Medical Are Mail Order Chicken Pox Lollipops a Safe Alternative for Immunization?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Evo
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
Parents are increasingly opting to expose their children to chicken pox instead of vaccinating them, driven by misinformation linking vaccines to autism. A controversial mail-order scheme has emerged, where parents can buy lollipops licked by infected children, promoting this as a method for "natural immunity." Authorities, including U.S. Attorney Jerry Martin, have condemned this practice as unsafe and illegal, highlighting the risks of receiving potentially contaminated items from strangers. The discussion also touches on the concept of "pox parties," where parents intentionally infect their children to build immunity, which some argue is preferable to vaccination in the absence of available vaccines. However, the consensus remains that vaccination is the safer and more effective option, despite varying vaccination practices in other countries like the Netherlands. Concerns about the long-term implications of avoiding vaccinations and the potential risks associated with chicken pox are also raised, emphasizing the importance of informed decision-making regarding children's health.
Evo
Staff Emeritus
Messages
24,029
Reaction score
3,323
This is crazy, people would rather risk giving their children chicken pox than a vaccine. This all stems from that bogus vaccine causes autism garbage.

And now people would actually buy dirty lolipops?

Authorities and doctors are warning parents who want to avoid chicken pox vaccines for their children that a new mail-order scheme to share lollipops licked by children infected with the disease as a way to create immunity in their kids is not only unsafe but illegal.
“Can you imagine getting a package in the mail from this complete stranger that you know from Facebook because you joined a group, and say here, drink this purported spit from some other kid?” U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee Jerry Martin told The Associated Press.

News reports from Phoenix’s KPHO-TV and Nashville’s WSMV-TV this week looked into groups forming on social media sites like Facebook that offer ways to get “natural immunity” from chicken pox by deliberately exposing children to the disease.

http://news.yahoo.com/parents-warned-mail-order-chicken-pox-lollipops-194620241.html
 
Biology news on Phys.org
So dumb people have found a new way to remove themselves from the gene pool. What's bad about that? :approve:

(Chicken pox doesn't kill many people, but IIRC one of its side-effects is sterlity.)
 
AlephZero said:
So dumb people have found a new way to remove themselves from the gene pool. What's bad about that? :approve:

(Chicken pox doesn't kill many people, but IIRC one of its side-effects is sterlity.)

Loss of gene pool diversity is bad too. Consider hybrid vigour and inbreeding:)
 
May I ask if instead there was an outbreak of smallpox and a ready supply of lollipops licked by milkmaids infected with cowpox was avaliable, would you lick one? No, not the milkmaid. I mean the lollipop.

Actually, I don't think the virus would survive on a lollipop but I'm not sure so would lick it up in desperation anyway.
 
Last edited:
jackmell said:
May I ask if instead there was an outbreak of smallpox and a ready supply of lollipops licked by milkmaids infected with cowpox was avaliable, would you lick one? No, not the milkmaid. I mean the lollipop.

Actually, I don't think the virus would survive on a lollipop but I'm not sure so would lick it up in desperation anyway.
I would get a smallpox vaccination and not risk it.
 
Evo said:
I would get a smallpox vaccination and not risk it.

Can you imagine getting a package in the mail from this complete stranger that you know from ...

Just sayin.

Seriously. Wouldn't this be something that Homeland Security would want to look into?
 
Seems the lollipop thing is similar to a "pox party" where parents would intentially infect their children with the virus because the virus is less virulent in children than adults. So they're not looking to immunize their children with the lollipop but rather infect them (and by so doing obtain immunity from future exposures) so that they won't be succeptable to it later when it can cause more problems.

Surely it's better to get a vaccine but if none were available, I'm a little sympathetic to this approach.
 
Last edited:
jackmell said:
Surely it's better to get a vaccine but if none were available, I'm a little sympathetic to this approach.

That's not the case anywhere in the US, as far as I know.
 
I totally agree that the lollipop idea is really backward. On the other hand, childhood chicken pox is not dangerous right? In the Netherlands it is not part of the vaccine program and about 90% of children get the disease at a young age, only adults that haven't had the disease as a child are vaccinated when there is a special indication like chemotherapy treatment.

The US does vaccinate on a large scale, I wonder whether the cost of the vaccination program outweighs the benefit?
 

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top