3 ms·

Not true. Wouldn't people who chose to get vaccinated live, and those who don't would die? That sounds like the tragedy of the commons.

by smanek 18y ago

KirinDave 18y ago
Many vaccines sadly aren't 100% effective. The reason they work so well is because if _everyone_ is vaccinated the immunities of the group reduce exposure to the group, a kind of self-reinforcement. And the more a vaccinated person is exposed to a disease, the more permutations of that disease get thrown at the vaccinated population. If one takes, then we have the whole problem of the disease all over again. One consequence of the short life of bacteria and the mutation of viruses is that they're basically brute-forcing our immunities of every population they're in contact with. This is why it's _so important_ that people follow vaccination programs. Eventually we'll have to deal with new diseases, but if we aggressively and correctly vaccinate, we can stave off that day for a lot longer than if we half-ass it.
- smanek 18y ago
  Good point. You may be right then (depending on the specific number, that I don't know), that this is a situation where regulation is called for.
- Andys 18y ago
  Sounds good in theory. In practice, there have been disease outbreaks in communities with 100% vaccination rates against that disease. Most vaccines don't even cover all the known strains, forget the new mutations. IMO, vaccination is no replacement for promoting a strong natural immunity and preventative medicine. Both of which are virtually thrown out the window in modern medicine.
  - evgen 18y ago
    [citation needed]
  - KirinDave 18y ago
    I'm for any medicine that can be proven to work through the techniques espoused by modern medical science. If you can prove it works in a placebo-controlled double-(or dare-i-dream-triple?)-blind study, then I'm all for it. Anything less means "controlled study needed."

Not true. Wouldn't people who chose to get vaccinated live, and those who don't would die? That sounds like the tragedy of the commons.

by smanek 18y ago

Not true. Wouldn't people who chose to get vaccinated live, and those who don't would die? That sounds like the tragedy of the commons.

KirinDave 18y ago

Many vaccines sadly aren't 100% effective. The reason they work so well is because if _everyone_ is vaccinated the immunities of the group reduce exposure to the group, a kind of self-reinforcement. And the more a vaccinated person is exposed to a disease, the more permutations of that disease get thrown at the vaccinated population. If one takes, then we have the whole problem of the disease all over again. One consequence of the short life of bacteria and the mutation of viruses is that they're basically brute-forcing our immunities of every population they're in contact with. This is why it's _so important_ that people follow vaccination programs. Eventually we'll have to deal with new diseases, but if we aggressively and correctly vaccinate, we can stave off that day for a lot longer than if we half-ass it.

smanek 18y ago
Good point. You may be right then (depending on the specific number, that I don't know), that this is a situation where regulation is called for.
Andys 18y ago
Sounds good in theory. In practice, there have been disease outbreaks in communities with 100% vaccination rates against that disease. Most vaccines don't even cover all the known strains, forget the new mutations. IMO, vaccination is no replacement for promoting a strong natural immunity and preventative medicine. Both of which are virtually thrown out the window in modern medicine.
- evgen 18y ago
  [citation needed]
- KirinDave 18y ago
  I'm for any medicine that can be proven to work through the techniques espoused by modern medical science. If you can prove it works in a placebo-controlled double-(or dare-i-dream-triple?)-blind study, then I'm all for it. Anything less means "controlled study needed."