Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Amelia

Seems that vaccinating only half the population is the very thing the mandatory vaccination advocates are against. They complain that the unvaccinated part benefits from the herd immunity and they aren’t taking their share of the responsibility. So people who want to opt out to avoid any potential side-effects are strongly condemned for being irresponsible.

The vaccine crowd acts as if that’s an immoral thing to do, ride the benefit of herd immunity without taking the risks of the vaccine yourself. But that’s the very thing that’s being promoted here with only females being required to get the vaccine. Granted only females get cervical cancer, but since the vaccine targets the VIRUS that is implicated in the cancer, then it’s hypocritical for only females to get the vaccine and take all the risks of any side effects that vaccine may produce when males transmit the virus.


23 posted on 12/19/2007 8:16:10 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: metmom
Granted only females get cervical cancer, but since the vaccine targets the VIRUS that is implicated in the cancer, then it’s hypocritical for only females to get the vaccine and take all the risks of any side effects that vaccine may produce when males transmit the virus.

Exactly! Vaccinating everyone would be far more effective, if vaccinating is indeed effective.

30 posted on 12/20/2007 3:24:15 PM PST by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson