PORTLAND, Ore. — Teachers across Oregon say they are seeing outbursts and disruptive behavior from students at an unprecedented rate and the alarming trend has caused many of them to question if they can continue to provide a safe learning environment.
The argument made for denying a public education to children who are selectively vaccinated or unvaccinated is the risk they pose to the immune-compromised who can’t be vaccinated. It’s a heart-warming story motivated out of compassion for those children who are medically fragile. Or is it?
If we take these pro-mandate advocates at their word, then it would follow that we also cannot allow any child or adult to attend our public schools and daycares who isn’t fully immunized. This means not just being vaccinated, but rather genuinely immunized against infectious diseases.
So, this begs the question(s):
- Are immune-compromised children who can’t be vaccinated allowed to attend school and daycare?
- Is the 10% of the population who are non-responders to vaccination allowed to attend schools and daycares?
- Is the significant percent of the population whose antibody levels have waned allowed to attend schools, daycares and other public spaces?
- Is titre testing being conducted to determine who has adequate antibody levels and therefore safe to attend school and daycare?
- And, if disease transmission is really what the proponents of vaccine mandates are worried about, then shouldn’t those children recently vaccinated with live-virus vaccines also be excluded from schools and public spaces until the viral shedding has ceased?
If mandate proponents aren’t demanding all of these individuals be excluded from schools, daycares and other public spaces, then one has to wonder whether the transmission of disease really is their primary concern.
It’s Not About Medical Risk
I think we all know the answers to these questions. None of the unvaccinated immune-compromised children are denied access to a public education. None of the non-responders to vaccination are denied a public education. None of the significant number of children and adults whose immunity has waned are denied a public education. We know there is no required titre testing to determine who is actually immune and who is not. And there is no acknowledgement given, much less consideration of the viral shedding from the recently vaccinated. A child can be vaccinated with a live virus vaccine and be back in their classroom within minutes.
This means that the restrictions being imposed upon selectively vaccinated or unvaccinated children is not about medical risk. It is not about the transmission of disease. It is not about the safety of the public space. If it really was about medical risk and the transmission of disease, these other unvaccinated and unimmunized children and adults, as well as those recently vaccinated with live virus vaccines would also be deprived of a public education and access to public spaces. But that will never happen.