Parental opposition to childhood vaccination grows as Canadians worry about harms of anti-vax movement

[blackbird]

3 hours ago, Black Dog said:

The overwhelming body of scientific evidence going back more than 50 years affirms the safety and efficacy of fluoridated water.

The safety of fluoridation is widely disputed.  It is not unanimous.  Many cities and towns have rejected it.

Only three towns in B.C. fluoridate their water supplies.  The rest of B.C. do not fluoridate.

97% of western Europe has rejected water fluoridation.

Canada: fluoridated and non-fluoridated cities and towns - Fluoride Action Network (fluoridealert.org)

 

Edited February 29 by blackbird

[blackbird]

2 hours ago, Black Dog said:

If it's not junk woo-woo superstition, it's junk woo-woo science with you.

50 Reasons to Oppose Fluoridation - Fluoride Action Network (fluoridealert.org)

 

 

Edited February 29 by blackbird

[blackbird]

QUICK FACTS

97% OF WESTERN EUROPE HAS REJECTED WATER FLUORIDATION

MANY CHILDREN NOW EXCEED RECOMMENDED DAILY FLUORIDE INTAKE FROM TOOTHPASTE ALONE.

FLUORIDE IS NOT A NUTRIENT.

64 STUDIES HAVE LINKED FLUORIDE WITH REDUCED IQ IN CHILDREN.

50 Reasons to Oppose Fluoridation - Fluoride Action Network (fluoridealert.org)

Much of Ontario has fluoridated public drinking water supplies.  

[herbie]

5 hours ago, eyeball said:

Hopefully someday we'll figure out how to put vaccines into our water or in an aerosol and just dust everyone.

Oh f*ck the anti-flourine mob finally got their way in Prince George about a decade ago. A couple years later dentists were reporting such a surge in cavities they needed more dentists. How cavities reached epidemic proportions on the reserves within one generation...
Yep over sixty years of the anti-science dullards griping about socialist doctors stealing their precious body fluids...

[I am Groot]

6 hours ago, CdnFox said:

One-in-six parents of minors (17%) say they are “really against” vaccinating their kids,

That's fine. They can home-school them. As they won't be accepted in school without their vaccination certificates. There are loopholes but if a significant number of parents start using them those loopholes will close. As far as I'm concerned they should never have existed in the first place. If it's against your religion to get your kids vaccinated then keep them away from the schools - and every other sort of communal place where kids gather, from cub scouts to organized sports. 

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, herbie said:

Oh f*ck the anti-flourine mob finally got their way in Prince George about a decade ago. A couple years later dentists were reporting such a surge in cavities they needed more dentists. How cavities reached epidemic proportions on the reserves within one generation...
Yep over sixty years of the anti-science dullards griping about socialist doctors stealing their precious body fluids...

Obviously you don't know anything about the subject of fluoridation.

There are countless articles and reports about the negative effects of fluoridation on people.  

This video is a good place to start.  This gives accounts of some of the people affected by it.

Don’t Swallow Your Toothpaste - Fluoride Action Network (fluoridealert.org)

I am not holding my breath to see whether you will read or watch anything on it.  That would be counter to your objective of just being a rabble rouser.

Like many things, fluoridation is a political football.  This means citizens must get involved to fight it or it could be forced on them and have very negative consequences to many people.  Sadly many towns and cities in Ontario have succumbed to the fluoridation poison proponents.  Quebec has managed to escape it except in about seven towns.  BC managed to escape it except in three towns thankfully.  

97% of western Europe rejected it but for some strange reason Ireland has fluoridation and 10% of Britain.

Don't confuse vaccination with fluoridation.  The two subjects are entirely different.  Unfortunately some people confuse the two and think if vaccination is good, fluoridation must be too.  There is no connection.  Fluoridation is a poisonous chemical which does cause harm in people.

Edited February 29 by blackbird

[herbie]

OMG you are a total anti-science m0ron.
I'll just keep rabble rousing along with every Dentist on the planet, you just keep telling yourself that you know better than them.

And watch out! There's iodine in your table salt, it's even more poisonous! And don't take that new malaria shot it's experimental so avoid it when you head off toe preach to the heathen i deep in the jungle. Invite your grandkids for a measles party, get it all over at once... measles is a nothingburger. I know that cuz only one of my 3 sisters died from it.

 

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

That's fine. They can home-school them. As they won't be accepted in school without their vaccination certificates. There are loopholes but if a significant number of parents start using them those loopholes will close.

If a significant number of parents use them - they'll vote in gov'ts that won't close them.

And if you're not happy with that you can always home school YOUR kids after all, so there you go.

Sorry but the forced-vax crowd brought this on themselves.

[Black Dog]

12 hours ago, CdnFox said:

If a significant number of parents use them - they'll vote in gov'ts that won't close them.

And if you're not happy with that you can always home school YOUR kids after all, so there you go.

Sorry but the forced-vax crowd brought this on themselves.

Blindingly obvious you don't have kids.

[CdnFox]

23 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

Blindingly obvious you don't have kids.

So - the polling shows that more and more parents WITH kids are not supporting vaccines, and that parents without kids do, and so you take this as proof that i don't have kids.

Sigh. It would take a medical research team to find a way to make you more dumb.. You've hit peak stupid.

[I am Groot]

13 hours ago, CdnFox said:

If a significant number of parents use them - they'll vote in gov'ts that won't close them.

There will never be enough people stupid enough to side with the anti-vaxxers. This society believes in vaccinations for good, sound scientific reasons that have been validated for generations. People who can't accept that are free to emigrate. 

[CdnFox]

47 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

There will never be enough people stupid enough to side with the anti-vaxxers.

There already are in some provinces, and it doesn't take much. Remember that only about 60 plus percent of people vote, and special interest groups who can get people out in large percents are valuable to politicians.  i mean - there's not many muslims in canada and look how hard some political parties worked to court that vote.

If 30 plus percent of parents don't want to be forced to vax their young kids, that's a powerful voting block.  And the more people like you call people like them stupid the more they're going to dig in their heels and convince others.

[I am Groot]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

There already are in some provinces, and it doesn't take much. Remember that only about 60 plus percent of people vote, and special interest groups who can get people out in large percents are valuable to politicians.  i mean - there's not many muslims in canada and look how hard some political parties worked to court that vote.

If 30 plus percent of parents don't want to be forced to vax their young kids, that's a powerful voting block.  And the more people like you call people like them stupid the more they're going to dig in their heels and convince others.

They are stupid. Full stop. There is no argument that counters the impact vaccinations have had on what used to be the regular epidemics of deadly diseases that spread across this country and continent every year until the vaccines put a stop to it. You want polio to come back? is that your desire?

Edited February 29 by I am Groot

[CdnFox]

20 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

They are stupid. Full stop.

Sorry, no.  That is an 1diotic thing to say.  It's what a child would say, not a rational adult.  There are no risk free vaccines and some people may feel the risk is not justified and may have their reasons. Parents may have all kinds of reasons to feel the risk is unacceptable and that doesn't make them stupid.

And even if it were true saying it just makes them dig in harder - which means you'd have to be even MORE stupid if your goal is to get more kids immunized.

 

22 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

There is no argument that counters the impact vaccinations have

In your mind. And you're entitled to think that. For your kids.  not other people's kids. Sorry.

25 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

You want polio to come back? is that your desire?

Sigh.  Sure - that's what i want, for polio to come back.  Yeash.

Do you want children to DIE!!?!?!  Is THAT your desire?!!?!  (dun dun duuuuuuun)

Get a grip.  Parents of today's young kids will have to decide if they feel the risk of polio potentially making a comeback is or is not worth the risks of the vaccines. Some will decide one way - others  another.  But i think we can all agree that probably none of them are actually ROOTING for polio.

At the end of the day people should be allowed to decide what medical treatments their kids have and i don't mean at the end of the barrel of a gun.

[Black Dog]

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

So - the polling shows that more and more parents WITH kids are not supporting vaccines, and that parents without kids do, and so you take this as proof that i don't have kids.

Sigh. It would take a medical research team to find a way to make you more dumb.. You've hit peak stupid.

It didn't say anything about people without kids, it just said "people without kids under 18". Dipshit.

Edited February 29 by Black Dog

[Black Dog]

7 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Get a grip.  Parents of today's young kids will have to decide if they feel the risk of polio potentially making a comeback is or is not worth the risks of the vaccines. Some will decide one way - others  another.  But i think we can all agree that probably none of them are actually ROOTING for polio.

Doesn't matter if they are "rooting for polio" or not; if they choose not to get their kids vaccinated they are objectively pro-polio (or measles, or whooping cough, or mumps or whatever).

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

It didn't say anything about people without kids, it just said "people without kids under 18". Dipshit.

If they're over 18 they're not kids, they're adults.  M0ron.

But kudos - i was just thinking "he's been so stupid so many days in a row he can't POSSIBLY find a NEW way to be stupid today", but i wasn't giving you enough credit. well done.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Black Dog said:

Doesn't matter if they are "rooting for polio" or not; if they choose not to get their kids vaccinated they are objectively pro-polio (or measles, or whooping cough, or mumps or whatever).

No that is stupid. Which shocks no one coming from you.

If a person is afraid the vaccine may have risks and feels the risks of polio are low, then they are not 'objectively' pro polio, they're closer to anti-vaccine. 

What have we told you about not using words if you don't know how they work?

And it's people making dumb ass statements like that which cause people to question if they're being told the truth. It's such obviously incorrect that of course people are going to hear you say that and think 'if the pro vaxers are THAT dense, what else are they wrong about?"

[I am Groot]

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

In your mind. And you're entitled to think that. For your kids.  not other people's kids. Sorry.

It's got nothing to do with opinion. This is raw, unalterable fact. Arguing with it is like arguing the world is flat and the moon is made of cheese. It's utterly ridiculous.

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Sigh.  Sure - that's what i want, for polio to come back.  Yeash.

That is the inevitable result of people like you fighting against vaccines. To return us to a world where deadly diseases swept through the population every year, from measles to whooping cough to polio and smallpox.

A smallpox epidemic was sweeping through Canada in 1885. Ontario enforced vaccinations, which wasn't too hard. The French in Quebec were narrow minded and suspicious and fought against vaccinations. Ontario put police at the border and wouldn't let anyone in without inspections. Something like 50 people died in Ontario vs about 6,000 in Quebec. That's the difference vaccinations make.

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

At the end of the day people should be allowed to decide what medical treatments their kids have and i don't mean at the end of the barrel of a gun.

No one is going to shoot them. Instead, we'll shun them. Don't vaccinate your kids and you don't get to send them around other people's kids, including schools, clubs, sports teams, etc. Very few parents would want their kids to play with unvaccinated kids.

Because it's not just about YOU. Vaccinations work best the higher the proportion of the population gets them. None are perfect. But if almost everyone has them then the few that don't won't be able to spread the disease very much. Society has a right to protect itself from lunatics who don't trust science, doctors or reality.

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

Society has a right to protect itself from lunatics who don't trust science, doctors or reality.

It's more like a duty really.

[OftenWrong]

15 hours ago, I am Groot said:

Society has a right to protect itself from lunatics who don't trust science, doctors or reality.

 

12 hours ago, eyeball said:

It's more like a duty really.

You psudeo-scientific propeller heads are so sure of what you don't know, you're almost ready to attack anyone who might dare question the party line.

"Lock them up! Lock them up!"

Well it turns out that it's not as black and white as your simple understanding leads you to believe. Fauci himself has co-authored a paper, published in 2023, that points to problematic issues with the mrna vaccine. Some of this says the very same thing so-called 'anti-vaxxers' claimed during the outbreak, even to the point that getting the vaccine could put you MORE at risk. 

First, some exerpts from an online article describing the paper. Then I'll link to the paper itself so you can read it and weep.

In January 2023, Fauci, and two colleagues, outlined concerns rooted in the interplay between respiratory viruses and the human immune system. 

Here are the key arguments underpinning Fauci et al.’s reversed position:

1. Mucosal vs. Systemic Immunity: mRNA vaccines are designed to elicit systemic immune responses, primarily through the generation of neutralizing antibodies. However, respiratory viruses require a robust mucosal immune response for effective neutralization and clearance. Fauci and colleagues argue that mRNA vaccines, in their current form, do not adequately stimulate mucosal immunity, potentially limiting their effectiveness against respiratory pathogens.

2. Durability of Protection: Another concern they point to involves the duration of protection offered by mRNA vaccines. Respiratory viruses, including influenza and coronaviruses, exhibit high mutation rates, leading to the emergence of new variants. The implication is that mRNA vaccines may not provide long-lasting immunity against these ever-evolving threats, requiring frequent updates and booster shots.

3. Immune Imprinting: The phenomenon of “original antigenic sin” or immune imprinting is also highlighted as a potential issue. This concept suggests that exposure to a specific viral strain via vaccination could bias the immune system’s response to future infections, making it less effective against different strains. While mRNA vaccines can be quickly updated, repeated vaccinations might reinforce this imprinting, potentially complicating responses to new variants.

Link to the paper:

Rethinking next-generation vaccines for coronaviruses, influenzaviruses, and other respiratory viruses

Hopefully you government-affirming bobbleheads will have the time and mental prowess to read it?

But nahh...    

[OftenWrong]

It begs the question, is Dr. Fauci, the left's "patron-saint of Covid 19" now peddling fake science propaganda from 'anti-vaxxers'? Will he now be labelled as political chandala? How many people does he want to kill anyway?

[eyeball]

5 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

You psudeo-scientific propeller heads are so sure of what you don't know, you're almost ready to attack anyone who might dare question the party line.

No, we just want to protect ourselves from diseased vermin like normal people normally have done for centuries.

 

8 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Hopefully you government-affirming bobbleheads will have the time and mental prowess to read it?

I'm not an expert so I'll pass on slogging through the technical aspects but it appears from the paper's title and concluding remarks that experts intend to use the self-correcting nature of science and hindsight to develop even better vaccines in the future. Within the text of the paper there's a pretty straightforward reference to a successful deployment of vaccines during the SARS-CoV2 pandemic that strongly suggests the authors agree the deployment of what we had at the time was the correct action to take.

Then the concluding remarks go on to say;

Past unsuccessful attempts to elicit solid protection against mucosal respiratory viruses and to control the deadly outbreaks and pandemics they cause have been a scientific and public health failure that must be urgently addressed. We are excited and invigorated that many investigators and collaborative groups are rethinking, from the ground up, all of our past assumptions and approaches to preventing important respiratory viral diseases and working to find bold new paths forward.

New vaccines in other words which I doubt will do a thing to put a dent in attitudes of the anti-vaccine crowd. 

[CdnFox]

16 hours ago, I am Groot said:

It's got nothing to do with opinion. This is raw, unalterable fact. Arguing with it is like arguing the world is flat and the moon is made of cheese. It's utterly ridiculous.

It just isnt. It;s opinion and cannot be made 'factual'  as a result.  If i give you the name and address of a 7 year old child in a specific town in canada can you tell me with precision whether he will catch measles without a vaccine?  Or even what his personal precise chances are? If i were to say they were zero would you be able to prove otherwise? Meanwhile given his specific physiology what will be his reaction to a vaccine? or his chances - we know those are non zero.

But you caim it's 'fact' that the vaccine rewards outweigh the risk?  You don't seem to understand how 'facts' work. It is not a demonstrable fact that it's better.  the facts are that it's impossible for any given individual to say. Which means it boils down to how you interpret the data and what your personal priorities are, along with your personal beliefs.

Before a discussion on this can happen, you have to understand and accept that.  In the end it IS an opinion, You can say YOU believe the conclusion should be pretty obvious and fair enough but that does NOT mean another person having a different opinion is somehow invalid,

I honestly believe that a sizeable hunk of our problems today come from an unwillingness to accept other people's right to have conclusions and opinion

 

 

[CdnFox]

16 hours ago, I am Groot said:

It's got nothing to do with opinion. This is raw, unalterable fact. Arguing with it is like arguing the world is flat and the moon is made of cheese. It's utterly ridiculous.

That is the inevitable result of people like you fighting against vaccines. To return us to a world where deadly diseases swept through the population every year, from measles to whooping cough to polio and smallpox.

A smallpox epidemic was sweeping through Canada in 1885. Ontario enforced vaccinations, which wasn't too hard. The French in Quebec were narrow minded and suspicious and fought against vaccinations. Ontario put police at the border and wouldn't let anyone in without inspections. Something like 50 people died in Ontario vs about 6,000 in Quebec. That's the difference vaccinations make.

No one is going to shoot them. Instead, we'll shun them. Don't vaccinate your kids and you don't get to send them around other people's kids, including schools, clubs, sports teams, etc. Very few parents would want their kids to play with unvaccinated kids.

Because it's not just about YOU. Vaccinations work best the higher the proportion of the population gets them. None are perfect. But if almost everyone has them then the few that don't won't be able to spread the disease very much. Society has a right to protect itself from lunatics who don't trust science, doctors or reality.

As long as you're ok with people 'shunning' others they don't like.  If you don't like gays or trans you should be allowed to shun them right? Or if they're someone you don't approve of right?

Sigh. You bettter take a look around the world and history and see how that always ends,