Rejecting vaccination - "growing public health time bomb", NHS Chief warns

[Shechemite]

Ah, so you weren't advocating changing the law to allow social services to remove children from their parents for forcible vaccination, just discussing it hypothetically?

If that was the case, my apologies.

edit: and I do agree if we're talking hypotheticals that in a sufficiently authoritarian environment you could force or induce medical personnel to take part in such things, but I wouldn't want to live in that environment

I liked a post if that’s what you mean by ‘advocating’.

I see no issue with parents losing PR if they refuse to act in their child’s best interests, and not vaccinating children is against their best interests. That’s hardly authoritarian, nor is it advocating the forcible injection of anyone.

You do know that forced injections (for psychotropic medication) already happens, and on far, far less sound science than there is for vaccinations. Do you consider that authoritarian?

 

[Shechemite]

One of the problems atm is that nurses themselves are refusing/failing to be vaccinated, which is resulting in trusts making it mandatory to be vaccinated if staff want to work in certain roles.

Again, that’s not ‘authoritarian’

 

[SpookyFrank]

If you're opposed to evidence based healthcare practices perhaps nursing ain't the job for you.

 

[Shechemite]

If you're opposed to evidence based healthcare practices perhaps nursing ain't the job for you.

Well quite

 

[8ball]

I liked a post if that’s what you mean by ‘advocating’.

I see no issue with parents losing PR if they refuse to act in their child’s best interests, and not vaccinating children is against their best interests. That’s hardly authoritarian, nor is it advocating the forcible injection of anyone.

You do know that forced injections (for psychotropic medication) already happens, and on far, far less sound science than there is for vaccinations. Do you consider that authoritarian?

Acting by force because you consider something in someone's best interests, or the best interests of society, without pretty rigorous channels of backup and accountability is exactly what authoritarian means.

As for forced injection of psychotropics - you're comparing something I'm calling very problematic with something else which is also problematic in many cases...

Re: your further point regarding the vaccination of medical personnel themselves - it's not regarded as a right in any sense to work as a medical professional (and clearly no one is forced to), so I'd give it a commensurately lower priority in terms of justification going by my usual ethical standards*, so that would come down to the evidential backup for the use of such vaccinations (which rather dovetails with what Frank just said).

* Basically the old "the burden of proof is carried by the initiator of force" thing.

 

[Shechemite]

Acting by force because you consider something in someone's best interests, or the best interests of society, without pretty rigorous channels of backup and accountability is exactly what authoritarian means.

As for forced injection of psychotropics - you're comparing something I'm calling very problematic with something else which is also problematic in many cases...

Re: your further point regarding the vaccination of medical personnel themselves - it's not regarded as a right in any sense to work as a medical professional (and clearly no one is forced to), so I'd give it a commensurately lower priority in terms of justification going by my usual ethical standards*, so that would come down to the evidential backup for the use of such vaccinations (which rather dovetails with what Frank just said).

* Basically the old "the burden of proof is carried by the initiator of force" thing.

Um social services already remove children in the basis of best interest.

Taking away parental responsibility is no small thing, and there is (a degree of) legal oversight of this.

 

[8ball]

Um social services already remove children in the basis of best interest.

Taking away parental responsibility is no small thing, and there is (a degree of) legal oversight of this.

Um... yeah. Maybe read the second part of what you just posted in the context of what I posted.

 

[Shechemite]

Um... yeah. Maybe read the second part of what you just posted in the context of what I posted.

You’re weird

 

[8ball]

You’re weird

Given the context, I’ll take that as a compliment.

 

[William of Walworth]

My position on all this is that of beesonthewhatnow -- anti-vaccination** propaganda is disgusting .
Plus all the (100% correct!) abuse he ranted

**I refuse to use terms like "anti-vaxxers" etc., because for some conspiracists/loonspuds and gulllibles, that's a positive term

Odd comment in the Guardian piece from a Professor at the University of Bristol :

Adam Finn, Professor of paediatrics at the University of Bristol, said : “Having your child fully immunised against measles and other childhood infections should be as automatic and straightforward as teaching them how to feed themselves and sending them to school. It should be a no-brainer.

“Unicef is delivering a clear message to all of us in public service to get our act together. If we insist on playing the blame game, then we should be blaming ourselves, not parents and anti-vaxxers when things are not done right.

“It’s what we are paid to do and we have a joint responsibility to deliver. If we fail we are letting down the next generation just as negligently as by filling the seas with plastic and the atmosphere with greenhouse gases.”

I get some of his points about the medical profession , etc., worldwide having a lot of work to do.

But the bolded comment looks like he's blaming himself and colleagues more than anti-vaccination propaganda. I'd accept that blame rests with anti-vaccination idiots more than with parents (although vaccination-refusenik parents should take full responsibility for their own idiocy too!).

But blame the medical profession for failing when charlatans like Wakefield++ and evil propagandists still spreading his shit online, have so much more responsibility?

++Should be in prison. Any way of achieving this?

Fuck that hand-wringing self-blaming shit

 

[Dogsauce]

Throw them out of a plane with a homeopathic parachute. That ought to learn em.

 

[8ball]

Throw them out of a plane with a homeopathic parachute. That ought to learn em.

I think you'll find the evidence for parachutes mitigating gravitationally-induced kinetic trauma after unscheduled high-altitude vehicular exits is very shaky.

Not a single randomised blinded trial on the books.

 

[SpookyFrank]

I think you'll find the evidence for parachutes mitigating gravitationally-induced kinetic trauma after unscheduled high-altitude vehicular exits is very shaky.

Not a single randomised blinded trial on the books.

Meanwhile nobody who has bought one of our homeopathic parachutes has ever come back to complain that it didn't work.

 

[SpookyFrank]

But the bolded comment looks like he's blaming himself and colleagues more than anti-vaccination propaganda. I'd accept that blame rests with anti-vaccination idiots more than with parents (although vaccination-refusenik parents should take full responsibility for their own idiocy too!).

I don't think it should be incumbent on doctors alone to tackle all the woo. They've got enough to do as it is, and as people in an evidence-based profession they may not be best equipped to comprehend and thus defeat the mindset of conspiraloons, quacks and common-or-garden idiots.

Science communication is a very particular skill and one that should be treasured, we shouldn't just assume that every GP can do it. Particularly when, thanks to the tories, people's experiences of healthcare and thus their trust in doctors is nosediving.

I do also think there's a point at which the propagandists are unambiguously, deliberately endangering public health. We don't really have crimes for that sort of thing, mostly because if we did a lot of corporations would be in deep trouble, but we probably should do.

 

[Poi E]

there's a point at which the propagandists are unambiguously, deliberately endangering public health.

 

[Pickman's model]

I don't think it should be incumbent on doctors alone to tackle all the woo. They've got enough to do as it is, and as people in an evidence-based profession they may not be best equipped to comprehend and thus defeat the mindset of conspiraloons, quacks and common-or-garden idiots.

given it was a dr who started all the mmr bollocks I think some of them will be quacks who can readily understand the mindset of 'loons and cog idiots

 

[farmerbarleymow]

I do also think there's a point at which the propagandists are unambiguously, deliberately endangering public health. We don't really have crimes for that sort of thing, mostly because if we did a lot of corporations would be in deep trouble, but we probably should do.

The main one I can think of is the Cancer Act 1939, which prohibits people publishing material claiming to be able to cure cancer. There have been a few people pulled up on this in recent years, usually religious groups of the evangelical flavour. More information on the remaining provisions of the Act and how it works are here.

The law could be updated to make peddling dangerous health claims an offence which would help reduce the numbers of such claims. Difficult to police on the internet though.

 

[Orang Utan]

There's a lot of people on Facebook (well, there are if you look at woo and anti-woo groups on there) using something called black salve to 'cure' cancer. Some well grim photos of some really quite advanced tumours being slathered with black mud. Proponents of this are mostly American. Is a factor in this foregoing of conventional medical treatment partially a result of people not being able to afford proper health care? It can't all be mistrust in authority that's leading people to such idiocy.

 

[Poi E]

The black salve stuff is particularly disturbing, as people encourage some moron on as their face dissolves.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

There's a lot of people on Facebook (well, there are if you look at woo and anti-woo groups on there) using something called black salve to 'cure' cancer. Some well grim photos of some really quite advanced tumours being slathered with black mud. Proponents of this are mostly American. Is a factor in this foregoing of conventional medical treatment partially a result of people not being able to afford proper health care? It can't all be mistrust in authority that's leading people to such idiocy.

If it was mud it wouldn’t be so bad - that stuff literally burns through flesh, it’s truly grim.

 

[polly]

There's a lot of people on Facebook (well, there are if you look at woo and anti-woo groups on there) using something called black salve to 'cure' cancer. Some well grim photos of some really quite advanced tumours being slathered with black mud. Proponents of this are mostly American. Is a factor in this foregoing of conventional medical treatment partially a result of people not being able to afford proper health care? It can't all be mistrust in authority that's leading people to such idiocy.

I don't know the answer but it seems to be really popular in Australia too, where afaik they have free atpou health care. (Edit - they don't - they have medicare) I also read a paper on black salve use recently by a doctor, who said that, when they find out a patient is using it, they offer them support - not because they approve but presumably because of hippocratic oath stuff. Anyway she (the dr) said that this often makes the patients go to ground completely and stop seeking any medical care. She said they are a particularly secretive bunch. So I don't think it's entirely cost related.

The whole thing is terrifying. People are putting their aged piss on their newborn babies. Salving their kids, their dogs

 

[wemakeyousoundb]

There's a lot of people on Facebook (well, there are if you look at woo and anti-woo groups on there) using something called black salve to 'cure' cancer. Some well grim photos of some really quite advanced tumours being slathered with black mud. Proponents of this are mostly American. Is a factor in this foregoing of conventional medical treatment partially a result of people not being able to afford proper health care? It can't all be mistrust in authority that's leading people to such idiocy.

Pretty sure this is definitely part of it, some desperate people without the means to cover the exorbitant costs over there.
Then there are the loons.

 

[8ball]

given it was a dr who started all the mmr bollocks...

That David Tennant one, I reckon.

 

[Pickman's model]

That David Tennant one, I reckon.

Andrew wakefield

 

[pinkmonkey]

Something has to be done to reinstate herd immunity, which means more people have to have vaccinations.

I can remember having various ones at school - does that still happen?

Measles was on the brink of eradication, Andrew Wakefield has a lot to answer for.

No it doesn't happen in schools anymore - edited -saw Thoras post, I see it does - it did when I was a kid though - but I was off school that day and didn't get the vaccination. An administrative cock-up. I was incredibly ill with measles and off school for months. Measles was the onset of adhd for me, it's in my family, but I'm far worse with it than everyone else and my shrink thinks thats why - it causes brain trauma. It also caused my high myopia and retinal vitreous detachment. Within a couple of weeks of getting over measles I remember my eyesight beginning to change at an alarming speed.

I think this is half of the issue - because it's been mostly eradicated, barely anyone knows someone with real life experience of the disease, so they dismiss it as being nothing worse than a mild flu case - one of my clients was born in Nigeria and she recounts being hospitalised with it and other kids in her school dying from it. I've had some success convincing parents to vaccinate - because I have real life experience of what a dangerous disease it is (I'm also on the autism spectrum so yeah, there is that too.)

You'll never reach the anti vacc loons though, like Flat Earthers, they've made it their whole life, like a replacement religion - I honestly think it should be made the law that kids have to be vaccinated, enough of this crap, already. Social media is to blame - just like with the far right - they've been too late to act.

 

[Thora]

They still do vaccinations at school.

 

[pinkmonkey]

The main one I can think of is the Cancer Act 1939, which prohibits people publishing material claiming to be able to cure cancer. There have been a few people pulled up on this in recent years, usually religious groups of the evangelical flavour. More information on the remaining provisions of the Act and how it works are here.

The law could be updated to make peddling dangerous health claims an offence which would help reduce the numbers of such claims. Difficult to police on the internet though.

Well you'd think so, but...

I helped a group of women in their anti network marketing campaign, reps were hawking their snake oils (aloe juice/vitamins, you name it) on Facebook and making false medical claims. If you report Facebook posts to the ASA yes it does work. We got results - we can see that from following their conference where the top of the pyramid reps receive giant bonus cheques on stage. They are 80% less than they used to be and the auditorium has lots of empty seats - its getting harder to sell and recruit because they've been warned by the ASA that they can't make these claims. Without that the product is obviously worthless. No one will spend £30 on a bottle of what might as well be pop.

If just five of us could manage this (and five national newspaper articles and two documentaries in less than a year) then I reckon it could be achieved again with this bullcrap. And even though most of us from the original group are not actively campaigning now, there's another documentary coming out too on BBC3 next month.

 

[8ball]

The law could be updated to make peddling dangerous health claims an offence which would help reduce the numbers of such claims. Difficult to police on the internet though.

Yeah, that's a tough one. I think an agreed system of accreditation of health advice between health agencies and the social media giants is the way to go with that. As has been said, you'll never reach the true loons, but an easy way of verifying general health claims would be very useful.

 

[farmerbarleymow]

Yeah, that's a tough one. I think an agreed system of accreditation of health advice between health agencies and the social media giants is the way to go with that. As has been said, you'll never reach the true loons, but an easy way of verifying general health claims would be very useful.

There are charter mark schemes for websites now but I don't know how well-known they are. NHS display it as do some companies, but it's not widespread. But the Web poses unique challenges for managing such schemes given social media firms don't operate solely in UK jurisdiction.

 

[8ball]

There are charter mark schemes for websites now but I don't know how well-known they are. NHS display it as do some companies, but it's not widespread. But the Web poses unique challenges for managing such schemes given social media firms don't operate solely in UK jurisdiction.

Yeah, I think you would need the involvement of international health agencies, and keep a pretty tight remit.