Last week's CDC report on the flu

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I disagree that the decision over whether or not to get the vaccine for yourself or your kids is a "personal" decision. A "personal" decision is becoming a vegetarian or deciding to home school your kids. The decision not to get yourself or your kids vaccinated raises potential consequences for the health and welfare of your community. I'm not advocating a role for government to mandate the vaccine. I believe people should be free to chose whether or not to get the vaccine. However, I don't believe they should expect society to accept their decision not to get vaccinated as a "personal" decision. Like it or not we are all in this together and your decision not to vaccinate your kid puts other people at risk. In other words, you and your child aren't likley to be the only ones who will suffer the consequences if you forego the vaccine and contract H1N1 as a result.

What's the difference between "people should be free to choose" and "a personal decision"? I'm the PP who said it was my personal decision not to vaccinate the family, but perhaps I meant I choose not to .... ? Not sure what you mean.

Also, I feel the same as you about almost all other vaccines, but not flu ones. Perhaps it's because our family comes from 2 other western countries where flu vaccines are not given out to everybody so we're still not used to that one being 'necessary'.

[Anonymous]

The distinction between "free to choose" and "personal decision" is that I don't think anyone should require anyone else to do something against their will, but I don't think we should ignore the fact that those choices have consequences not just for the person making the decision, but for others in the community. I don't think that a decision to become a vegetarian is of consequence to anyone other than the one making the decision. The decision not to get vaccinated against a contagious virus/disease, on the other hand, does have consequences for people other than the one making the decision. I'm sorry if some people find this concept "off-putting" but I think I'm making a fairly obvious point that shouldn't be that controversial. I just don't think we should continue acting like the decision not to get the H1N1 vaccine is a "personal" decision that impacts no one but the one making the decision. That is just not true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The distinction between "free to choose" and "personal decision" is that I don't think anyone should require anyone else to do something against their will, but I don't think we should ignore the fact that those choices have consequences not just for the person making the decision, but for others in the community. I don't think that a decision to become a vegetarian is of consequence to anyone other than the one making the decision. The decision not to get vaccinated against a contagious virus/disease, on the other hand, does have consequences for people other than the one making the decision. I'm sorry if some people find this concept "off-putting" but I think I'm making a fairly obvious point that shouldn't be that controversial. I just don't think we should continue acting like the decision not to get the H1N1 vaccine is a "personal" decision that impacts no one but the one making the decision. That is just not true.

How does it impact you if I'm sick for a week?

[Anonymous]

"Anonymous wrote:
The distinction between "free to choose" and "personal decision" is that I don't think anyone should require anyone else to do something against their will, but I don't think we should ignore the fact that those choices have consequences not just for the person making the decision, but for others in the community. I don't think that a decision to become a vegetarian is of consequence to anyone other than the one making the decision. The decision not to get vaccinated against a contagious virus/disease, on the other hand, does have consequences for people other than the one making the decision. I'm sorry if some people find this concept "off-putting" but I think I'm making a fairly obvious point that shouldn't be that controversial. I just don't think we should continue acting like the decision not to get the H1N1 vaccine is a "personal" decision that impacts no one but the one making the decision. That is just not true.

How does it impact you if I'm sick for a week? "

Wow infectious disease 101!

If you are sick you are shedding the virus and infecting others before you realize you are sick. The more hosts a virus can infect the longer it lives on within the population. Within that population, individuals who were unable to be vaccinated (age, allergies, or access), and individuals for whom the vaccine did not yield enough of an immune response (no vaccine is 100% effective in the entire population) would then be at a higer risk for contracting the virus. The longer a virus lives within a population the higher the likliehood the virus will mutate with possible serious outcomes.

[Anonymous]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/11/AR2009111126675.html?hpid=sec-health

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How does it impact you if I'm sick for a week?

Because you're a carrier for that week, and unless you completely isolate yourself, you're going to spread H1N1 to others (ultimately increasing the chance of me and my family getting it).

Aggressive vaccination is how smallpox was eradicated: "To eradicate smallpox, each outbreak had to be stopped from spreading, by isolation of cases and vaccination of everyone who lived close by. This process is known as "ring vaccination". The key to this strategy was monitoring of cases in a community (known as surveillance) and containment. The initial problem the WHO team faced was inadequate reporting of smallpox cases, as many cases did not come to the attention of the authorities." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox)

[Anonymous]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,574387,00.html