Replies

...no business mandating a vaccine for a disease that can’t be passed by sitting next to someone in school.

How about exposure to blood products (saliva, direct sneeze, helping a friend bandage a cut or scrape, etc etc) which can happen in a non-sexual context?

I'm not clear on whether I condone the mandate approach. I do know that parents today don't take a pro-active health approach given the new risks which are out there now.

I can't remember whether the SALK polio vaccine was government mandated, but my parents felt that it offered protection against one more of the worlds' risk, at that time (50's) so we got it.

13 posted on 04/14/2007 2:06:24 PM PDT by GoldCountryRedneck ("The American Indians found out what happens when you don't control immigration."- unknown)

The more vaccines the government mandates, the more children are affected by vaccine injuries. Those children are just as valuable, and their injuries offset the few who would be helped by this.

This is NOT government’s place.

14 posted on 04/14/2007 2:25:13 PM PDT by Politicalmom ("Thompson seems to recognize that he wins the guy-I'd-want-to-get-a-beer-with- contest hands down.")

Also, transmission of measles gives you measles.

Why on earth should ALL girls have to receive a vaccine for something that is not directly transmitted?

A child MAY contract HPV IF she HAPPENS to come in contact with a blood product of an affected child and then MAY contract one of the 4 cancer causing HPVs and then MAY get cancer.

I would like to know what the chances of such an event happening are.

15 posted on 04/14/2007 2:30:37 PM PDT by Politicalmom ("Thompson seems to recognize that he wins the guy-I'd-want-to-get-a-beer-with- contest hands down.")