A measles outbreak is occurring in the Northwest in localities with lower-than-average vaccination rates (1 Viewer)

superchuck500

tiny changes
VIP Subscribing Member
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
44,076
Ratings
57,289
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
Sticky Post
Go figure. Washington state governor has declared a state of emergency over an outbreak that is centered in Clark County - where almost 25% of children are unvaccinated. According to health officials, most of the 55 cases are among unvaccinated children.

Amber Gorrow is afraid to leave her house with her infant son because she lives at the epicenter of Washington state’s worst measles outbreak in more than two decades. Born eight weeks ago, Leon is too young to get his first measles shot, putting him at risk for the highly contagious respiratory virus, which can be fatal in small children.

Gorrow also lives in a community where she said being anti-vaccine is as acceptable as being vegan or going gluten free. Almost a quarter of kids in Clark County, Wash., a suburb of Portland, Ore., go to school without measles, mumps and rubella immunizations, and Washington Gov. Jay Inslee (D) recently declared a state of emergency amid concern that things could rapidly spin out of control.

Measles outbreaks have sprung up in nine other states this winter, but officials are particularly alarmed about the one in Clark County because of its potential to go very big, very quickly.

The Pacific Northwest is home to some of the nation’s most vocal andorganized anti-vaccination activists. That movement has helped drive down child immunizations in Washington, as well as in neighboring Oregon and Idaho, to some of the lowest rates in the country, with as many as 10.5 percent of kindergartners statewide in Idaho unvaccinated for measles. That is almost double the median rate nationally.

Libertarian-leaning lawmakers, meanwhile, have bowed to public pressure to relax state laws to exempt virtually any child from state vaccination requirements whose parents object. Three states allow only medical exemptions; most others also permit religious exemptions. And 17,including Washington, Oregon and Idaho, allow what they call “philosophical” exemptions, meaning virtually anyone can opt out of the requirements.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...8500644dc98_story.html?utm_term=.61ca4eb8327e
 
OP
OP
superchuck500

superchuck500

tiny changes
VIP Subscribing Member
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
44,076
Ratings
57,289
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
Sorry, it's an article from 2015
It's every bit as compelling today. Part of the anti-vaccine line of argument is that measles doesn't kill that many Americans - something like five Americans have died of measles since 2000. When contrasted with the number of deaths to adverse reactions from the MMR (something like 400) it appears like a strong argument.

But it doesn't hold up to any meaningful scrutiny. First, is that physicians and epidemiologists strongly believe (to the point of medical fact) that a substantial reason why measles deaths are so few in the US is because so much of the population is vaccinated, cases are few and they can get quality medical care that makes measles mortality very, very low (it isn't that low in other countries). But if vaccination rates dropped substantially in the US, outbreaks could occur in localities that challenge the medical system there and reduce the quality of individual care . . . likely leading to higher mortality. So it's a somewhat perverse argument to say "measles mortality is low compared to deaths from adverse reactions so I'm not going to vaccinate" when one of the keys to low mortality is high vaccination rates (where the incidence of serious reaction remains very, very low). More importantly, though, is that the argument based on measles mortality wholly fails to account for the other adverse implications of a measles infection, including being linked to immune system disruption that can cause death later in life.
 

JimEverett

More than 15K posts served!
Joined
Mar 18, 2001
Messages
24,343
Ratings
7,556
Offline
That’s essentially how California changed their law in 2016 after the measles outbreak in Disneyland. Before that, any reason you wanted and you didn’t have to vaccinate your kids. Now, unless you have a doctors waiver due to child’s health prohibiting vaccination, you must get your child vaccinated. It was taken to court of course and it withstood the challenge. However, vaccine stays is checked at schools at kinder and 7th grade, and of course college admissions. So, if you want to not vaccinate your children, home school is your only choice.
I did not know that California had such a strict law. I looked it up and surprisingly - 10% of kindergartners got medical exemptions for the 2017-18 school year.

https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-sears-vaccines-fight-20180713-story.html
 

Taurus

More than 15K posts served!
VIP Contributor
Joined
Dec 20, 1997
Messages
24,563
Ratings
12,157
Age
50
Location
Yacolt, WA
Online
Perhaps I wasn't clear, sorry. What I'm saying is that if the political climate of the state (or the anti-vaccine lobbyists or whatevever) is such that the state refuses to require vaccination, they aren't going to allow a rule that says you can't go to school without being vaccinated. The anti-vaccine and the libertarians would challenge/resist that rule on the basis that it is a de facto requirement for children to be vaccinated.

I'm saying that if the politics are such that the state isn't going to require vaccinations, it isn't likely going to be able have a rule that you have to be vaccinated to go to school . . . it's effectively the same thing. So the same interests that are successful in preventing a state requirement for everyone would likely to be similarly successful fighting a school requirement.
See Goat's post above yours. California did it just fine.
 

Tapxe

Coalescing the vapors of human existence
Joined
Jul 19, 2001
Messages
20,894
Ratings
50,259
Location
Now
Online
Apparently California's was after a significant outbreak. Maybe this year's situation in Wash state will bring it about there too.
I recall that now. They traced that to a Disneyland visitor iirc. People are so comfortable since disease fighting has been so successful, that the consequences are just not understood well on a cultural level.

With air travel and people able to hop continents in a few hours then go into a crowd, we should be more afraid than ever of letting something get a new foothold.
 

egautr1

ALL-MADDEN TEAM
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
2,419
Ratings
1,955
Location
Madisonville, LA
Offline
I find it interesting that every state has a religious exemption for vaccination outside of CA, WV, and AL.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-vaccine-medical-exemptions-20181029-story.html?outputType=amp
See that is what I just don't get. What does Religion have to do with any Vaccine. I do know that a few religions don't allow any modern medicines like the Amish and some other strict religions, in which case those kids most likely aren't even attending public schools.

This shouldn't be a religious, personal, or Political issue. This is a Public Health issue and the health and safety of the public outweighs ones personal or even religious beliefs or preferences. So you don't want to vaccinate your kids, o.k. that is fine, but then they can't come to a publicly funded school or facility since you are then putting the public at risk.

Just like you can't fly or drive without proper ID and/or training you shouldn't be able to attend public schools without immunizations.

It's just ridiculous that people would rather expose their own children to death and major health problems than to take the extremely small risk of developing another condition or side affect from the vaccine. Even though all research has largely concluded that their is little to no risk in getting kids immunizations.

So people would rather their own kid die than possibly get Autism (although that theory has been proven false by literally everyone) or whatever they think will happen.
Great job America!!! :dl:
 

JimEverett

More than 15K posts served!
Joined
Mar 18, 2001
Messages
24,343
Ratings
7,556
Offline
We eradicated measles and other diseases while having those religious exemptions to vaccines and allowing those children to go to public schools. Not sure how you can view that as the problem.
 
OP
OP
superchuck500

superchuck500

tiny changes
VIP Subscribing Member
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
44,076
Ratings
57,289
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
See that is what I just don't get. What does Religion have to do with any Vaccine. I do know that a few religions don't allow any modern medicines like the Amish and some other strict religions, in which case those kids most likely aren't even attending public schools.

This shouldn't be a religious, personal, or Political issue. This is a Public Health issue and the health and safety of the public outweighs ones personal or even religious beliefs or preferences. So you don't want to vaccinate your kids, o.k. that is fine, but then they can't come to a publicly funded school or facility since you are then putting the public at risk.

Just like you can't fly or drive without proper ID and/or training you shouldn't be able to attend public schools without immunizations.

It's just ridiculous that people would rather expose their own children to death and major health problems than to take the extremely small risk of developing another condition or side affect from the vaccine. Even though all research has largely concluded that their is little to no risk in getting kids immunizations.

So people would rather their own kid die than possibly get Autism (although that theory has been proven false by literally everyone) or whatever they think will happen.
Great job America!!! :dl:
I think you're right that the religious exemption applies to situations where the person's established religion has tenets against modern medicine including vaccines. That's not the same situation as someone saying that their personal belief is against vaccines. That's why some states (including Washington state) have allowed additional exemption on a "philosophical" basis. It's sort of like conscientious objector status.

While objections to vaccines on truly religious grounds might have some constitutional merit (though the state could demonstrate that the requirement is a compelling state interest and there's no other way to accomplish it), the philosophical objection isn't rooted in any clear right, that I can tell.

This just means that it is a matter for the legislature. If a state house wants to require it, they certainly can and I don't think the modern anti-vaccine line of argument is going to be effective to challenge that law. Again, it remains a question of political will.
 

egautr1

ALL-MADDEN TEAM
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
2,419
Ratings
1,955
Location
Madisonville, LA
Offline
We eradicated measles and other diseases while having those religious exemptions to vaccines and allowing those children to go to public schools. Not sure how you can view that as the problem.
I assume you were referring to my post so, the problem is that more and more people are not getting their children or themselves vaccinated so it is undermining the 'herd immunity' concept and allowing outbreaks to happen like in Washington state. This one I believe happened at a sporting event or somehting, so in this case it wasn't a school issue, but I think one of the outbreaks in CA happened at a school but I could be wrong. Haven't looked into it that much yet.

My point was just because you personally don't 'believe' that vaccines are effective or work or don't want them for Religious reasons doesn't matter since the data facts show that person is wrong. Vaccines do work whether you believe it or not, doesn't matter the reason why.
That's why I said if someone is say Amish, and they don't partake in any modern medicine and all that and don't get vaccinated at all because that is their way of life then I can at least understand it. That is their entire way of life. They aren't going to public schools and sporting events anyway.
The issues is with people who send their kids to schools/events/public spaces with no protection from these previously eradicated diseases/illnesses on the basis of some purported 'belief' or 'preference'. It's either all or nothing.
You can't use the science and logic and reason that powers your home, car, and cellphone and then disregard it when it comes to vaccines and then just claim it is because of 'religious' beliefs or whatever. You shouldn't get to pick and choose when it is convenient for you. You either believe in the Science or you don't.

Peoples idiocy and stupidity are literally killing people. Kids are the most vulnerable and often don't even have a 'choice'. I have read/heard of children secretly going and get the vaccines and hiding it from their parents. What the Fork!???? is that where we are at now? SMH.

*I was using the term 'You' in the general sense and wasn't specifically referring to you the poster known as JimEverett. Thanks
 

B4YOU

All-Pro
Joined
Mar 17, 2017
Messages
2,297
Ratings
3,064
Offline
While objections to vaccines on truly religious grounds might have some constitutional merit (though the state could demonstrate that the requirement is a compelling state interest and there's no other way to accomplish it), the philosophical objection isn't rooted in any clear right, that I can tell.
I think it's interesting that we have another thread where the sole agency of one's body is an argument for action but when it comes to vaccines public health trumps sole agency. I think barring unvaccinated children from school is reasonable, but we are seeing private businesses requiring flu vaccines which I think is a worrisome trend. I don't like religious exemptions because I think any time we carve out space for religions we further establish a preference for religion. Medically unable is fine. Philosophically against, ok, but no school for you and no social reimbursement for vaccine-preventable diseases.

There's a movement in Public Health (PH) towards a health in all policies view of governing. I think there's a trend towards utilitarian views at the expense of some personal rights.

Herd immunity works at around 95%. So we can support a population where 5% are medically incapable of vaccines or stupid before we see outbreaks. I've often seen ideas compared to viruses in how they spread. I think our poor education system has weakened our herd immunity to infection from bad ideas.
 

TheRealJRad

The Artist Formerly Known as AgentJRad
Staff member
Tech-Admin
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Joined
Dec 16, 2009
Messages
9,895
Ratings
10,554
Age
35
Location
Baton Rouge
Online
I think it's interesting that we have another thread where the sole agency of one's body is an argument for action but when it comes to vaccines public health trumps sole agency.
To be fair, a pregnant woman doesn't increase someone else's chance of being pregnant. Someone not getting the measles vaccine can contribute to an outbreak.
 

B4YOU

All-Pro
Joined
Mar 17, 2017
Messages
2,297
Ratings
3,064
Offline
To be fair, a pregnant woman doesn't increase someone else's chance of being pregnant. Someone not getting the measles vaccine can contribute to an outbreak.
I understand the difference. I think the state has more power to force a medical procedure than prevent one.

I think we always one new fear, good intention, or emergency from authoritarianism. We violated sole agency in the late 1800s through 1940s via forced sterilization of criminals and mentally ill. In the early 1900s, we had forced vaccinations for smallpox which the Supreme Court upheld based on a public health emergency. We use a system of compelled vaccination by withholding public school admission. But if enough people refused vaccinations in an area, a state could force vaccination with no regard for religious concerns. I think we are nearing a tipping point on opioid overdose deaths where forced, monthly naltrexone injections for repeat abusers are not far away.
 

blackadder

...from a chicken, bugwit
VIP Contributor
Joined
Nov 8, 2003
Messages
26,507
Ratings
17,289
Offline
To be fair, a pregnant woman doesn't increase someone else's chance of being pregnant. Someone not getting the measles vaccine can contribute to an outbreak.
Well, I know how this will go but what the hell.

I vaccinated my child but did so on a schedule and carefully to observe for reactions. I absolutely didn't do multiple in a day because if there was a reaction how would I know which particular one was the source? I have seen them happen to people I know. Seizures.

People have different sensitivities to things but there is no interest in the small % injured by this particular medical procedure. This is considered a small price to pay. Those impacted should deal with it and don't spook anyone else.

But in general with the view of effectiveness, what kind of product is so great when you get it and it only works if 99% of everyone else gets it too?

If you're protected...you're protected? or not?

It doesn't take much effort to find many cases of outbreaks in populations where vaccination rates meet the criteria for herd immunity but there is little interest in this except for the medical researchers to study.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/wr/mm6742a4.htm

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1646939/

https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.77.4.434

https://academic.oup.com/aje/article-abstract/129/1/173/58793

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/201...nt-first-time?r3f_986=https://www.google.com/

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022347605807267

Flame away.

I'm vaccinating but with informed consent and reading the inserts and asking questions.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)



Saints Headlines (The Advocate)

Headlines

Top Bottom