With measles, it's not just the death. There are severe complications including encephalitis that affects 1 in 1000 people, which is not an insignificant number.
But look, I get the skepticism. I do. And I am disappointed with my own profession and how we handled Covid. Actually very disappointed in fact. I'm pretty sure a very large percentage of doctors are fully into the Covid hysteria. And there are few things I hate more than being called a hero or essential, for coming in and doing my job. I am no more essential than anybody else. So I don't blame you for lack of trust. In fact, I would be surprised if more people didn't have lack of trust.
Very first paragraph
(1)
No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death associated with the administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988, if the injury or death resulted from side effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared and was accompanied by proper directions and warnings.
Meaning if you for example have an anaphylactic reaction and die because of an allergy to a component of the vaccine, it's an unavoidable side effect. Avoidable reactions are not covered. Unavoidable reactions are considered the standard side effects that become evident in drug trials and reported when the drugs go up for approval. They would include the severe effects that you sometimes hear in those drug commercials (leukemias, lymphomas) for example. And of course improper manufacturing, contamination, etc.
Now, drug companies pay a lot of money for good lawyers, so your legal outcomes are far from certain, but winning against them isn't unheard of.
Perhaps you're right about the covid vaccine. Too early to tell. It may be (likely to be?) similar to the flu vaccine, and arms race against a rapidly mutating virus. Or maybe not. Interesting point about about rapidly declining rates of infection and herd immunity. For 20k years (or however long) of human history, and we were only rapidly declining just before vaccines came out. Not buying it. I guess people that were dying in Iron lungs from polio, or diphtheria outbreaks that are now an ancient relic of human history weren't actually happening. Well, except now, in those close communities that don't vaccinate. And smallpox wasn't eradicated, right.
Also, you can absolutely hold companies accountable in the case of a vaccine that causes harm beyond what would be considered side effects. Just like with any other drug. Except in covid, which is another issue that I have with the vaccine, and why I haven't taken it yet. Perhaps I will later, but for now, I'm waiting.
I don't care what you do to yourself. I take issue when people put their kids at risk through sheer ignorance. Nobody is in a position to force you to do anything to your kids or to take the power of consent away from the parent (except is some limited circumstances that I'm not going to get into), but it is still misguided at best, and stupid at worst. The risk is exceedingly minimal, the benefit is massive, childhood mortality has plummeted since vaccines were introduced, fatal and debilitating childhood diseases that used to be common and virtually non existent, etc. But naturalnews says vaccines are poison so let's disregard 70 years of data. Sorry, I take issue with it because it's stupid. Putting kids at risk due to sheer ignorance is stupid. You may not like it, but that doesn't make it any less stupid.
OK, very well. The first article you linked does not show any link or evidence linking vaccines to autism. It poses the question for the sake of posing the question.
The 2nd article gives you the reason why it's used, you choose to believe that it cause harm.
The third article mention several vaccines, none of which are required. The MMR2 vaccine is pretty new I believe and I don't know how often it is used, if at all. In any case, the article is written from the perspective of the church, so I am putting exactly zero faith in it. I don't think you'd want your doctor to treat you with prayer, so let's keep religion out of it.
The first article specifically states from the oral vaccine. Because they are administering and actual live virus, as the article clearly mentions. This does not apply to the inactivated shot. I do not know if we're administering the oral polio vaccine in the US, as this is not the branch of medicine that I'm involved in, but back in my day as a resident, we were not.
The second article is talking about the same vaccine, and mentions that it's in "rare instances". Very few vaccines are live attenuated vaccines. The nasal flu shot is one, and can cause infection in immunocompromised people. Which is why they don't get that one. There is one more, that is I think one of the MMR vaccine components, but don't quote me on that. Either way, I haven't seen any issues with that one.
Look, I don't fault you for not understanding the details. You're probably not a medical person, and that's OK. What I do hold you accountable for is not realizing that you don't know what you are taking about, refusing to be educated (or educating yourself), and then spreading misinformation and fear.
I don't think you realize that you are absolutely wrong. When was the last time you saw a kid with polio (except for a few communities that refuse to vaccinate), or measles (except for, well you know), etc. The flu vaccine is an exception, and the long term efficacy (and safety) of Covid is still unknown. Please educate yourself or at least know enough so you keep your mouth shut. You know the saying, it's better to keep your mouth shut and have people assume you're an idiot, than to open it and remove all doubt.
I can just as easily turn your argument back on you. Not that I needed your permission to do as I feel is appropriate, but thanks I guess? In any case, my decision is guided by decades of solid science (which doesn't get invalidated by 1 example), if you want to guide yours by internet bullshit, you do you. It's your kids and your life.
Well, there are anti-vaxxers as they were known pre covid, who were people against all vaccines, based on shoddy recommendations from the depths of the internet, and there are "anti-vaxxers" as they are known now, which are people who are hesitant to take the covid vaccine.
I take a big issue with the old school anti-vaxxers who put the lives of their children at risk by depriving them of vaccines that have decades of safety and efficacy data, and will instead treat them with snake oil. I take no issue with anyone who makes a conscious decision for themselves to not take a brand new vaccine that isn't even FDA approved. These two types of people are now being conflated for political purposes.
The virus is of course smaller than the filter medium in the mask. All viruses are. But this virus isn't airborne, it is spread via respiratory droplets. And the respiratory droplets are large enough to be stopped by the N95 mask, which is why these masks are effective.
An N95 mask absolutely works and has been used in taking care of respiratory diseases such as covid and TB. There are several problems. They are not a one size fits all (like I said, we have to get fit tested), beards make them worthless, they have a finite life span (moisture degrades them), and there aren't enough to go around. They would work just about as well in the general population as a cloth mask because of the above reasons.
I have one major critique of this video. He did not test an actual NIOSH certified N95 mask. I would have liked to see that. It is a fact that N95 masks, when properly fitted (we all have to have fit testing done) and worn by medical personnel, and properly removed and disposed of when no longer needed, work to prevent viral transmission via respiratory droplets. The first mask is not an N95 mask, although it resembles one from the outside. It is also a fact that moisture will degrade the mask significantly over time. This is precisely why mass masking the population does not work, and studies show this. This is also why it was always recommended against in previous pandemics. There is a possibility that the masks become vectors of disease transmission as well. Surgical masks, cloth masks, bandanas, etc, don't do jack. The masks are just a part of the whole fear campaign to weaponize the virus.
Because odds are extremely high that it will not. He thinks that society as a whole will benefit, and he's probably right.
Why do you get into your car every morning when it may possibly kill you? Why get on a plane? Why get a surgery? Why step outside in a thunderstorm. Why play contact sports? Do you see where I'm going with this?
You do all of these potentially dangerous or deadly activities because you want to, or because you need to, and most importantly because you feel that the benefits outweighs the risks. For many people the theoretical risk of the vaccine outweighs the risk of Covid in their own risk assessment. In the short term, the vaccines are safe. Even the one that supposedly causes blood clots, the odds of getting a clot is virtually the same as in the general population. It's the long term stuff that is unknown.
Do your own risk assement, and decide if you want it or need it.
So you blame the state for a decision made by a private business? I'm sure if you go to Austin, you'll find plenty of businesses that will hassle you for not wearing a mask. I mean one the one hand we want the state to keep out or private affairs, but it it only applies on issues we agree with? Can't have it both ways. This isn't specific to FL. Your argument is asinine and you need to grow up.
I mean, if you enter my house you need to play by my rules. I don't care if the city has looser rules, my house, my rules. You enter a business, their rules apply. For example, if you live in a CCW state, businesses can put up a "no guns" sign. The enforcement of that sign falls on the state, should you refuse to leave if asked. In VA, it is a trespassing charge. FL is probably the same should you refuse to leave if asked.
If they want to require masks, they have the right to do so regardless of what DeSantis says. He only removed the state mandate and the specific mask-related fines/punishment that came with it. You may still be asked to leave the place if you refuse to wear a mask. And if you refuse, the police will remove you. You'll not be charged with refusing to wear a mask, but will be charged with trespassing (probably). So go to a different place or put on a mask. But don't bitch about it on the internet if you don't understand how it works.
Thanks. Being an anesthesiologist most people don't ask me about vaccines. If I were asked, I'd tell them to do their own risk assessment. The known risk of the virus vs the unknown long term risk of the vaccine. People with serious medical conditions should strongly consider it. For one person in particular, I have recommended the vaccine. But it's not, and shouldn't be a one size fits all approach.
I think that if this happens, what will likely happen is that you're not going to be forced to take the vaccine. But you may not be able to board a plane for example without showing proof of vaccination. You will have the illusion of choice, but it will probably pass legal muster. Can you send your kids to public school without vaccination? I don't know, but I think not right?