Mennonite Measles in Texas

[Soloist]

Maybe it is wiser to protect the children in front of us? Does pro-life end at birth? Measles, in particular, can and does kill. It was the largest killer of native Americans after the columbian exchange. While I understand your objections to the currently available MMR vaccine, the cell line that is used to create it is there. Destroying it will not make the dead child resurrect. The policy passed under George W. Bush represents a fair compromise. Do not create any new ones, don't destroy the ones currently in use. I support this policy as a pragmatic, but necessary compromise.

That is no longer the policy and as you should be well aware. Prior to Bush there was a federal ban on tax payer money funding this research. It didn’t stop it and private universities still studied and produced new cell lines.
Pres Bush permitted federal tax dollars to fund the current cell lines and I’m sure you are aware of the arguments about how many or how few are viable.
Also what you are not stating here, The measles vaccine was available in an ethical form during Pres Bush’s administration. That was changed during Pres Obama’s administration. He also basically opened the floodgates building on Pres Bush’s choice.
If Bush hadn’t compromised, I’m sure Obama would have later, but let’s not celebrate Bush and him permitting federal funding.

But since I hear a position taken that is an absolutist position, I would consider it inconsistent if it was only vaccines that there is an objection to. If you are to be consistent, you will need treat ALL products that are tested, created or produced by stem cells the same, not just vaccines. I just do not see this happening.

You don’t get to decide someone’s conviction or its consistency.
Besides, I openly admit very few people hold my stance and mostly it’s because they aren’t aware how widespread the practice is. To think it’s going to change when it’s impacting almost all medical fields and treatments and people like you argue you can’t object to part?
That’s just as foolish as saying Trump does nothing good or Biden does nothing good. People are not perfect, and you are advocating for using abortion derived medicine and treatments.
If even half of the Christians actually cared about benefiting from the death of babies this would result in funding for ethical options.

you do know it’s using fresh frozen to make humanized mice used to produce more modern therapies. This isn’t a old thing like you try to deflect.

[R7ehr]

An outbreak of measles is wreaking havoc in the South Plains region of Texas, where nearly 60 children have been confirmed to be infected. Physicians in the state say the current situation was “inevitable” due to the low rates of vaccination among the largely Mennonite community.

As of Feb. 21, the Texas Department of State Health Services has confirmed 90 cases of measles with 16 patients hospitalized. Five of the cases are vaccinated while the rest are not. The department has stated there are likely more measles cases that have yet to be confirmed due to the highly contagious nature of the virus.

…

A TDSHS spokesperson confirmed to The Hill that most of the measles cases have occurred in the Mennonite community of the South Plains region but emphasized lifestyle choices and not religion led to low immunizations in this community.

“Most of the cases are in a close-knit, under vaccinated Mennonite community in Gaines County. The important nuance here is that it is their lifestyle and not the church that is the reason for many people being unvaccinated,” the spokesperson told The Hill in a statement.

“The Mennonite church allows for free choice on vaccination and it is not widely against vaccination,” they added.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/why-texas-me ... 00744.html

[barnhart]

I appreciate them making that distinction.

[Judas Maccabeus]

Maybe it is wiser to protect the children in front of us? Does pro-life end at birth? Measles, in particular, can and does kill. It was the largest killer of native Americans after the columbian exchange. While I understand your objections to the currently available MMR vaccine, the cell line that is used to create it is there. Destroying it will not make the dead child resurrect. The policy passed under George W. Bush represents a fair compromise. Do not create any new ones, don't destroy the ones currently in use. I support this policy as a pragmatic, but necessary compromise.

https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives ... 719-6.html

But since I hear a position taken that is an absolutist position, I would consider it inconsistent if it was only vaccines that there is an objection to. If you are to be consistent, you will need treat ALL products that are tested, created or produced by stem cells the same, not just vaccines. I just do not see this happening.

In case you haven't noticed, both public opinion and government policy is transforming from "you are a bad, evil person if you don't agree to take all kinds of vaccines" to one allowing personal choice and encouraging a release of all the data, instead of the near-religious mantra that "all vaccines are safe and reliable".

I also don't really want to hear from people who don't share my convictions about how I should be "consistent" with mine. They are my convictions, not yours. I hope you will eventually have the same convictions, but if you don't, your opinion on how I should practice them is utterly irrelevant. Your tone seems to be one of simply pushing the propaganda that vaccines are somehow required to be alive, as if the human race didn't exist before 1960.

I suspect it is because some of you have never lived in places where vaccines were not available until fairly recently, and seen what human tragedy COULD have been avoided. Personally, you may not like to hear about it, but the inevitable consequences will be on your conscious, not mine.

[Judas Maccabeus]

Maybe it is wiser to protect the children in front of us? Does pro-life end at birth? Measles, in particular, can and does kill. It was the largest killer of native Americans after the columbian exchange. While I understand your objections to the currently available MMR vaccine, the cell line that is used to create it is there. Destroying it will not make the dead child resurrect. The policy passed under George W. Bush represents a fair compromise. Do not create any new ones, don't destroy the ones currently in use. I support this policy as a pragmatic, but necessary compromise.

That is no longer the policy and as you should be well aware. Prior to Bush there was a federal ban on tax payer money funding this research. It didn’t stop it and private universities still studied and produced new cell lines.
Pres Bush permitted federal tax dollars to fund the current cell lines and I’m sure you are aware of the arguments about how many or how few are viable.
Also what you are not stating here, The measles vaccine was available in an ethical form during Pres Bush’s administration. That was changed during Pres Obama’s administration. He also basically opened the floodgates building on Pres Bush’s choice.
If Bush hadn’t compromised, I’m sure Obama would have later, but let’s not celebrate Bush and him permitting federal funding.

But since I hear a position taken that is an absolutist position, I would consider it inconsistent if it was only vaccines that there is an objection to. If you are to be consistent, you will need treat ALL products that are tested, created or produced by stem cells the same, not just vaccines. I just do not see this happening.

You don’t get to decide someone’s conviction or its consistency.
Besides, I openly admit very few people hold my stance and mostly it’s because they aren’t aware how widespread the practice is. To think it’s going to change when it’s impacting almost all medical fields and treatments and people like you argue you can’t object to part?
That’s just as foolish as saying Trump does nothing good or Biden does nothing good. People are not perfect, and you are advocating for using abortion derived medicine and treatments.
If even half of the Christians actually cared about benefiting from the death of babies this would result in funding for ethical options.

you do know it’s using fresh frozen to make humanized mice used to produce more modern therapies. This isn’t a old thing like you try to deflect.

It was as of the last time i was involved in writing an application for a grant. Ever write one of those? I will admit it has been five years or so, but it was in the boilerplate. Yes, I actually read that stuff. It was totally irrelevant to what we were applying for. We did not get it.

[Soloist]

It was as of the last time i was involved in writing an application for a grant. Ever write one of those? I will admit it has been five years or so, but it was in the boilerplate. Yes, I actually read that stuff. It was totally irrelevant to what we were applying for. We did not get it.

Even if I had, the way you do it differs depending on what its for so its not really relevant. The point was, its not just vaccines, and its steadily been increasing in scope since the original development.
You and I can agree to disagree, we both understand it, just come to different stances. You see it as wrong to abstain, I see it as wrong to partake.

There is many things in Christianity that are like this, both sides insisting theirs is the correct stance. We will know some day, but as for me, I will continue to do as I believe is right.

[Ken]

I also don't really want to hear from people who don't share my convictions about how I should be "consistent" with mine. They are my convictions, not yours. I hope you will eventually have the same convictions, but if you don't, your opinion on how I should practice them is utterly irrelevant. Your tone seems to be one of simply pushing the propaganda that vaccines are somehow required to be alive, as if the human race didn't exist before 1960.

We actually know what life was like before vaccines and antibiotics. It involved millions of dead children and babies.

[JohnH]

I also don't really want to hear from people who don't share my convictions about how I should be "consistent" with mine. They are my convictions, not yours. I hope you will eventually have the same convictions, but if you don't, your opinion on how I should practice them is utterly irrelevant. Your tone seems to be one of simply pushing the propaganda that vaccines are somehow required to be alive, as if the human race didn't exist before 1960.

We actually know what life was like before vaccines and antibiotics. It involved millions of dead children and babies.

What year in your graph were vaccines introduced?

[Soloist]

The graphs can be manipulated to say quite a lot.
We know factually that sanitation helped, and we know factually vaccines helped reduce childhood mortality. Anyone arguing differently doesn’t understand how bad things like smallpox was.
You don’t overly see an exact point where the rates started dropping, for one, the vaccines didn’t suddenly appear and have broad uptake. We did a lot of methods of disease control as these things were really deadly.
I’d say the advent of germ theory is when we start to see disease mortality drop.

[Ken]

What year in your graph were vaccines introduced?

No particular year because vaccines for different diseases came out at different times. But since this thread is about measles, how about we look at just measles? Of course the 2000 declaration that measles was eliminated was obviously premature and didn't account for the modern anti-vax movement which seems bound and determined to bring back measles.