ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2014 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Saturday, November 23, 2013

Mailvox: a more reasonable vaccine schedule

CM asks what is a more reasonable vaccine schedule than the current US one:
I have followed your blog for quite some time now and have come to really value your opinion on a wide variety of topics. I recently had my first child and my wife and I have already resolved to home school (largely because we looked into a lot of the information that you discussed on your blog). I want to know what in your opinion would be the ideal alternative vaccine schedule.
The first thing is to understand that many European and Asian doctors think the US schedule is insane. Don't be moved by the rhetorical appeals to the US medical industry; remember the same people are also telling you to fill up on carbohydrates and fructose to lose weight. The second thing is to realize that your primary responsibility is to your children, not to the collective. If something is better for your child than for the community, then you put your child first.

That's called being a good parent.

Of course, if you are genuinely more concerned about the community, then go ahead and get yourself sterilized. Because global warming or whatever.

Anyhow, in my opinion, no vaccinations need be given until the child is walking. Then the tetanus vaccine is a good idea since tetanus can't be treated. Polio is probably the next concern, given its seriousness, and should be addressed some time before the child is likely to come into regular contact with large quantities of people.  If you're homeschooling, this probably means sometime between the ages of three and five.

Due to the potential risk of blindness and the way immigrants and travelers have been spreading it around so freely, measles is probably a good idea around the age of school, so sometime between five and seven. I would recommend a measles-specific vaccine and not MMR; mumps and rubella are much less serious diseases and the rubella vaccine is, as far as I can tell, completely worthless.

Not only is the disease less serious, but I know of several women who have been repeatedly vaccinated for it and still show no evidence of antibodies, hence the repeated vaccinations. If you don't have pregnant women or infants around, whooping cough is probably not an issue, although it is a real bitch if your children get it. But if you can't keep your kids home for two to three weeks straight without a problem, then you should probably seriously consider the vaccination around the age of seven.

Vaccines for chicken pox and other non-fatal diseases are a joke. Forget potential reactions, merely driving to the doctor's office puts your children more at risk than the disease does.  The point is not to avoid all vaccinations entirely, but rather, avoid overloading the very young child's system. I know vets who refuse to give dogs more than one vaccine at a time due to the negative effects they have observed over the years, so the idea that the current US vaccine schedule can't possibly be harming children is ludicrous on its face.

As for the inevitable appeals to science, I will merely point out that no science - ZERO - has been done concerning the safety of the current US vaccine schedule. If anyone wishes to dispute that, I invite them to provide everyone here with a link to the published paper. And as for the appeals to the greater good of the collective, I first note that I've never been much moved by Leninist arguments, and second, observe that one could just as easily justify murderously culling the immigrant population on that basis.

Labels: ,

152 Comments:

Anonymous dh November 23, 2013 2:14 PM  

You are criticizing the current US vaccine schedule for being not rooted in scientifically validated evidence. But replacing it with your own that is not rooted in anything but your own observations (with an assist from a vet you know).

Granted the advice was asked for, but people ask their doctors for advice all the time. Is it any different that they are giving unscientific advice, and so are you? What is the difference, that you have no claim to authority?

Blogger Nate November 23, 2013 2:30 PM  

The simple fact is an infant's immune system is a neurological function that is still developing well after birth.

How anyone could think that hyper-stimulating an immune system that really isn't even functional yet is a good idea is far beyond me.

We do not vaccinate.

At all.

Blogger Nate November 23, 2013 2:32 PM  

"But replacing it with your own that is not rooted in anything but your own observations (with an assist from a vet you know)."

and advice from non- US doctors. you're leaving that bit out.

Anonymous dh November 23, 2013 2:38 PM  

and advice from non- US doctors. you're leaving that bit out.

I didn't really catch that part. I have heard from VD and others that many (not all) European doctors think the US plan is insane. Is what they recommend instead similar to what Vox and others are saying to do? I.e. vaccinate against the deadly diseases and then use sparingly on the others?

Anonymous Samson J. November 23, 2013 2:42 PM  

Vaccines for chicken pox and other non-fatal diseases are a joke.

Chicken pox can be fatal and shingles is no joke. As a physician, I second the inquiry about what exactly the European doctors advocate.

Anonymous TLM November 23, 2013 2:45 PM  

.....Don't be moved by the rhetorical appeals to the US medical industry;......

USA, USA, USA!!!!! What few outside the medical device/ biotech industry know is that almost all of our new medical/surgical technology comes from Europe. Then it's up to US companies to find some obscure predicate device that was developed before the arbitrary year of 1975 to have it approved for use here under the 510K laws.

Anonymous Idle Spectator November 23, 2013 2:48 PM  

You are criticizing the current US vaccine schedule for being not rooted in scientifically validated evidence. But replacing it with your own that is not rooted in anything but your own observations (with an assist from a vet you know).

The huge difference is: Vox's schedule is merely an opinion, I am not required by law to use it.


Another good reason to space vaccines out is if something DOES go wrong, you'll know exactly which vaccine it was.

Anonymous Salt November 23, 2013 2:52 PM  

Here in the US, and highly advertised on the Tv, is the supposed connection between ChickenPox and Shingles later in life. Not sure of any veracity to the claim, but the ads say so.

Blogger Nate November 23, 2013 2:57 PM  

"As a physician, I second the inquiry about what exactly the European doctors advocate."

The european vaccine schedule is severely slowed compared to the American one.

Anonymous Brad November 23, 2013 2:57 PM  

BTW Fructose is a carbohydrate. Just sayin'

Anonymous VD November 23, 2013 2:59 PM  

Granted the advice was asked for, but people ask their doctors for advice all the time. Is it any different that they are giving unscientific advice, and so are you? What is the difference, that you have no claim to authority?

First, do no harm. My advice is consistent with the Hippocratic Oath. Theirs is not. Furthermore, we know the risks of harm from infectious diseases. We do not know the risk of harm from vaccines. Logic dictates that one take a very, very small real and statistically measurable risk versus an unknown one.

Is what they recommend instead similar to what Vox and others are saying to do? I.e. vaccinate against the deadly diseases and then use sparingly on the others?

The official ones are pretty similar; they've made changes as recently as this year that have been imposed by the EU. But a lot of the doctors quietly stretch them out and don't keep to the heavy first-year program. You can compare the various national schedules.

Keep in mind that my opinion is not theoretical. I have seen a serious and instantaneous vaccine reaction in an infant and heard the momentary panic in the doctor's voice. They are not even CLOSE to being as harmless as advertised. They serve a purpose, but never forget that a massive industry is very vested in pushing them as hard as possible. And never forget that it is an industry that has been granted special immunity from liability.

Blogger Nate November 23, 2013 3:01 PM  

"Chicken pox can be fatal and shingles is no joke."

The flu and common colds can also be fatal. As can... drinking to much water. As for shingles... the immunity offered from the chicken pox vaccine was wishful thinking at best.

Hell the chicken pox vaccine isn't even very effective against chicken pox. Certainly not compared to the hype that was introduced with.

Anonymous Stickwick November 23, 2013 3:03 PM  

I'm a few weeks away from giving birth, so this is timely. Just bought Dr. Sears' vaccine book, but your observations are also helpful. The standard schedule in the U.S. now calls for 25 shots in the first 15 months of a baby's life, including Hep B at birth. Irrespective of what science potentially says about this, common sense tells me it's way too much for a tiny little body. And why does an infant need to be vaccinated against a disease that's primarily transmitted by sexual contact and sharing needles?

Thankfully, not all of the medical establishment is behind the current schedule. I've talked to two nurses recently who think it's way too much.

Anonymous Idle Spectator November 23, 2013 3:04 PM  

Here in the US, and highly advertised on the Tv, is the supposed connection between ChickenPox and Shingles later in life. Not sure of any veracity to the claim, but the ads say so.

It is. Basically a small reservoir of the Chickenpox virus hides out in the body after the immune system fights off the initial infection, that might get reactivated years later as Shingles. Now it is possible it might never return. That depends on your body.

This is similar to why people get multiple genital herpes outbreaks. Some people have one sever one and then nothing. Some people get multiple outbreaks. The body destroys the virus, but a small reservoir remains in the nerve ganglions at the base of the spine. They've been working on that problem since the 1950s. Chickenpox and Shingles are from Human Herpesvirus 3 (HHV-3 also called Varicella Zoster Virus), while the genital is from Human Herpesvirus 2 (HHV-2 also called Herpes Simplex Virus 2).

Hence the similarity.

Blogger Astrosmith November 23, 2013 3:07 PM  

Read Robert Sears' "The Vaccine Book" for all the details related to the risks and benefits of all the various vaccines. He gives several ideas for alternative schedules as well. While he is an advocate for giving kids all the vaccines, he understands those of us who have concerns about the U.S. schedule because they are not unfounded.
Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a separate measles vaccine. Most of them have been combined in some way so that you can't get a single vaccine.

Blogger Astrosmith November 23, 2013 3:09 PM  

Now, what is the primary reason the U.S. schedule loads up infants with so many vaccines at once? The doctors are afraid that the parents, being incompetent idiots or something, won't bring their baby back in for visits so it is incumbent upon them to give the babies all the shots as quickly as possible.

Blogger Nate November 23, 2013 3:11 PM  

"I'm a few weeks away from giving birth, so this is timely."

Tell them they can give you baby vitamins only. No vacs at the hospital. Stick to your guns. It would probably be good to talk to your pediatrician before hand.

Be advised... no one is more vaccine brainwashed than pediatricians. The vast majority have accepted everything they are told on blind faith and have never questioned any of it. If it was dangerous... after all... the CDC wouldn't be recommending it.

My wife, a board certified anesthesiologist mind you, went round and round with an ancient pediatrician about the vaccine schedule. When she dropped the science on him... he still refused to listen to her. So... we're found another one.

The best you can hope for is to find one that just accepts your decision and doesn't give you shit about it.

Blogger Nate November 23, 2013 3:13 PM  

Personally I'd love to see a study between european food allergies and american food allergies.

We're hyper-stimulating still developing immune systems. perhaps there is a good reason for the explosion of food allergies over the last 20 years.

Anonymous Idle Spectator November 23, 2013 3:14 PM  

Hey guys, have you not heard? Refridgerator moms cause autism! That's what the medical establishment said in the 1950s, so it must be true.

Anonymous VD November 23, 2013 3:15 PM  

In the 1990s, 4 million people got chickenpox every year and 100 died. So, there was about a one in 3,000,000 chance of getting the disease and dying from it.

There were also 44,590 traffic deaths and a one in 6,728 chance of dying in a traffic accident. So the risk of dying in a car accident is 446 times greater than dying of chickenpox.

So, if you live life on the wild side by letting your children ride in cars, there is no reason to vaccinate them for chickenpox. In fact, by homeschooling them, you're reducing the amount of road travel they do, so you're reducing the risk to them much more heavily than vaccination would.

Anonymous Stickwick November 23, 2013 3:21 PM  

Nate: Tell them they can give you baby vitamins only. No vacs at the hospital. Stick to your guns. It would probably be good to talk to your pediatrician before hand.

Absolutely no vaccines at the hospital -- we'll be adamant about that -- and our baby will never be out of sight of either me or my husband. I'm meeting with a potential pediatrician soon, and my primary concern is how willing he is to accept our decisions. I'm always willing to consider expert advice, but common sense is common sense. And although I don't have the benefit of your wife's medical credentials, I do have the letters "Dr." in front of my name; I suspect a pediatrician won't be too inclined to try to intimidate a professional scientist. But if he is, we'll drop him and find someone else.

Blogger SAHMIND November 23, 2013 3:22 PM  

But according to my pediatrician . . . the chicken pox vaccine has caused the virus to mutate (go figure) and NOW the mortality rate is so much higher. I "MUST" get it. I'm still pondering this one.

Anonymous Porky November 23, 2013 3:25 PM  

The first thing is to understand that many European and Asian doctors think the US schedule is insane.

The schedules are fairly similar among developed countries.

However, it does feel really good to point the finger at the US and yell "INSANE!"

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother November 23, 2013 3:27 PM  

Common sense tells me not to vaccinate. My profession tells me that as well. Samson J, what is the mercury concentration in a dose of the MMR vaccine?

I sell process analytical equipment to every major oil, gas and chemical company in the US. I have quoted mercury analyzers to midstream companies to control and report mercury concentrations of less than 500 ppb, because even at that incredibly low level, mercury is devastating to the human body.

And you want to inject that into a tiny baby?

Anonymous Dr. Idle Spectator, Yale Virology November 23, 2013 3:28 PM  

But according to my pediatrician . . . the chicken pox vaccine has caused the virus to mutate (go figure)

What the fuck? No one is safe from Superpox. Save yourselves.

Blogger Nate November 23, 2013 3:32 PM  

"And although I don't have the benefit of your wife's medical credentials, I do have the letters "Dr." in front of my name; I suspect a pediatrician won't be too inclined to try to intimidate a professional scientist. But if he is, we'll drop him and find someone else."

it helps. But like I said... it didn't stop one oldster pediatrician from trying to lecture my wife.

The younger pediatricians seem to be more understanding about this stuff as well.

Anonymous Dr. Idle Spectator, Yale Virology November 23, 2013 3:36 PM  

Common sense tells me not to vaccinate. My profession tells me that as well. Samson J, what is the mercury concentration in a dose of the MMR vaccine?

They used to use Thiomersal everywhere in the 1940s. Everything from creams to nasal sprays and even eye drops as a bactericide.

They have not really used organomercury compounds in vaccinessince 2001.

I think you should be safe.

Blogger Nate November 23, 2013 3:37 PM  

"And you want to inject that into a tiny baby?"

Can you imagine how much fun it would be to stick someone from the EPA in the room with a CDC vaccine advocate.

Anonymous Stickwick November 23, 2013 3:42 PM  

Stg58/Animal Mother: ... what is the mercury concentration in a dose of the MMR vaccine?

I don't have that info, but just FYI you can request vaccines without mercury. Also, from perusing Dr. Sears' website, it seems aluminum content is a concern. It's not really a concern for adults, but little infant bodies can't handle very much aluminum.

Nate: The younger pediatricians seem to be more understanding about this stuff as well.

The doc we're meeting is rather young and was recommended by a nurse who's not keen on the current schedule, so hopefully he's not like that pushy old fart who lectured your wife.

Blogger Nate November 23, 2013 3:42 PM  

"I think you should be safe."

and yet vaccine labels still include things like "trace mercury" on them.

Anonymous Idle Spectator November 23, 2013 3:43 PM  

Yes, and my candy bar says "trace soy."

Anonymous Stickwick November 23, 2013 3:43 PM  

Nate: Can you imagine how much fun it would be to stick someone from the EPA in the room with a CDC vaccine advocate.

An irresistible force meets an unmovable object ...

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother November 23, 2013 3:46 PM  

Trace mercury levels are higher than the levels of the mercury analyzers I sold. You lose.

Anonymous VD November 23, 2013 3:49 PM  

I'm meeting with a potential pediatrician soon, and my primary concern is how willing he is to accept our decisions.

Just drop this on him: "I'm a fucking physicist, Mr. biological "science" guy. Do you really want to play the academic credential game with me?"

Blogger Nate November 23, 2013 3:49 PM  

"I don't have that info, but just FYI you can request vaccines without mercury."

you can request it... but there is no one that actually goes and checks to make sure the manufacturers really are sticking to that claim.

Remember... this is an industry that's been granted immunity.

Anonymous Idle Spectator November 23, 2013 3:52 PM  

Trace mercury levels are higher than the levels of the mercury analyzers I sold. You lose.

Gosh, and here I thought mercury was different than mercury with a thiolate and ethyl groups added. I must have been off or something. Just like hydrogen is exactly the same as dihydrogen monoxide (hint: water).


Tell me again how long you were in the industry?

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother November 23, 2013 3:53 PM  

The immunity is the obvious smoking gun. If vaccines were as safe as the vaccine pushers say they are, why would the manufacturers of the vaccines feel the need to get immunity from the Federal Government?

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother November 23, 2013 3:55 PM  

Idle Spectator,

Mercury emissions can take the form of elemental mercury or mercury compounds. There are also those pesky little things called chemical reactions that can occur inside little bodies.

You suck again.

Blogger Benjamin Harris, D.C. November 23, 2013 3:58 PM  

As a Chiropractor I am asked about vaccines consistently. My biggest piece of advice is simply to do your research. Having said that, we have three unvaccinated children that have yet to see a doctor besides myself.

PS: Love the comment, " by homeschooling them, you're reducing the amount of road travel they do, so you're reducing the risk to them much more heavily than vaccination would."

Anonymous Stickwick November 23, 2013 3:59 PM  

VD: Just drop this on him: "I'm a fucking physicist, Mr. biological "science" guy. Do you really want to play the academic credential game with me?"

LOL. I'll be sure to do the air quote thingie when I sarcastically say "science."

Nate: Remember... this is an industry that's been granted immunity.

You have a point there.

Anonymous Salt November 23, 2013 4:00 PM  

Guess I'm still somewhat immune from Chicken Pox and Measels. I had them both. Not like I should be to worried about getting them again. I had the natural vaccine.

Anonymous Idle Spectator November 23, 2013 4:06 PM  

Mercury emissions can take the form of elemental mercury or mercury compounds.

Correct.

There are also those pesky little things called chemical reactions that can occur inside little bodies.

...And, trainwreck.

The bioavailability, mechanisms, and resulting damage is not determined by dosage level alone. See also organomercury compounds: methylmercury (bad) vs. dimethylmercury (fatal at even 0.1 mL absorbed through the skin).

You suck again.

Projection. Would you like to talk about it? There's no shame in crying.

Anonymous Chu November 23, 2013 4:09 PM  

It's better to just find a dr who is open to patients who wants to delay or decline vaccinations. Made that mistake with my firstborn. Dr. Sears have a list of some of the vaccine-friendly doctors: http://www.askdrsears.com/topics/health-concerns/vaccines/find-vaccine-friendly-doctor-near-you

Blogger Nate November 23, 2013 4:12 PM  

I cannot help but note the ferocity with which the pro-vaccine community operates. Its almost as if... I dunno... they are trying to defend some past decision...

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother November 23, 2013 4:13 PM  

So...are you saying that chemical reactions involving mercury do not occur inside the human body? It doesn't seem like it, so tell me how mercury reactions occur inside the body. It seemed like you agreed with me in the last comment.

Anonymous Idle Spectator November 23, 2013 4:19 PM  

So...are you saying that chemical reactions involving mercury do not occur inside the human body?

No.

It doesn't seem like it, so tell me how mercury reactions occur inside the body.

That's like asking me how oxygen reactions occur inside the body: lots of ways.

It seemed like you agreed with me in the last comment.

No.

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother November 23, 2013 4:24 PM  

So mercury does react inside the body, regardless of whether it enters the body in elemental form or as part of a compound?

Anonymous Idle Spectator November 23, 2013 4:26 PM  

So mercury does react inside the body, regardless of whether it enters the body in elemental form or as part of a compound?

Depends.

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother November 23, 2013 4:29 PM  

Depends on what?

Blogger Matamoros November 23, 2013 4:30 PM  

1. In the hospital don't fight with the staff, it marks you as uncooperative; and they will call children's social services.

Tell them you will work with your pediatrician to have the shots after you take the baby home.

2. Tetanus is readily treatable by homeopathy. The remedy is Ledum Palustre. It is used for deep puncture wounds, and for wounds with blood poisoning (red lines running up the leg or arm).

There are also homeopathic vaccines, called nosodes, that do not poison your blood stream; but the schools will not accept homeopathic vaccination - so do a religious or philosophical exemption.

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother November 23, 2013 4:33 PM  

We did religious exemptions. No one has bothered us so far.

Anonymous Idle Spectator November 23, 2013 4:37 PM  

Depends on what?

Size. Polarity. Hydrophobicity. Isomer. And many more...

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother November 23, 2013 4:40 PM  

And all of those conditions can be present inside the human body. So you really haven't proved anything.

Blogger pilgrim4life November 23, 2013 4:44 PM  

Another concern is that many vaccines were developed using cells from aborted babies. Some vaccines may have a "moral" alternative and some may not.

I'm really not cool with putting mercury or cells from dead babies in my children...especially when the people telling me that I "must" vaccinate are advocates of "Choice" and "I can do what I want with my own body" on other issues.

There may be some vaccines that are worthwhile. But people definitely need to be careful and do more than trust their doctor's word that it is safe.

Anonymous Salt November 23, 2013 4:46 PM  

But people definitely need to be careful and do more than trust their doctor's word that it is safe.

Ask the government, they're there to help you.

Anonymous Idle Spectator November 23, 2013 4:48 PM  

And all of those conditions can be present inside the human body. So you really haven't proved anything

Those attributes were referring to the chemical compound, not the human body. You're like long, sad, crying, derailed train of chemistry fail.

Passengers are crying and on fire by the rail tracks right now.

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother November 23, 2013 4:53 PM  

I am crying because a guy who probably possesses chemistry credentials is arguing with me about whether mercury is safe for ingestion into the human body.

Anonymous Will Best November 23, 2013 4:55 PM  

Studies show that the wealthier/higher income people are more likely to delay vaccinations. I might suggest looking for pediatricians in upscale neighborhoods. Case in point, we live in an upscale neighborhood and we run my daughter's vaccinations about 6-12 months behind the US schedule. Our pediatricians (its a 4-doctor practice) don't care.

I would probably delay them further except she is our third so her exposure to disease is substantially higher than our first two. We did get her hep B immediately, because at the time her grandfather was dying of hep B induced liver cancer and he had already managed to give one of our kids MRSA (hospitals are such sterile environments).

I think as a parent you are in a much better position to weigh the risks to your children in terms of exposure. Neither your doctor nor the CDC knows nor have they done studies on your particular activities. ie. are you in frequent contact with immigrants, school age children, work in hospital, family, daycare/homeschool, etc.

As long as you know how serious the diseases, how prevelent they are, and how they are contracted you are in the best position to make the educated guess against the vaccine risk (which if the government knows, they aren't telling).

Anonymous VD November 23, 2013 4:56 PM  

I cannot help but note the ferocity with which the pro-vaccine community operates. Its almost as if... I dunno... they are trying to defend some past decision..

It's fascinating that they affect to get all worked up over the terrible danger from CHICKEN POX and yet blithely ignore the far greater danger involved in putting children inside rapidly moving large boxes of metal containing significant quantities of highly flammable oil derivatives.

One of these days I'm going to have to work out the risk of driving your child 100 miles compared to not vaccinating them even if we assume vaccines are perfectly safe.

Anonymous Idle Spectator November 23, 2013 5:07 PM  

I am crying because a guy who probably possesses chemistry credentials is arguing with me about whether mercury is safe for ingestion into the human body.

Well, that depends on the mercury, right? Just like I need copper and zinc in my food for a balanced diet. But I don't go around swallowing entire pennies.

Why do you hate children so much Stg58? Why do you want them to die in a trainwreck? HAVE YOU NO DECENCY?!?

One of these days I'm going to have to work out the risk of driving your child 100 miles compared to not vaccinating them even if we assume vaccines are perfectly safe.

He will too! He's just that cool.

Blogger kurt9 November 23, 2013 5:10 PM  

Vox Day's suggestion regarding vaccination mirrors my own. You vaccinate kids for the 4-5 most serious diseases (tetanus, polio, etc.) when the kid is between 3 and 5 years old. Don't bother with the rest of them.

It is worth considering that the only reason why the U.S, medical establishment pushes to have kids vaccinated as infants (say, around 9 months of age) is because this is when most mothers bring their kid in for examination and this is the most convenient time to vaccinate the kid. This is the only reason, not one based on actual molecular biology considerations.

Also consider the vaccines that used to be given to 5 year old kids were never dose-adjusted for the lower weight of 9 month old infants. That such a basic concept of chemistry, concentration ratio, has been completely neglected when the vaccine schedule was changed, makes abundantly clear the practice of medicine is no longer a legitimate technical discipline.

Blogger kurt9 November 23, 2013 5:13 PM  

As for the inevitable appeals to science, I will merely point out that no science - ZERO - has been done concerning the safety of the current US vaccine schedule.

Yep. Not only that, but there are papers that show, based on statistical analysis that is denied by the medical community, that vaccines actually do cause more harm than good.

And as for the appeals to the greater good of the collective, I first note that I've never been much moved by Leninist arguments, and second, observe that one could just as easily justify murderously culling the immigrant population on that basis.

Indeed, Leninist arguments can be used to justify the extermination of the current inhabitants of the dangerous neighborhoods of U.S. cities.

Anonymous Will Best November 23, 2013 5:16 PM  

One of these days I'm going to have to work out the risk of driving your child 100 miles compared to not vaccinating them even if we assume vaccines are perfectly safe.

Unless you go work for Allstate, USAA, or somebody you will never be able to do that calculation in any meaningful manner because not every mile driven has the same risk factors.

My wife drives our kids about 100 miles each week, but its mostly residential, good weather, sub 40 mph, during a time of near 100% sobriety. Which is different than say the 100 miles I drive in and out of the city when we are going to the symphony or whatever on a Friday night.

Blogger RobertW November 23, 2013 5:34 PM  

dh - it is not Vox's job to prove that the vaccine schedule is not safe - it is the industry's job to prove they are safe and effective, which they never do because they can't. So they end up appealing to authority (their own). The number of vaccines administered has doubled or tripled even since my kids were born a couple of decades ago. Why? Because vaccines are big business. And what could be sweeter than having the government nearly force people to use your product/

Anonymous Bobo November 23, 2013 5:36 PM  

When my son was 2, he had a big "whack" of make-up vaccines, 6 shots at one visit.
He was sick for 2 weeks after, then night sweats, 2months later we find a tumor on his tonsils. Lymphoma. The next year was REAL fun...
No one will ever convince me that the cancer wasn't a result of the vaccines wrecking his immune system.
Steer clear...

Anonymous TMQ Fanboy November 23, 2013 5:38 PM  

"I would recommend a measles-specific vaccine and not MMR; mumps and rubella are much less serious diseases and the rubella vaccine is, as far as I can tell, completely worthless."

The rubella vaccine is not for the person being vaccinated, nor for the collective. It is for future fetuses. Adult rubella is clinically silent, but Congenital Rubella Syndrome is frighteningly common if the pregnant mother becomes infected.

Anonymous Sojourner November 23, 2013 5:41 PM  

Damnit people, if you do ANY intensive action and wish to KEEP your muscle you will NEED carbs, as in COMPLEX carbs. If you don't, if you maintain a high protein diet while keeping low good carbs you will not maintain the muscle mass that you keep working hard for. Yes simple carbs of all kinds are bad. But realize there is a BIG difference in short chain and long chain carbohydrates and your body needs the glucose for energy AND maintaining muscle mass.

/Sorta OT rant over.

Anonymous Truth November 23, 2013 5:46 PM  

Here's your research. And the reason more of it's not done is because using controls in a vaccine study is unethical and puts unnecessary risk on a child.

http://jpeds.com/webfiles/images/journals/ympd/JPEDSDeStefano.pdf

For those who have questions about vaccines, seek professional advice. Not the advice of a fantasy author. http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org

Anonymous Idle Spectator November 23, 2013 5:48 PM  

The rubella vaccine is not for the person being vaccinated, nor for the collective. It is for future fetuses. Adult rubella is clinically silent, but Congenital Rubella Syndrome is frighteningly common if the pregnant mother becomes infected.

We are the Fetus. Lower your pants and surrender your sperm. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own umbilical cord. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile.


I like the eyes. They look like the children from the Village of the Damned.

Anonymous Curlytop November 23, 2013 5:48 PM  

@Stickwick
Early Congrats! Will be praying for a safe arrival for the little one.

In regards to a doc for the baby, my understanding is that Family Physicians can see babies/children for wellness visits, which is essentially what you're looking at when these poisons, I mean vaccines are administered. We've had better luck with Family Physicians being more supportive of our decision not to vaccinate. It's also more commonly seen in the Seventh Day Adventist Physicians than in general, but there is improvement.

Blogger Nate November 23, 2013 5:50 PM  

"Another concern is that many vaccines were developed using cells from aborted babies. Some vaccines may have a "moral" alternative and some may not."

Its very telling how the Pro-Vaccine Camp chooses to deal with this complaint. Note that there are pages and pages dedicated to debunking the claim that there are fetal cells in vaccines.

A claim which exactly no one has made.

Blogger Nate November 23, 2013 5:52 PM  

"For those who have questions about vaccines, seek professional advice."

You mean like the advice from my board certified anesthesiologist wife?

Blogger JACIII November 23, 2013 5:53 PM  

~"using controls in a vaccine study is unethical and puts unnecessary risk on a child. "

So... There isn't any science behind the "safe" claims.


Next!

Anonymous Curlytop November 23, 2013 5:59 PM  


"For those who have questions about vaccines, seek professional advice."

So the links to Dr. Sears and the European Physician schedule are not considered "professional advice"?

@Nate
Of course, he means professionals that HE agrees with. ;-)

Anonymous Faust November 23, 2013 6:04 PM  

Vox-

I'll do it, since it's not a terribly hard calculation. This is for the US, since that's where most of us are based.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year

Chance of dying in a 100 mile trip: 100 * chance of dying in a one mile trip.
Chance of dying in a one mile trip: Accident Deaths / Miles Driven (This isn't quite right because you can have multiple passengers die in an accident, but it'll do for a guess.)
Accident Deaths (For 2012): 33,561
Miles Driven (For 2012) : 2954,000,000,000
Odds of dying per mile driven: 1 in 1/(33561/2954000000000)
Comes out to 1 in 88,018,831.

So the odds of dying over a 100 mile trip are: 1 in 880,188.

Anonymous VD November 23, 2013 6:17 PM  

Here's your research. And the reason more of it's not done is because using controls in a vaccine study is unethical and puts unnecessary risk on a child.

"We analyzed data from a case-control study conducted in 3 managed care organizations (MCOs) of 256 children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and 752 control children matched on birth year, sex, and MCO."

Pathetic attempt to deceive. As I said, ZERO science has been done on the safety of the US vaccine schedule. Statistical reviews are not scientific experiments.

Anonymous kh123 November 23, 2013 6:18 PM  

"Just like I need copper and zinc in my food for a balanced diet. But I don't go around swallowing entire pennies."

I remember as a kid hearing a lecture once about the local village idiot, who apparently got that way from an acid OD that was snuck into his cereal bowl: "Yeah, you have no idea what he's going to do, if he's going to talk, play with his radio, or spin on his head and spit nickles."

Then again, this was a cop saying this.

Still don't know what to make of all of this. So many layers - all of which seem chemical or metallic. Life's mysteries.

Anonymous kh123 November 23, 2013 6:24 PM  

"And the reason more of it's not done... unethical... unnecessary risk... child."

So unscientific, because ethics.

Anonymous MrGreenMan November 23, 2013 6:26 PM  

using controls in a vaccine study is unethical and puts unnecessary risk on a child.

This is conceding the entire ground and not even realizing it. However, for the slow:

1) The science fetishist materialist world view says that the only correct way to know anything is through science, and, at the core of science, the testing of hypotheses by experimentation, falsifying but always skeptical of any truth claim as it is a falsifying, not a truth-verifying, machine.
2) Here then, from the a priori assumption that the vaccine works, it becomes unethical to use that very process which we are always told, in every other circumstance, if not the only way to know things, the first and primary way of knowing things, to challenge the idea that the vaccine works.

Anonymous HongKongCharlie November 23, 2013 6:29 PM  

It appears Idle Spectator has an agenda as well as personality issues.

HKC

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother November 23, 2013 6:30 PM  

Vox,

Yes it is a pathetic attempt. By now I usually just ignore any paper or study they throw around because it is always a red herring or attempt at deceit.

Just like Idle Spectator's pathetic attempts to ignore the Mad Hatter.

Anonymous karen November 23, 2013 6:31 PM  

I commented here about vaccines several months ago. My granddaughter was born at 28 weeks due to my daughter having preeclampsia. The baby weighed 2lbs. 1oz. and dropped to 1 1/2 lbs. shortly after birth. She was a mere 13 inches long. After 72 days in NICU she was able to come home. They pushed for her to get fully vaccinated (2 month shots) when she was still a month from being a full term baby. We had done our research and declined. They wanted to do them in the hospital in case there was severe reaction (that is what we were told). It made no sense that such care was taken to keep her alive only to inject her with poison and reverse everything. No one who was sick was permitted in the NICU, yet they wanted to INJECT viruses into her 3 lb. body in the hopes they would stimulate her immune system. IT MAKES NO SENSE.

In her almost 11 months of life, my granddaughter has received 0 vaccines. She currently weighs 20 lbs. and is 30 inches long. She has never been sick. NOT ONCE. The pediatrician pushes my daughter to vaccinate her, however, we see what the human body can do on its own, and it is absolutely AMAZING. She is a miracle. She is breast fed and eats organic food.

She crawls and pulls herself to standing up and has caught up to her actual age so quickly that every medical professional who sees her, says they cannot believe how well she is doing. We believe it's because her body has been able to heal on its own without a bunch of poisons and toxins reversing her progress. We have seen with our own eyes this fragile baby grow and thrive and we know without question that this would not be the case if we had allowed them to vaccinate her when they wanted to.

I had three full term babies myself, and back in the day, the vaccine schedule wasn't so sinister and aggressive. I was not educated back then, so I vaccinated them and I will tell you that my kids as babies were always sick, starting at 2 months (after the first set of vaccines).

I don't trust that the makers of vaccines have our children's best interest at heart.

Anonymous Truth November 23, 2013 6:32 PM  

"it becomes unethical to use that very process which we are always told, in every other circumstance, if not the only way to know things, the first and primary way of knowing things, to challenge the idea that the vaccine works."

No one's challenging that the vaccine works. That was established long ago. Even Vox isn't challenging whether they work. The challenge here is that they're safe. But clearly the spread of the disease is unsafe. So exposing children to unnecessary risks means that using a control in the study is unethical. But, like the studies that I referenced. It is possible to study the effects of vaccine. And so far, Vaccinations of the young have done far more good than harm.

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother November 23, 2013 6:33 PM  

Greenman,

I think the fetishists claim it is unsafe to perform these studies because that would leave the control group bereft, even temporarily, of the manifold goodness derived from repeated applications of the General Electric GAU-8/Dillon Aero Mark V injection device.

Anonymous karen November 23, 2013 6:33 PM  

http://www.exodushc.com/2011/08/why-is-aluminum-in-our-vaccines/

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother November 23, 2013 6:35 PM  

"Truth",

Vox has accepted this? Really? You'll be good enough to provide evidence of this claim.

While you're at it, the NFL called. They want their goalposts back before tomorrow's action.

Anonymous Idle Spectator November 23, 2013 6:35 PM  

I remember as a kid hearing a lecture once about the local village idiot, who apparently got that way from an acid OD that was snuck into his cereal bowl: "Yeah, you have no idea what he's going to do, if he's going to talk, play with his radio, or spin on his head and spit nickles."

I read about this guy who would eat metallic objects (coins, nails, silverware, ect...) and ceramic dishware. He would break them into smaller pieces. Aside from some minor dental damage due to the wearing action, he was in perfect shape. Scientists did an X-Ray. Nothing wrong. Maybe his stomach produced more hydrochloric acid than normal.

Another guy was a fried chicken cook who could grab the food directly out of boiling oil with his bare hands, without getting burned. Maybe he had more sweat on his skin that gave him a productive layer. That's a physics trick you can do with water that creates a vapor layer.


You never know on these things.

There are so many whacky genetic mutations and permutations out there.

Anonymous VD November 23, 2013 6:48 PM  

No one's challenging that the vaccine works. That was established long ago. Even Vox isn't challenging whether they work. The challenge here is that they're safe. But clearly the spread of the disease is unsafe. So exposing children to unnecessary risks means that using a control in the study is unethical. But, like the studies that I referenced. It is possible to study the effects of vaccine. And so far, Vaccinations of the young have done far more good than harm.

1. It depends upon the vaccine.
2. The question is if the spread of the disease is worse than the damage caused by the vaccine. Smallpox, yes. Tetanus, yes. Polio, yes. Chickenpox, no. Everything else is unsettled.
3. Bullshit. Controls are REQUIRED in most medical experiments. There is nothing even POSSIBLY ethical about NOT injecting someone with something.
4. Studying the effects with statistics and no controls is not science. It is statistical review.
5. Begging the question.

Also, I again point out that you should not be trusted, as the statistical review was not what you claimed it was. It did not contradict my point, it supported it.

Anonymous MrGreenMan November 23, 2013 6:49 PM  

So, Mr. "Truth", you will appeal to medieval logic "clearly the spread of the disease is unsafe" when science deserts you. Isn't it fun to assert someone who disagrees with you is unethical and inhuman to question what the government puts in you, or shoves into infants?

A statistical analysis is certainly an interesting thing, but, there've been far too many demands from people of your side of big government that said - we own the universities, we own the journals, the only acceptable thing is a peer-reviewed paper about an experiment - for us to accept something less. After all, if nothing else, perhaps your demands for peer-reviewed, published experimental science had something, and you're retreating from it because you have nothing?

To your assertion - is it really so clear?

You make an interesting appeal to a risk without quantification, and play a sleight of hand to treat all of those vaccines as if they are equally effective; many do question the efficacy of some of the vaccines in that schedule - they are not all the polio vaccine, after all. You retreat to an interesting position that is the brain-dead read or the scoundrel's recourse - of course the context is an aggressive schedule, with far more vaccines than ever before. If this wasn't the context, why would the discussion have been about delay as a possible solution, and the trade-off of how early the vaccines must be administered?

You don't get to wriggle out and try to claim that, because, individually, there is some proof of the efficacy, that science must therefore be silent on the efficacy of the aggressive schedule, and we must rely just on medieval logic to decide that one? This is the actual definition of begging the question - the question being whether the schedule is safe, which is a certain constellation of vaccines delivered in a certain time; then you so clearly see the spread of disease is unsafe, so, since the opposite is unsafe (nice and binary there...), it is safe, since we're told that, individually, there is some efficacy of the vaccines.

Some people do challenge that some of these vaccines work. Many people lived through chicken pox just fine, and the chicken pox vaccine doesn't appear to be of the same stuff as some of the others. Then, there are others - when the vaccine touches a behavioral thing - some question why this needs to be a mandated vaccine with nanny government deciding - since you'll engage in some behavior in X years, let's give you this vaccine now.

Blogger Eric November 23, 2013 6:49 PM  

Vaccines for chicken pox and other non-fatal diseases are a joke.

Shingles is far from a joke. For some people the pain never goes away, and let me tell you it hurts like hell, too. I think parents who don't vaccinate their children for chicken pox are doing them a terrible disservice.

Anonymous Dr. Idle Spectator, MIT Toxicology November 23, 2013 6:50 PM  

Just like Idle Spectator's pathetic attempts to ignore the Mad Hatter.

Oh my GOD, you are so right! That mercury is going to turn you into a Mad Hatter. My goodness, your brain is exactly two days slow! We're going to have to look into this. I see the problem: too many wheels.

Say it with me slowly, after I repeat it from Paracelsus, the founder of the field of toxicology: The dose makes the poison. Even water is a poison like Nate mentioned in the proper dose (water toxicity can kill you).

Anonymous Will Best November 23, 2013 6:52 PM  

So the odds of dying over a 100 mile trip are: 1 in 880,188.

You are woefully wrong. Your numerator includes adults in addition to children, along with deaths occuring on bikes, walking, motorcycles, scooters, etc. Basically if it died on the road, it gets counted.

Your denominator is way off because the amount of passenger miles traveled by children is substantially less than that of everybody.

And I still maintain type of mile matters in addition to whether or not a safety restraint is used.

Also just using fatalities is wrong because you can live through a lot and be just as F'd up as a result. The data on crippled from auto accident is much more scarce than death.

Anonymous bw1 November 23, 2013 7:00 PM  

Our small town pediatrician was fine with our desire to dial back the vaccine schedule, The big city hospital where we delivered, not so much. When I told them we'd be holding off on Hepatitus B, the staff ganged up on me. They gave me the information sheet, and I pointed out to them that their own sheet listed the risk factors as unprotected sex and sharing needles. I told them no, but I'd let them know if I changed my mind. The next morning, we came up to the NICU to find they had just administered it. TRUST NO ONE.

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother November 23, 2013 7:09 PM  

Idle Spectator,

It's ok. Just calm down. I didn't steal your McDonald's fries in fourth grade.

Just curious, do you own a top hat with a scrap of paper with 10/6 written on it?

Blogger Nate November 23, 2013 7:17 PM  

"No one's challenging that the vaccine works."

Actually yes sugartits. In this very thread vaccine effectiveness has been questioned.

Anonymous Idle Spectator November 23, 2013 7:17 PM  

It's ok. Just calm down. I didn't steal your McDonald's fries in fourth grade.

Yeah, who needs that history, chemistry, toxicology, and math thing? Let's talk French fries!

Just curious, do you own a top hat with a scrap of paper with 10/6 written on it?

Sometimes. 10 women boned, 6 to go. Usually it is 16/0. Kind of like the McDonald's sign: 16 bitches served.

Blogger Nate November 23, 2013 7:20 PM  

"water toxicity can kill you"

shitty way to go too.

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother November 23, 2013 7:31 PM  

Idle Spectator,

Perhaps I've been unkind. Let's agree that the mercury doses contained in vaccinations received by infants are at levels too low to harm the infants.

Anonymous scoobius dubious November 23, 2013 7:36 PM  

"Neither your doctor nor the CDC knows nor have they done studies on your particular activities. ie. are you in frequent contact with immigrants, school age children,"

If you live within the territory of what was once the USA, then categorically speaking you are in frequent contact with immigrants, whether you realize it or not.

Anonymous Idle Spectator November 23, 2013 7:36 PM  

November 23, 2013 7:31 PM
Idle Spectator,

Perhaps I've been unkind. Let's agree that the mercury doses contained in vaccinations received by infants are at levels too low to harm the infants.


In your mind.

Blogger Nate November 23, 2013 8:12 PM  

"Let's agree that the mercury doses contained in vaccinations received by infants are at levels too low to harm the infants."

I don't see how you can agree about that since we don't actually know how much mercury is there.

There is no one double checking.

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 November 23, 2013 8:21 PM  

@Stickwick

When you asked: And why does an infant need to be vaccinated against a disease that's primarily transmitted by sexual contact and sharing needles?, the answer is quite simple. They need to vaccinate against such a disease because of all the other needles they are going to be sticking into your baby. In other words, the medical establishment isn't even sure of the safety of their needles, let alone the vaccines.

Anonymous cheddarman November 23, 2013 8:42 PM  

We're hyper-stimulating still developing immune systems. perhaps there is a good reason for the explosion of food allergies over the last 20 years. -Nate

And add to that the fact that our diets suck, high in pro-inflammatory sugars and omega-6 fats, low in omega-3's and other anti inflammatory compounds. Sugar causes inflammation people, you dont here that in the news, but it is in the scientific literature.

Anonymous Brad November 23, 2013 9:08 PM  

really, i was deleted for pointing out that fuructose is a carb?

Blogger James Dixon November 23, 2013 9:10 PM  

> The standard schedule in the U.S. now calls for 25 shots in the first 15 months of a baby's life,

From my rather foggy memory of studies performed, I recall that the mothers antibodies act to protect the child for up to 2 years (I remember this because everyone was surprised that they lasted that long). I'd go with Vox and say no vaccines should be given before the first year.

> Now, what is the primary reason the U.S. schedule loads up infants with so many vaccines at once?

To get them out of the way so the child will be safe to farm out to preschool and nursery care as soon as possible. Can't have the mother not getting back to work as soon as possible, now can we?

> I cannot help but note the ferocity with which the pro-vaccine community operates.

Reminds me of the circumcision discussion we had here a while ago. That's another question you should consider, Stickwick.

> There may be some vaccines that are worthwhile.

Sure. Polio. measles, and (if it were still a live issue) small pox. Whooping cough may be considered in that category by some. There are probably a few others, but those are the main ones.

Anonymous brad November 23, 2013 9:13 PM  

what

Blogger Nate November 23, 2013 9:14 PM  

"And add to that the fact that our diets suck, high in pro-inflammatory sugars and omega-6 fats, low in omega-3's and other anti inflammatory compounds. Sugar causes inflammation people, you dont here that in the news, but it is in the scientific literature."

That's all true... and its a problem... but that was true 40 years ago too and we didn't have the same food allergy problems.

Anonymous Stickwick November 23, 2013 9:25 PM  

James Dixon: Reminds me of the circumcision discussion we had here a while ago. That's another question you should consider, Stickwick.

We're having a girl, so not something we have to worry about.

Blogger James Dixon November 23, 2013 9:29 PM  

> ...so not something we have to worry about.

Yet. :)

Anonymous TWS November 23, 2013 9:47 PM  

Lots of crap like TB whooping cough and bed bugs because we have 30+ million illegals. Deport and quarentine.

OpenID James November 23, 2013 10:20 PM  

Having chicken Pox greatly increases a persons chances of developing Leukemia
My younger brother died from leukemia when he was 13 years old,
2 years before they released the chicken Pox vaccine.

Anonymous Grandmaster-B November 23, 2013 10:25 PM  

Having chicken Pox greatly increases a persons chances of developing Leukemia

Everyone in my family and all my childhood friends had chicken pox long before the "vaccine". This is the first I've heard of that.

Blogger bethyada November 23, 2013 10:27 PM  

I don't have a problem with vaccines in general.

I wouldn't bother with 'flu vaccines in healthy children. Of Vox's list one could also consider diphtheria which is often bundled tetanus in the adult form.

Hep B is less of a concern current in the developed world and one can wait to adulthood, though preferable to have if you work in the health industry, it is highly contagious. I think hep B vaccine in childhood in you live in the developing world is desirable. Millions die from cirrhosis due to Hep B.

Anonymous cheddarman November 23, 2013 10:34 PM  

"And add to that the fact that our diets suck, high in pro-inflammatory sugars and omega-6 fats, low in omega-3's and other anti inflammatory compounds. Sugar causes inflammation people, you dont here that in the news, but it is in the scientific literature." cheddarman

That's all true... and its a problem... but that was true 40 years ago too and we didn't have the same food allergy problems. - nate

I would expect the amount of per capita sugar consumption to have gone way up over the last 40 years. Sugar tends to raise the over all markers of inflammation in the body.

Blogger rycamor November 23, 2013 10:35 PM  

Nate November 23, 2013 9:14 PM

"And add to that the fact that our diets suck, high in pro-inflammatory sugars and omega-6 fats, low in omega-3's and other anti inflammatory compounds. Sugar causes inflammation people, you dont here that in the news, but it is in the scientific literature."

That's all true... and its a problem... but that was true 40 years ago too and we didn't have the same food allergy problems.


To a degree yes, but we're not really eating the same foods we ate 40 years ago. Even if they are called by the same names.

Blogger bethyada November 23, 2013 10:37 PM  

Vox First, do no harm. My advice is consistent with the Hippocratic Oath.

"First do no harm" is a common medical phrase but it is possibly not part of the Hippocratic Oath. The latter mentions doing good and not evil as general principles. The former is an aphorism focusing avoiding damage; ie. consider that doing nothing is the best treatment.

First do no harm seems to many to mean do nothing harmful at all. I prefer do no net harm, though it is not so pithy.

Anonymous Anonymous November 23, 2013 10:38 PM  

In Japan, our pediatrician was working out the vaccine schedule for my newborn (yes it's a personalized schedule based on the specifics of the patient) and she asked to see the vaccine schedule for our oldest daughter (most of which were blank because we eschewed them). The pediatrician just stared down at it for about a minute and then said "I must be seeing this wrong," and then asked me to confirm that they give THIS many vaccines, of THIS type, to children SO young, in such large tranches. I said that was standard and after absorbing that for minute she actually muttered the word "irresponsible" (a MAJOR indictment for a Japanese to actually verbalize such criticism.)

Her schedule was to give about half as many shots as required in the States (and that includes the addition of TB and Japanese encephalitis (naturally)), none before the first year and never more than one in a 6 months stretch with the exception of MMR.

Blogger rycamor November 23, 2013 10:38 PM  

Sojourner November 23, 2013 5:41 PM

Damnit people, if you do ANY intensive action and wish to KEEP your muscle you will NEED carbs, as in COMPLEX carbs


Yeah, yeah... generally when people talk about carbohydrates informally they mean bread, cereal, corn, etc... They aren't exactly thinking of broccoli or kale.

Anonymous Anonymous November 23, 2013 10:40 PM  

(cont'd from above Anonymous)

Thank goodness we were able to emigrate...the medical establishment in the US seems to be becoming the sharp edge of the sword...

--JT

Anonymous cherub's revenge November 23, 2013 11:02 PM  

Studies show that the wealthier/higher income people are more likely to delay vaccinations. I might suggest looking for pediatricians in upscale neighborhoods. Case in point, we live in an upscale neighborhood and we run my daughter's vaccinations about 6-12 months behind the US schedule. Our pediatricians (its a 4-doctor practice) don't care.

Will Best beat me to it. He's absolutely right according to my experience.

Our pediatrician in Chicago was combative about delaying any vaccine for any amount of time.

Our new one in Winnetka - "no problem, whenever you feel comfortable with it, bring them in. Please see the receptionist for payment."

Still vax free.

Anonymous maniacprovost November 23, 2013 11:43 PM  

Here's your research. And the reason more of it's not done is because using controls in a vaccine study is unethical and puts unnecessary risk on a child.

http://jpeds.com/webfiles/images/journals/ympd/JPEDSDeStefano.pdf


I find statistical studies useful, even if the ideal study isn't as good as the ideal experiment. However, in practice, they often have glaring errors. Also, any experiment or study has a very, very narrow focus.

This one, for example, appears to take a group of living children and look at their vaccine history. The children that died? Or that suffered other issues than autism? Not included. This is a study of autism only.

... From which they excluded 7 children that had indications of autism. Of course if you take the autistic kids out of the sample then you won't find vaccines cause autism. WTH. Furthermore they only rule out a statistical correlation between the level of whatsits and the presence of autism. However, that assumes a relatively flat probability distribution. If, for example, a certain percentage of children have an adverse reaction to ANY level of antibody stimulating proteins, and the rest have NO reaction to any level of proteins, then the degree of vaccination will not be correlated to the prevalence of autism even if the risk is 100%. It's finite mathematics.

Anonymous James mcjames100@yahoo.com November 23, 2013 11:49 PM  

I incorrectly posted the chicken pox "greatly" increases a child's chance on developing leukemia.
Is is an unusual in any event.
Chicken pox only increases the chance, I do not know by what percentage.
I read this decades ago.

Anonymous PhillipGeorge(c)2013 November 24, 2013 12:13 AM  

The plural of anecdote is data.

Bobo, within 24 hours of my son having the infant HepB injection he had an apnoea/ respiratory arrest and would have died if he weren't already in hospital.

The Japanese, I am told, do not give any vaccines to children under 2 yo and have significantly less cot death/ SIDS and autism I believe.

Tetanus can be treated with hyperbaric oxygen. Every/ EVERY anaerobic pathenogen responds to hyperbaric oxygen. [further evidence that the antediluvian world had significantly higher pCO2 and pO2 levels]

Adequate iodine/ boron/ Vitamin D for a healthy immune system and possibly colloidal silver is a useful treatment for many infectious diseases.

maybe a third of modern medicine is bat shit crazy/ ie. heavily influenced by Darwinians and paradigms they push.

back away very slowly from anyone who refers to people as 'human species'

Anonymous kfg November 24, 2013 2:04 AM  

" . . . merely driving to the doctor's office puts your children more at risk than the disease does."

This. A thousand times this. If you drive. bath and use staricases and find yourself worrying about some risk factor that is lower than these, you're doing it wrong.

Anonymous concerned mama November 24, 2013 3:31 AM  

Okay, for the commenter who wanted facts; here are a few:
First, let's kill the myth of the 'chicken pox' vaccine. My third daughter received the chicken pox vaccine. For a few reasons, after delayed vaccinating with our first two, my husband and I vaccinated almost to schedule with our third, (I'm not going to go into those reason now as it is frankly irrelevant, and I feel badly enough about that.) anyways, when her unvaccinated big sisters caught chicken pox, they had a dozen spots, mild cold symptoms for a few days, and ran about like normal. She caught chicken pox and was so covered in spots she didn't have a square inch of skin left. Her eye lids, insides of her mouth and the works! She was in agony, and suffered terribly for 2 weeks. Her peers in our community, who were vaccinated, overwhelmingly went to hospital through complications. I could specifically name 8 children who spent at least a week in hospital that autumn with chicken pox. All who received the same vaccine, in the same month, from the same doctor's office. Bad batch? Useless vaccine? We don't know, but none of the unvaccinated older sibling, for whom the vaccine was not available, caught chicken pox with any degree of severity.

Second, vaccine scheduling. It is fact, that a 2 month old baby's brain is roughly 25% of the weight it will be at the age of 3 years old. Newborns are born each neurone having 2,500 synapse each and a total of roughly 50 trillion synapses overall. By the age of 1, their neurons have 15,000 synapses, totalling over 1,000 trillion synapses. Now, the ingredients such as mercury, have a well established reputation for harming brain development. I could go into the details, but being a clever lot, you are more than capable without me writing a full essay on the subject.

In my little bitty opinion, I would wait until the soft spots close up. I would suggest that waiting until those little 'seed' neurones have all finished forming their synapses, before washing them in a chemical cocktail.

And needless to say, we have chosen differently with our subsequent two boys.

Anonymous Idle Spectator November 24, 2013 7:01 AM  

Having chicken Pox greatly increases a persons chances of developing Leukemia

Everyone in my family and all my childhood friends had chicken pox long before the "vaccine". This is the first I've heard of that.


Both. Having the infection in the first two years lowers the risk by stimulating the immune system. After the first two years it increases it by damaging the immune system. And it is not "great" but that is a qualitative term.

That's what the latest data says.

Anonymous Stilicho November 24, 2013 7:05 AM  

Sugar tends to raise the over all markers of inflammation in the body.

I had not heard this. Interesting. On an unrelated note, when are we going to build that long ship? It's nearly time to go a viking.

Anonymous kfg November 24, 2013 8:31 AM  

"I had not heard this."

Although you have heard about needing antioxidants? It's all over the nutritional news. Why do you need them? To offset the inflammation caused by glycolysis, in other words, sugar metabolism.

What is the most common antioxidant? Vitamin C. It could be argued (and has) that the reason you need to eat fruit to get vitamin C is because . . . you eat fruit! The poison is packaged with the antidote. Eat less fruit, need less vitamin C in the first place.

Why do sailors get scurvy unless they have fruit? Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that were fed on hardtack biscuits. In other words, metabolically speaking; sugar cubes.

Blogger James Dixon November 24, 2013 8:31 AM  

> I would expect the amount of per capita sugar consumption to have gone way up over the last 40 years.

Well, there's sugar (sucrose) and then there are sugars (fructose, glucose, etc.). Wrt sugars, you're probably correct. Sugar itself, I don't believe you are. Sugar was largely replaced by high fructose corn syrup in most processed foods.

> ...but it is possibly not part of the Hippocratic Oath.

Well, since the original oath was in Greek...
However, a simple Google of the term will get you translations. There's no need to settle for possibly.

Anonymous Gracie November 24, 2013 9:10 AM  

"We do not vaccinate. At all."

Same here.

Haven't gotten there yet but on my reading list is Suzanne Humphries' Dissolving Illusions.

Video


Blogger wrf3 November 24, 2013 9:53 AM  

Vox wrote: Statistical reviews are not scientific experiments.

Well, yes. But in the same way that a pancreas is not a dog or a word is not a novel.

Anonymous Will Best November 24, 2013 10:46 AM  

The next morning, we came up to the NICU to find they had just administered it. TRUST NO ONE.

If this is true and happened within the last 5 years you should talk to a lawyer. If there is any evidence that you denied consent, you should be looking for a 5-figure payout even after the lawyer takes his cut. And even if there isn't except your own worlds they might still pay you to make you go away.

Anonymous cherub's revenge November 24, 2013 12:18 PM  

"vax"

Can't believe I used this abbreviation. This topic carried me off to some mommy blogs and I apparently picked up some of their lingo. Sorry about that.

Anonymous NorthernHamlet November 24, 2013 3:15 PM  

As an aside...

Shingles does hurt like a bitch, but it's not nearly as bad as people make it out to be. Painful and inconvenient, but you can still get shit done.

Blogger Mom November 24, 2013 4:33 PM  

Three years ago we had a hospital birth where they were pressuring us to give her a vitamin D shot. Still can't figure that one out. Two nurses and a Dr. Came in to all me into it. I did my smile and nod and "no thank you." When I questioned the Dr. About when he last saw that (of course horrible) complication he mentioned, he admitted he had never encountered it. Anyone heard of that one? If you're a healthy Mom on a good diet taking prenatal vitamins, and planning on breast feeding, your baby doesn't need anything else.

Anonymous robwbright November 24, 2013 5:38 PM  

"Here's your research. And the reason more of it's not done is because using controls in a vaccine study is unethical and puts unnecessary risk on a child. "

Something I have always found odd about this position:

Based on this thread alone, there are obviously a few people out there who are going to choose to avoid vaccines altogether and/or severely limit the schedule.

Why not use people such as those as the control group? Is it still unethical to not give the vaccine to children who weren't going to receive it anyway?

Anonymous rtp November 24, 2013 5:39 PM  

Thank you for this Vox. But it is much worse than all of what you say.

You see, no vaccine has ANY benefit. Modern medicine (and indeed most alternative medicine) has no idea about cause and effect it just thinks that every disease, every reaction, every biological function is God playing dice. So they worship statistics - just like Keynesians worship statistics in economics. The only problem is that in medicine – just like economics – it is almost impossible to get around the problem of cherry-picking and bias.

To get around the placebo effect you need both the patient AND the doctor to be blinded as to whether you received the treatment. In the case of vaccines the placebo effect is actually more important from the doctor's point of view (because infants are unlikely to have a placebo effect anyway). But all of that wonderful data which purportedly "proves" that the polio vaccine stops kids from being crippled or that the diphtheria/pertussis vaccines stopped kids from having respiratory problems etc is not double-blinded ie the doctors almost always knew whether their patients had received the vaccines for them.

This renders any meaningful analysis of this data impossible because nobody could possibly say whether the children were less likely to actually have polio or whether the doctor just made that assumption because they assumed that anybody who had received the polio couldn't possibly have had polio.

Now, this doesn't explain my certainty that none of them work though. But, if you look here http://apps.who.int/immunization_monitoring/en/diseases/poliomyelitis/case_count.cfm you can work out the fraud for yourself. Plug in say India for 1996 and you will get 1005 cases of acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) of which exactly 1005 cases were deemed polio. Plug in 2012 for India and you will get zero cases of polio. Sounds good huh? But then go to AFP cases - 61000!

To put it another way. Since the massive global polio eradication campaign there has been a 60 fold increase in the number of crippled children (at least according to the WHO's own data) but doctors have simply refused to label any of them polio. They call it Guillain Barre, transverse myelitis, coxsackie, non-polio enteroviruses amongst others. You can do the same with other developing nations for similar results.

The story is the same in the developed world, the only difference is that we, ironically, haven't got the same data on AFP over time (ie since the polio vaccine was introduced here). According to census data though kids are 10 times more likely to have a disability than in 1950 (ie at the height of the polio epidemic).

Indeed, the story is the same for ALL so-called vaccine success stories but again, nobody has collected data on measles/diphtheria/pertussis vs what used to always be called measles/diphtheria/pertussis. However, you can look at proxy data such as hospitalisations for respiratory infections. In addition, we are spending four times as much on health (as per cent of GDP) as 1950 - how anybody could marry that up with the idea of a successful preventative medical campaign is beyond me.

Even where doctors themselves are reluctant to use vaccination status to make their diagnoses, very often after vaccines are introduced public health bureaucracies will encourage doctors to do just that and what's more, diagnostic criteria is often strengthened after the vaccine introduction. For example, polio was almost always diagnosed clinically in 1950. Today it is impossible to have a polio diagnosis without a stool (or other laboratory) test. We have no idea how many similar cases would have been excluded using the same criteria in 1950. And it is the same for measles, diphtheria, pertussis and even chicken pox - it is much harder for doctors to make such diagnoses today (ie more criteria have to be fulfilled).

Anonymous TimP November 24, 2013 6:54 PM  

wrf3 wrote:
> Vox wrote: Statistical reviews are not scientific experiments.

> Well, yes. But in the same way that a pancreas is not a dog or a word is not a novel.

No, that's not right at all. A statistical review is not a scientific experiment in the same way as a dog house isn't a dog, and a book cover isn't a novel.

Statistical reviews are something you can do after a scientific experiment to interpret it, and almost always will do, but in this case no scientific experiment was conducted. They just did a statistical review to interpret reality, which is something you will sometimes do BEFORE a scientific experiment to give you an idea of what to check for during the experiment.

On the subject of this particular study 25% of the non-ASD control group "had indications of speech delay or language delay, learning disability, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder or attention deficit disorder, or tics, or had an individual education plan."

And also it's very simple to come up with a theory as to why they might have got those results even if Vaccines caused autism. For example hippies are probably less likely to vaccinate their children, but having hippies for parents could result in increased incidences of Autism; I don't actually believe this is the cause, but it's possible.

(I personally doubt that vaccines cause Autism, but this statistical review provides almost no support for that opinion; I doubt it because, from what I've heard, the argument in favour of Autism from vaccines is based on similarly limited or even worse statistical reviews as well)

OpenID cailcorishev November 24, 2013 7:09 PM  

Based on this thread alone, there are obviously a few people out there who are going to choose to avoid vaccines altogether and/or severely limit the schedule.

Why not use people such as those as the control group?


Because people who refuse vaccinations are apt to be different in many other ways. Someone pointed out that they're more likely to be wealthier than average. They might also eat better, have better genetic health, be better educated about illness and able to spot it early, etc. If the non-vaccinated turned out to have better (or worse) health, all you'd have proven is correlation -- the kind of people who refuse vaccinations tend to have better (or worse) health than others -- but no causation.

For a control group to be useful, it has to be made up of people who are as much like the test group as possible in every way other than what you're testing. Ideally, you do it double-blind so that no one involved in the project even knows who is in which group. There's no way to do that ethically with a treatment that people are allowed to choose to accept or reject.

Anonymous cherub's revenge November 24, 2013 9:23 PM  

Because people who refuse vaccinations are apt to be different in many other ways.

Horse puckey. There are still hundreds of thousands of educated, wealthy, and healthy parents who dutifully hold their children's arm out for the jab when and where they're told. More than enough to build a comparable group clinical study controlling for other lifestyle factors.

Anonymous rtp November 24, 2013 9:42 PM  

cherub's revenge,

Whilst you are correct about there being a signifcant enough sample, do you really think that the Government would conduct such a study in an honest manner?

They would just see it as a propaganda exercise and when their highly secretive "adjustments" to the data were criticised they would just say "see everybody how unreasonable these anti-vaxers are! We give them what they want and because the data doesn't tell them what they want to hear they shift the goalposts!" And many people will believe them.

If you want to convince people of the stupidity of vaccination then DON'T use statistics. By all means critique the statistics that get used to support vaccinations but if you try and set yourself up in a he said she said debate over which study is slightly less cherry-picked than the other most people will just side with the majority view.

There is a principle in medicine called "challenge, dechallenge, rechallenge". There is no reason not to apply the same methodology to vaccine side effects as to antibiotics, analgesics etc. But the health authorities refuse to because they know that there are hundreds of thousands of such cases that meet this criteria when it comes to vaccines - including for autism. If we were to apply the same criteria for causality to vaccines as we do for antibioitics then nobody would vaccinate their child - ever.

Anonymous JRL November 25, 2013 12:05 AM  

People who think improved sanitation and nutrition is the sole reason for the vast decrease in communicable diseases are nuts. Up until very recently, chicken pox was a normal childhood disease in America, now not so much. Sanitation and nutrition had nothing to do with it.

In addition to not getting the chicken pox, there is a potential benefit to the vaccine: a probable reduction in the chance of getting shingles as an adult, or a reduction in the severity thereof. There is of course a shingles vaccine available for older folks as well.

The side effect of mass vaccination for chicken pox is the older generations who are infected with the virus will have fewer subsequent exposures and will therefore not maintain the same level of immunity...thereby leading to a probable increase in shingles cases. But...there is a shingles vaccination.



OpenID cailcorishev November 25, 2013 1:46 AM  

Cherub's,

Okay, change "those who refuse vaccinations" to "those who would be willing to have their kids forego vaccinations for a study." The problem remains that such a self-selected group is not a particularly useful control.

Anonymous rtp November 25, 2013 3:52 PM  

"Up until very recently, chicken pox was a normal childhood disease in America, now not so much."

We strengthened the criteria as to what could be classified as chicken pox. In other words it has been defined out of existence (or out of common existence). There is no evidence that kids are less likely to have skin conditions today than in previous decades. The same is true for measles. We now call it roseola or fifth disease - particularly if the child has been vaccinated. The vaccine is worthless but doctors simply stop diagnosing measles unless the kid is unvaxed or there has been an epidemic on the news.

Every so-called vaccine success story is just a renaming of the disease. Diptheria/pertussis were renamed croup, RSV, strep throat; polio as Guillain Barre/transverse myelitis, viral meningitis etc; hepatitis B was renamed Hep C - the vaccine was introduced to stop liver cancer but liver cancer rates have skyrocketed; Hib meningitis/pneumonia/septicemia was renamed other forms of meningitis/pneumonia/septicemia and their total number is much the same as before.

Anonymous David of One November 25, 2013 5:14 PM  

Likely Related: Mother claims flu shot is responsible for death of teenage son

Anonymous cherub's revenge November 25, 2013 8:59 PM  

The problem remains that such a self-selected group is not a particularly useful control.

What? Barring some unknown USG Tuskegee stuff going on, clinical studies are "self-selected" and in the instance of childrens' studies they are parent selected. That's what makes them ethical.

Have you ever been on a research university campus and seen the flyers?

"Earn $150 a week. Sign up for X study in room 822 of the Rubloff building of the Feinberg School of Medicine by May 9."

That's not self-selected?

Your argument is just dumb.

Anonymous JRL November 25, 2013 11:41 PM  

There is no evidence that kids are less likely to have skin conditions today than in previous decades.

Really? Has there been a corresponding increase in the number of diagnosed "skin conditions" that equals the reduction of chicken pox diagnoses? I'd like to see the evidence.

Some kids still get a mild form of chicken pox even after the vaccination. It's well known and doctors have no problem diagnosing it.

I grant you the possibility of bias toward vaccine efficacy in diagnosing illness, but your bias against vaccines skews your perception no less.

Anonymous rtp November 26, 2013 11:03 PM  

"Really? Has there been a corresponding increase in the number of diagnosed "skin conditions" that equals the reduction of chicken pox diagnoses?"

We don't have the data so we can't say. We do have the data for polio vs disability and diptheria/pertussis vs hospitalisations for respiratory infections and they all point to those vaccines being useless. We also have data for Hep B vs liver cancer and Hib related meningitis/septicemia/pneumonia vs other forms of meningitis/septicemia/pneumonia, we also have data for congenital deafness/blindness and heart defects vs rubella. In all cases the vaccine appear to be worthless at stopping people from actually getting sick. It is possible that measles and chicken pox are the odd ones out whereby the vaccines actually reduced illness but it seems like a leap of faith to me. At any rate the burden of proof is on the positive. If you want to make the claim that these vaccines worked to reduce illness you need to come up with the data.

"but your bias against vaccines skews your perception no less."

What bias? I grew up believing in vaccines like anyone else and I don't make a cent from my current non-belief. This is distinctly opposed to the multi-trillion medical industry which I suspect wouldn't survive if people came to know the truth about vaccinations.

It is true that most people who question vaccines have seen a bad reaction in someone they love (which I would have thought a reasonable basis for being biased) but in my case that had nothing to do with it. I HAVE seen bad reactions in others but I turned against vaccines on first principles and a careful look at the woeful statistics that underpin them.

"Some kids still get a mild form of chicken pox even after the vaccination. It's well known and doctors have no problem diagnosing it."

Some doctors don't some do. And, like I said, since the vaccine, the criteria to diagnose it has been strengthened. This renders the time series comparisons invalid.

Anonymous JRL November 27, 2013 1:02 AM  

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that, concurrent with the roll out of mass vaccinations for chickenpox in the USA, the criteria for diagnosing chickenpox was changed so it would be very difficult to diagnose someone with chickenpox.

Please provide evidence of said change in criteria...

Also it seems likely deaths attributed to chickenpox would nearly always be confirmed diagnoses. If this is the case, the vaccine is shown to be effective at least to the extent that it has nearly eliminated deaths caused by chickenpox.

Anonymous rtp November 27, 2013 4:34 PM  

Well yes. Have a look at the difference between "probable" and "confirmed" cases. There was no such thing as laboratory confirmation 100 years ago. Here is an example: http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/immunize/Documents/B.%20Varicella_Quicksheet%20(CDPH)2-07.pdf

As you can see it doesn't even consider single non-serious cases reportable - although this varies from state to state and country to country. The point is that we simply have absolutely no idea how many cases of chicken pox there were 10, 20, 30, 100 years ago because very few cases get reported and the percentage of cases would fluctuate wildly from year to year.

Your point about mortality data being more secure is valid (by virtue of the fact that we know how many people die), however, the number of deaths due to chicken pox were and are simply too small to make valid comparisons. And you still run into the problem that today we use laboratories but 100 years ago we had no such technology. And you still have the problem of bias amongst doctors themselves in favour of the vaccine.

And I should point out that when Samuel Johnson wrote his dictionary in 1750 something chicken pox was defined as a perfectly harmless disease. Nobody had ever died of it before then. After Jenner gave the world his concoction doctors started diagnosing a hitherto unknown condition called fatal chicken pox if the patient had received a smallpox inoculation. In short, the same happened for smallpox as for all the other so-called vaccine preventable diseases - the statistics look like the vaccine worked but all that happened was that the same number (or more) got sick they were just called something else.

Anonymous JRL November 28, 2013 10:30 PM  

Are you talking about change in diagnosis criteria or in reporting criteria?

I see the CDC reporting criteria in the doc you linked, where is the pre-vaccine criteria?

The means to confirm chickenpox via lab culture 100 years ago is irrelevant. All we need to know is info from the last 25 years or so...pre and post mass vaccination. Could they get laboratory confirmation of varicella in 1985?

Interesting discussion...

Anonymous rtp November 30, 2013 11:56 PM  

Both. And both conscious/government directed and unconscious on the part of doctors. And PCR was invented in 1985 I think if that is what you are referring to. But it stretches credulity to imagine they used it just as commonly the day after it was invented as they do now. That is why I say we are just guessing here. We are making absurd assumptions about doctor bias (or lack thereof) and use of and quality of lab testing. And like I said, given that when we DO have the alternative data it almost always looks terrible for the vaccine (such as polio/rubella and disability or diphtheria/pertussis and respiratory hospitalisations) it seems like desperate clutching at straws to place one's entire faith on a vaccine for which such limited benefits are available (eve assuming it worked).

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts