3 ms·

Logically speaking someone with AIDS is a "free-rider" from this logical perspective. How is this person different from a healthy person that chooses not to vac

Logically speaking someone with AIDS is a "free-rider" from this logical perspective. How is this person different from a healthy person that chooses not to vaccinate? The logical argument seems to be that "intent" determines if you are a threat or someone to be protected? Again, by the same logical arguments people with AIDS can't go to a foreign country that doesn't vaccinate?

detaro 8y ago
It's surely not a surprising concept that someone who chooses to put other people at risk is viewed differently than someone that can't make that choice?
- RobertRoberts 8y ago
  But does that make one person more or less dangerous to the group regarding infection? Or are they both equally dangerous disease carriers to a group of people?
shepardrtc 8y ago
If you mean HIV, which most intelligent people would understand that it is the cause of the syndrome called AIDS, then it is much more difficult to contract that Chickenpox. Either via blood transfusion or sex, both of which are controllable by the infected. If the infected choose to bring the risk to others and infect them, they can be held criminally liable.
- RobertRoberts 8y ago
  I think we had a misunderstanding. I was refering to AIDs in the sense that their immune system was compromised, not that they were spreading HIV.
berberous 8y ago
Let's say a particular disease requires 80% of the population to be vaccinated to provide herd immunity (this percentage varies by disease). You are extremely unlikely to have 20% of the population have AIDS or otherwise be so immuno-compromised so that they cannot get a vaccine, so everyone is safe. The anti-vaxxers come along and free-ride, and for 10+ years, they think the are brilliant -- their kids do not get these mythologized diseases! But one day, enough morons start thinking that, that you reach a tipping point, and only 75% are vaccinated. All of a sudden, an outbreak occurs, putting all the immuno-compromised at risk, as well as the other 20%+ children of anti-vaxxers. Many kids die or become very sick. Suddenly, the anti-vaxxers realize they were playing with fire, putting children at risk. What don't you get about this?
- RobertRoberts 8y ago
  >All of a sudden, an outbreak occurs, putting all the immuno-compromised at risk... I mentioned the issue of being a single US traveler (that got vaccinated) going to a foreign country without vaccinations. It's a single person in the middle of everyone else. How does the vaccine protect one person in millions (US traveler) but in the US a few unvaccinated kids put lots of people at risk?

detaro 8y ago

It's surely not a surprising concept that someone who chooses to put other people at risk is viewed differently than someone that can't make that choice?

RobertRoberts 8y ago
But does that make one person more or less dangerous to the group regarding infection? Or are they both equally dangerous disease carriers to a group of people?

shepardrtc 8y ago

If you mean HIV, which most intelligent people would understand that it is the cause of the syndrome called AIDS, then it is much more difficult to contract that Chickenpox. Either via blood transfusion or sex, both of which are controllable by the infected. If the infected choose to bring the risk to others and infect them, they can be held criminally liable.

RobertRoberts 8y ago
I think we had a misunderstanding. I was refering to AIDs in the sense that their immune system was compromised, not that they were spreading HIV.

berberous 8y ago

Let's say a particular disease requires 80% of the population to be vaccinated to provide herd immunity (this percentage varies by disease). You are extremely unlikely to have 20% of the population have AIDS or otherwise be so immuno-compromised so that they cannot get a vaccine, so everyone is safe. The anti-vaxxers come along and free-ride, and for 10+ years, they think the are brilliant -- their kids do not get these mythologized diseases! But one day, enough morons start thinking that, that you reach a tipping point, and only 75% are vaccinated. All of a sudden, an outbreak occurs, putting all the immuno-compromised at risk, as well as the other 20%+ children of anti-vaxxers. Many kids die or become very sick. Suddenly, the anti-vaxxers realize they were playing with fire, putting children at risk. What don't you get about this?

RobertRoberts 8y ago
>All of a sudden, an outbreak occurs, putting all the immuno-compromised at risk... I mentioned the issue of being a single US traveler (that got vaccinated) going to a foreign country without vaccinations. It's a single person in the middle of everyone else. How does the vaccine protect one person in millions (US traveler) but in the US a few unvaccinated kids put lots of people at risk?