Does herd immunity mean nothing to you @hootersforshooters

Also you are literally throwing aside facts that @say has put to you

I have no idea. What does herd immunity mean to you?

I'm not throwing aside anything. I'm keeping him to the subject at hand

His "facts" are mere distractions from the subject matter.

Herd immunity means as long as enough of a Population is immunised to a disease that disease can not spread through them to more vulnerable members of the community who can't v he immunised

So, then.....you're against immigration then, right?

And against travel, right?

I am for informed consent and educating those who believe that health should be associated with politics

And pro-coercion, right?

So.....anti-immigration, right?

No because you can vaccinate immigrants they aren't vaccine repellent

But what if they don't want to be immunized?

Well then that's their right

OK, great. Problem solved. Vaccinate if you want to.

Children are different however

So.....coercion?

No to send a immuninisable child to school without vaccines regardless of your personal view on vaccines is neglectful of the child's health

How so?

Are you trying to say that one form of harm is acceptable whereas another form of harm isn't?

You are potentially exposing a child who can not make their own decisions to diseases which can prove fatal

Their is a difference between a pin prick and a bit of redness for a day and contracting measles

There not their

So, you're a moral relativist?

I thought you were for informed CONSENT?

Children can not give consent

But their caretaker can.

And if their caretaker hit them or neglected to feed them or fed them rotten food they would be taken away from the care giver

Then they wouldn't be a caretaker.

Based

And then another caretaker would be initiated, if there was someone willing to be a caretaker.

Not vaccinating your kids when you’re able to is child abuse

A caretaker doesn't initiate harm.

Yes authorised by the state

The caretakers job is to prevent harm coming to the child

Giving potential harm is abuse.

Allowing your child to contract an easily preventable disease is abuse

Yea, the caretaker's choice is to prevent harm.

@Say allowing you child to be exposed to harm is abuse, yes.

If they refuse to immunise the child and the child then receives measles which is entirely preventable for the majority of the populous then the care taker has failed in their job

@hootersforshooters if you are comparing the possible risks of vaccines to the harm they prevent you need to do some fact checking