4 ms·

Ah, excellent. Taking a more nuanced view than the simple binary "safe" or "not safe". Let's continue down that path. Since nothing is 100% safe, we ought to c

by cwp 11y ago

Ah, excellent. Taking a more nuanced view than the simple binary "safe" or "not safe". Let's continue down that path. Since nothing is 100% safe, we ought to choose the most safe option. And since we're talking about government policy here, it's not about what's safest for your kids, but what's safest for everyone. So what's safer, vaccines, or measles? I think rlpb had it right elsewhere in thread - this is about a tragedy of the commons. Anti-vaxxers don't want to ban vaccines, they want to be the only ones not taking them.

paulhauggis 11y ago
"So what's safer, vaccines, or measles?" This isn't the point. The point is that from this ruling, a person would assume that it's completely safe with no chance of any ill effects. I've even seen a few posts saying that any ill effects are "old wives tales". Here is a good list: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/side-effects.htm http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/side-effects.htm From the CDC, which is a good source. Some of these could cause serious problems. "Anti-vaxxers don't want to ban vaccines, they want to be the only ones not taking them." Who said anything about anti-vaxxers? If people in this world are foolish enough to believe that the things Dr. OZ talks about on his show will cure something (I watched the show many times and he has never actually said this), this ruling is pretty dangerous.
- __z 11y ago
  >that from this ruling...this ruling is pretty dangerous. A piece of legislation that hasn't even passed yet is not the same thing as a court ruling.
  - paulhauggis 11y ago
    "California Senate overwhelmingly passes SB 277..." I guess you missed this part?
    - __z 11y ago
      >I guess you missed this part? No. It is a bill that passed in the Senate. It still has to pass in the Assembly to become law. Not a court ruling and not yet a law.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

by cwp 11y ago

paulhauggis 11y ago

"So what's safer, vaccines, or measles?" This isn't the point. The point is that from this ruling, a person would assume that it's completely safe with no chance of any ill effects. I've even seen a few posts saying that any ill effects are "old wives tales". Here is a good list: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/side-effects.htm http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/side-effects.htm From the CDC, which is a good source. Some of these could cause serious problems. "Anti-vaxxers don't want to ban vaccines, they want to be the only ones not taking them." Who said anything about anti-vaxxers? If people in this world are foolish enough to believe that the things Dr. OZ talks about on his show will cure something (I watched the show many times and he has never actually said this), this ruling is pretty dangerous.

__z 11y ago
>that from this ruling...this ruling is pretty dangerous. A piece of legislation that hasn't even passed yet is not the same thing as a court ruling.
- paulhauggis 11y ago
  "California Senate overwhelmingly passes SB 277..." I guess you missed this part?
  - __z 11y ago
    >I guess you missed this part? No. It is a bill that passed in the Senate. It still has to pass in the Assembly to become law. Not a court ruling and not yet a law.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]