Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Children to get jabs against drug addiction

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
T_i_B Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 07:17 AM
Original message
Children to get jabs against drug addiction
It's a UK story, but I would be interested in your views about how likely this is to work.

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/story.jsp?story=...

A radical scheme to vaccinate children against future drug addiction is being considered by ministers, The Independent on Sunday can reveal.

Under the plans, doctors would immunise children at risk of becoming smokers or drug users with an injection. The scheme could operate in a similar way to the current nationwide measles, mumps and rubella vaccination programme.

Childhood immunisation would provide adults with protection from the euphoria that is experienced by users, making drugs such as heroin and cocaine pointless to take. Such vaccinations are being developed by pharmaceutical companies and are due to hit the market within two years.

The Department of Trade and Industry has set up a special project to investigate ways of using new scientific breakthroughs to combat drug and nicotine addiction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 07:22 AM
Response to Original message
1. I don't see how this could work
Sounds to me it would also shut off euphoria from listening to great music, spiritual experiences, or even great sex. What they appear to want to do is create a generation of numb zombies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Soloflecks Donating Member (518 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 07:41 AM
Response to Original message
2. HFS!
Talk about draconian. Welcome to Brave New World. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibLabUK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. Hmm
"Talk about draconian. Welcome to Brave New World."

Immunisations in the UK are 100% voluntary. Even though they are they have a 80-95% take up rate.

SO it's not draconian in the least... no one will be forced to take the jab.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unperson 309 Donating Member (836 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #5
21. Excuse Me! CHILDREN would be forced by PARENTS!

Maybe 100% voluntary by adults, but what of the kids?!! A 7 year old (or 4 or whatever age) can NOT give informed consent if the persons responsible for their very lives, safety and shelter are calling the "shots"!

And what of other euphorics? Will painkillers still work? If an adult finds that they cannot get to sleep because sleeping pills no longer work, what then?

Bad idea all the way around!

309
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibLabUK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. Hmmm...
"A 7 year old (or 4 or whatever age) can NOT give informed consent "

A 7 year old is incapable of giving informed consent, fullstop.

That is why parents must act in the best interests of their children until such time as they can.

Are you suggesting that no medical intervention should take place on a child unless the child consents?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gate of the sun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 11:55 PM
Response to Reply #22
28. why are you so defensive on this issue?
just curious?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nihil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 04:06 AM
Response to Reply #5
31. "100% voluntary" ... until you try to opt out ..
> no one will be forced to take the jab

Recall the fuss recently about the combined MMR jab (the mega-boost of
pharmaceuticals into a small child that can lead to serious behaviour
changes and even autism in some cases).

Although that was technically "voluntary", people had to pay for the
alternative course of separate injections whereas they could get the
three-in-one jolt for free. Doctors were strongly advised to persuade
the parents to go for the three-in-one and, although some doctors were
still honest/moral/decent enough to allow choice, many interpreted that
"advice" as a rule that they were not allowed to give the separate jabs.

Fortunately, my kids are now over 7 and so will be safe from this little
episode but, if I was a new parent, I would want to know a lot more
about this proposal before even considering giving consent for my kids
to become guinea-pigs for the pharmaceutical industry and government.

Nihil
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibLabUK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 05:01 AM
Response to Reply #31
32. Err..
"(the mega-boost of
pharmaceuticals into a small child that can lead to serious behaviour
changes and even autism in some cases)"


That's a claim entirely without evidence. Infact the large scale studies done in the UK and Scandinavia have shown that there is no link between MMR and Autism.

The "link" was postulated in one paper, of which only one of the 10 authors now supports the conclusion. It was a poorly constructed study, with only 12 self-selecting participants, the results of which have never been replicated.

The single vaccines do not provide the same level of cover and leave children open to infection for a much longer period. It is quite right that the government not pay for an inferior product.

The MMR crisis was handled badly by Westminster, their use of counter health scares (Measles epidemics etc) was a bad strategy, as was Blair's refusal to confirm or deny Leo's immunisation.

The crisis was the result of poor judgement in Westminster, and scaremongering in papers such as the Daily Mail and Telegraph.

The only winners were the private clinics who made a fortune from providing the separate immunisations... although it now turns out that there were a couple of clinics engaged in what can only be described as criminal behaviour. Civil suits (to which a family member of mine is party) are proceeding.

The real losers in all of this were the parents and children. I can only begin to imagine the anxiety and fear that this caused.

The telling thing though, compared to the Whooping Cough vaccine scare of the early 80's where uptake dropped over 25%, the drop in the uptake of the MMR was only 3%.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nihil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 07:52 AM
Response to Reply #32
33. Notice you didn't mention the "voluntary" aspect again
> That's a claim entirely without evidence.

Wrong. The "serious behaviour change" reaction affected the son of
a colleague. He subsequently looked into this and found that it could
have been much worse. There *was* evidence. There was also a
significant amount of pressure from the pharmaceutical companies to
keep it quiet.

Please note that this was in the early 90's (i.e., nothing to do with
the most recent media panic).

I agree that the most recent study stated that there was no conclusive
evidence of a causal link between the most common MMR vaccine and the
onset of autism. At the time of the above event though, the age at
vaccination was allowed to be lower - it was increased after a flurry
of "potential" side-effects among the younger children - so most of the
earlier cases were rules inadmissible for later analysis. Convenient.

> The real losers in all of this were the parents and children.

Agreed.

> The telling thing though, compared to the Whooping Cough vaccine
> scare of the early 80's where uptake dropped over 25%, the drop in
> the uptake of the MMR was only 3%.

Apples and oranges. The whooping cough vaccine was actually killing
people (comparable fatality rate to the current smallpox vaccine IIRC)
whilst the MMR vaccine was not fatal - "merely" connected to certain
mental/emotional conditions in a minority of cases.
The alternative to the whooping cough vaccine was nothing.
The alternative to the MMR cocktail was three (expensive) courses.
The most recent MMR scare (to which you appear to be referring) hit
during a period of unprecedented media manipulation (both pro & con)
so, in addition to the general "vaccination is a good thing" concept
that most people believe in, there was far more pressure to follow the
official policy.

FWIW, the whooping cough vaccine was one of the arguments that
convinced us to get our children vaccinated. My wife was badly
affected by whooping cough as a child and the doctors were convinced
that she would have died had she not have been previously vaccinated.
I'm not a Luddite but neither have I been blinded by Big-Pharm BS.

Nihil
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibLabUK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 08:46 AM
Response to Reply #33
36. Hmm..
"There *was* evidence"

Can you provide some of it? Maybe a citation or two.

"The whooping cough vaccine was actually killing
people"


Actually no.

It was claimed that it caused brain damage in toddlers. A claim that was later shown to be erroneous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
booksenkatz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 07:55 AM
Response to Original message
3. Would it prevent other types of euphoric experiences as well?
Orgasms, for example? In other words, would it set a top limit for the amount of happiness/enjoyment able to be experienced by the subject? (We're just mere subjects now, you know.) And could we not allow the subject to mature and then decide for itself whether it wants to be injected with this substance?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibLabUK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 08:09 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. Right...
Edited on Sun Jul-25-04 08:09 AM by LibLabUK
Because the cocaine and nicotine receptors in the brain play such a huge role in orgasm.. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 08:41 AM
Response to Reply #7
12. It's a little more complex than "cocaine" and "nicotine" receptors
There are also various drugs that block the reuptake of serotonin, which can create a feeling of well being or euphoria. And, there are physiological response that create that SSRI responses, as well. The brain has multiple receptors around opiates, stimulants, etc. A question: if someone has this immunization, will that prevent narcotics or analgesics for pain from working, since opiate receptors are key in these meds reducing pain. Just some thoughts. MKJ
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibLabUK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 08:49 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. Yes, I agree it's more complicated.
"A question: if someone has this immunization, will that prevent narcotics or analgesics for pain from working, since opiate receptors are key in these meds reducing pain."

That did cross my mind actually... I've put morphine to good use over my 28 years, so I'd be very wary of anything that blocked it's use for pain relief.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. Morphine is the perfect example of a medication that utilizes
opiate receptors for pain relief. Some of the conscious sedation medications which are used for diagnostic procedures to reduce anxiety and pain, might be rendered ineffective by these immunizations. I'd even question if general anesthesia could be effective in patients with this immunization on board. Certainly, this should not be given to children, but allow people to make an informed decision to have this injection after they reach adulthood. (the thought a child without a response to anesthesia or pain medications is chilling...emergency surgeries, fractures, traumatic injuries that children suffer would be made much more horrendous).
MKJ
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
luaneryder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 08:05 AM
Response to Original message
4. This is tantamount ot mind control
It has nothing to do with protecting a child from communicable diease; it has everything to do with controlling the future lifestyle choices. Perhaps the lifestyle choices will be bad, but that's a personal decision. Even scarier that ministers are the ones hawking it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibLabUK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. Err.. no.
IT's a public policy decision.

The treatment of drug addiction, and it's social consequences costs enough that it is a matter of public policy.

It is also a matter of public health because smoking is known to increase the risk of disease, and as a result is a drain upon the public heath system.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laughing Mirror Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 08:16 AM
Response to Original message
8. Head of Psychopharmacology Professor David Nutt
Is this some sort of mass-hypnosis joke?

We've seen how the big pharmaceuticals work. They want to get everybody off marijuana and they come up with their own synthesized versions like Marinol, completely legal, prescription only. They want the kids off Ecstasy so they get everybody hooked on Prozac and Zoloft and all their spin-offs. They even get to advertise their once-a-day euphoria pills on TV, as they start future drug abusers out in school with Ritalin, among others.

They want everybody hooked on their drugs so they vaccinate the entire population against more, let's say, organic competitors. New competitors spring up with anti-vaccines which promise sort level of pleasurable euphoria to the vaccinated masses. New anti-anti-vaccines will be needed. And on and on it will go, perpetual drug wars to enslave the population, control them, make messes of their lives, and take away their money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frank frankly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 08:22 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. DING DING DING
we have a winner!

"They want to get everybody off marijuana and they come up with their own synthesized versions like Marinol, completely legal, prescription only."

great post, downstairsparts! you summed up what's been on my mind.

clearly, the pharmacuetical industry is making their big grab now. funny, isn't it, that we're just beginning to see people seriously question these drugs even as they are being made COMPULSORY in Illinois. does ADHD exist as a medical disease that can only be treated with Ritalin? No.

i trust psychiatry as much as i trust MTV.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laughing Mirror Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 08:55 AM
Response to Reply #9
14. Did you know that there is only one private edifice
closed to the public on the National Mall in Washington, the mall of the Smithsonian, the National Gallery, the Monument, all open and free to the public?

It's at the very end on the right heading west toward Memorial Bridge. It's the American Pharmaceutical Association. Large edifice with monstrous big brass doors, locked, forbidden to the public.

That ought to tell you something.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kimchi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #9
20. Can you explain more about Illinois?
I haven't heard about compulsory drugs. Do you mean if someone is diagnosed with ADD or something?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DustMolecule Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #20
24. IL launches compulsory mental health screening for children
Monday, July 19, 2004
IL launches compulsory mental health screening for children and pregnant women
http://www.illinoisleader.com/news/newsview.asp?c=17748

--------------------
See also:

July 21, 2004
Children's Mental Health task force hearings continue through Friday
http://illinoisleader.com/news/newsview.asp?c=17852

and

July 24, 2004
Mental health plan forums end, parents concerned about findings
http://illinoisleader.com/news/newsview.asp?c=17900
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kimchi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Scary stuff in IL - thanks for the links. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeronimoSkull Donating Member (335 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 08:30 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. and the BSAD project
unbelievably creepy

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laughing Mirror Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 09:02 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. What is the BSAD project?
for those of us uninformed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeronimoSkull Donating Member (335 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #15
29. it's the committee that is proposing the vaccinations
Brain Science, Addiction and Drugs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 08:26 AM
Response to Original message
10. Legislated Social Hygiene
Way to GO!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donsu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
17. brainwashing with pills and injections


parents who think the pharm corps and doctors have their children's best interest are woefully misinformed.

I wouldn't touch any pill or treatment that is sold in ads on TV, print or pc.

remember: it's the doctors and the AMA who don't want universal health. they were the ones who fought Clinton for 8 yrs. with the help of the bushgang. (read Hillary's book for further info)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amazona Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 10:41 AM
Response to Original message
18. wouldn't this interfere with the medical use of opiates?
The child will not thank you if, in later life, when screaming from chronic pain from cancer (a large proportion of the population lives long enough to get cancer), he or she is unable to benefit from pain medication because of an inocculation against opiates. A friend of mine went through a horrible experience with his dad begging to be killed for over a year because of pain caused by terminal stomach cancer. When he was able to get an RX for sufficient morphine, he was able to have several more months with a decent quality of life.

Drug hysteria -- monitoring by the DEA backed up the threat of taking doctor's licenses -- was the only reason it took so long for him to find a doctor to treat his chronic pain from terminal cancer.

Would you be removing this option for the child innoculated against opiates like heroin and morphine? What I'm asking is -- would this "jab" make medical morphine, opiates, etc. less effective in future life?

If so a great many people will curse the day they were ever born. I don't think younger people and healthy policy makers are fully aware of the terrible issue of chronic pain. My friend's father could not eat without screaming...for a year. I would need to have this question answered before I allowed anyone I cared about to receive such an innoculation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kimchi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
19. This is so wrong.
How to calculate who is at risk? According to some fabricated table based on insurance rates? I'm pretty sure the poor would be the first on the list to be "persuaded".

And, as another poster pointed out: what about the very real need for opiates for surgery, etc.?

Put a chip in their arm, and vaccinate them against smoking and drugs.

What the hell ever happened to raising your children with values? I will maintain to my dying day that MOST children raised to have love and respect for themselves and others won't become crack heads, although, let's face it; most kids experiment with drugs and grow out of it. SOME kids will have problems, and there isn't a lot you can do. But there is no way to know who they are as children.

This makes me very uneasy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ilsa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
23. This is insane.
I know of people that have had to use prescription opiates for chronic back pain relief, end stage cancer, etc, and they didn't become addicted. Such an immunization would probably interfere in their palliative care.

I can't help but wonder if it wouldn't set off a wave of depression or simply not having any joy in life from the things that naturally make you feel good.

Narcan can be administered in some people to ruin their high, if that is the purpose.

I wouldn't do this to my kids.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CheshireCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 10:13 PM
Response to Original message
26. Scary stuff!
I am actually glad that I am in the latter part of my life. The ideas that those in control come up with to keep us under their control chill me to my core!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gate of the sun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 11:54 PM
Response to Original message
27.  I believe that this is ill-advised.
but then I'm not into shoting my kid up with government approved drugs anyway..... and this sounds way too weird....let's try this on our babies OK ... oh sorry ,I'm sorry you'll never have an orgasm you know side effects of the drug and all. It wasn't throughly tested.....

This sounds a little too weird for my taste.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Animator Donating Member (999 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 12:47 AM
Response to Original message
30. Maybe they'll come up with a vaccine for homosexuality too?
fast forward a couple decades and watch a movie called "Equilibrium".

Want kids, but don't want the hassel of being a responsible parent? We've got a shot that will rob them of all their pleasure. You can rest assured that they will never try to do drugs, or smoke ciggarets. You'll never have to have that uncomfortable "Birds and the Bees" talk with them because sex will have no allure to them. Sure, they might turn to violence in an attempt to gain the euphoria that you've denied them, but hey, at least they'll never raid your stash.

All I can say is, I get my Euphoria from Krispy Kreme Donuts. Ain't nobody taking that away from me...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 08:15 AM
Response to Original message
34. And then came sterilization...
As much as I despise breeding, with an exploding population, it is not something that we can take from people. It is a right. We have a right to destroy the planet with our proliferation. And we have a right to ingest whatever we want. I think the question must be settled. Drugs are or aren't bad. I think the answer is overwhelming, and obvious.

Now if we could vaccinate against fascism, I would be all for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fedsron2us Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 08:17 AM
Response to Original message
35. Note the project is run by the Department of Trade and Industry
Edited on Mon Jul-26-04 08:29 AM by fedsron2us
not by the Department of Health. You just know big business is behind this proposal. The suggestion that drug addiction is comparable to infectious diseases such as measles, mumps and rubella is simply laughable. Any way the policy of immunisation is completely unnecessary. I have found that just living in Britain under Tony Blair's government is sufficient to quench any sensation of "euphoria".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
T_i_B Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #35
38. Good point
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftHander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 09:03 AM
Response to Original message
37. Keep kids off drugs by drugging them....
Stupid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Sep 21st 2014, 07:11 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC