Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (8994)	3/17/2001 11:17:56 AM
From: epicure	Respond to of 82486

Did you notice in the facts that if adults are forced to buckle up there is greater compliance with buckling up children? So if you want to protect children seatbelt laws seem to be a good way to do it. But I personally don't want to pay the higher medical costs (insurance costs, and government medical costs) that car crash victims will need (children and adults) if they stop wearing seat belts. If you have data that seat belts do not reduce costs, let me see it. If you have data that goes against the compliance data that I have let me know. The data I have could be wrong. Some people who wear seatbelts are not aware they don't fit them- so they are akin to the undiagnosed child. You are not exactly like them, because you know who you are, II agree with that. But there are people who are exactly like the children. The cost of people not wearing seat belts is distributed to all of us. That is why I favor immunizations- it's public health dollars- it's much cheaper. I don't really care about the fact that they spread germs- since they spread lots of germs we can't vaccinate for. But it is far cheaper to vaccinate- and so we vaccinate.

To: Lane3 who wrote (8994)	3/19/2001 1:03:04 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Immunizations of kids protect the health of both the kids getting the immunizations and those with whom they come into contact. They prevent outbreaks. With seatbelts, the health of only one person is involved. Brains splattering off the pavement do not infect bystanders. The other sub-factor here is that the immunizations are for kids so there's an element of protecting kids from their neglectful parents. The seatbelt laws I'm talking about are the ones that apply to adults. Different dynamic there. Even with the immunizations you get stupid rules that cause more harm then good. Like when children are required to get vaccinated against hepatitis B. The health risk of the vaccination while relatively small might be greater then that of the child getting hepatitis B. If the parents resist the idea of getting the child vaccinated against the disease child services might take the children away from the parents. "In October in Utica, New York, the parents of 77 middle school kids were threatened with neglect charges by local child protection agencies if they didn’t get their kids vaccinated for hepatitis B, a disease almost always spread through intravenous drug use or sex with multiple partners. Vaccines themselves pose possible, if rare, health risks that some parents wanted to avoid." reason.com There are a lot of other examples of similar over reach by public health, or child protective services in that link. Tim