Anti vaxxers a simple question.

a reply to: InconspicuousWhistle
There was, from what I understand, an unvaccinated child that was sick that may have exposed her child. She has lost a child to this disease already. Hm, here you go, maybe you missed this part: On Feb. 9, York Region Health called to inform her that another patient in the waiting room was infected with measles, and she and her family may have come into contact with the virus, which is airborne.

Hibben-White has no doubt who is to blame.

"I won't get angry at or blame the person in the waiting room," she wrote in her post. "If you have chosen to not vaccinate yourself or your child, I blame you. I blame you."

Hibben-White's son, Griffin, is too young to receive the measles vaccination, but everyone else in her family has been vaccinated. Should her youngest develop measles, she notes that death is "a potential outcome."

Hibben-White says she knows this outcome very well, as her five-year-old daughter died from an infection.

The story only came out today. I don't know any other details. Okay, I read the article again, here you go: Hibben-White will get an update on whether Griffin has indeed contracted measles on Feb. 17. Until then, she says, the two are waiting at their home in isolation.

a reply to: InconspicuousWhistle

The incubation period ranges from 7 to 21 days from exposure to onset of fever; rash usually appears about 14 days after exposure.

wwwnc.cdc.gov...

a reply to: ccseagull

She has lost a child to this disease already.

Incorrect. Read it again.

a reply to: Phage

Here you go, I'm pretty sure I'm reading it correctly: Hibben-White says she knows this outcome very well, as her five-year-old daughter died from an infection.

EDIT: yes, I see what you're saying. She lost a child from "an infection". But the point is she has lost a child and there is the slight potential she could again.

a reply to: ccseagull
Not "measles". Not "this disease". "An infection."

There is more than one type of infection.

a reply to: Phage

Got it! Thanks Phage.

a reply to: ccseagull

There was, from what I understand, an unvaccinated child that was sick that may have exposed her child. She has lost a child to this disease already.

"I won't get angry at or blame the person in the waiting room," she wrote in her post. "If you have chosen to not vaccinate yourself or your child, I blame you. I blame you."

This implies that the person was vaccinated though.

Hibben-White says she knows this outcome very well, as her five-year-old daughter died from an infection.

Died of an infection.

a reply to: InconspicuousWhistle

This implies that the person was vaccinated though.

It implies no such thing.

a reply to: InconspicuousWhistle

I think we're all tired, check out the line:
There was, from what I understand, an unvaccinatedchild that was sick that may have exposed her child. She has lost a child to this disease already.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: InconspicuousWhistle

The incubation period ranges from 7 to 21 days from exposure to onset of fever; rash usually appears about 14 days after exposure.

wwwnc.cdc.gov...

Ya, I know, after 15 days I would say the kid is probably safe though.

a reply to: ccseagull

There was, from what I understand, an unvaccinatedchild that was sick that may have exposed her child. She has lost a child to this disease already.

Where in the article did you read that? And didn't we just establish that her other child died of an infection.

a reply to: Phage

Why doesn't she blame the infected person? Or was it a child of anti vaccination parents?

a reply to: InconspicuousWhistle
I don't know.
To both questions.
As to the second, she probably doesn't know.

a reply to: Phage

Then just must agree that it possibly could imply that.

a reply to: InconspicuousWhistle

If you're into speculation. Sure.

Here's some more.
She doesn't blame the person because she has no idea who that person may be.
She blames those who don't vaccinate because they help spread disease.

How's that for speculation?

a reply to: Phage

Judging an implication is often based on speculation.

She doesn't blame the person because she has no idea who that person may be. She blames those who don't vaccinate because they help spread disease.

But this person was spreading the disease, and she blames those who don't vaccinate, but she doesn't blame this person. So either she knows this person was vaccinated or she knows this person wasn't vaccinated outside of their own fault.

a reply to: InconspicuousWhistle
See my edit.

originally posted by: ccseagull
** I don't get flu shots. Ever. I am discussing deadly diseases not some fluke that occurs.

So the flu isn't a deadly disease now? Hmm. Damn near killed my grandfather last year, and did kill thousands of others, but I guess that's just "some fluke that occurs," right?

I believe that if someone fails to get a recommended vaccination, and they spread that disease to another person, they should be held liable for it--whether it's polio, measles, or influenza. It's all the same thing. Person makes a choice that puts others in danger, that choice harms someone, they should take responsibility for it.

a reply to: InconspicuousWhistle

So either she knows this person was vaccinated or she knows this person wasn't vaccinated outside of their own fault.

This is getting silly.
No. She only knows someone in the waiting room had measles.

a reply to: FurvusRexCaeli

So the flu isn't a deadly disease now? Hmm. Damn near killed my grandfather last year, and did kill thousands of others, but I guess that's just "some fluke that occurs," right?

Hell, it kills more people than Measles but Measles seems to be the flavor of the week.