Don't immunise your child, lose benefits?

[johncocker]

Australia seems set to implement such a policy:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-32274107

 

Difficult one! What do you think?

 

 

I work out of sydney oz most of the time and I'm down here at the moment, most people I speak to are all for it.

first, the only thing being removed is Family Tax Benefit A (FTBA).

 

FTBA has always been based on your vaccination status - the only difference now is that conscientious objection has been removed

 

FTBA is only a mechanism where people can reclaim money expended on child care.

 

Since most Australian states either have, or are soon to have, bans on unvaccinated children in child care, this change will have little impact.

 

it won't bother the wealthy . The poor, however, would be affected. However, given the high out of pocket costs of child care, the question is how many people who have children in day care will be genuinely affected by this.

 

FTBA has always been contingent on vaccination status. Anti-vaxers have to be noticeably aware of the high risks they are taking before a doctor will sign off the conscientious objector form. A lot of doctors refuse to sign the forms, because the anti-vaxers show wilful ignorance on the topic.

 

Medical grounds is an acceptable reason to not vaccinate. If you have medical grounds, you can continue to collect FTBA. However, the people who can't vaccinate are put at risk by those who don't vaccinate.

[Obelix]

True- well spotted, I missed that. Really sad that the writers of the article didn't consider that particular fact worthy of mentioning, as it's clearly highly relevant.

Great improvements in nutrition, and, especially, in sanitation, are obvious contenders.

 

Remind me why smallpox vanished again then, even in places where people live in utter squalor.

 

Ditto for Polio - gone everywhere apart from places where aid works are shot for trying to vaccinate children....

[onewheeldave]

Remind me why smallpox vanished again then, even in places where people live in utter squalor.

 

Those regions being...?

 

 

Ditto for Polio - gone everywhere apart from places where aid works are shot for trying to vaccinate children....

Places with aid workers usually have serious sanitation and water issues. Places with aid workers under fire, generally even more so.

 

---------- Post added 13-04-2015 at 16:28 ----------

 

I

 

it won't bother the wealthy . The poor, however, would be affected.

 

And you wonder why people have an issue with this?

[Obelix]

<snip>

 

Are you actually intending to answer the question?

[onewheeldave]

However, the people who can't vaccinate are put at risk by those who don't vaccinate.

Unless mass vaccinations aren't effective and are harmfull (as those who don't vaccinate clearly believe), and then the reverse is true- those forced to vaccinate are being put at risk by those who support enforced vaccinations.

[MAC33]

I went to a female doctor 10 years ago to get my ear syringed as it was blocked.

 

I brought up vaccines.

 

She did not have the foggiest idea of even one ingredient they contain.

 

Yet she was certain the big pharma claims of protection were true.

 

She had never heard of the thousands of adverse reactions also.

 

Just a puppet on a string......the lot of them.

 

 

 

http://www.whale.to/v/rapp.html

[onewheeldave]

Are you actually intending to answer the question?

 

This one?

 

Remind me why smallpox vanished again then, even in places where people live in utter squalor.

 

Ditto for Polio - gone everywhere apart from places where aid works are shot for trying to vaccinate children....

 

I asked for clarification on the first-

 

Those regions being...?

 

 

and pointed out-

 

 

 

Places with aid workers usually have serious sanitation and water issues. Places with aid workers under fire, generally even more so.

 

for the second. Which is an alternative and plausible hypothesis as to why polio might be an issue in those areas. If you google sanitation and disease you'll find some scientific stuff indicating that bad sanitation, especially where waters concerned, can, and often has, lead to outbreaks of really serious diseases.

[L00b]

Those regions being...?

70s' Bangladesh and Somalia OK with you, or not quite squalid enough yet?

 

You ain't got a leg wheel to stand on with this one

And you wonder why people have an issue with this?

Are you seriously debating about vaccination on the basis of class politics?

[JFKvsNixon]

I went to a female doctor 10 years ago to get my ear syringed as it was blocked.

 

I brought up vaccines.

 

She did not have the foggiest idea of even one ingredient they contain.

 

Yet she was certain the big pharma claims of protection were true.

 

She had never heard of the thousands of adverse reactions also.

 

Just a puppet on a string......the lot of them.

 

 

 

http://www.whale.to/v/rapp.html

 

Do you seriously expect a GP to know every ingredient in every drug?

 

As I said to you a couple of hours ago, there are adverse reactions to almost every drug, with people dying from simple drugs like ibuprofen, you can never eliminate risk.

 

What you do is mitigate the risk to the child. So the risk of the disease that you're inoculating against is far greater to the child than the risk of the inoculation itself.

Edited April 13, 2015 by JFKvsNixon

[onewheeldave]

I went to a female doctor 10 years ago to get my ear syringed as it was blocked.

 

I brought up vaccines.

 

She did not have the foggiest idea of even one ingredient they contain.

 

Yet she was certain the big pharma claims of protection were true.

 

She had never heard of the thousands of adverse reactions also.

 

Just a puppet on a string......the lot of them.

 

 

 

http://www.whale.to/v/rapp.html

 

Yep. Sadly, it's often the case that Drs are the biggest sheeple of all- they really do not question the issues of pharmacutical companies corruption of the medical system.

 

But, it's understandable- doctors training is notoriously tough, long hours, with any kind of actual questioning of course content being strongly disapproved of (even if they had free time to do research of their own).

 

Then it's a career of long hours, and big pay. Long hours means, again, little free time for research, and big pay means lots of opportunities to use that free time to be doing things which is a lot more fun than doing research into stuff that shows deep flaws in the system your career is geared to maintaining.

 

Unfortunately, there's a lot of cranks out there with weird theories, many of them calling themselves 'doctors' when they are anything but.

 

That's why I posted a link to the John Mcdougal article- he's a genuine doctor

 

https://www.drmcdougall.com/

 

who is heavily critical of much of what passes for health care in our society.

As is Doctor Caldwell (treated ex-president Clinton for heart disease by getting him off the pharmaceutical drugs (statins etc) and getting him on a plant-based diet instead), and, many other doctors who are openly, and heavily, critical of the pharmaceutical industries corruption of medical science.