I'm sure if there was a vaccine that turned everyone into a docile sheep, some of you will want it mandatory too, because after all - it has clear benefits and the government knows what's best for us all.
Thump553
Lifer
- Jun 2, 2000
- 12,742
- 2,518
- 126
If vaccines aren't mandatory then insurers should be allowed to drastically alter their premiums-or even deny coverage-for those who voluntarily assume that risk. After all, it is THEY who should bear the entire cost of their decisions, not the rest of us.
That's coupled, of course, in a perfect Perry/Paul world where health care providers will turn their back on you without payment, regardless of your need.
That's coupled, of course, in a perfect Perry/Paul world where health care providers will turn their back on you without payment, regardless of your need.
Thump553
Lifer
- Jun 2, 2000
- 12,742
- 2,518
- 126
You seem prone to say really stupid things. Leaded gas and asbestos were used by the industry until government regulations outlawed them, so your argument is bassakwards.
I wonder if we would be having the same conversation if HPV-associated penile cancer effected as many men as HPV-associated Cervical cancer effects women.
Thump553
Lifer
- Jun 2, 2000
- 12,742
- 2,518
- 126
I guess you never heard of FDA testing and such new fangled things. For that matter many vaccines are invented/developed in government and college labs-the money is just not there, as compared to baldness and penis pills.
Proceed ahead with your half baked fantasies-but please do pretend they have any relation to reality.
werepossum
Elite Member
- Jul 10, 2006
- 29,873
- 463
- 126
I believe that lead in gasoline (or an equivalent valve lubricant) was previously mandated in gasoline, and I know that asbestos was required by law in some fire protection applications.
DrPizza
Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
This.
The reason people are opposed to it is because, "oh no! My kid will never have sex in his/her life. My kid is a good Baptist/(whatever) kid who would *never* engage in sex." Basically, it's a lot of people living in denial who are taking major risks with their children's health.
I'll ask this question: What if there was a vaccine that prevented lung cancer. MANDATORY! I don't give a shit whether or not the cause of that particular cancer was due to the actions of the individual (smoking.) What I *do* give a shit about is how much money it costs to treat such cancer patients.
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. When people get cervical cancer, it costs ALL of us money, not just the patients. - We pay in the form of higher insurance premiums, and we pay in the form of higher bills for other hospital procedures which cover their costs of treating uninsured patients who cannot/do not pay. And, we pay in lost productivity.
I've heard of FDA, and I've also heard of EPA, SEC, DEA, DOJ, and other official-sounding government agencies that make the news almost every day due to fraud and incompetence. Just because you like your head buried in the sand doesn't mean everyone else should.
I'm pretty sure lead was never mandated by the government in gasoline, it was pushed by the auto manufacturers to keep their engines working better.
davmat787
Diamond Member
- Nov 30, 2010
- 5,512
- 24
- 76
You would force an AID's vaccine? Really?
You can't catch the AID's from touching someone or breathing the same air. The risky activities and communities are well known and I imagine they would flock to get the vaccine anyway, as well as most others.
No need to send the stormtroopers after granny for not getting the antiaids vaccine.
Also, I am somewhat surprised so many are in favor of forced vaccinations with the ever thinning line of separation between corporation and state, and the image many have of evil big pharma.
So basically what we are saying is the entire baby boomer population has been spoiled by lead poisoning and can't be trusted to discuss mandatory vaccinations rationally.
The asbestos thing is overhyped. There are six types of asbestos, and they weren't all equally bad. Canada still uses asbestos.
The most common replacement is fiberglass. Do you think breathing in fiberglass is good for you?
werepossum
Elite Member
- Jul 10, 2006
- 29,873
- 463
- 126
You're probably correct. I did sixty seconds of research and it looks like lead was simply the cheapest and most stable method of meeting the federal octane requirements.
Does anyone think breathing in fiberglass is good for them? What's your point...
The point is fair about asbestos, as an example from history of something being accepted as safe that wasn't. There are lessons to learn from that.
But he's an idiot, and the lesson he's trying to claim isn't one. What happened with asbestos decades ago has nothing to do with the science issues with this vaccine.
In fact, some vaccines aren't entirely safe and might kill, say, 1 in a million. And that's a good reason for an 'opt-out', even though the vaccine does far more good.
Behind box number 1 is a policy that will save thousands more lives, called "opt out". Behind box #2 is a policy with thousands more killed, call "opt in".
Balancing the rights of people and the benefits, I think box #1 is the better pick.
I haven't heard a good reason why opt-out doesn't meet the needs for parents who don't want vaccination; but a lot of lazy parents are fixed by 'opt opt'.
Gunslinger08
Lifer
- Nov 18, 2001
- 13,234
- 2
- 81
I'm not sure that it's ever a good idea for a government to mandate anything that's health related. People want to live their lives the way they want and not have someone interfere with their personal matters. Your health and your child's health is about as personal as you get.
I'd prefer that the vaccine not be mandatory, and just promote awareness of both HPV and the vaccine.
You are quite misguided about the issues.
Let's start with 'the evil of big pharma'. Let's list a few of those.
- Lobbying for lowering their costs in ways against the public interest. This can be everything from safety trials to worker rights.
- Lobbying for 'tort reform' that denies the victims of their negligence the right to compensation, related to the item above.
- Making and marketing unneeded drugs because they're profitable.
- Lobbying for excessive monopolistic rights over drugs preventing 'the free market' from selling generics for far less to consumers.
Note I'm not saying to get rid of those protections; incentives are appropriate for developing new drugs (and the government has a role there too IMO).
- Exploiting other countries where they extract natural biological products and 'patent' them with little or no compensation for the residents.
- Patenting 'human genes' and such.
- Misleading marketing.
- Lobbying against universal health carein the public interest because it threatens their profits.
- Financial scams highlighted by Medicare Part D, where they arranged for Republicans to get them hundreds of billions of excessive profits by preventing the federal government from negotiating the prices of drugs under the new Medicare drug entitlement, donating more to Republican campaigns than any other industry, then hiring the Congressman who led the bill, after he resigned weeks later, to head its lobbying for $2 million a year (hundreds of billions for $2 million a year, not bad).
- Effectively bribing doctors with free vacations and other incentives into over-prescribing their medications.
That's a partial list. NONE of these items have anything to do with an ignorant, paranoid, right wing conspiracy theory about drug companies wanting to murder the children of America by forcing dangerous vaccinations onto them - with evil GOVERNMENT doctors endorsing the policy.
That's the difference. So don't try to use the left's 'big pharma' concerns to claims you are on the same side with your paranoia idiocy that will kill a lot of people.
Just because both are concerned with big pharma doesn't put them as allies.
Is there room for a conspiracy theory about a 'big pharma' drug company pushing an unnecessary and possibly dangerous vaccine with the willing support of a whore like Perry that should be opposed? Sure there is, and the answer to that is a strong government scientific function to protect against such abuses. That's what parents, who are not scientists with drug testing labs and studies to find the information, need.
Last edited:
And just ignore the fact that your preference will kill thousands of people.
Because not all parents are that responsible to 'opt in'.
There should be strong safeguards put in place for neutral government scientists to advise on the policy - that's the best place for addressing the issue, with an opt-out.
And that's harmful ideology. So the government has no business 'mandating' that you can't bring fruits harboring dangerous insects into the country - personal choice.
The same kids who never have sex, and have the highest rates in the nation of STD's and unplanned pregnancies.
Last edited:
If the statistics support that the vaccine is less deadly than the disease, than I 100% support every parent having their child get it, or getting it themselves. Why should what I believe be forced on others?
EVERYONE should pay the cost of producing and injecting these vaccines since it benefits EVERYONE. However, at the end of the day, people should be able to choose what medical care they get.
So what is the age we start mandatory birth control and mandatory condom carrying for our young girls and boys?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 20K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 12K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Facebook
Twitter