Australia to withhold incentives for child vax noncompliance

Made of Stars · #1 by **Made of Stars** » Nov 25, 2011 4:37 am

6minutes.com.au wrote:The Federal government is cracking down on vaccinations by witholding hundreds of dollars in incentives from parents who do not get their child immunised. Around 8% of one-year-olds, 7% of two-year-olds, and 11% of five year-olds are not being immunised, says the Federal government, which is a “real risk to their health and to the health of other children”.

From July 2012, children will have an additional check at one years-old, and three payments of $726 will be paid out once the child is fully immunised at one, two and five years of age...

“We know that immunisation is fundamental to a child’s lifelong health and that’s why we want to make sure that children are immunised at the right time,” Health Minister Nicola Roxon said.

Source: http://www.6minutes.com.au/news/carrot- ... munisation

ughaibu · #2 by **ughaibu** » Nov 25, 2011 5:06 am

Made of Stars wrote:. . . . are not being immunised, says the Federal government, which is a “real risk to their health and to the health of other children”.

I dont get the logic here. Either vaccinations work or they dont. If they dont, there's no point getting them, if they do, then one won't get the disease, and that includes not getting the disease from a kid who hasn't been vaccinated.

ginckgo · #3 by **ginckgo** » Nov 25, 2011 5:13 am

ughaibu wrote:
Made of Stars wrote:. . . . are not being immunised, says the Federal government, which is a “real risk to their health and to the health of other children”.
I dont get the logic here. Either vaccinations work or they dont. If they dont, there's no point getting them, if they do, then one won't get the disease, and that includes not getting the disease from a kid who hasn't been vaccinated.

There are always people who either can't get immunised due to health reasons like allergic reactions, or others for whom the vaccine does not give the full immunity. To protect these people a minimum percentage of the population (I think it's at least 80%) must be vaccinated so the pathogen can't spread through the community, it's called Herd Immunity.

ughaibu · #4 by **ughaibu** » Nov 25, 2011 5:23 am

ginckgo wrote:There are always people who either can't get immunised due to health reasons like allergic reactions, or others for whom the vaccine does not give the full immunity. To protect these people a minimum percentage of the population (I think it's at least 80%) must be vaccinated so the pathogen can't spread through the community, it's called Herd Immunity.

I see, thanks. Doesn't this entail that vaccination campaigns will only be effective if 80+% of adults also get the jabs?

ginckgo · #5 by **ginckgo** » Nov 25, 2011 5:43 am

ughaibu wrote:
ginckgo wrote:There are always people who either can't get immunised due to health reasons like allergic reactions, or others for whom the vaccine does not give the full immunity. To protect these people a minimum percentage of the population (I think it's at least 80%) must be vaccinated so the pathogen can't spread through the community, it's called Herd Immunity.
I see, thanks. Doesn't this entail that vaccination campaigns will only be effective if 80+% of adults also get the jabs?

Immunisation rates have been well above 80% in first world countries for quite a few decades, so the adult population is generally well vaccinated (though some require boosters). But thanks to cunts like Andrew Wakefield and the anti-vaxxer movements spreading their vile lies, these rates have started to drop dramatically in the past decade, and we're now seeing some populations with immunisation levels below those required for Herd Immunity. For pertussis (whooping cough) the herd immunity needs to be almost 95%, and this is making a massive comeback in many countries that have had almost zero instance of it.

ughaibu · #6 by **ughaibu** » Nov 25, 2011 5:57 am

Okay, thanks again.

the_5th_ape · #7 by **the_5th_ape** » Nov 25, 2011 9:27 am

Parents who do not have their children fully immunised will be stripped of family tax benefits under a scheme announced by the Federal Government.

The Government says 11 per cent of five-year-olds are not immunised and has announced a shake-up of the system which will take effect from July 1 next year.

Under the changes, families who refuse vaccinations face losing up to $2,100 per child in benefits.

Continued: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-11-25/i ... =newcastle

Loren Michael · #8 by **Loren Michael** » Nov 25, 2011 9:41 am

good.

Made of Stars · #9 by **Made of Stars** » Nov 25, 2011 10:05 am

It is good, and sends a strong and clear signal to most of the population, hopefully enough that the vaccination rates will return to pre-arsehat-Wakefield levels. But I'm skeptical that those that are completely irrational about this will be amenable to losing tax incentives. You don't need a lot of money to keep yourself in sandals and hemp dresses.