu shot than I did when I was getting one. I'll never take another flu shot.

While I agree with Professor Silverman's logic and his persuasive arguments, I still probably will not get a swine flu shot. First, I don't fall into a high risk category, so I will have to wait until those that do obtain their shots. By that time the flu season may be over. Moreover, I dread going into the health clinic where many infected people have spread their ills. Surely my chance of catching the swine flu at the health clinic while receiving my vaccination is at least double or triple my chances of becoming infected while sitting in my office.