4 ms·

Darwin awards would suffice here if this antivax crap didn't hurt others who were vaccinating properly as people are supposed to.

• cies 9y ago
  Could you please elaborate how someone not-vaxing who gets sick can hurt a vaxed person? I hear this argument some times but no-one was able to explain how this works.
  • nokcha 9y ago
    Vaccines are not 100% effective. A small percentage of those vaccinated do not develop immunity.
  • spenvo 9y ago
    What nokcha said, plus: Some people for legitimate health reasons can't get vaxxed, so they depend on others being immune (aka "herd immunity") to stay safe. That model only works if healthy kids get vaxxed
  • moosterv 9y ago
    You can't get vaccinated before a certain age. If there are unvaccinated people around, spreading the disease, your child has a chance to catch it when they are still vulnerable.
    • nonbel 9y ago
      This is a myth. The original reason babies are not vaccinated is that they are supposed to be already protected by maternal antibodies, and therefore the vaccine won't work. Nowadays there is a new problem of people spreading the myth that vaccination is known to be dangerous to infants, so it is not politically acceptable to lower the vaccination age. This is even though we know the maternal antibodies of vaccinated mothers wear out sooner than those of earlier generations (who generated them in response to a full on infection). I explained this a number of times in an earlier thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13655795 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13655795 For example here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13656462 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13656462
      • ahakki 9y ago
        Does it really matter why an infant is not vaccinated in this discussion? Unless we immeduatly vaccinate everyone as soon as they leave the womb (unlikely / impossible) there will always be unvaccinated people.
        • nonbel 9y ago
          >"Does it really matter why an infant is not vaccinated in this discussion?" Yes, for two reasons: 1) It is not the vaccinated/unvaccinated state that determines whether someone is susceptible to measles. Instead, it is whether they have antibodies towards the virus. One reason to have antibodies towards the virus is vaccination, another would be having had a measles infection in the past, and the most important to us here is being recently (~1 yr) born from a mother that has antibodies. The newborns are already protected from measles, there is no reason to be concerned about exposing them to measles until the maternal antibodies wear off. 2) This myth is an obstacle to preventing the spread of measles because it is not possible to lower the vaccination age to account for the more quickly waning maternal antibodies generated by vaccinated (as opposed to previously infected) mothers. By repeating this myth you are helping to spread measles. > "Unless we immeduatly vaccinate everyone as soon as they leave the womb (unlikely / impossible) there will always be unvaccinated people." So what if the newborns are unvaccinated? They are already protected by the maternal antibodies. Further, even if you did vaccinate them, it would fail to elicit immunity because the maternal antibodies would just neutralize the vaccine. I feel like I am repeating myself here though...
      • cies 9y ago
        Thanks for this thorough response.
  • jacoblambda 9y ago
    The issue is 2-fold. First and most importantly is that there are people who either cannot get vaccinated for either medical or religious reasons and there are people with immune systems so weak that the vaccination serves little use protecting them. By having high vaccination rates, it serves as a buffer to protect these people by limiting their exposure to it. The other side of the issue is that vaccinations do not guarantee immunity from a disease. Exposure to a disease puts anyone at risk but they are much less likely to get it if they are vaccinated but they still can get it none the less.
  • manyxcxi 9y ago
    Even more importantly certain vaccines are given at certain ages. So if some anti-science parent doesn't vaccinate their brood and say, take their kid to the same play area as my kids, one of which isn't a year old yet, she's now got an exposure to something she can't be vaccinated for yet. This is why having high vaccination rates are so important. There is a percentage who can't be vaccinated (age, health issues, whatever), there's an unknown percentage for whom the vaccination just didn't work, and then there's the wide circle of immunity formed around them by everyone else who is immune and up to date on those immunizations.
    • nonbel 9y ago
      Please stop spreading this "cannot vaccinate due to age" myth. It is completely off-base. I explained more here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14282142 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14282142
      • manyxcxi 9y ago
        It's not really a myth if your pediatrician won't do it. And though I see the idea as valid, I'm not really going to fight against the vaccination schedule that every pediatrician wants to stick to.
        • nonbel 9y ago
          What reason did the pediatrician give?
  • tuacker 9y ago
    Have a look at the video in this article[1]. Not everyone can get vaccinated (for example, doing so would kill them due to allergies/born with some form of deficit or weak/missing immune system). These people rely on herd immunity. [1] http://www.forjudeforeveryone.com/2017/02/22/how-herd-immunity-is-protecting-you-and-your-child-and-why-you-should-be-concerned-if-you-rely-on-herd-immunity/ http://www.forjudeforeveryone.com/2017/02/22/how-herd-immuni...
  • dragonwriter 9y ago
    > Could you please elaborate how someone not-vaxing who gets sick can hurt a vaxed person? Because vaccines, while very effective, are less than perfectly effective. Vaccines have a first order effect of reducing the vaccinated person's chance of getting the disease when exposed, and a second order effect of reducing everyone else's chance of getting exposed.