Controversian idea from the fabian society

Trans-sane

LE
Book Reviewer
#1
Can't find a link for the story, but saw it on BBC news 24 this morning.

Apparently they are suggesting that checks need to be made of a childs medical records for imunizations. If a child hasn't been vaccinated then they should:-

1/ be prevented from attending school until they are.

2/ have child benefits stopped.

As I said controversial idea. What would everyones' opinion of this be if it became policy?

Personaly I would support it.
 
#2
Here

No Jabs, No School

School bit makes sense to me too. The benefit thing would be a nightmare to police so a thumbs down for that.
 
#3
No!

Education and health are not interlinked.

What if you don´t want your child to have the MMR jab? It has been linked to autism in kids. IIRC the Bliars never admitted that their youngest kid (can´t remember his name Leo? ) had or didn´t have the MMR jab.

It is up to the parents to decide what jabs their child should have. Not some lefty sandel wearing stalin like outreach hippy.

Freedom of choice. Or standby for some large payments if the jabs are wrong. What is the percentage of kids who don´t have the jabs? I recall at my school, there were very few who didn´t. Although in them days we didn´t have the MMR.

Likewise for the cash.

Although I am not adverse to cash being stopped if the children AREN`T attending school.
 
#4
chocolate_frog said:
No.

Education and health are not interlinked.

What if you don´t want your child to have the MMR jab? It has been linked to autism in kids. IIRC the Bliars never admitted that their youngest kid (can´t remember his name Leo? ) had or didn´t have the MMR jab.

It is up to the parents to decide what jabs their child should have. Not some lefty sandel wearing stalin like outreach hippy.

Likewise for the cash.

Although I am not adverse to cash being stopped if the children AREN`T attending school.
Think you will find that that theory has been disproved to the point that the doctor who started that horror story off has been struck off.
 
#5
Has he? Didn´t know that. Either way, what if the docs come up with a new jab that you, as a parent, might be adverse against?

School is th to educate the children, their education should not be used as a lever to bend parents to the will of the state.
 
#6
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4311613.stm

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7076

From the New Scientist

Parents need have no more fears about the triple vaccine against measles, mumps and rubella. A study of more than 30,000 children in Japan should put the final nail in the coffin of the claim that the MMR vaccine is responsible for the apparent rise in autism in recent years.

The study shows that in the city of Yokohama the number of children with autism continued to rise after the MMR vaccine was replaced with single vaccines. "The findings are resoundingly negative," says Hideo Honda of the Yokohama Rehabilitation Center.

In the UK, parents panicked and vaccination rates plummeted after gastroenterologist Andrew Wakefield claimed in a 1998 study that MMR might trigger autism, although the study was based on just 12 children and later retracted by most of its co authors.

Soon the vaccine was being blamed for the apparent rise in autism, with Wakefield citing data from California, US (see graph). In some parts of the UK, the proportion of children receiving both doses of the MMR vaccine has dropped to 60%. This has led to a rise in measles outbreaks and fears of an epidemic.

Not one epidemiological study has revealed a link between the vaccine and autism
A correction to my last. He was investigated but not struck off. Apologies.
 
#7
The status of the doctor is irrelevent.

And the end of the day the only condition to access to the education system is the childs/families willingness to co-operate and turn up.

If they are ahead of their years, move them up, if slow move them-keep them down.

What´s next? exclusions on the political beliefs of the parents?
 
#8
That is a very bad idea. What is the mischief they are trying to prevent?

If someone has been vaccinated, then presumably they will not be affected by someone who isn't. If they haven't been vaccinated because their parents do not want them to be vaccinated, then presumably the risk of catching the condition has been accepted by the parents.

What then is this supposed to achieve?

Did some quick reading: Apparently, they want to achieve "herd immunity". My points above still stands and I still think this is a very bad idea.
 
#9
I'm normally in favour of small government, but this is a brilliant idea. Doctors frequently see kids who were not vaccinated by their parents due to some dodgy scare story which provoced an over the top reaction from (usually) mummy. If we make vaccines compulsory then we will see a big drop in the number of diseases.

Also: the fewer people vaccinated, the more hosts avaliable for a pathogen. The more hosts avaliable, the greater the chance of mutation. The greater the chance of mutation, the greater the chance of previous vaccines becoming worthless and the disease re-emerging as a serious threat. Vaccines are perfectly safe and should be compulsory.
 
#10
chocolate_frog said:
Has he? Didn´t know that. Either way, what if the docs come up with a new jab that you, as a parent, might be adverse against?

School is th to educate the children, their education should not be used as a lever to bend parents to the will of the state.
My bold.

I dont understand this. If the medical world comes up with a vaccine that is good enough to be ratified for general use in this country then there is no real grounds for opposition.
 
#11
This has to be a matter of parental choice, many parents are against the MMR vaccine given in one dose, and choose to have them as separate vaccinations because of the possible link to autism. If there is no smoke without fire how come our former PM chooses not to disclose how his son was vaccinated!

What next, checking their blood lines to check that they are of aryan origin, and therefore pure!

Sorry we should not be linking our education system to our health system, with all the sinster implications of yet more public servants able to access our personal health records.

Not a step I would be happy to encourage.
 
#12
This is the problem. One doctor makes a completely unsubstantiated claim and thouseands of children are left at risk. Loads of parents have crazy ideas about "natural" immunity and a combination of these two leads to thousands of children left unprotected, many of whom contract (and die from/ar mamed by) avoidable diseases.
 
#13
chocolate_frog said:
No!

Education and health are not interlinked.

.
Really? Do you also disagree with the healthy eating regime that has been introduced in schools? It is much to do with education of the kids to eat better, be fitter etc etc. See a link?

There is an obvious link at it must be seen at more than an individual level. The national health is linked to the successful management of serious diseaces. To make it compulsory is obvious. jew_units points are well put.
 
#14
itc, would allow children to be banned from school merely because they and/or their parents chose to eat unhealthily?

I am all for ensuring children are healthy and that they are vaccinated and fed properly. But excluding them from education until they comply is not the way.

Teach them and present the facts. Let them hold their own council.

Jew unit, and others.

Two words FREE WILL.

If the medical world are so right all the time perhaps you can explain this....



Perhaps this is your idea of the school children of tomorrow?

Freedom of choice, ladies and gents. That is one of the freedoms that we defend, and which this law will remove for no good reason what so ever.
 
#15
There is no compulsion for children to eat healthily. Children - in my direct experience - can and do bring packed lunches into school, lunches that are anything but healthy. So I'm afraid Your analogy doesn't work ITC.

People are not taking up multiple vaccinations for various reasons. The autism scare is one reason but many intelligent people are coming to the conclusion that seperate vaccinations may be better for their children. Another reason is that some - again intelligent parents - feel that some illness should run their course.

I do not think that government should subvert the views of parents in this area.
 

Trans-sane

LE
Book Reviewer
#16
Scabster_Mooch said:
That is a very bad idea. What is the mischief they are trying to prevent?

If someone has been vaccinated, then presumably they will not be affected by someone who isn't. If they haven't been vaccinated because their parents do not want them to be vaccinated, then presumably the risk of catching the condition has been accepted by the parents.

What then is this supposed to achieve?

Did some quick reading: Apparently, they want to achieve "herd immunity". My points above still stands and I still think this is a very bad idea.
The problem with this idea of yours is that varient pathogens exist where the vaccinated imunity is only partial, or completely ineffective. It has been proven by the WHO that leaving a small resovoir of non-vaccinated people allows pathogens to mutate to bypass the vaccinated imunity.

In addition most more modern vaccines mearly allow the infection to be fought off before it causes permanent damage. The older vaccines that provided total imunity did so because the pathogen was easier to fight off AFTER your body had a developed imune response. Before a developed imune response, it would likely kill you very quickly...

As for the MMR vaccine and a link to autism, that was proven to be not only bad science, but the prime author admitted it was bad science BEFORE he published it. He had surrounded it with that many caveats that it was an utterly meaningless study. It was basically a publicity stunt to get more funding to continue the research that was picked up by the mass media who had zero comprehension of the subject.
 
#17
jarrod248 said:
Sven said:
There is no compulsion for children to eat healthily. Children - in my direct experience - can and do bring packed lunches into school, lunches that are anything but healthy. So I'm afraid Your analogy doesn't work ITC.

People are not taking up multiple vaccinations for various reasons. The autism scare is one reason but many intelligent people are coming to the conclusion that seperate vaccinations may be better for their children. Another reason is that some - again intelligent parents - feel that some illness should run their course.

I do not think that government should subvert the views of parents in this area.
what Illneses Sven - Meningitis, Diptheria, Polio? It would be great to let them beauties run their course.
How many of the three You mention are halted by vaccination? :roll:
Measles, rubella, chicken pox can all be treated without resorting to vaccination. Yes there is a slight risk with measles but there is also a risk with the needle route.
 
#18
The Choclate_Frog Society has decided that ALL children must be registered blood and organ doners or they will be excluded.

Likewise, all children must be barcoded and ID chipped to prevent them being kidnapped.

Anyone with any problems with this can sign a waiver removing them from the NHS and DHSS lists.
 

Sixty

ADC
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#19
Jarrod said:
what Illneses Sven - Meningitis, Diptheria, Polio? It would be great to let them beauties run their course.


Sven said:
How many of the three You mention are halted by vaccination? :roll:
Measles, rubella, chicken pox can all be treated without resorting to vaccination. Yes there is a slight risk with measles but there is also a risk with the needle route.
It's probably worth pointing out that all new Army recruits have to have a provable vaccination history for all three of those before being allowed to set foot in a training establishment.

I have the doc from LAND kicking about somewhere if anyone needs to see it.
 
#20
OK. I must admit that I am not knowledgeable about pathogens and vaccinations.

Yet, even assuming that this "herd immunity" idea has been proven, and a 95% vaccination rate has significant advantages over the current 85% vaccination rate, I still feel uncomfortable that a member of parliament even entertains the idea of using access to education as a tool of coercion.

All in all, this is about balancing rights. I do not feel the right to education should be further eroded.

The way I look at it, if this is really important that one feels the need to use access to education as a coercive tool, then make it compulsory. If the public is not ready to accept compulsory vaccination, then the govt should not try to compel vaccination by stealth.

As well, if passed, the measure will almost affect the poorest most. They are the ones who cannot afford private education and therefore they will be compelled to vaccinate their children, whatever their misgivings. I am no dyed in the wool socialist but even I feel that is quite unfair.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top