Sunday, March 20, 2016

Anti vaxxers, natural remedies and tossers

I read this story at The Age but it seems to be a direct copy of what was published at The Independent, without attribution. I don't believe The Independent is a pay wall site, originally started by a collection of journalists, so you should be able to read the story well enough from here.

What a nice looking Canadian daddy the poor dead boy had, but was he a nice daddy? I think at best he was a misguided, alternative and religious tosspot. He and his wife are before the courts in Canada.



Here is a snip from the article,  In his death, some see dangerous medical quackery. In his parents’ trial, however, others see a witch hunt.

“Isn’t losing their child punishment enough?” one local wrote in the Lethbridge Herald.

“Children have a right to evidence-based medical care, not just prayer and useless folk remedies,” shot back a commenter.

Hmm, evidence based medical care........I think that is what I approve of, that is evidence based. By evidence based judgement, homeopathy is a load of rubbish, as are anti vaxxers.  I don't so quickly write off natural cures but if it is serious, see a doctor.

12 comments:

  1. Evolution occurs in thought and practice too and evolution has produced our current medical care, what works what doesn't. Some would go back centuries for their cures but when they do, they would suffer the consequences of old ways, as they did then, when there were not such modern wonders as antibiotics, et.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Strayer, yes back to the days not so long ago when the average age for dying was in people's thirties.

      Delete
  2. We all make mistakes, but this is a more painful one than most.
    The anti-vaxxers worry me. They put others at risk for their beliefs... In this case it was their child, but it is often other people and people's children too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. EC, and as you would know, herd immunity doesn't work once the vaccination level falls below a certain percentage.

      Delete
  3. So sad that a child is gone because of these parents. I wonder sometimes why some people have children and others can't - that can't ones doing the right thing in seeking proper medical care and advice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed Margaret, why is that so?

      Delete
  4. It's a sad case. I wonder how long the child was ill before they rushed him to hospital? a day or two? that seems to be within normal 'wait and see' range, but if they were treating with other 'remedies' for more than a few days, that's wrong. children that young go downhill so very quickly.
    I don't agree with the trial though, they made a mistake and have suffered from it already. Trial and punishment won't bring the boy back.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. River, your opinion is charitable and gracious and in this case, I may well agree with you. But as a general matter, I have no truck with alternative medicine nonsense unless proven. You'll have to read the article to know the time lines from illness to death. If the trail makes some parents think twice, then it has served its purpose, and yes at the expense of the dead boy's parents.

      Delete
  5. Parents have so much to answer for Andrew, this is just one, albeit a serious one, where parents go wrong. Look at the numbers of child deaths in the US due to reckless gun control.. What makes it totally unacceptable is the belief that 'now they are in the hands of the lord' .. never mind the many years those young children will never know.. grrrr!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Too true Grace. And how about the boy that accidentally shot his mother in her car.

      Delete
  6. It's all in this exchange:-

    "“Isn’t losing their child punishment enough?” one local wrote in the Lethbridge Herald.

    “Children have a right to evidence-based medical care, not just prayer and useless folk remedies,” shot back a commenter."

    It's all about the parents; the responder goes some way but no-one actually mentions that children lose their lives thanks to parental 'beliefs' or, shall we say, 'well-meaning' intransigence. Beliefs in which the children have no say because they depend for their lives on their parents and have no idea of what they are being denied. But, after their child's death, the parents are free to have more children and, well, ...

    'Losing a child' is not punishment, just collateral damage in terms of their 'beliefs' and they'll keep trying until they get that wonderful, totally naturally immune kid they want. What might happen to them later, in the real world, is debatable.

    And people say abortion is abhorrent. What is this antivaxx stuff apart from potential post-natal abortion? I was going to add 'intentional or otherwise' but, well, make up your own mind.

    This rather puts the equally vexed questions of female genital mutilation and male circumcision (both generally occurring in childhood) in the shade, surely? At least, those who suffer these atrocities may have a chance of recompense in the future but, well, for kids that die of a preventable disease, no chance.

    The parents effectively get away with murder.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No argument from me Chris, except I don't put male circumcision in the same league as female genital mutilation.

      Delete