Quote:
Originally Posted by Pammy
I generally agree with everything you said on this thread Sim :-)
|
Thanks..it's refreshingly unusual to hear something like that online, especially on debates, even when people do they rarely say it..
Quote:
However, I am not sure, still, on the sexually transmitted diseases. Imagine there was finally an HIV vaccine...Imagine it was effective, but it had a very, very slight risk (almost negligible) of adverse reactions, or, worse, an effect that might make it easier in the future to acquire HIV (they have found such things with some of the microbicides they tested!).
Now is it fair to give this vaccine to someone who can personally ensure that he/she will never be exposed to HIV? At least with the other vaccines, everyone shares the risk, but everyone also shares the benefit...
|
I'd put that down as unfairly tyrannical to the individual. with no conpulsion there you'd still drastically cut HIV rates, and indeed the unvaccinated would be very sure of the risks, yet noone's possibly being forced to a detrimental effect on their body - one which is known about.
If it was merely adverse reactions, then i'm unsure. Minor cimplications sure, make it compulsory, theyll be fixed medically and the good is just too great. death, no. that's too tyrannical.