Doesn’t mean that any group (public or private) has to accept you in and risk everyone who falls into the non-immunizable (is that even a word?) category. While this may force your hand, that’s how it should work. You don’t want to protect others, they don’t have to play with you.

When I was looking into vaccines for my 1st boy, I came across the herd immunity concept and was sold. This was before I even checked into what I had received as a kid.
I also like Penn &Teller’s….um…graphical?…way of presenting this.

While this next may sound mean I’m really just being direct: stop thinking of yourself and start thinking of the herd.

As stated, I believe vaccinations work. I also believe that there are methods of persuading the doubtful that do not included forced injections.

If we as a nation decide that the government can “mandate” health, we will be in for some very difficult times indeed.

The “idea” of vaccinations is not limited to just 1 person being relatively protected by a disease. It requires (as has been stated here) a herd immunity. When that is broken, the vaccination “idea” is gone. Kaput. The herd immunity protects those that cannot get immunity or that (known or unknown) have some complications with immunity/vaccines.

IANAD but I’ve been reading that the risk to an un-vaccinated person is approaching 90% likelihood that they will get Measles. The only way to combat this is mandatory vaccinations to be involved in public life.

I know what I’m about to say may sound extreme but: You don’t want them or can’t get them? Fine. You must let people in many group interactions know and they can refuse you admittance (the KinderCare event here in Chi-land). I think public schools already do that in many places. Heck, you don’t want to get them? You have a large monetary responsibility to the rest of us…though I get worrried about some of the slippery slopes that may cause.

Getting vaccinations is not just for YOU but for ALL of society. We stop thinking about ourselves for a moment and we won’t be doomed to letting the diseases reemerge.

Don’t get me wrong, I am fully on board with the no vaccination/no public school deal. I think that is a wonderful way to “encourage” vaccinations. I would go as far as to say that if you receive any government money, you must vaccinate or forfeit your dole.

Heck, I would even be OK with a fine (tax, if you prefer) if you do not vaccinate.

But I am more than a little nervous about the government demanding an injection. I understand that this particular injection is beneficial and all, but what about the next one? Or the next?

Choice is not always a bad thing.

It also doesn’t help the argument that we had established a robust herd immunity. Polio and Measles had been essentially eradicated. At that point, it makes sense to avoid the vaccinations. The tiny risk of bad results is greater than the tinier risk of catching the disease. But this is only a good idea if nobody does it. Once you have a statistically significant population of vax-refusniks, the herd immunity gets broken. We are at that point from a combination of refusniks and the horde of unvaccinated and infected Wetbacks that has been inflicted upon us.

The rules are changing, and many have not caught up.

You write: “If vaccines work like we are told that they do, how can somebody endanger a vaccinated person by not getting vaccinated?”

I think others have given valid reasons as to why your sentiment is mistaken. But here’s another: vaccines are not by any means 100% effective (precious little is in life). They are very effective, but part of their effectiveness lies in mass usage (i.e, mass immunization helps ensure against the risk of individual cases of ineffectiveness). For example, Vaccine.gov states that most childhood vaccines are approximately 90 – 100% effective.

What’s so frustrating about this anti-vaccine nonsense and indifference to mass vaccination, is that the information regarding vaccine effectiveness and the reasons for mass immunization are widely known and publicly available. If you don’t know this information, it is because you have chosen not to know, or are to ambivalent to bother having an informed opinion on the subject.

I truly don’t wish to be uncivil. But that statement–“If vaccines work like we are told that they do, how can somebody endanger a vaccinated person by not getting vaccinated?–reflects scientific illiteracy and/or innumeracy.

Obama and Hillary, who laudably got on the bandwagon this week, excuse their pandering to anti-vaxxers 8 years ago by saying we weren’t sure back then. Actually, even then the efficacy of vaccination had already been established beyond a reasonable doubt. Since then,with the formal retraction of the alarmist Lancet article, it has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt,the informal standard we use for executions. Christie and Paul are unfit for the high office they seek.