[TomB]

My suspicion (not conspiracy theory) is that the new requirement for proof of CHICKEN POX vaccine is not for the public welfare. I can't prove it. I don't know the reason for it.

What possible "other" reason could there be?

You keep ignoring the fact that trained physicians are almost unanimously recommending this vaccine. If "the government" has ulterior motives for pushing this vaccine, why are the doctors going along with it?

And your "suspicion" that drug company profits is driving this is indeed a conspiracy theory, considering the number of people necessary to be involved.

[TomB]

ping

[carmody]

The trained pediatricians I know admit there are pros and cons to the chicken pox vaccine. They admit that the economical reason is one of the main benefits, and they admit that it's up to us whether or not to vaccinate for chicken pox. If we decide against the vaccination they are okay with that decision. When it comes to polio, tetanus, and mmr vaccines they are more convincing. If the chicken pox vaccine were a serious public health issue they would more strongly recommend it and they don't. The doctor's only concern is a healthy child. He has no ulterior motive.

Ulterior motive for local schools in my state: They lose funds every time a child is absent. Promoting a vaccine which prevents a child from missing a week of school is indeed a policy local politicians would embrace. Afterall, if a politician can make the claim that he supported an initiative that caused the local school to get extra money, he could turn that in to votes. (That would be the politicians ulterior motive.)

Pharmaceutical companies make decisions that will make them money. That's not an ulterior motive, it is their purpose. They support politicians (not governments)who promote policies that will help the company to make more money. They don't have to meet in a back alley to "conspire" to make a deal. They don't even have to hide the fact that they want to make money. Their secondary goal is to help people. If their first goal was to help people they would operate as non-profit organizations.

You apparently believe that the state is encouraging 100% participation of the pox vaccine because their number one concern is for the people in their community. They have no ulterior motives and pharmaceutical companies don't have a vested interest in 100% participation in the program. I believe that this vaccination became an issue because many parties believed there was money to be made and the health of the children was not the primary consideration. In as much as you cannot prove the recommendation for the pox vaccination had pure motives, any more than I can prove they did not, we can agree to disagree.

Who could possibly imagine that politicians and corporations would encourage a vaccination program that would mean profit for both? Especially when it benefits the children.