8 ms·

The article does not mention this, but it's quite probably the unvaccinated child in question is from the fast-expanding Hasidic community in Jerusalem, many of

The article does not mention this, but it's quite probably the unvaccinated child in question is from the fast-expanding Hasidic community in Jerusalem, many of whom are strongly anti-vax. This has led to measles outbreaks in the past in NYC as well, and the community was also hit especially hard by COVID. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/23/opinion/my-fellow-hasidic-jews-are-making-a-terrible-mistake-about-vaccinations.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/23/opinion/my-fellow-hasidic...

martin1975 5y ago
Being anti vaccination is fine, it's a human being's right to choose, I only ask they let me know ahead of time if possible of their position.
- ende 5y ago
  [flagged]
  - ComradePhil 5y ago
    It is extremely concerning that this is most likely a mainstream position. Mandatory medical procedure for the common good is a slipperly slope… and it has been made into a mainstream position with pharma marketing and PR working with politicians and “news” agencies for their short-term profits. This could end up in someone coming to power and making high doses of copper cyanide mandatory to everyone who is pro-mandates, for the common good of course. Be careful what you wish for.
    - _lx4l 5y ago
      We've been legally mandating vaccines for over a century now. Where are we slipping to?
      - ithkuil 5y ago
        Apparently we slipped into anti-vax positions
    - pawelmurias 5y ago
      Superstition and idiocy being more important than the common good is a slippery slope... what if someone decides that putting out fires is against the will of their God?
      - GauntletWizard 5y ago
        That's a pretty quickly self-limiting population. As is the Antivax community, though the flareups of forgotten diseases will continue for a few more cycles before this group dies out naturally - So long as we don't fan the flames by actually persecuting them. More than a few will die of disease, most will learn better from seeing the results of their actions.
        ComradePhil 5y ago
        A significant portion of that population will develop natural immunity (mostly by natural selection) and will be the one to survive when at some point centralized supply chain is exausted out of resources and all the viruses that they had vaccines for come back with a bang.
      - t0bia_s 5y ago
        Thinking that my opinion is best for others has many names... Arrogance, hubris, pride...
    - dzhiurgis 5y ago
      > medical procedure you are being vaccinated thousands times a day by countless parasites, fungi and bacteria, yet when it's safely designed by tens of thousands of smartest people in the world it becomes... medical procedure..?
  - ravenstine 5y ago
    Then it's also not fine for you to leave your house because even if you are vaccinated you can still spread disease. With modern technology, there's no need to leave the home for anything but work and some essentials. So if you have this technological-integrationist view on vaccines then you might as well self-ban from any sort of outside recreation or public gatherings since you would be putting others at risk.
    - klyrs 5y ago
      Between the two extremes of not getting vaccinated and self-isolating forever on the off chance you might have a virus is something called reasonable precaution. Getting vaccinated for something like Polio is just such a thing.
      - ravenstine 5y ago
        Who gets to draw that line? If one has the choice to self-isolate, and they are motivated by social obligation, then they should do so even if they are vaccinated because the morality of the issue doesn't scale with the severity of the virus. To knowingly risk giving others a disease for the sake of frivolity, even when the chances are relatively low, would nevertheless be an immoral act. This is of course something I don't actually believe. Vaccines should be a personal choice because presumably they are effective enough that the argument for one's responsibility towards other people's health is greatly diminished to a point where we can decide what's a reasonable compromise. I more or less agree with what you're saying in actuality.
        klyrs 5y ago
        Well, the thing about reasonable precautions is that there's a fairly bright-line test: reasoned arguments behind those precautions. As for who should draw that line, I'd say that subject experts should have a very loud voice in the conversation. In this case, that would mean epidemiologists. It's fine for vaccines to be a personal choice, but if epidemiologists think that an unvaccinated person is an undue risk to the general public, it's reasonable to limit that person's access to the public. > Vaccines should be a personal choice because presumably they are effective enough that the argument for one's responsibility towards other people's health is greatly diminished to a point where we can decide what's a reasonable compromise. Emphasis mine. Your presumption does not hold for all vaccines. Different vaccines and different strains of viruses have varying degrees of effectiveness. Epidemiologists take a data-driven approach to that decision where you're just making an assumption. Reasoned arguments must be backed by data, not just assumptions.
  - t0bia_s 5y ago
    This is what you want to believe. If you inform yourself more, which is now possible more then ever in history, then you find out, that this is just huge business with fear. I recommend book from Gerhard Buchwald - "Vaccination - A Business Based on Fear" (1994) if your are open to new research. Remember... Scared and uninformed people are easy to be manipulated.
- mikojan 5y ago
  Endangering other people is not fine even if it's in your every right to do so.
- SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago
  I don’t believe the child chose their vaccination status.
- Gareth321 5y ago
  I think I agree with you insofar as adults are concerned, but this child was not given that opportunity. This is what polio does: (https://polioeradication.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/unspecified-4.jpg https://polioeradication.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/unsp...). Inflicting this on a child is quite ruthless.
dalbasal 5y ago
There's a decently populous anti-vax vegan community too.
- Cosmin_C 5y ago
  - rlt 5y ago
    I find it disheartening so many people are willing to gloat over fellow humans' deaths, regardless of the reason, some notion of "karma", "Darwinism", etc. (I am triple vaccinated, for the record)
    - ikt 5y ago
      what would you expect? sympathy for people who should know better?
      - rlt 5y ago
        No, simply abstain from celebrating death. Sympathy for their families. Acknowledgment you don’t know all the circumstances in their life, and we all have varying levels of susceptibility to disinformation.
  - gpt5 5y ago
    I'm not sure that COVID anti-vax is a good example of Darwinism. Out of the 950K deaths from COVID in the US, only 6K are under 30 years old - hence less likely to have reproduced.
  - searealist 5y ago
    Hasidic Jews have 4.1 children on average, it's still Darwinism, just the opposite of what you think.
    - Arnt 5y ago
      There's a mosque around the corner where I live. I see old people go in and out, hardly any teenagers. Just like in the church to which my parents-in-law once brought us. How many of those hasidic jews' 4.1 children keep the faith, and how many get a career instead? 0.5, 1.5, 2.5, 3.5? If it's 3.5 I'll have to ask why they succeed so well.
JamesAdir 5y ago
According to the Israeli ministry of health the kid got infected with the virus from the vaccination that includes a living weak virus, a vaccine that is not given in many countries and have been not given in Israel for almost 20 years. The decision to give the weakened virus was based on live viruses found in the sewage of Bedouin community in Rahat. Also the ultra orthodox Jews in Jerusalem are pro-vaccine and the number of the anti-vax people among them is much lower than the anti-vax secular people in Israel.

martin1975 5y ago

Being anti vaccination is fine, it's a human being's right to choose, I only ask they let me know ahead of time if possible of their position.

ende 5y ago
[flagged]
- ComradePhil 5y ago
  It is extremely concerning that this is most likely a mainstream position. Mandatory medical procedure for the common good is a slipperly slope… and it has been made into a mainstream position with pharma marketing and PR working with politicians and “news” agencies for their short-term profits. This could end up in someone coming to power and making high doses of copper cyanide mandatory to everyone who is pro-mandates, for the common good of course. Be careful what you wish for.
  - _lx4l 5y ago
    We've been legally mandating vaccines for over a century now. Where are we slipping to?
    - ithkuil 5y ago
      Apparently we slipped into anti-vax positions
  - pawelmurias 5y ago
    Superstition and idiocy being more important than the common good is a slippery slope... what if someone decides that putting out fires is against the will of their God?
    - GauntletWizard 5y ago
      That's a pretty quickly self-limiting population. As is the Antivax community, though the flareups of forgotten diseases will continue for a few more cycles before this group dies out naturally - So long as we don't fan the flames by actually persecuting them. More than a few will die of disease, most will learn better from seeing the results of their actions.
      - ComradePhil 5y ago
        A significant portion of that population will develop natural immunity (mostly by natural selection) and will be the one to survive when at some point centralized supply chain is exausted out of resources and all the viruses that they had vaccines for come back with a bang.
    - t0bia_s 5y ago
      Thinking that my opinion is best for others has many names... Arrogance, hubris, pride...
  - dzhiurgis 5y ago
    > medical procedure you are being vaccinated thousands times a day by countless parasites, fungi and bacteria, yet when it's safely designed by tens of thousands of smartest people in the world it becomes... medical procedure..?
- ravenstine 5y ago
  Then it's also not fine for you to leave your house because even if you are vaccinated you can still spread disease. With modern technology, there's no need to leave the home for anything but work and some essentials. So if you have this technological-integrationist view on vaccines then you might as well self-ban from any sort of outside recreation or public gatherings since you would be putting others at risk.
  - klyrs 5y ago
    Between the two extremes of not getting vaccinated and self-isolating forever on the off chance you might have a virus is something called reasonable precaution. Getting vaccinated for something like Polio is just such a thing.
    - ravenstine 5y ago
      Who gets to draw that line? If one has the choice to self-isolate, and they are motivated by social obligation, then they should do so even if they are vaccinated because the morality of the issue doesn't scale with the severity of the virus. To knowingly risk giving others a disease for the sake of frivolity, even when the chances are relatively low, would nevertheless be an immoral act. This is of course something I don't actually believe. Vaccines should be a personal choice because presumably they are effective enough that the argument for one's responsibility towards other people's health is greatly diminished to a point where we can decide what's a reasonable compromise. I more or less agree with what you're saying in actuality.
      - klyrs 5y ago
        Well, the thing about reasonable precautions is that there's a fairly bright-line test: reasoned arguments behind those precautions. As for who should draw that line, I'd say that subject experts should have a very loud voice in the conversation. In this case, that would mean epidemiologists. It's fine for vaccines to be a personal choice, but if epidemiologists think that an unvaccinated person is an undue risk to the general public, it's reasonable to limit that person's access to the public. > Vaccines should be a personal choice because presumably they are effective enough that the argument for one's responsibility towards other people's health is greatly diminished to a point where we can decide what's a reasonable compromise. Emphasis mine. Your presumption does not hold for all vaccines. Different vaccines and different strains of viruses have varying degrees of effectiveness. Epidemiologists take a data-driven approach to that decision where you're just making an assumption. Reasoned arguments must be backed by data, not just assumptions.
- t0bia_s 5y ago
  This is what you want to believe. If you inform yourself more, which is now possible more then ever in history, then you find out, that this is just huge business with fear. I recommend book from Gerhard Buchwald - "Vaccination - A Business Based on Fear" (1994) if your are open to new research. Remember... Scared and uninformed people are easy to be manipulated.
mikojan 5y ago
Endangering other people is not fine even if it's in your every right to do so.
SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago
I don’t believe the child chose their vaccination status.
Gareth321 5y ago
I think I agree with you insofar as adults are concerned, but this child was not given that opportunity. This is what polio does: (https://polioeradication.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/unspecified-4.jpg https://polioeradication.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/unsp...). Inflicting this on a child is quite ruthless.

dalbasal 5y ago

There's a decently populous anti-vax vegan community too.

Cosmin_C 5y ago
- rlt 5y ago
  I find it disheartening so many people are willing to gloat over fellow humans' deaths, regardless of the reason, some notion of "karma", "Darwinism", etc. (I am triple vaccinated, for the record)
  - ikt 5y ago
    what would you expect? sympathy for people who should know better?
    - rlt 5y ago
      No, simply abstain from celebrating death. Sympathy for their families. Acknowledgment you don’t know all the circumstances in their life, and we all have varying levels of susceptibility to disinformation.
- gpt5 5y ago
  I'm not sure that COVID anti-vax is a good example of Darwinism. Out of the 950K deaths from COVID in the US, only 6K are under 30 years old - hence less likely to have reproduced.
- searealist 5y ago
  Hasidic Jews have 4.1 children on average, it's still Darwinism, just the opposite of what you think.
  - Arnt 5y ago
    There's a mosque around the corner where I live. I see old people go in and out, hardly any teenagers. Just like in the church to which my parents-in-law once brought us. How many of those hasidic jews' 4.1 children keep the faith, and how many get a career instead? 0.5, 1.5, 2.5, 3.5? If it's 3.5 I'll have to ask why they succeed so well.

JamesAdir 5y ago

According to the Israeli ministry of health the kid got infected with the virus from the vaccination that includes a living weak virus, a vaccine that is not given in many countries and have been not given in Israel for almost 20 years. The decision to give the weakened virus was based on live viruses found in the sewage of Bedouin community in Rahat. Also the ultra orthodox Jews in Jerusalem are pro-vaccine and the number of the anti-vax people among them is much lower than the anti-vax secular people in Israel.