Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   North Spore Injection Grain Bag

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate
    #8576609 - 06/29/08 07:05 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

There are some interesting comments following this piece if you follow the link below.

--

The AAP gets tough on vaccine dissenters

The American Academy of Pediatrics is growing so concerned about the climbing rate of vaccine exemptions--and the possible affect on community health--that it recently formed a group called the "Immunization Alliance" to address the growing refusal of some parents to vaccinate.

In a letter sent to members, the AAP identified the following as problems:

    * "Parent-to-parent spread of myths."
    * "A public that does not understand the risk of vaccine-preventable diseases."
    * "Unbalanced Internet and media exposure."
    * "Decreased trust in the government and health care providers."
    * "Slow response to negative news coverage."
    * "Increasing calls for philosophical exemptions."

But here's a problem the AAP missed: The sheer number of recommended and mandated vaccines is freaking parents out. And new combo shots that contain a stew of four or five different vaccines aren't going to help matters.

In 1982, The Centers for Disease Control recommended 23 doses of 7 vaccines for children up to age 6.

Today, the CDC recommends that children get 48 doses of 12 vaccines by age 6. That's a lot. Toss in flu shots for all infants and children and it boosts the number of recommended vaccines for children to 69 doses of 16 vaccines by age 18.

The two new combo shots approved yesterday by a federal advisory panel don't change the schedule; they just reduce the number of individual shots. GlaxoSmithKline's four-in-one shot offers protection against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis and polio. Sanofi Pasteur's five-in-one shot is for diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio and illness due to Haemophilus influenzae type b, or HiB.

But parents who are already asking doctors to unbundle the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine because they want their child to have individual vaccines aren't likely to embrace a five-shot cocktail. The new shots are also likely to raise questions, concerns and storage issues.

And how does the AAP plan to handle it? The organization will not talk about choice or informed consent, issues that should be raised with any medical procedure that carries a risk.

Instead, the AAP suggests in a sample letter to pediatricians, that physicians tell parents who refuse to vaccinate that they have a "self-centered and unacceptable attitude" since your child is getting protection from others who have chosen to vaccinate.

And if you absolutely refuse to vaccinate your child despite your physician's efforts, you could be booted from your pediatrician's practice. The sample letter to doctors from the AAP recommends saying:

    "We will ask you to find another health care provider who shares your views. We do not keep a list of such providers nor would we recommend any such physician."

Chicago Tribune


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 5 months
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Diploid]
    #8576678 - 06/29/08 07:56 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Do you guys have to pay for vaccines? It'd be a shame if parents are choosing not to vaccinate based on financial reasons. At least the combo shots will reduce the number of injections.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: zouden]
    #8576757 - 06/29/08 08:54 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

People are citing safety concerns. What informed parent wants to inject mercury (read: thimerosal) into their kids?


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineVisionary Tools
Male User Gallery


Registered: 06/23/07
Posts: 7,953
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Diploid]
    #8576795 - 06/29/08 09:22 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

--

The AAP gets tough on vaccine dissenters




Hey, you want to inject mercury into people? You first. Take your fucking mercury laden "medicine" (that doesn't really do anything but weaken one's immune system).

Vaccinations are designed to grant immunity from a disease. In which case, they should be purely voluntary. Don't want that disease? Take the shot. You've got nothing to worry about from unvaccinated people, because if you took the vaccination, you're not going to get that infection, or if you do, your immune system will quickly tackle it.

This just reeks of collectivism. "You must vaccinate your children for the greater good!"

How does injecting a neurotoxic preservative into a child good? You're telling me, that in all the decades of chemical innovation, the only preservative vaccine companies can use is mercury based?

What next, fluoride in our water?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAnnoA
Experimenter
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 06/17/99
Posts: 24,166
Loc: my room
Last seen: 19 days, 8 hours
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Diploid]
    #8576885 - 06/29/08 10:21 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Diploid said:
What informed parent wants to inject mercury (read: thimerosal) into their kids?




Every informed one, since the dosis of mercury  you get through thimerosal conserved vaccine is as less than you get when you eat a portion of tuna...

A common content of mercury in a vaccine is 25 µg per dose.

A small tuna steak (200g/7 oz) contains 60 µg mercury!
Same size shark steak 180 µg mercury!

Read
http://www.fda.gov/CBER/vaccine/thimerosal.htm
and
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~frf/sea-mehg.html

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Anno]
    #8576998 - 06/29/08 11:14 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

The concern isn't just over mercury. Other suspect organometallic compounds are used in vaccines that I would not want in my kids.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Diploid]
    #8577031 - 06/29/08 11:29 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

So are the doctors and vaccine makers just stupid, and the average parent knows more than they do about the dangers?

Or are the doctors and vaccine makers purposefully poisoning the population in some devious conspiratorial plot?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinesupra
computerEnthusiast
Registered: 10/26/03
Posts: 6,446
Loc: TEXAS
Last seen: 12 years, 11 months
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: DieCommie]
    #8577039 - 06/29/08 11:35 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Mercury has been linked to the rising levels of autism in children.  Now if this mercury is from the vaccines or not, I haven't seen, but they had stuff on the news report about it.  Until it is tested under more scrutiny, there is no telling...though I have had lots of vaccination, as have my children, and we are all fine and well.

peace

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: DieCommie]
    #8577066 - 06/29/08 11:51 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

So are the doctors and vaccine makers just stupid

Not stupid. Greedy.

I dunno about doctors, but vaccine makers (the pharmaceutical industry) has a history of putting profit ahead of safety, and the FDA a history of sleeping on the job.

Vaccines are a good thing, don't misread me. But putting blind faith in their safety, efficacy, and necessity just because they're 'experts' is dangerous, IMO.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAnnom
※※※※※※
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 12/22/02
Posts: 6,367
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 10 months, 7 days
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Diploid]
    #8577402 - 06/29/08 01:46 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Following blind faith in their safety is never good, but vaccines generally are a good thing.

Most people in my country are vaccinated (it's free), but you don't have to. There are some groups that don't vaccinate their children for (stupid) religious reasons. They profit from herd immunity while not contributing to it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinecurenado
73rd Man
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/03
Posts: 2,603
Loc: North Central Arkansas
Last seen: 10 months, 21 days
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Annom]
    #8577525 - 06/29/08 02:30 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

But if the "herd immunity" thing could be seen by some as kinda thin propaganda, especially considering the disease situation today they won't see how they are benefiting from it except that by having a bunch of other people take vaccines they enjoy a perimeter perhaps that they didn't make and was voluntarily "contributed to".
I think people get to choose and I think the ones on the "better ways" than current vaccine proposals and methods are justification enough for the "don't want any" crowd.
Medicine is getting away with violating people's rights and intimidating them all over and especially in child related areas which is a shame because they are farming their victims at the expense of everyone else who does bother to educate themselves and make choices.


--------------------
Yours in the Natural State!
"The woods are lovely, dark and deep; but I have patches to keep, and jars to sterilize before I sleep...."

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblebadchad
Mad Scientist

Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 13,377
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Annom]
    #8577540 - 06/29/08 02:34 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Mass vaccinations can lead to things like the eradication of smallpox, and polio.

A lot of these vaccines (and their components) have been given to millions of children for decades with no adverse events.


--------------------
...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge.  It is an indellible experience; it is forever known.  I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did.

Smith, P.  Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27.

...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely.

Osmond, H.  Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 5 months
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: badchad]
    #8577760 - 06/29/08 03:55 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

There's no way vaccines are related to autism. First they claimed it was the mercury, but they removed the mercury in the 90s yet autism continued to rise. And vaccination rates have been falling but autism is still increasing. It just doesn't fit the data. Something else causes autism.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAlan RockefellerM
Mycologist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 48,358
Last seen: 7 days, 8 hours
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: zouden]
    #8578108 - 06/29/08 05:58 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

I think 99% of these vaccines are unnecessary.  I wouldn't pay money for vaccines unless I thought there was a real risk of getting the disease they prevent.  I am sure they were necessary at some point in history, but with most kids vaccinated I doubt there would be any consequences from not giving any vaccines.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 1 month, 19 days
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Alan Rockefeller]
    #8578137 - 06/29/08 06:08 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

>  I am sure they were necessary at some point in history, but with most kids vaccinated I doubt there would be any consequences from not giving any vaccines.

Unfortunately, that isn't how it works.  When I was in high school, a large group of kids (160+) went on a trip over Christmas break.  After we got back, one of the kids came down with the measles (or mumps, I can't remember for certain which).  They quickly gave everybody that had gone on the trip a MMR booster shot.  Unfortunately, by then it had started to spread through the entire high school (2500 students).  They gave the entire student body a MMR booster shot.  Still didn't stop it.  They ended up giving all high school and junior high school students in the entire city a MMR booster shot.  And this is in a place where vaccinations are required to attend school.  Imagine the spread like wildfire had none of us been vaccinated.  (I didn't get sick.)


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Alan Rockefeller]
    #8578146 - 06/29/08 06:11 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

I am sure they were necessary at some point in history, but with most kids vaccinated I doubt there would be any consequences from not giving any vaccines.

That's kinda selfish relying on others to risk the vaccine and give you the benefit without the risk. If everyone thought this way, we'd have polio again within a generation or two. :shrug:

Not that I entirely disagree with you. If I had kids, I might do the same thing knowing that I wouldn't be the only one. Just sayin...


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 1 month, 19 days
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Diploid]
    #8579639 - 06/30/08 03:50 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

> That's kinda selfish relying on others to risk the vaccine and give you the benefit without the risk.

If this did happen, and your non-vaccinated child were to get sick and start an localized epidemic, then would you be criminally negligent?  (I don't know, but something to think about...)


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Seuss]
    #8579663 - 06/30/08 04:31 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

I'm surprised at diploids stance, but I agree with it.

First, the policy of the pedatrician's group is stupid.  I'm sick of overbearing medical societies and this is just another example.

For all the bitching the medical groups do about free markets, they want nothing of the sort.  They just want more money and control.  They know what's best for your kid, and they want you to submit.

They also know its better to have an anesthesiologist at your surgery and will try and prevent you from having your choice of provider, as you'd have in a free market, and try and block legislation giving nurses and others the right to practice anesthesia.

Similar to how they limit the medical schools and residency positiions available:  they want their to be an artificial shortage of doctors, and they want their money.

Fuck doctors' groups.  We need a return to free market medicine like we had in the 1800's earlier 1900's.  Fuck the FDA, fuck the doctors, fuck the legislation.



As for the actual immunization, I think its a pretty stupid issue.  The parents that object to the mercury exposure can demand mercury free vacines.  Who cares if that means the kid will need to get more shots?  These things are usually IM/SC anyways, so its not a big deal.  The kid will live, deal with it.

I agree with the doctors that the anti-vaccination people are usually fucking insane, but so what?  I think the parents should have the right to refuse vaccination so long as the kid doesn't object.

The only issue of relevance is the public school issue.

As for that, I again side with the parents, despite having a pretty low opinion of them.


I think someone has to make decisions for the child, and it might as well be the parent.  The risks for the unvaccinated aren't so great that the state can legitimatly interfere, in my opinion.

I was vaccinated, and glad I was, too.  I just don't like doctors trying to tell folks what to do or use coercive tactics to do so.  The legislators and doctors groups allready create an artificially high demand for doctors, and now they try to use that for coercive purposes?  Screw that.

The schools should teach kids.  If the schools want to exclude sick kids, fine.  But don't exclude healthy kids on the ground that they could be a vector for a disease- garbage.

If the parents want to go to a school with all white children, or all immunized, or all circumcized, or all anything else, they are free to go to a private school with such a policy- or should be.

But they shouldn't be able to demand conditions on school attendance for other people's kids that is unrelated to the proper role of a school- and that is teaching, not healthcare.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 1 month, 19 days
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: johnm214]
    #8579692 - 06/30/08 05:21 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

The schools should teach kids.  If the schools want to exclude sick kids, fine.  But don't exclude healthy kids on the ground that they could be a vector for a disease- garbage.

If the parents want to go to a school with all white children, or all immunized, or all circumcised, or all anything else, they are free to go to a private school with such a policy- or should be.




This is the only part I disagree with you.  If parents want to skip vaccinations, fine, BUT, their kids don't get to mingle with my kids at public school.  Private schools can take whatever risks they like.  Home schooling is also an option.  (Unfortunately, debate about public schools existing or not is for another thread.)

There is a difference between "all white schools", "all circumcised schools", and "all immunized schools".  The difference is that in all white or all circumcised, the act of being white or being circumcised does not have the potential to effect the health of another child.  If a non-vaccinated child gets sick and spreads disease to some vaccinated children, then the vaccinated children's parents should have recourse to sue for loses (lost wages, medical expenses, etc) caused by the non-vaccinated child.

(Personally, I don't think there should be public schools funded by the federal government, thus the federal government shouldn't have any say in immunizations for school children; unfortunately, we have to work within the system that exists.)


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 5 months
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: johnm214]
    #8579699 - 06/30/08 05:27 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

legislation giving nurses and others the right to practice anesthesia.



:eek: holy shit I cannot think of a worse idea


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 1 month, 19 days
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: zouden]
    #8579711 - 06/30/08 05:38 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

zouden said:
Quote:

legislation giving nurses and others the right to practice anesthesia.



:eek: holy shit I cannot think of a worse idea




I have no problem with a nurse giving a shot of Lidocane, but they certainly have no place practicing general anesthesia (imho).  There are CRNA programs for nurses that wish to specialize in anesthesia, but if I am on the table, it will be a fully licensed and board certified anesthesiologist (medical doctor) that puts me under.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Seuss]
    #8579779 - 06/30/08 06:36 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)



--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 5 months
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Diploid]
    #8579790 - 06/30/08 06:44 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

That's the CRNA program that Seuss mentioned. Seems like a good idea now that I can see how much extra training is required. And they also get paid $140k! And so they should.

I see nothing there about "blocking legislation giving nurses the right to practice anaesthesia". It seems they've had that right for ages and it isn't under any threat. Unless it's just not mentioned in that article.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Seuss]
    #8579822 - 06/30/08 07:16 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Seuss said:
Quote:

The schools should teach kids.  If the schools want to exclude sick kids, fine.  But don't exclude healthy kids on the ground that they could be a vector for a disease- garbage.

If the parents want to go to a school with all white children, or all immunized, or all circumcised, or all anything else, they are free to go to a private school with such a policy- or should be.




This is the only part I disagree with you.  If parents want to skip vaccinations, fine, BUT, their kids don't get to mingle with my kids at public school.  Private schools can take whatever risks they like.  Home schooling is also an option.  (Unfortunately, debate about public schools existing or not is for another thread.)

There is a difference between "all white schools", "all circumcised schools", and "all immunized schools".  The difference is that in all white or all circumcised, the act of being white or being circumcised does not have the potential to effect the health of another child.  If a non-vaccinated child gets sick and spreads disease to some vaccinated children, then the vaccinated children's parents should have recourse to sue for loses (lost wages, medical expenses, etc) caused by the non-vaccinated child.

(Personally, I don't think there should be public schools funded by the federal government, thus the federal government shouldn't have any say in immunizations for school children; unfortunately, we have to work within the system that exists.)




I understand the difference between what I listed and vacinations, however; the point is that government shouldn't be able to deprive you of your benefits, school for your kids, unless you comply with regulations that don't have a substantial and narrowly-tailored benifit to the mission of the school- education.

I understand the trouble an unvaccinated kid can cause.  It comes down to whether their is sufficient risk to the school that the kid must be excluded.  I don't know all the facts, but I doubt such a risk exists with every required vaccination for a hypothetical state/locale.    Take measals.    It appears there was 216 cases of measels in 2001- 2003 (not sure if 2003 was included or not) in the US.  About half were simply imported from afar.  Is this incidence great enough to infringe upon a liberty interest of a child or their parent? 

What about the flu?  Should the kid be required to get a flu shot?  Much more people die of the flu in a given year in this country than were killed in the 9/11 attacks.  Surely the government must require noone go unvaccinated.

There were 628,000 violent assaults among students at school in 2005.  http://nces.ed.gov/programs/crimeindicators/crimeindicators2007/

  Surely the government must require pads be worn on student's hands and feet, and all students don helmets?  How could they do otherwise?  If a disease such as measals has such a low incidence, yet fighting is so prevalant, mustn't we protect Seuss' kids by requiring everyone where pads on their body parts likely to inflict injury?  Surely the math suggests so.

Do you guys support mandatory vaccinations to leave your house?  How about to go shopping or in areas analogous to schools?  I have a problem with government restricting rights of people less they comply with regulation unless there is a serious risk to others, I doubt that's the case here for vaccinations as a whole.




Quote:

Seuss said:
Quote:

zouden said:
Quote:

legislation giving nurses and others the right to practice anesthesia.



:eek: holy shit I cannot think of a worse idea




I have no problem with a nurse giving a shot of Lidocane, but they certainly have no place practicing general anesthesia (imho).  There are CRNA programs for nurses that wish to specialize in anesthesia, but if I am on the table, it will be a fully licensed and board certified anesthesiologist (medical doctor) that puts me under.





What do you mean they have no place practicing general anesthesia?  They shouldn't, by law, be able to function autonomously or they shouldn't be able to follow protocols and orders?  Should the law mandate this?

If the law should mandate it, why?  What is the difference between the identical training recieved by a hypothetical nurse and a hypothetical doctor?

I don't understand how a family physician is able to do the anesthesia on a heart transplant, something he knows nothing about, but a nurse shouldn't, by law, be able to. 

I have no problem with you personal choice.  I have a problem with laws and regulations preventing me from having a full assortment of profesionals to choose from whom I recieve care.  If I want to get care from a doctor, I should be able to, same from a nure or whatever.


I see no reason why a dermatologist should be able to do a kidney transplant while a nurse can't order a xanax pill for my colonoscopy.  Moreover, I see no reason why I should be prohibited from choosing whoever I want to do whatever I want to me.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 5 months
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: johnm214]
    #8579829 - 06/30/08 07:24 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

I don't understand how a family physician is able to do the anesthesia on a heart transplant, something he knows nothing about,



A family physician is not able to do the anaesthesia on a heart transplant.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: zouden]
    #8579851 - 06/30/08 07:40 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

zouden said:
That's the CRNA program that Seuss mentioned. Seems like a good idea now that I can see how much extra training is required. And they also get paid $140k! And so they should.

I see nothing there about "blocking legislation giving nurses the right to practice anaesthesia". It seems they've had that right for ages and it isn't under any threat. Unless it's just not mentioned in that article.





They haven't, to my knowledge, though I didn't read the link.  Did they have the right to practice autonomously? 

I'm only aware of the regulations and laws relativly recently, and they tell a different story.  Many states have had fights with the nurses and doctors groups.

The doctors say the nurses will kill ya, the nurses promise not to, and the issue of personal choice is neglected.

I should be able to get whatever done to me by whoever.

Since the laws in all states I'm aware of allow a dermatolotist to do brain surgery, I don't understand the aversion to nurses doing anesthesia, unless its some antiquated notion of what a physician is and what a nurse is.

Screw that, the patients should have the choice. 

I looked up for some information regarding the lobbying and lawsuits, but all I can find is medicare suits and lobbying- which really isn't my point.  I'm more concerned with state laws allowing nurses or whomever to render care.  But you can find a bunch of stuff on the efforts of physicians' groups by searching for midlevel provider scope of practice and anesthesiologist and physician.  There's been a bunch of press and lobbying/lawsuit effort in this area by the doctors.



Informed consent laws need to be beefed up though.


Did you know that if I went to a doctor to get a asdfectomy and the doctor gets my consent, though I don't even know what it is, and the doctor cuts off my left arm and leg, the following will happen in my state:

Irregardless of whether I would have prefered to have kept my leg and arm, if the doctor convinces the court/jury that a "reasonable person" would have still done the surgery, I can't collect, and the doctor wins?  Doesn't matter if I'm a professional boxer, and will die in poverty without my arm and leg.  If the doctor can convince the jury that there was, say, a substantial risk to the limbs becoming cancerous, and a reasonable person would side with the doctor that its best to be cautious, their would be no informed consent violation?  Never mind that I, as a boxer and an individual with my own opinions about what I want for my own body, still would have taken the increased risk of cancer over a career ending procedure.

Same with the pianist.  If the doctor consents you for exploratory surgery, but doesn't advise you there's a chance the surgery could lead to death of your middle and pointer finger, and these fingers fall of as a result, you won't be able to win a suit if the doctor convinces the jury that a reasonable person would take the risk of the fingers falling off, cuz who needs all their fingers anyways, in exchange for the surgery to see what's causing you pain?  Doesn't matter that you are not a "reasonable person" but an individual who makes his living with his fingers, you only win if the hypothetical average guy would have gone ahead anyways with the operation.

A person should be free to make choices others would not deem wise, including saving quality of life at the expense of increased mortality or whatever.  Currently the law in my state doesn't recognize this.  You are judged against the "reasonable person" not whatever your wishes are, or even whatever the wishes of people in your group (architects, pianists, boxers, laborers, et cet) are likely to be.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineVisionary Tools
Male User Gallery


Registered: 06/23/07
Posts: 7,953
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: zouden]
    #8579865 - 06/30/08 07:47 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

zouden said:
There's no way vaccines are related to autism. First they claimed it was the mercury, but they removed the mercury in the 90s yet autism continued to rise. And vaccination rates have been falling but autism is still increasing. It just doesn't fit the data. Something else causes autism.




You're being lied to

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/38784.php



The nice lady said Mercury is good for you!


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 5 months
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: johnm214]
    #8579877 - 06/30/08 07:54 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

The doctors say the nurses will kill ya,



I'm sure they say no such thing.
Quote:

Since the laws in all states I'm aware of allow a dermatolotist to do brain surgery



Really. Are these the same states that allow a family physician to do the anaesthesia for a heart transplant?

John, I would like to agree with your sentiment, but you're making too many inaccurate claims and appeals to emotion. You shouldn't need examples to back up your general message of freedom-of-choice, but if you are going to use examples, at least make sure they're factually accurate.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: zouden]
    #8579880 - 06/30/08 07:55 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

zouden said:
Quote:

I don't understand how a family physician is able to do the anesthesia on a heart transplant, something he knows nothing about,



A family physician is not able to do the anaesthesia on a heart transplant.





Source?

I should clarify that I'm talking about in the united states here.  Didn't mean to say this was everywhere.


In all state's I'm aware of a physician can do whatever he likes.  You get  your medical license and can do whatever procedure you want, residency or no, in any state I'm aware of.


Here it is for Ohio, you can do whatever you like in medicine/surgery once you get a license, which means, I believe, medical school and one year of residency (internship).  You can do a year of IM internship and start doing heart surgery if you like:


Quote:

If the individual holds the degree of doctor of medicine, the certificate shall state that the individual is authorized to practice medicine and surgery pursuant to the laws of this state. If the individual holds the degree of doctor of osteopathic medicine, the certificate shall state that the individual is authorized to practice osteopathic medicine and surgery pursuant to the laws of this state. If the individual holds a medical degree other than the degree of doctor of medicine or doctor of osteopathic medicine, the certificate shall indicate the diploma, degree, or other document issued by the medical school or institution the individual attended and shall state that the individual is authorized to practice medicine and surgery pursuant to the laws of this state.





ORC 4731.14(C)


Its like this everywhere I'm aware of in the US.  A medical license is a license to do whatever you want, though you'll be a magnet for lawsuits, its completely legal in and of itself.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 5 months
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: johnm214]
    #8579895 - 06/30/08 08:07 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

That's interesting. The way wikipedia describes it, there are various Boards that grant licenses for the various Specialties; I don't know how it fits in with that law you quoted, but the result is similar to what we have in Australia:
Quote:

Today, after graduating high school, nearly every physician specializing in anesthesiology completes at least 12 years of education and training prior to becoming eligible for board-certification.



In Australia it's 17 years. Anaesthetists require the most training of any profession, second only to neurosurgeons (19 years). Must require some pretty serious dedication to set aside that much of your life...


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: zouden]
    #8579898 - 06/30/08 08:07 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

zouden said:
Quote:

The doctors say the nurses will kill ya,



I'm sure they say no such thing.
Quote:

Since the laws in all states I'm aware of allow a dermatolotist to do brain surgery



Really. Are these the same states that allow a family physician to do the anaesthesia for a heart transplant?

John, I would like to agree with your sentiment, but you're making too many inaccurate claims and appeals to emotion. You shouldn't need examples to back up your general message of freedom-of-choice, but if you are going to use examples, at least make sure they're factually accurate.





I'm sure you understand the nurses will kill you stuff is hyperbole.  You can find instances of docs saying this kinda stuff, but I can't find a source applied to everyone as a whole.  Nonetheless, I've heard several surgeons say if nurse anesthetists are allowed to practice independantly in given hospitals that patients will start dieing.


As for the scope of practice argument, I limited it to the united states, and I'm correct.

I've chosen Ohio and listed the the licensing statute, which imposes no limitation on the scope of practice.  The only other restraint at law in ohio is just general negligence and civil actions for injuries and whatnot.  I suppose the medical board could yank your license if they decided you were being unsafe as well, which I presume they would if you did operations you had no training in or otherwise exceeded your training.

But the point stands: you get a license of medicine/surgery/whatever in all states I'm aware of and can practice however you like under law.  The only restraint will be post-hoc suits and license revocations, however; there is no freestanding prohibition on the things I"ve listed that you take issue with besides various rules of medical licensing boards that you not exceed your knowledge base.  This is only grounds for license revocation, however; I'll conceed that point if that's what your driving at.  It remains, however; that there is only a generic requirement in any state I'm aware of, that you have the ability to do the procedure proficiently, not that you have formal training.  And since you don't need licensure for your particular area of practice, and only medicine, they won't stop you but after the fact.

So if you want to find some evidence that physicians once licensed are prohibited from a particular field less they have a residency/fellowship in it or whatever, feel free.  That the license isn't restricted to an area is fairly well known in medicine, and as far as I know, the same throughout the united states.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 5 months
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: johnm214]
    #8579901 - 06/30/08 08:13 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Indeed, my understanding is a license is field-specific, mandatory, and revocable, but I'll look into it tomorrow (it's midnight here). Goodnight :smile:


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: zouden]
    #8579932 - 06/30/08 08:35 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

zouden said:
That's interesting. The way wikipedia describes it, there are various Boards that grant licenses for the various Specialties; I don't know how it fits in with that law you quoted, but the result is similar to what we have in Australia:
Quote:

Today, after graduating high school, nearly every physician specializing in anesthesiology completes at least 12 years of education and training prior to becoming eligible for board-certification.



In Australia it's 17 years. Anaesthetists require the most training of any profession, second only to neurosurgeons (19 years). Must require some pretty serious dedication to set aside that much of your life...





Okay, that was me being USA-centric, sorry.  I was refering to us, not you guys.  Nonetheless, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that AU is the same way.  The term anesthesiologist infers a residency, so I'm sure that's what wikipedia's talking about.

There are boards that grant certificates and whatnot, but these don't have any legislative or police powers.  This is the "board eligible" or "board certified" you hear about.  All this means is that you've met some private group's standards to sit for their certification test/process or that you've completed such process and are recognized by them.  Usually they require a license and so much residency in a program accredited by them or some other group, before you are eligible to sit for their test or whatever else they require to certify you.

There is no state I'm aware of that requires board eligibility even as a requirement to practice in any particular area.


The solution and how it works out is pretty neat for the free market folks, actually.

The hospitals won't let you operate or have privileges to treat/admit/write orders if you don't have board eligibility in the specialty you wish to function in.  In addition, the hospital will usually only allow you to work within a limited area.  This is to avoid malpractice suits, generally, although it can also be to protect the compteting specialty's turf, such as between, say, the surgeons and the radiologists in a given hospital- they will compete for some of the same procedures and teh hospitals settle who gets what procedure.

However, this is only in the general case, and is at the hospital's grace, not the legislatures.

For example, in many rural areas they hire whoever has a license to work the emergency rooms or be a house medical officer.  At one around here we have internal medicine and family practice guys working in the emergency rooms, and also guys without any residency completed (usually they're students pursueing their training at the moment and allready have a license to practice.


The house surgical officers, on call surgeons that work for the hospital, are often surgical residents as well who haven't completed residency.  This is cuz the house surgical guy gets paid shitty, so they can usually only get residents who are broke and couldn't get another job, and allows the hospital to pawn off their indigant patients to this cheap guy rather than pay a private doc to do their case.  He'll also provide emergency care to middle-of-the-night cases.


But with the exceptions of the house medical/surgical officers and the ER, the hospitals won't usually let you work if you don't have board eligibility.

But you do get these guys doing operations and treating folks.  An example is the doc-in-the-box places we get over here.  They are free-standing urgent care centers that are popping up.  Some of these places will take whoever they can get, whether they have any training or not.  As teh cases they handle are all private pay, lots of money, and so stupid anyone could treat them, i.e. cough/sore throught/flu, they make money and don't care who the guy is.  Anythign complicated gets sent to the ER.

You also get guys setting up their own shop and working.  You hear horror stories about them once in a while.  They get a  liposuction machine and kill folks with it or just generally mismanage folks and get sued/ their license revoked.


Here's a fun story of a doc who actually was "board certified", but not in the field he was working in.  The story notes there was no legal prohibition on the guy working in a field outside of his training, as he was licensed, and didn't need to be boarded.

Quote:

Kerri O'Reilly remembers waking up in the operating room last winter. The problem was that it was during her breast-reduction surgery, not after.

"I remember hearing someone say, 'Oh... she's waking up," O'Reilly, 39, recalled from her Troy-area home last week.

The surgery in December was not in a hospital, but in the office of Dr. Terri Savage, a self-described cosmetic surgeon who practiced inside O'Neys Medical Wellness Center at 30 W. Rahn Road, Washington Twp.

But Savage is not a cosmetic surgeon, a plastic surgeon or a certified surgeon of any kind.

Savage is certified in internal medicine, yet the 48-year-old physician has practiced for five years in plastic and cosmetic surgery, reducing and enlarging breasts, hiding wrinkles and unsightly veins, transplanting hair, tucking tummies and lifting, inflating and sculpting cheeks, chins and lips among other procedures designed to defy the natural laws of aging and gravity.

But there's nothing illegal about that in Ohio or across the nation. More and more doctors are cashing in on the lucrative plastic and cosmetic surgery business without the rigorous training - - five or six years of an accredited residency training program after medical school -- that certified plastic surgeons must undertake.

.....

"This is something that happens every day of the week, and they can do this because it's legal," Apesos said. "The public is caught in the middle of who is and who isn't real."

In Florida, cosmetic surgery in medical offices has come under increased scrutiny amid reports of dozens of patient deaths and serious injuries.

And in Massachusetts this summer, police discovered an illegal cosmetic surgery clinic after the death of a young Brazilian woman and the hospitalization of another.

Both underwent liposuction at the hands of a Brazilian doctor in the makeshift basement clinic on a massage table covered with sheets.

O'Reilly believed Savage was board certified and qualified to perform plastic surgery. A friend was pleased with Savage's work, and a call to the state Medical Board of Ohio confirmed Savage was board certified -- just not in what specialty.

O'Reilly, it turns out, wasn't specific enough with her question. Complications arose during her surgery in December, she said, and now she's facing at least two more surgeries to correct Savage's work. 



http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/627557/doctor_who_performed_plastic_surgery_was_not_board_certified_/index.html

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 1 month, 19 days
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: johnm214]
    #8580124 - 06/30/08 10:06 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

There are boards that grant certificates and whatnot, but these don't have any legislative or police powers.  This is the "board eligible" or "board certified" you hear about.  All this means is that you've met some private group's standards to sit for their certification test/process or that you've completed such process and are recognized by them.  Usually they require a license and so much residency in a program accredited by them or some other group, before you are eligible to sit for their test or whatever else they require to certify you.




Every physician, in the US, must hold a license to practice medicine.  Medical boards in US states and territories issue these licenses.  These boards have legal authority to issue licenses, investigate and discipline practitioners, and regulate the practice of medicine within their state or territory.

In addition to licensing, some physicians may be board certified in their specialty.  Typically, in the US, when a physician claims that he is 'board certified', he is claiming to be certified by a specialty board recognized by the American Board of Medical Specialties.  These boards typically do not have legal authority to investigate and discipline practitioners or to regulate the practice of the specialty.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Seuss]
    #8580159 - 06/30/08 10:30 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

agreed, I was loose with the language.

I used boards in the sense of the medical specialty boards, not the licensing boards.


Course the licensing boards have statutory authority, but the specialty boards don't.



It should be noted too that medicare is free to issue regulations, and this is a powerful motivator.  Most hospitals would go out of buisness without medicare certification, as private insurers/medicare/medicaid/whatever all usually won't pay without acredation by the joint commision.

So that tempers my free market rant.  I just think private payers should have the freedom, other factors excluded, to get procedures they want done by who they want.

The practitioner should have to aprise the patient of all relevant factors, including his education, and shouldn't falsely advertise.  Other than that though, private contract.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 1 month, 19 days
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: johnm214]
    #8580308 - 06/30/08 01:28 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

> I just think private payers should have the freedom, other factors excluded, to get procedures they want done by who they want.

I certainly cannot argue against that.  Unless the Government owns my body, I should be allowed to do with it as I please, assuming that I am an adult.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Seuss]
    #8580472 - 06/30/08 02:22 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

In the case of infectious diseases and antibiotic medicine what you do with your body directly effects the population at large.  In these cases the govt. should be able to dictate, otherwise I agree.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: DieCommie]
    #8580547 - 06/30/08 02:48 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

What about the topic at hand?  Is the vaccination requirement justified?

What is the threshold risk before which we may allow the government to require preventative action?

Flu?

Fights?

Tripping?

Should we require padded extremities to prevent some damage in case fights occur?

Handcuffs?

What is the difference?

In the case of measles, I've provided evidence the risk of Flu or Fighting is much much much greater.

I agree with you in principle, however; there should be a threshold, and I don't think all the typical vaccinated diseases meet that threshold.  Pure potential for harm shouldn't be the only criteria.  There should have to be a potential for that risk to manifest.

I don't think the liberty interest in refusing medical care and receiving your rights (education) should be trumped by a risk you might become and transmit measles, when the risk seems to be on the order of magnitude of 3x10-7 per the citation provided earlier- even presuming kids are as likely to contract measles as any other person in america- which I doubt, considering half simply import the disease from other countries.


Especially since this risk is much much lower for the kids that are vaccinated, I think the whole thing reeks of improper government intrusion for certain vaccination requirements.




Seuss, you said:

"
I certainly cannot argue against that.  Unless the Government owns my body, I should be allowed to do with it as I please, assuming that I am an adult."

but earlier you said that nurses have no place giving anesthesia.  How do you square the two?  You mean surgeons shouldn't operate with nurse anesthetists, hospitals shouldn't allow them, the state should bar them, or what?  If you just mean that you wouldn't agree to be sedated by them then I'd agree with you- its all about what the patient wants.  If the government even wants to set minimum standards for the incompetent, I'm fine with that.  Even if they limit reimbursement for medicade- fine. 

I just think the patient should be able to choose whoever they want.  Informed consent, which I've given my opinion on previously in this thread, should be the only requirement.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 1 month, 19 days
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: johnm214]
    #8580567 - 06/30/08 02:57 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

> but earlier you said that nurses have no place giving anesthesia.  How do you square the two?

I don't feel that nurses should be legally licensed to provide general anesthesia.  (General anesthesia is when they knock you unconscious for surgery, not in the sense of "all around".)  However, if you want to go to Dave's Drive-Thru Face Lift Shack, then I'm not going to stop you.  I think the government, or the licensing board, should be setting the minimum standards needed to claim "Board Certified" or "Licensed".  Beyond that, consumer beware and let Darwin rule.  (Reading your post again, I think we are saying the same thing here.)


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: johnm214]
    #8580571 - 06/30/08 02:59 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

The threshold is something that has to be debated amongst doctors, researchers and policy makers.  It does, however, exist somewhere and cant be ignored. 

Ever hear of the story of typhoid mary?  Thats a good example of where an individuals right to freedom gets trumped by societies need to stay health.  Sometimes you have to quarantine.  Sometimes you have to force vaccinate or mass medicate.

Im pretty libertarian compared to most and dont delight in compromising individual rights for the good of the whole.  But still, I have to say, to answer your question about the topic at hand, yes sometimes a vaccination requirement is justified.  Sometimes.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 5 months
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: DieCommie]
    #8580861 - 06/30/08 04:30 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Yeah, I agree there's a threshold, and ultimately that's what we're debating about. For me, the threshold is further away from individual's rights than it is for most of you, because I don't think the public can always be trusted to make the right decision.

The freedom to make an informed decision is only useful if you're educated about the subject. But there are so many people out there who put an awful lot of effort into spreading misinformation that unless you're an expert, you're likely make an ill-informed decision. The invisible hand of the free market is easily swayed by sophistry.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 1 month, 19 days
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: zouden]
    #8581030 - 06/30/08 05:22 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

> because I don't think the public can always be trusted to make the right decision.

Nobody ever said the public must make the right decision.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Seuss]
    #8586569 - 07/02/08 01:27 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Exactly.  Freedom is freedom, not freedom to make the right decision.


Diecommie, I don't know quite what your point is.

Typhoid marry infected other people.  This is wrong as it subjects somone's body to illness.  She new she was sick.

This is not the same scenario.  We have healthy people that may at a later date get an excedingly rare illness and infect someone else, who has an even lesser risk of getting infected than the unvaccinated.


I think the infected should have recourse against those who choose not to get vaccinated for their medical bills and damages.  I don't think they can demand in every instance that people are vaccinated against pathogens.  I don't think it becomes right just cuz the regulation or law requires it.



I think the right to due process and right to privacy encompass a right to make poor decisions without interference from the government unless you have a real impact upon society such that restraining your behavior becomes not an arbitrary and capricious government function.
Quote:



Zouden:

Indeed, my understanding is a license is field-specific, mandatory, and revocable, but I'll look into it tomorrow (it's midnight here). Goodnight





Are you talkin about where you are or in america?


I've explained the licensing in america, and I'd be shocked if there was any regulation anywhere, outside of free market forces, on who can practice what.

Its a common misconception.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineVisionary Tools
Male User Gallery


Registered: 06/23/07
Posts: 7,953
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: DieCommie]
    #8586857 - 07/02/08 06:21 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
In the case of infectious diseases and antibiotic medicine what you do with your body directly effects the population at large.  In these cases the govt. should be able to dictate, otherwise I agree.




Fuck that. It's peoples rights to choose what they want in their body. It's not your right, and when vaccinations contain neurotoxins..

Knock yourself out. Keep drinking your aspartame and fluoride and beg for more mercury in the vaccinations. Then when you get sick from all the slow poisoning, you can beg for even more poisoned medication.

This is not hard folks. Mercury is toxic, Mercury and people do not mix.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Visionary Tools]
    #8586862 - 07/02/08 06:27 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Visionary Tools said:
Quote:

DieCommie said:
In the case of infectious diseases and antibiotic medicine what you do with your body directly effects the population at large.  In these cases the govt. should be able to dictate, otherwise I agree.




Fuck that. It's peoples rights to choose what they want in their body. It's not your right, and when vaccinations contain neurotoxins..

Knock yourself out. Keep drinking your aspartame and fluoride and beg for more mercury in the vaccinations. Then when you get sick from all the slow poisoning, you can beg for even more poisoned medication.

This is not hard folks. Mercury is toxic, Mercury and people do not mix.




Source for mercury is toxic?  I presume you mean some exposures to mercury are toxic, right?

Nitpicking on my part, but it highlights the debate.

Yes, people should be able to choose what they want in their body.  People should have more information about their health care products than currently disclosed by most.  What evidence do you have that the levels of mercury in these vaccines cause toxicity?  I'm interested in experimental data, or some damn good study, which I doubt exists, with some other methodology.

Is it your right when the vaccines donot contain mercury?  What vaccines do you presently object to that are required by some schools?  Why do you object?

Do you think its okay to require kids to be vaccinated during an epidemic or not allow them to attend school?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 5 months
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Visionary Tools]
    #8586873 - 07/02/08 06:40 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Sure, it's your right to decide what you put in your own body. But what about your kids? They're trusting you with their health. You have a duty to make the right decisions.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAnnoA
Experimenter
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 06/17/99
Posts: 24,166
Loc: my room
Last seen: 19 days, 8 hours
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Visionary Tools]
    #8586875 - 07/02/08 06:41 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Visionary Tools said:
This is not hard folks. Mercury is toxic, Mercury and people do not mix.




Too hard to understand for you though it seems.

EVERYTHING is toxic. EVERYTHING! The amount of a substance is what makes it toxic, not the substance itself. Drink too much water and you will die. Breath too much air and you will die.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAnnom
※※※※※※
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 12/22/02
Posts: 6,367
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 10 months, 7 days
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Visionary Tools]
    #8586878 - 07/02/08 06:44 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Visionary Tools said:
Fuck that. It's peoples rights to choose what they want in their body.




What if I have a very deadly and infectious disease, which can be easily cured with a pill, but I don't want the pill? Should I be allowed to walk through crowded streets?

I agree that we should have to freedom to do with our body what we want, but without seriously harming others.

There are hypothetical situations where I would agree with mandatory vaccination (but people should be allowed to refuse when they move to an uninhabited island).

Edited by Annom (07/02/08 06:48 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineVisionary Tools
Male User Gallery


Registered: 06/23/07
Posts: 7,953
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Anno]
    #8586880 - 07/02/08 06:47 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Anno said:
Quote:

Visionary Tools said:
This is not hard folks. Mercury is toxic, Mercury and people do not mix.




To hard to understand for you though it seems.

EVERYTHING is toxic. EVERYTHING! The amount of a substance is what makes it toxic, not the substance itself. Drink too much water and you will die. Breath too much air and you will die.




Sure, I'm aware of toxic effects of oxygen and water. However there's a difference between oxygen and water, which we must consume to live, and mercury. Last time I checked, our body didn't need any amount of mercury, compared to arsnic or selenium or even fluorine which it does use.

I don't object to vaccinations. I do object to poisoning people against their will.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineVisionary Tools
Male User Gallery


Registered: 06/23/07
Posts: 7,953
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Annom]
    #8586881 - 07/02/08 06:49 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Annom said:
Quote:

Visionary Tools said:
Fuck that. It's peoples rights to choose what they want in their body.




What if I have a very deadly and infectious disease, which can be easily cured with a pill, but I don't want the pill? Should I be allowed to walk through crowded streets?

I agree that we should have to freedom to do with our body what we want, but without seriously harming others.

There are hypothetical situations where I would agree with mandatory vaccination (but people should be allowed to refuse when they move to an uninhabited island).




Does this pill have no side effects? Then take it. Or be ostracised from society. Does it have side effects, is it more deadly than the infection?

The world's not as black and white as your hypothetical situation.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: zouden]
    #8586887 - 07/02/08 06:52 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

zouden said:
Sure, it's your right to decide what you put in your own body. But what about your kids? They're trusting you with their health. You have a duty to make the right decisions.




Well your kids really have just about no legal rights, so it'd be consistant w/ american law.


I'd say this though, which is what I believe with all medical consent issues:

The parents make the call as to consent.  If the doctor decides its medically necesary and the parents are competent and able to object, he asks the kids and aprises them of the risks, the parents aprise the kid of their opinion.

The kid then decides outside the presence of the parents.  If the kid consents and the doc consents, the procedure is done, if its an emergency.

If its not an emergency, the parents can demand a second opinion and sue, with the court deciding if the procedure is necesary and if the kid was coerced.


I think its the kid's right.  Yes its a tough spot and he may be threatened by his family, or afraid to alienate them, but life sucks, and this is a decent way to consider his opinion.  If he goes along iwth the parents he'll only join the poor of the world, and I don't see why his will should be violated, even if its a product of faulty thinking in my opinion.

But if his will is to live, the parents are restrained and the kid gets the procedure or treatment.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 1 month, 19 days
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: johnm214]
    #8587199 - 07/02/08 10:05 AM (15 years, 8 months ago)

> The kid then decides outside the presence of the parents.

Most children lack the experience/wisdom/maturity needed to make informed, intelligent decisions of this magnitude.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 5 months
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Seuss]
    #8588377 - 07/02/08 04:25 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Yeah, in nearly every situation they'll just choose what their parents told them. After all, if the parents are the sort that don't trust doctors, then the kid won't either. If the parents say that "vaccination = government mind control" then the kid will believe them, despite the fact that they are wrong.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: zouden]
    #8588460 - 07/02/08 04:51 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

I agree that is likely, but so what?

I think the kid has the right to make that decision if the parents support it.

I do not think the state should have the authority to make medical decisions for competent people.

The parents are the competent people, if they say no, that's fine as of now, generally, unless the state seeks emergency custody.

I'm concerned with a kid that wants to live/be treated and won't be.  If the kid doesn't want to be treated, then that's fine.

Not a decision I'd make or make for my kid, but these decisions have to be made.

If you'll indulge in some moral relativism, how is that any different than the african kids who don't have the ability to make the decision and just don't get treated?  Its not accept that the kid could get treated.

People die, it happnes.  I don't think the state should be able to force its beliefs on people unless there is evidence the kid is being manipulated, abused, or some other like situation.

If the kid doesn't express a clear desire for the treatment, and the parents object, I think that's how it should be.  How is this different than the 50 year old jehova's witness who refuses a blood transfusion on an absolutly insane and idiotic ground?  Only difference is we expect kids to become better suited and possibly change their minds later in life.  Well we don't have time to wait, and if you have a kid who's not willing to consent to a life saving procedure, and knows he'll die as a result, then I don't think that's much different than the older person.  Both have a wish or at least don't affirmativly wish for intervention.  Just cuz the kid may feel differently later I don't see the big deal. 

Terrible situation, but is it right to force the kid to get a blood transfusion, lets say, if the parents and the kid both refuse, or the parents refuse and the kid won't communicate a desire to be saved?


I'm concerned about the kid who is 14 and the fucking idiotic state won't let the kid make his own medical decisions, that's wrong.  IF the doctor agrees, the parents should have nothing to say about it.  No court, no judge, the kid should be able to sign the paper and that's it.  (the parents coudl sue of course, and they should have that right, but I think the law should recognize minor's consent, and it will be moot in an emergency.)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 5 months
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: johnm214]
    #8588474 - 07/02/08 04:58 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Well we don't have time to wait, and if you have a kid who's not willing to consent to a life saving procedure, and knows he'll die as a result, then I don't think that's much different than the older person.



What if the kid is misled into believing he'll live even without the procedure?


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineTri High
Whigro
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/02/08
Posts: 11,769
Loc: Monaghan, Ireland
Last seen: 12 years, 20 days
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Anno]
    #8589300 - 07/02/08 09:16 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Anno said:
Quote:

Diploid said:
What informed parent wants to inject mercury (read: thimerosal) into their kids?




Every informed one, since the dosis of mercury  you get through thimerosal conserved vaccine is as less than you get when you eat a portion of tuna...

A common content of mercury in a vaccine is 25 µg per dose.

A small tuna steak (200g/7 oz) contains 60 µg mercury!
Same size shark steak 180 µg mercury!

Read
http://www.fda.gov/CBER/vaccine/thimerosal.htm
and
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~frf/sea-mehg.html




Check your sources, silly ass.

www.fda.gov

It's a flippin' website produced by the government.  The only way to be sure is to get a vaccine and have it tested with a gas chromatograph or something of the sort to test for minute portions of mercury.

I don't trust the FDA.  Check out a book called seeds of deception and you'll see why.  All sorts of things approved by the FDA are actually bad for health, but it makes profits, so they let it happen.  F*** the FDA.  And most other bureaucracies.


--------------------
you just need money to get laid - starfire_xes

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Tri High]
    #8589415 - 07/02/08 09:44 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Nonsense and a half.

Is saline bad for you?  I don't know what your getting at here besides some government conspiracy.  I'd certainly trust the FDA over your broad assertion they're lieing, with no sources.


Instead of citing us to some book, why don't you carry your burden and explain why the source is wrong or unreliable.  Please cite your sources, specifically, or demonstrate how the FDA's conclusions are flawed.


As an aside I'd also like to know when the FDA has lied about factual matters.  I would imagine with an agency that size its happened, but this is what your accusing it of here, and if you like, I'd be interested to know what similar conduct you're aware of them doing in the past.


What do you think the role of the FDA should be?  What is wrong with it?  We need another agency to protect us and approve the drugs, is that your solution?  Or do you object to it approving and limiting drugs at all, and think people should be able to buy what they want?

I think the FDA is fine as an advisory board, and Medicare can limit reimbursment to FDA approved drugs and devices, but I don't see how a private payer should have to have the FDA's approval before he buys or takes a drug, or before his doctor can do the same for him.  Your body, your money, your choice.


Zouden:
Quote:

What if the kid is misled into believing he'll live even without the procedure?




Depends I suppose.  The doctor should explain to him in detail the risks.  Perhpas a social worker could spend more time with the child.  I suppose I'm worried that a young kid can be manipulated to do anything, but whatever.

I think if there's evidence of deception on the parents part, that would speak to the need for seizing custody of the child for the purposes of facilitating the treatment, provided the health risk is great.  But it has to be deception, not good faith religious beliefs.

Basically I think if the kid agrees with the parents consistantly then he gets to do what the parents want.

If the kid consents to the procedure then I think its fine\.  If the kid refuses 't consent to the procedure that's also fine- perhaps he shares the same motiviations as the parents (faith, heaven, et cet) it should be a respected wish. 

If the kid is unsure or gives inconsistent answers, then I suppose I'd have to think it would be best, after thinking about this myself over the course of this thread, to let the doctor's wishes prevail.  If its not an emergency, the parents could challenge the doctor's opinion.


But I really am torn, and I don't know.

I am steadfast in the right of the adult competent person to refuse care or refuse part of his care, or even to request homicide by the doctors, which I think should be allowed provided the doctor consents.


I detest government seizing of liberties, but since the kid cannot express his wishes clearly, in this hypothetical, and it is the doctor who must initiate the process, by certifying there is a medically ill-advised choice being made, I find it much more tolerable.  The government is just enforcing the doctor's judgment.




It is a very tough choice, and with children, I cannot say I feel strongly either way, except for those children who can consistantly and clearly explain thier position, as I believe I would have been able to at maybe 12 and up.  These kids should have their wishes respected.

The rest, I don't find it intolerable for the state to enforce the doctor's wishes, and this may be the most moral policy.

Edited by johnm214 (07/02/08 10:04 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: Tri High]
    #8589509 - 07/02/08 10:09 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

Tri High, calling people names is against the rules and doesn't help you make your case besides. If your best rebuttal is to call someone names, then please just stay out of the debate. Let's keep the conversation civil.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 5 months
Re: American Academy of Pediatrics Gets Tough on Parents Who Refuse To Vaccinate [Re: johnm214]
    #8589709 - 07/02/08 11:07 PM (15 years, 8 months ago)

It's nice debating with you, John :chugbeer:

And, Tri High:
Quote:

Check your sources, silly ass.

www.fda.gov

It's a flippin' website produced by the government.  The only way to be sure is to get a vaccine and have it tested with a gas chromatograph or something of the sort to test for minute portions of mercury.

I don't trust the FDA.  Check out a book called seeds of deception and you'll see why.



I could easily just say "Check your sources, silly ass, it's a flippin' book produced by someone with an agenda."
And people have tested vaccines with a "gas chromatograph or something" but the results aren't what you want, I'm afraid.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   North Spore Injection Grain Bag


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* The Science of Synesthesia JssMthrFcknChrst 1,144 1 05/01/03 03:03 PM
by JeRiKo1
* Tough for me, easy for someone out there ricelicker 1,673 7 01/07/05 11:11 AM
by ricelicker
* my parent's internet stuff... questions... Anonymous 865 4 12/30/03 06:28 PM
by fIsh in my head
* Is the HIV virus a hoax?
( 1 2 3 all )
Baby_Hitler 8,895 42 05/08/03 04:38 PM
by Baby_Hitler
* Scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change
( 1 2 all )
phi1618 5,462 31 05/09/08 04:39 AM
by Learyfan
* Post deleted by Administrator Anonymous 34,189 8 12/25/02 11:15 PM
by Anonymous
* Cold Fusion is back, and this time it looks good. Baby_Hitler 1,077 3 04/20/04 10:41 AM
by Baby_Hitler
* Discovery of hidden laboratory sheds light on Leonardo's genius automanM 1,361 0 01/13/05 10:13 PM
by automan

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: trendal, automan, Northerner
4,103 topic views. 0 members, 0 guests and 3 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.047 seconds spending 0.01 seconds on 14 queries.