ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Wednesday, February 04, 2015

The vaccine scaremongers

It is increasingly obvious that the hysterical scaremongers among the pro-vaccinists are either pharma propagandists or probability-challenged:
Inquisitive Mind ‏@livebeef
Your decision to not vaccinate your children puts my children's health at risk. You are the worst kind of person.

Vox Day ‏@voxday
Your decision to drive your children in your car puts their health at much greater risk. You are an even worse person.

Vox Day @voxday
Deaths from measles in last 10 years = 0. Automobile deaths in last 10 years = 383,542

Vox Day @voxday
Deaths from measles in last 10 years = 0. Deaths from bicycles = 6,770. ONLY A MONSTER WOULD LET KIDS RIDE BIKES!

Inquisitive Mind ‏@livebeef
What the hell is WRONG with you people? (Posts scary propaganda cartoon.)

Vox Day ‏@voxday
We're just not idiots like you who embrace totalitarian government because someone said BOO! Measles deaths in 2014 = 0

Inquisitive Mind ‏@livebeef
Do you not understand what the concept of "almost eradicated" means? Look up the death count it used to have.

Vox Day ‏@voxday
I have. And most of the deaths stopped long BEFORE widespread vaccine availability. You are misinformed.

Inquisitive Mind ‏@livebeef
Prove it.

Vox Day ‏@voxday now
Measles deaths dropped 91.5 percent by 1960, 2 years BEFORE vaccinations. You are misinformed.
 In the unlikely event that anyone is interested in the actual historical facts of the matter:
In 1962, immediately preceding the licensure of the first measles vaccines in the United States, when measles was a nearly universal disease, Alexander Langmuir described the medical importance of measles to the country and put forth the challenge of measles eradication. Although most patients recovered without permanent sequelae, the high number of cases each year made measles a significant cause of serious morbidity and mortality Langmuir showed that >90% of Americans were infected with the measles virus by age 15 years. This equated to roughly 1 birth cohort (4 million people) infected with measles each year. Not all cases were reported to the public health system; from 1956 to 1960, an average of 542,000 cases were reported annually. By the late 1950s, even before the introduction of measles vaccine, measles-related deaths and case fatality rates in the United States had decreased markedly, presumably as a result of improvement in health care and nutrition. From 1956 to 1960, an average of 450 measles-related deaths were reported each year (∼1 death/ 1000 reported cases), compared with an average of 5300 measles-related deaths during 1912–1916 (26 deaths/ 1000 reported cases).
Note that even in the ABSOLUTE WORST CASE, which is a completely unvaccinated scenario with 90 percent infection rates that assumes absolutely no improvement in health care in 55 years, we're talking about 450 deaths per year.  Realistically, we're probably talking around 200, given the advancements in medical technology. THAT is what all the pro-vaccine scaremongers are going on about. Americans would do better to ban bicycles, as they would save three times more lives per year.

The pro-vaccine propaganda is just more creeping totalitarianism, albeit one of bizarre appeal to the supposedly conservative and libertarian right. But it cannot be rationally defended on any material grounds, nor balanced against its infringements on personal liberties and human rights.

UPDATE: Sweet Salk, but the pro-vaxxers are stupid.
Utes Byfive ‏@Utesbyfive
Natural immunity produces carriers: Typhoid Mary, Someone vaxxed can't be infected. CANT FUCKING CARRY

Labels:

188 Comments:

Anonymous Bah February 04, 2015 12:11 PM  

450 preventable deaths -- trivial!

Unless one of them is your kid.

Anonymous Stilicho February 04, 2015 12:13 PM  

Note that even in the ABSOLUTE WORST CASE, which is a completely unvaccinated scenario with 90 percent infection rates, we're talking about 450 deaths per year. THAT is what all the pro-vaccine scaremongers are going on about.

Are there any available stats on the rate of adverse reactions or deaths attributable to the MMR vaccine?

Blogger MATT February 04, 2015 12:15 PM  

Thanks for posting the link, i was looking yesterday and for every page that said rates fell before widespread vaccination, tgere was another saying the complete opposite.

Blogger MATT February 04, 2015 12:17 PM  

It's incredible how stupid these people are. A parent can say he saw a marked difference in his son soon after vaccinations, and is called a kook because "duur bill nye da science guy says ders no link. Dddddduuuuuuurr!!"

Anonymous p-dawg February 04, 2015 12:20 PM  

I guess we need a law to make wearing personal floatation devices at all times mandatory for children, since about 700 of them drown every year. Since you can never be SURE when they're going to drown, they must wear them at all times, even when sleeping. Can't be too careful.

Anonymous Don February 04, 2015 12:28 PM  

My children were not vaccinated at all and are almost never sick. I'm not sure how much not being vaccinated contributes to their relative good health but I imagine not having their immune system ravaged by all the toxic chemicals in vaccines has to help.

Blogger Nate February 04, 2015 12:29 PM  

pro-vaxxers are racists.

Anonymous Starbuck February 04, 2015 12:34 PM  

Inquisitive Mind ‏@livebeef
Your decision to not vaccinate your children puts my children's health at risk. You are the worst kind of person.


Would someone please explain to me how a non-vaccinated child is putting a vaccinated child's health at risk? After all they got the vaccination! If the as they believe the child is vaccinated for measles are they not immune? If the vaccinated child is now immune how would the non-vaccinated child even if they had the virus be a threat to the vaccinated child? Is this person saying that the vaccination doesn't work?

Tell me how this even remotely makes sense?!

Anonymous Starbuck February 04, 2015 12:37 PM  

My children were not vaccinated at all and are almost never sick. I'm not sure how much not being vaccinated contributes to their relative good health but I imagine not having their immune system ravaged by all the toxic chemicals in vaccines has to help.

Your children can catch the measles. I was not vaccinated to the measles and I got the measles. of course I was exposed to the measles. But once you got over it, you were immune to the measles.
Same with mumps and chicken pox, etc.

Anonymous Cost-Benefit February 04, 2015 12:37 PM  

An obvious question is what does it cost to vaccinate annually versus what does it cost to treat 542,000 cases a year, and what is the cost of 450 deaths, if you don't vaccinate.

The cost of those cases will include not only medical care but time off school, parents time off work, long-term care for those who are seriously affected with possible secondary effects, etc.

Seems pretty obvious that vaccination will be a winner on those grounds.

http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/189/Supplement_1/S131.full

To evaluate the economic impact of the current 2-dose measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccination program in the United States, a decision tree-based analysis was conducted with population-based vaccination coverage and disease incidence data. All costs were estimated for a hypothetical US birth cohort of 3,803,295 infants born in 2001. The 2-dose MMR vaccination program was cost-saving from both the direct cost and societal perspectives compared with the absence of MMR vaccination, with net savings (net present value) from the direct cost and societal perspectives of $3.5 bilhon and $7.6 billion, respectively.

Blogger MATT February 04, 2015 12:37 PM  

Starbuck, I asked that and was told "HELLOO, HERD IMMUNITY, ANYOOONNE??"

That and elderly/babies/immune compromised were mentioned.

Of course, the people saying it are truly so stupid they believe an unvaccinated, ill child, is a risk for a healthy vaccinated child. Because, just because.

Anonymous OK February 04, 2015 12:38 PM  

When I was a kid 60 years ago, measles was considered a bit of a joke. Everybody got it. Cartoonists would show a kid with measles with spots on their skin in cartoons. Absolutely nobody thought of it as more serious than catching a cold, that I remember. It was just a rite of passage, like getting spanked on your birthday.

Polio, on the other hand, was indeed scary.

Blogger Cataline Sergius February 04, 2015 12:43 PM  

Politically this is going to be a problem for the conservative movement in the next two years.

Journalists have picked up on the vaccination division within the right wing and will press all GOP candidates to give a definitive answer.

Forgive me for stating the obvious but this is being done to help Hillary as much as possible.

Yes, the hypocrisy is breathtaking. Ultra left wing and super rich Marin County in California has a vaccination compliance rate comparable to southern Sudan.

OpenID simplytimothy February 04, 2015 12:44 PM  

The Vox Day one-two punch: Impeccable dialectic; merciless rhetoric.







Blogger IM2L844 February 04, 2015 12:44 PM  

We really shouldn't put babies and the elderly in elementary schools. That would just be weird...even weirder than taking them to Disneyland.

Blogger bob k. mando February 04, 2015 12:46 PM  

Starbuck February 04, 2015 12:34 PM
Would someone please explain to me how a non-vaccinated child is putting a vaccinated child's health at risk?



because you're not doing what the rest of the herd is doing. and, if you're not herding with the others, you might not belong to the herd.

and not herd members are a threat.

Vox, Y U NO SCEINCE?


Bah February 04, 2015 12:11 PM
Unless one of them is your kid.



got it, so you're going to raise your children in a sterile, padded, temp controlled room.

because they might die if they climb a tree or ride a bike or go swimming ...

that should work out well.

Anonymous Vaccine myth denier February 04, 2015 12:49 PM  

It is strange that the authors of the article did not notice this inconsistency:

"The same study estimated total annual costs of measles in the absence of a vaccination program of $3.8 billion with _1859_ deaths."

Clearly any estimate that exceeds recent historical experience by a factor of 4 should be regarded with suspicion.

Blogger SirThermite February 04, 2015 12:50 PM  

There's something absurd and contemptible about any parent who states that "The X vaccine isn't an option for my special snowflake kid because the doctor says its risky or ineffective...so if you don't give the same shot to your kids instead then you're horrible people!"

Anonymous Michael Maier February 04, 2015 12:51 PM  

@OK, chicken pox were the same when I was a kid (born 1972). Chicken pox were seen as an annoying pain in the arse but I think I even remember folks getting their kids infected on purpose to get it over with.

I don't remember ever hearing about measles.

Anonymous Michael Maier February 04, 2015 12:54 PM  

"ANNOYING TWAT" AKA or Bah February 04, 2015 12:11 PM 450 preventable deaths -- trivial!

Unless one of them is your kid.



Same egg / omelette "argument" that asshat pro-vaxxers make about adverse reactions.

Everything's a trade off. I will likely never get another vaccination in my life and I will be very judicious about my spawn (if I unlikely ever do so).

Anonymous Stilicho February 04, 2015 12:55 PM  

what does it cost to vaccinate annually

Plus the cost of treating adverse reactions to the vaccine, plus the cost of trying to convince/browbeat everyone into vaccination, etc.

Seems pretty obvious that vaccination will be a winner on those grounds.

Only if you assume that someone other than the parent is paying for the treatment of their child. If you want to argue that those on the dole should be forcibly vaccinated on this basis, you might have a point. Go ahead, make that argument...

Blogger Vox February 04, 2015 12:57 PM  

"The same study estimated total annual costs of measles in the absence of a vaccination program of $3.8 billion with _1859_ deaths."

Which means the study is entirely worthless. I haven't run the numbers yet, but estimated deaths in the case of 90 percent infection in 2015 should be under 200.

Anonymous Dan in Tx (move along, nothing to see here) February 04, 2015 12:58 PM  

The other thing I haven't seen mentioned in the news about this: where has this "outbreak" come from? To listen to the MSM you would think that it just sprang up out of no where, like a weed might pop up in your garden. I'm sure the flood of immigrants has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Anonymous A Visitor February 04, 2015 12:59 PM  

"THAT is what all the pro-vaccine scaremongers are going on about."

I personally am ticked that all these illegals are in our country and brining it back. If people do not want to get vaccinated, that's fine by me. I just ask that they don't show up to the hospital later complaining and demanding treatment.

"of course I was exposed to the measles."

All of us born in the '80s went to chicken pox parties. My understanding is measles is a legitimate threat to adults not children. Perhaps that could explain the reason that children are vaccinated against it in the first place.

"Politically this is going to be a problem for the conservative movement in the next two years.

Journalists have picked up on the vaccination division within the right wing and will press all GOP candidates to give a definitive answer."

Limbaugh was talking about this yesterday. The way I personally see it, what is there left to conserve of our republic? I work and pay taxes but 51% of our fellow cohorts think it's better not to. I'm not holding my breath for 2016. If another amnesty is done, we're finished. As it is, per Breitbart, Dear Leader has, outside of Congressional authority, issued nearly 1 million temporary work permits to illegal aliens. Yes, you read that right.

Our legal immigration system is a joke. All a company needs to do to import an H1-Ber is drop the salary to a point that no American could afford to work on it and presto.

Anonymous Edjamacator February 04, 2015 1:00 PM  

Ah, who cares. Obama obviously doesn't find it that important, either.

Blogger IM2L844 February 04, 2015 1:01 PM  

I think I even remember folks getting their kids infected on purpose to get it over with.

Yep. It was the same with measles. A long weekend of aspirin, calamine lotion and 7-Up and that was it.

Blogger Nate February 04, 2015 1:05 PM  

***OT: WARNING OT***

3 of the top 5 high school recruits have committed today. They chose Florida, Auburn, and Mizzou.

Now... what do those schools have in common?

Right. They are all from the SEC.

Blogger Shibes Meadow February 04, 2015 1:06 PM  

I had all the available vaccinations when I was a child. My kids have them now. I think not having your children vaccinated is a mistake.

That being said, I'm against mandatory vaccination unless it's for some new or rare disease. If people want to permit their children to be susceptible to preventable childhood diseases, that's okay by me.

Blogger kurt9 February 04, 2015 1:07 PM  

You will note that attempts by hospitals to mandate vaccination for all health care workers often prompt significant opposition by the same health care workers who advocate the same policies for children.

Anonymous Lysander Spooner February 04, 2015 1:07 PM  

"pro-vaccinists are either pharma propagandists or probability-challenged"

A. pharma propagandists.

Big Pharma has paid alot of money for this GUN-vermint and written many of our so-called "LAWS" , therefore, no politician can ever prevail in an election if his views are in opposition to the theology of pharmaceuticals.

Blogger Marissa February 04, 2015 1:10 PM  

OT: Can anyone recommend Neal Asher? Can't get a feel for any SJW-ness from various internet sources, but I don't want to pay for bad writing by a self-hating white man.

Blogger MATT February 04, 2015 1:11 PM  

Damn, Obama. Between toxic waste and..everything else about their lives, being an Indian must really suck.

I applaud you, Vox, for hoisting yourself up.

Blogger Jehu February 04, 2015 1:20 PM  

Most vaccinations give way less than 100% immunity. For such vaccines most of the benefit does NOT go to the one vaccinated, which makes them inherently problematic under the Hippocratic Oath. The notion of herd immunity is that each case that pops up among a mostly vaccinated population begets less than one case on average and thus never seriously mushrooms into an epidemic. When that is true, you can avoid vaccinating parts of your population that may be particularly susceptible to side effects and still keep the disease largely eradicated. Actually controlling the border helps a lot there too.
We'll never get an adult conversation about vaccines though from our 'betters'. I make all the vaccination decisions on my family based on the cost-benefit for the child in question.

Anonymous RS February 04, 2015 1:22 PM  

SEC fans are the rabbits of college football.

Anonymous Vaccine myth denier February 04, 2015 1:22 PM  

"Which means the study is entirely worthless."

Right, that was my point.

Blogger Chris Ritchie February 04, 2015 1:23 PM  

Waded into a work conversation about it today. It's incredible the amount of credibility people give to the CDC. Unquestioning sheep. I showed them the graphs that go back to the turn of the 20th century. As you know, all diseases in sharp decline for decades BEFORE the introduction of the vaccines. Measles in particular was an egregious case of misrepresentation. Here's the chart from the government:

http://www.vaccines.gov/images/measles.jpg

Here's the rest of the data on that same chart, but not cherry-picked this time:

http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/88c-.jpg

I showed this to the co-workers and it was interesting to see them back down from their rhetoric.

Blogger Bluntobj Winz February 04, 2015 1:25 PM  

Shibes,

The vaccines you had are not the ones your children would get. Much like the sugars you had are not the HFCS your kids get now. Do you still use telnet to login to your VAX mainframe at work?

I'm sure others will note this if they have not already. The world moves on, and if your thinking is stuck in the past you are gonna have a bad time.

Blogger Bluntobj Winz February 04, 2015 1:27 PM  

Chris R:

Did you also talk about the CDC researcher who falsified his data in regard to autism links to MMR vaccines in black populations in the south? That always gets those "cow in the headlights" look going on.

Blogger YIH February 04, 2015 1:28 PM  

Michael Maier:
@OK, chicken pox were the same when I was a kid (born 1972). Chicken pox were seen as an annoying pain in the arse but I think I even remember folks getting their kids infected on purpose to get it over with.
Yes, like in that episode of South Park there were indeed ''chickenpox parties''.
Personal experience.

Anonymous Starbuck February 04, 2015 1:28 PM  

If people do not want to get vaccinated, that's fine by me. I just ask that they don't show up to the hospital later complaining and demanding treatment.

Really. Ok, if you drive a car and understand the risks, I suspect you won't be showing up at the hospital with broken bones if you happen to get into an accident. how will that work out for you?

If I didn't get my child vaccinated and they got sick with something, you telling me I have no right to take my child to the hospital? Try stopping me, you will be met with violence you wouldn't believe. Yes, I will resort to violence real quick if you are in my way of helping my child. I do not like dickheads like you spouting your "herd" mentality at me or anyone else.

I wish your life to be run by paranoid little tyrants demanding you do this and you do that all for your own good.

Just so you know, everyone I know who got the shingles vaccine ended up getting shingles. Every single one of them.

It isn't that I don't believe in vaccine technology, I DO NOT trust the people who make them and pass laws making them mandatory.

Blogger Chris Ritchie February 04, 2015 1:36 PM  

I mentioned the Tuskegee Syphilis experiment. Only one person had ever heard of it. They were raised to trust the government. I finished off with John Taylor Gatto and his book, Underground History of American Education. They still think public schools are to educate people and advance society! Ha Ha Ha, Ha Ha, Ha Ha, ohhh, I almost couldn't stop laughing.

Blogger Danby February 04, 2015 1:36 PM  

When measles entered the Western world, it was devastating. Some estimates place the fatality rate in 2nd century Rome at 40% (although it's not certain that the disease was the same one we know as measles). When it came to Central America in 1530, fatality rates of 50% among the native population were common.
Virtually every population on earth is now resistant, thanks to the high initial mortality rate.

1800 years, 60 generations later, when I was a kid, it was considered an inconvenience to get measles. I got it relatively late, when I was 10. The accompanying fever dreams influenced me deeply and convinced me of the reality of racial memories long before I had ever heard of them. I can still remember them quite vividly.

Anyway, it was just 3 days of high fever, a few days of isolation, and then back to normal.

The morbidity side of the vaccine is mostly the risk of encephalitis, which causes brain damage at about the same rate that measles kills. You're basically trading one dead child for one mentally retarded child.

Anonymous Stilicho February 04, 2015 1:43 PM  

The morbidity side of the vaccine is mostly the risk of encephalitis, which causes brain damage at about the same rate that measles kills. You're basically trading one dead child for one mentally retarded child.

What's your source for the rate of encephalitis from the vaccine?

Blogger S1AL February 04, 2015 1:43 PM  

I think this makes for an interesting parallel to the Ebola issue. In both cases, amended medical practices prevented serious issues from arising... But I find it hard to argue that we should bar the borders to those with Ebola while simultaneously arguing against general vaccination.

Seatbelts *and* airbags, if you get my drift.

Blogger S1AL February 04, 2015 1:44 PM  

*advanced medical practices

Blogger Joshua Dyal February 04, 2015 1:44 PM  

This has been the hot topic today; I've been in no less than three ongoing facebook debates on this issue over the last 24 hours or so.

Nice link to the history of measles elimination. Very helpful.

Blogger Danby February 04, 2015 1:49 PM  

RE: Chicken Pox Parties,
There was/is a real reason to do this. The older the subject is on contracting Chicken Pox, the more severe the symptoms. Babies will typically get a fever and a couple of spots, and are usually not even diagnosed. Toddlers will get sick for a couple of days. Adolescents will be down for 4-5 days and sometimes run dangerously high fevers. I contracted chicken pox in 1982 at the age of 23. I ran fevers of 102-104 for a week, had two ER trips and was unable to work for almost three weeks. My kids caught it from me and were over it before I had got through the initial phase of the disease.

My wife claims that I did it on purpose to avoid attending a performance of The Nutcracker. That was just fortunate circumstance.

Anonymous Jill February 04, 2015 1:51 PM  

Thinking on your last article on the historically misinformed, this is one of those areas. The stats are out there. You are absolutely correct that deaths from measles dropped enormously before the vaccination program. Understanding the cause of disease and subsequent hygiene had the biggest impact on lowering the death rates for vaccine preventable diseases. It's just ridiculous superstition that causes people to turn on parents who don't vaccinate their children; they're looking for the monster to sacrifice in order to alleviate their fears. Of course, one part of disease propagation that nobody will talk about is our virtually open borders. Not that immigrants are monsters to pin fears on--they are simply an unknown quantity.

Anonymous JJM February 04, 2015 1:51 PM  

I agree w/ your probability analysis, but I think it has more to do with the nature of fear. People will discount the risk in riding a bike because riding a bike is fun. Nothing about the measles is fun, regardless of how serious it is or isn't. There is no upside in assuming the risk, at least in the mind of most people. I think the big question for me, that I don't fully understand yet, is just how much of a role, if any, the vaccine played in further reducing measles case, and how much risk there is with a vaccine in and of itself.

And while I find it interesting, I don't have the time to dedicate to study to find out. So it just comes back to, "Which authority should I choose to trust / believe."

And this is a topic where I truly don't know. I will say all our kids received their vaccinations, however, it was on a schedule slower and more spaced out than the schedule recommended. Have no idea if that matters at all, though...

Blogger Chris Ritchie February 04, 2015 1:52 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Joshua_D February 04, 2015 1:53 PM  

Jehu February 04, 2015 1:20 PM

Most vaccinations give way less than 100% immunity.


I'm curious about the use of the term "immunity". It doesn't seem to me that you could be less than 100% immune. Either you are immune, or you are not immune, right?

Blogger S1AL February 04, 2015 1:57 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger S1AL February 04, 2015 1:59 PM  

I'm not sure what exactly he means here, but on a group level somewhere around 5-10% of the people receiving the vaccine don't develop the antibodies for whatever reason. Herd immunity is the effect that protects those people from contraction, because if everyone else is vaccinated, they're much less likely to catch it because they were already highly resistant, etc.

My phone managed to really foul that up the first go-round.

Blogger Danby February 04, 2015 2:00 PM  

@Stilicho
"What's your source for the rate of encephalitis from the vaccine?"

A book written by Tom Brewer, MD in the mid-1980s. I don't recall the title off the top of my head, I'll try to look it up.

Blogger JCclimber February 04, 2015 2:08 PM  

I'm in favor of strongly encouraging vaccination in the population.

Right after they make it mandatory for all pharmaceutical vaccine makers to publish the home address and names of every single person in that company who is signing the Quality Assurance Lot Release on each batch of vaccines.

Anonymous ThirdMonkey February 04, 2015 2:09 PM  

Once again, it is open borders. A friend from church became extremely ill, and her symptoms pointed to a parasite, which was only found Vietnam. She had never been to Vietnam, but had volunteered for a week to help with a church plant in a Vietnamese neighborhood in Port Arthur, TX. Once the doctors made the link, she was treated properly, and recovered. Land of the free and home of the brave, and I gotta take a damn parasite pill before I go to Texas.

When I was little, I remember my cousin got chicken pox. My aunt and my mother had all us cousins sleep in the same bed for a couple of nights, and we all got it over and done with. My wife, raised by an overprotective mother who was an RN, never had the chicken pox. If she gets it, it's not gonna be fun.

People are scared out of their minds about a nonfatal, rare disease when in fact you are much more likely to die of the flu or pneumonia. I've had strep once in the last two years, and I forget to wash my hands before I eat half the time.

Blogger Danby February 04, 2015 2:14 PM  

Well, it seems to have eaten the comment
@Stilicho
What Every Pregnant Woman Should Know by Gail Sforza Brewer and Thomas Brewer MD FACOG

Anonymous Sheila February 04, 2015 2:15 PM  

I'm with JJM here, in that while I understand how modern hygiene and medical advancements led to a drastic decrease in cases, I don't understand the role, if any, the vaccine played in further reducing the rate. I'm also unconvinced/uncertain regarding rate of complications and risks from the vaccine itself. Also, let me echo Joshua D - how does one define "immunity" if there is such a thing as less than 100% immune?

Finally - could someone (I know, I should probably google it) clarify for me the difference between the current cases of measles and the "german measles"? I know (from my genealogy work) that my husband had a great aunt who was deaf because her mother had the measles while pregnant. Regular measles or german measles? If the risk is primarily to adults and/or pregnant women, should vaccinations be limited to adults? Are there studies of adverse effects/percentage of immunity given by adult vaccines?

Blogger Marissa February 04, 2015 2:15 PM  

s. A friend from church became extremely ill, and her symptoms pointed to a parasite, which was only found Vietnam. She had never been to Vietnam, but had volunteered for a week to help with a church plant in a Vietnamese neighborhood in Port Arthur, TX. Once the doctors made the link, she was treated properly, and recovered. Land of the free and home of the brave, and I gotta take a damn parasite pill before I go to Texas.

Port Arthur is roughly an hour east of Houston. Houston has the largest population of Vietnamese outside of Vietnam, I think.

Anonymous Rigley February 04, 2015 2:16 PM  

Starbuck: I'm not sure anyone is making that argument. The actual claim is that the kids non-vaccinated by choice are putting the kids at risk who have not yet been vaccinated due to their age.

Anonymous MRiley February 04, 2015 2:18 PM  

I'm missing something in the math here. If 1 child in 1000 dies, and there are about 3.6 million cases per year (90% of the 4 million mentioned in the article), doesn't that eventually work out to about 3,600 deaths per year? What am I missing that allows 450 deaths/year to equal 1 in 1000?

OpenID SharpsKC February 04, 2015 2:25 PM  

Evidence does suggest that vaccines are in no way as effective in immunizing as surviving a natural exposure. This means people should/will be getting vaccine boosters from birth to death, medicine is starting to catch on to this. I seriously doubt anyone on any side of this cares about the pain and suffering of someone else's sick kid. So there is not much of a medical or ethical argument but there is a more collectivist one.
What we do know is that globalism considers any event that keeps someone out of the GDP monitored part of the economy to be productivity wasted. Unless there is already a full-time parent (you wrecker, why aren't you doing your part for global capital ;) ) there will be lost productivity when someone cares for the child. Of course, if the child is sick enough to require lots of expensive and billable medical care then that productivity loss can be overcome.

Blogger 지호 February 04, 2015 2:26 PM  

Vaccines may also be related to autoimmune diseases.

Blogger Shibes Meadow February 04, 2015 2:31 PM  

Bluntobj: I appreciate your concern for the well-being of my children. That being said, I believe the rewards of vaccination outweigh the risks.

Anonymous Pol Mordreth February 04, 2015 2:33 PM  

@Rigley, Yes, that is the base claim. My infant almost died from pertussis (whooping cough) as she contracted it at around 2 weeks from my older children. 6 weeks in Vanderbilt NICU and she recovered. According to the doctors (I haven't verified it personally) at 2 weeks pertussis has an approximate 70% fatality rate. My older children had been vaccinated, but hadn't had the requisite boosters. Apparently pertussis immunity wears off at about the same rate as tetanus immunity, which is why they merged the two vaccines. In older children (young teens) pertussis shows as an annoying, persistent cough. No other significant symptoms to discern it from a common cold. We vaccinate, but a little slower than the schedule (space them out more) and get the appropriate boosters.

On the plus side, my older children don't get the annual fall cough anymore from starting school. We always attributed it to the back to school crud. After our experience, the Vandy doctors notified the health dept and had a mass screening at the school. Turns out that 30% of the middle schoolers got pertussis every year. they just didn't have contact with newborns.

regards,
Pol

Anonymous Stephen J. February 04, 2015 2:34 PM  

"I think the big question for me, that I don't fully understand yet, is just how much of a role, if any, the vaccine played in further reducing measles case, and how much risk there is with a vaccine in and of itself."

The vaccine played a huge role in reducing the number of cases. The number of deaths, as Vox has already pointed out, had already dropped to less than 500 yearly most likely due simply to better care and nutrition. That said, it makes no sense to me to forgo a measure capable of saving even 200 kids' lives annually when the risk avoided by forgoing that measure is so infinitesimal in itself and the cost of that measure is so comparatively cheap; that "measles deaths in 2014 = 0" is directly due in part to the widespread coverage of vaccination, after all.

The problem, as always, is that the issue has already been successfully polarized by the vaccine absolutists: when a listener cannot hear a difference (or believe the claimed difference) between, "I wonder if vaccinating on a less intense schedule and offering more flexibility to individual parents might reduce metabolic strain on the children and reduce the risk of some known possible side effects," and "OMG VACCINES CAUSE AUTISM AND ARE EXCUSES FOR TOTALITARIAN CONTROL!" then room for sane discussion is choked off.

Blogger John Wright February 04, 2015 2:41 PM  

I notice the measles broke out in an area where a large number of aliens illegally crossing the border, undocumented, un-vaccinated, trespassers just so happen to be gathered.

Has anyone identified patient zero yet of this case?

Anonymous Stilicho February 04, 2015 2:41 PM  

The actual claim is that the kids non-vaccinated by choice are putting the kids at risk who have not yet been vaccinated due to their age.

So, their argument is that the convenience of pro-vaccine parents during the first 6 months of their child's life outweighs the concerns of other parents about the efficacy and dangers of the MMR vaccine. All those pro-vax parents have to do is to keep their children away from unvaccinated kids for the first six months at which point they can administer the the MMR vaccine per the CDC schedule* (peace be upon it).

*Administer 1 dose of MMR vaccine to infants aged 6 through 11 months before departure from the United States for international travel. These children should be revaccinated with 2 doses of MMR vaccine, the first at age 12 through 15 months (12 months if the child remains in an area where disease risk is high), and the second dose at least 4 weeks later.

Blogger Marissa February 04, 2015 2:44 PM  

The problem, as always, is that the issue has already been successfully polarized by the vaccine absolutists: when a listener cannot hear a difference (or believe the claimed difference) between, "I wonder if vaccinating on a less intense schedule and offering more flexibility to individual parents might reduce metabolic strain on the children and reduce the risk of some known possible side effects," and "OMG VACCINES CAUSE AUTISM AND ARE EXCUSES FOR TOTALITARIAN CONTROL!" then room for sane discussion is choked off.

The only vaccine absolutism I see in the mainstream media is more like "You and all your children are going to die if you don't buy what this pharmaceutical company who bought our advertising sells." I have to wonder why the media pushes these stories so hard. Why can't I walk around Kroger for more than 20 minutes without hearing about some vaccine I can't do without. The massive amount of money that goes into this scheme is mind-boggling and raises my suspicion.

Anonymous Stilicho February 04, 2015 2:45 PM  

the risk avoided by forgoing that measure is so infinitesimal in itself

You claim this risk is infinitesimal... great, now please quantify it for me.

Blogger CM February 04, 2015 2:46 PM  

I'm finding irony in how white man was responsible for killing off natives by bringing disease, yet the same people who call Columbus a terrorist aren't willing to apply the same logic to immigrants.

Anonymous Stilicho February 04, 2015 2:48 PM  

Has anyone identified patient zero yet of this case?

I suspect no one is trying to do so, operating under the maxim that one should not ask certain questions when one is not prepared to deal with the answers.

Anonymous Stilicho February 04, 2015 2:52 PM  

I'm finding irony in how white man was responsible for killing off natives by bringing disease, yet the same people who call Columbus a terrorist aren't willing to apply the same logic to immigrants.

Doubly ironic given the fact that this particular outbreak could be referred to as "Montezuma's revenge" (for measles, in part!)

Anonymous Native Baltimoron February 04, 2015 2:52 PM  

Stephen: "I wonder if vaccinating on a less intense schedule and offering more flexibility to individual parents might reduce metabolic strain on the children and reduce the risk of some known possible side effects."

Would be worth trying. Being able to predict adverse reactions (to drugs, vaccines, etc.) would also be very helpful. Dunno what the literature has to say on that currently, but I'd be shocked if there weren't researchers looking into genetic, etc. associations for things like Guillain-Barré, for example.

Blogger The Overgrown Hobbit February 04, 2015 2:53 PM  

@Bah: Amen to that. Considering how our masters in DC are importing illegal immigrants (which means no health screening, no vaccinations) I'd get a small pox vaccine for my kid if I could.

Correllation is not causation. We don't know what causes autism, but we do know when it occurs. Vaccinate later.

Manage your risk factors: space vaccines out and get them individually, not bundled. You'll probably have to pay for this yourself, but you should anyway. The third-party payment system is turning us all into socialist-lite.

Chicken pox is really dangerous for adults and is murder on children in utero (and don't give me any luddite nonsense about how h. sap. sap in the womb isn't "really" h. sap. sap. offspring because um... you can't see it and it doesn't look exactly like an adult h. sap. sap.). Whether you get the disease (shingles risk, better immunity) or the vaccine (booster shots required) have a blood titre drawn at or about puberty to be sure your kid really has the required antibodies.

Sheesh. We live in the golden age of information. Why would anyone rely on so-called "Medical Establishment" much less the dinosaur media to manage their or their children's health.

And if you don't have time to look it up yourself, call your local library and make 'em do it for you. You're stuck paying taxes, right? Might as well get something of value from them.



Blogger Chris Mallory February 04, 2015 2:53 PM  

"I mentioned the Tuskegee Syphilis experiment."

The government is not to be trusted, but most of the stuff going around about Tuskegee has been lying propaganda. No one was infected with syphilis and the men who were "treated" were in later stages of the disease when treatment would do nothing. They got better medical care than just about any other elderly black in the South during the same time period.

Blogger Vox February 04, 2015 2:53 PM  

That said, it makes no sense to me to forgo a measure capable of saving even 200 kids' lives annually when the risk avoided by forgoing that measure is so infinitesimal in itself and the cost of that measure is so comparatively cheap; that "measles deaths in 2014 = 0" is directly due in part to the widespread coverage of vaccination, after all.

Do you also support banning bicycles? That would save even more lives and cost even less.

Blogger Giraffe February 04, 2015 2:55 PM  

450 deaths. Allow for population increase, it would be about 800 per year, absolute worse case. And probably much less due to imprisonments in medicine.

Compared to 108 vaccine deaths in ten years. Or about 11 per year. Someone linked an article on FB that claimed 48 cases of harm from the mmr vaccine. 8 were deaths. So there were 40 kids otherwise harmed for every one death. So that would be 440 kids per year. (And probably on the low side. )

But we don't know how many kids have permanent harm from the measles yet didn't die.

Blogger Giraffe February 04, 2015 2:56 PM  

Imprisonments in medicine? Sheesh that wasn't even on a phone.

Blogger Joshua Dyal February 04, 2015 3:00 PM  

I notice the measles broke out in an area where a large number of aliens illegally crossing the border, undocumented, un-vaccinated, trespassers just so happen to be gathered.

Has anyone identified patient zero yet of this case?


Given that Disneyland has been highly touted as the Location Zero, at least, most likely it was a tourist here legally, not a migrant here illegally.

Plus, as everyone has been keen to inform me, whether or not it's really relevant, Mexico has a higher measles immunization rate than the US, doncha know.

Anonymous kh123 February 04, 2015 3:01 PM  

"CANT FUCKING CARRY "

The anti-gun lobby in a nutshell. We're here to protect you, from yourself. To hear more in English, please press 1 now.

Anonymous kh123 February 04, 2015 3:02 PM  

...If they really want to let the cat out of the bag:

"CANT FUCKING BE LATE, EVER. TRAIN WILL ALWAYS BE ON TIME. AND FINE."

Anonymous Stilicho February 04, 2015 3:04 PM  

Given that Disneyland has been highly touted as the Location Zero, at least, most likely it was a tourist here legally, not a migrant here illegally.

Wait, we can require passports, visas, and body scans at every airport but we can't ask them for immunization records?

Anonymous Gecko February 04, 2015 3:04 PM  

Those MMR deaths are from the VAERS database. Keep in mind that it is probably vastly underreported.

Blogger The Overgrown Hobbit February 04, 2015 3:05 PM  

@Joshua - according to Snopes.com, not yet. The cynical (realistic) will wonder "if ever" since when it comes to doing science, government bodies are very careful to avoid doing any that might potentially lead to finding out the wrong thing.

Anonymous Mark K February 04, 2015 3:05 PM  

I believe that before a doctor can give a child an injection, they must have the informed consent of the parents. For simplicity sake, I'll stipulate healthy, sane, law-abiding parents and healthy children.

These days, that belief makes me a radical and from what I understand, a danger to society.

I really don't think this belief requires much defense. It is as self-evident to me as the right to defend yourself or your children from what you perceive and judge to be harm or incipient harm. In fact those two rights are the same right. And it is probably the most fundamental of human rights. It is a necessary corollary to the right to life, the first of the rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence as inalienable.

A society that denies that right is not only totalitarian; it is the epitome of totalitarianism.

Thank you Vox, for telling the truth, and standing up for what's right.

Blogger SirHamster February 04, 2015 3:12 PM  

That being said, I'm against mandatory vaccination unless it's for some new or rare disease.

That sounds like it maximizes all downsides.

New -> Vaccine is also new, thus unproven safety/benefit, but made mandatory despite unknown risks

Rare -> Vaccine has minimal benefit in preventing a rare disease, but made a mandatory cost to all

Blogger Joshua Dyal February 04, 2015 3:14 PM  

Wait, we can require passports, visas, and body scans at every airport but we can't ask them for immunization records?

We could, but we don't. There are no vaccination requirements to visit the US.

http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/destinations/traveler/none/united-states

Blogger ScuzzaMan February 04, 2015 3:18 PM  

It is true though, Vox,that you are the worst type of person.

... to have this kind of argument with.

i.e. intelligent, informed and unafraid.

Anyway, I'm always amused by my self-styled "liberal" friends (almost universally D voters) in the USA who scream vaxx prop on command.

They make similar statements about the evil nature of the vaxx resistance, and how being part of it is axiomatic proof you're stupid, ignorant, etc. It is a wonder to behold.

I don't bother to argue with them often on this point. I prefer to point out that they erupt into these emotional paroxysms of grief and anger (at crazy republicans) at the prompting of their favoured media outlets, but they remain resolutely silent over the fact that both parties start wars of choice in which millions are maimed, killed, and impoverished.

You know, because they (my self-styled "liberal" acquaintances) just love people soooo much ...

[eye-roll]

What else can one say?

Anonymous Stilicho February 04, 2015 3:20 PM  

We could, but we don't. There are no vaccination requirements to visit the US.

Ah, it would be raciss to require vaccinations of foreigners, but anti-raciss to require them of Americans?

Why, it's almost as if the pro-vax crowd think its a good thing thing to be vaccinated if you're an American, but a bad thing to be vaccinated if you're not.

And what about the children at risk because they are too young to have been vaccinated?

Blogger ScuzzaMan February 04, 2015 3:21 PM  

@Gecko:

We KNOW for certain they are under-reported.

There are several documented cases of the medical profession selecting "sudden infant death syndrome" as their preferred cause of death when the child was vaccinated only 24 hours previously.

and etc...

Anonymous red-headed step-child February 04, 2015 3:23 PM  

I'm not sure what happened to what I posted a few minutes ago, but it doesn't seem to have shown up in the comments above, so I'll try again...

The problem with the concept of "herd immunity", is the assumption that the vaccines actually prevent the "spread" of disease. This is not the case. At best, they minimize or eliminate the symptoms of the disease. But even the vaccinated are capable of harboring and spreading these "preventable diseases", and in fact are more likely to do so, as they believe themselves to be fully protected from the disease, and are more likely to feel safe visiting the young, elderly, or otherwise immunocompromised. The unvaccinated are more likely to realize they're sick, and probably stay home (and there are always exceptions).

It seems that many who are vaccinated, believe themselves to be in this bubble that protects them from disease. But if you are unvaccinated, somehow you break their bubble, and bypass the safety net they believe themselves to have... which doesn't even make any logical sense... either the vaccine works, or it doesn't, it doesn't obtain some magical power of exponential coverage, simply by being in proximity. The fact is, there are probably a lot more people who are carrying these diseases than is realized, simply because of the masked symptoms.

Anonymous WaterBoy February 04, 2015 3:23 PM  

MRiley: "What am I missing that allows 450 deaths/year to equal 1 in 1000?"

The 1 in 1,000 represents the number of deaths (450) per reported cases (542,000), not calculated total cases (4,000,000). That works out to a little less than 1 in 1,000 (450/542=0.83).

Number of deaths per total cases would be ≈ 1 in 9,000.

Blogger luagha February 04, 2015 3:28 PM  

As I mention every time this topic comes up, Hillary Clinton destroyed the vaccine industry by making the government the prime purchaser and then cutting the rates. Of 25 vaccine makers, 20 left the market and the remaining 5 retooled to make cheaper versions so they could profit at the government-set reimursement rate. If there is something to all these bad responses, that's when it happened.

I'm waiting for some smart Republican to get the figures on this and bring it up, but what are the chances.

Anonymous Stephen J. February 04, 2015 3:30 PM  

"Do you also support banning bicycles? That would save even more lives and cost even less."

No, for the same reason I no longer support banning guns because of gun deaths: abuse of a tool, whether caused by malice or incompetence, does not justify forbidding all use of that tool whatsoever whether beneficial or not.

Likewise here: Much as I grant the legitimacy of the objection to government trumping of individual medical discretion, and the legitimacy of concerns about whether the current schedule's intensity and inflexibility may be causing more negative side-effects than known or acknowledged, the fact remains that I have not seen any convincing case made that the negative effects of widespread immunization outweigh the negative effects of widespread non-immunization, or that (to phrase the same thing another way) the positive effects of widespread non-immunization outweigh the positive effects of widespread immunization.

Blogger tweell February 04, 2015 3:30 PM  

Given that actually having the disease pretty much guarantees the immunity for life, why not get measles, mumps and chicken pox as children? A nephew who got the vaccines and the boosters found that his immunity had run out at age 34, and chicken pox really did a number on him.
Diseases like polio should be vaccinated against, but even there we should not overlook the damage done. The polio vaccine paralyzed me from the waist down for six weeks (I was four).

Anonymous Stilicho February 04, 2015 3:34 PM  

Likewise here: Much as I grant the legitimacy of the objection to government trumping of individual medical discretion, and the legitimacy of concerns about whether the current schedule's intensity and inflexibility may be causing more negative side-effects than known or acknowledged, the fact remains that I have not seen any convincing case made that the negative effects of widespread immunization outweigh the negative effects of widespread non-immunization, or that (to phrase the same thing another way) the positive effects of widespread non-immunization outweigh the positive effects of widespread immunization.

Do you consider all immunizations to be of equal value?

Blogger SirHamster February 04, 2015 3:35 PM  

I'm curious about the use of the term "immunity". It doesn't seem to me that you could be less than 100% immune. Either you are immune, or you are not immune, right?

Sure, but not everyone who gets the vaccine ends up with immunity. So 100 people get the vaccine, 90 people end up immune, but 10 can still get sick, that could be counted as 90% immunity. People are still immune or not immune, but there's an effective % rate when looking at large numbers.

And since the immune system is an analog system, "immunity" probably is more a spectrum of resistance rather than binary. So where a disease might have disabled for a week, a vaccine might make it so one only gets a fever for a day or two.

Quantifying *that* would take a bit of work.

Blogger Danby February 04, 2015 3:35 PM  

@Giraffe.
The number of reactions are faked. About 4 hours after my elsdest daughter got the DPT vaccine at 8 months, she went into convulsions and was more-or-less unconscious for 3 days. It was reported to CDC as a "mild neurological reaction, perhaps related to DPT vaccine" by the hospital.

Vaccination is a religious ritual of the American Civil Religion. Those who do not participate are witches and must be driven out.

Blogger ScuzzaMan February 04, 2015 3:36 PM  

"Every year in the US, the medical system kills 225,000 people. (See B. Starfield, JAMA, July 26, 2000, "Is US health really the best in the world?") Of those 225,000 deaths, 106,000 are caused by FDA-approved drugs. This means that, once the drugs are approved, everything that then happens to the public is one grand uncontrolled experiment."

Maybe we should have a War on Medical Professionals?

because "we were attacked!", etc ...

bygones.

The MEDICAL PROFESSION KILLS 225,000 PEOPLE EVERY YEAR, but let's get hysterical about 450 deaths caused not by disease, but by poor nutrition and hygiene.

Fucksake.

Anonymous Stephen J. February 04, 2015 3:38 PM  

Mark K: "I believe that before a doctor can give a child an injection, they must have the informed consent of the parents. For simplicity sake, I'll stipulate healthy, sane, law-abiding parents and healthy children."

A perfectly sensible stance. The problem is, what do you do when somebody says, "But refusing vaccinations, or even objecting to the schedule we want to use, is by definition *not* sane *or* law-abiding, and I can therefore disregard your consent or lack thereof"?

I am in favour of vaccination myself, but I am also in favour of not resolving disagreements between adults by disqualifying objections a priori, and I am a big believer that the best medicine is the most individually-tailored rather than the most consistently scheduled.

Anonymous DT February 04, 2015 3:38 PM  

Most people are utterly clueless when it comes to mortality statistics and separating real risks from practically non-existent ones. The risks being compared are often interchangeable yet the debate remains the same with the same tired old arguments (i.e 'it's not a risk until it's your child...YOUR...CHILD!').

I admittedly haven't worked out the math on this one, but it's a decent bet that stopping all immigration would reduce both the infection rate and the mortality of measles by a greater amount then forcing everyone to get a vaccination. I wonder if the same people who are so dramatic about vaccinations are willing to demand the closure of all our borders and ports tomorrow.

Blogger Jehu February 04, 2015 3:38 PM  

Joshua,
Immune systems aren't binary. What 'immunity' vaccines give you is better understood as a better chance to fight off the disease or infection on the part of your immune system. Only in a few cases is said immunity close enough to 100% for it to meet that standard definition of immunity.

Blogger Danby February 04, 2015 3:40 PM  

@Stephen J
""...the fact remains that I have not seen any convincing case made that the negative effects of widespread immunization outweigh the negative effects of widespread non-immunization..."

And if the information in government databases were faked and reporting were conducted by pseudo-scientific idiots who only report what is told them by the people who profit from vaccination, would you ever see that case?
Reliable data on vaccine reactions is virtually unobtainable.

Anonymous Gecko February 04, 2015 3:42 PM  

the fact remains that I have not seen any convincing case made that the negative effects of widespread immunization outweigh the negative effects of widespread non-immunization, or that (to phrase the same thing another way) the positive effects of widespread non-immunization outweigh the positive effects of widespread immunization.

The burden actually rests with with the pro-vax crowd to demonstrate that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks. The default/negative position is to simply not vaccinate.

Anonymous Stephen J. February 04, 2015 3:43 PM  

Stilicho: "Do you consider all immunizations to be of equal value?"

I consider them to all be useful enough that having them is preferable to not having them; that said, if one did want to space out the shots to reduce strain on a child, there is no doubt some (like polio) would be more important to ensure receiving than others (like measles), and some (like the anti-STD HPV virus) that could reasonably be classified as optional.

Anonymous Stephen J. February 04, 2015 3:44 PM  

Gecko: "The burden actually rests with with the pro-vax crowd to demonstrate that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks."

What would you consider a convincing demonstration of this fact?

Blogger ashepherd February 04, 2015 3:47 PM  

From Wikipedia "The measles vaccine is effective at preventing the disease. Vaccination has resulted in a 75% decrease in deaths from the disease since the year 2000 with about 85% of children globally being vaccinated. ... Measles resulted in about 96,000 deaths in 2013 down from 545,000 deaths in 1990. In 1980, before widespread vaccination, the disease is estimated to have caused 15.6 million deaths per year. Most of those who die are less than five years old."

Is this wrong?

Anonymous RatDog February 04, 2015 3:48 PM  

My kid hasn't been vaccinated. If I have an argument with a rabid, frothing-at-the-mouth pro-vaxxer, I just say this:

"Of course my child benefits from herd immunity. We just let the public school kids take the risk from vaccines."

Blogger Jehu February 04, 2015 3:50 PM  

Ashepherd,
There's one key word in your wikipedia cite: globally.
The measles to death conversion ratio in the US dropped dramatically prior to the release of the vaccine. Everybody got it, very few died. That same transition has not fully taken place globally. But we're not talking about the world here in this discussion, we're talking primarily from 1st world nations.

Blogger Danby February 04, 2015 3:52 PM  

@ashepherd
"Is this wrong?"

Wikipedia is always impartial, right?
So where are the stats on vaccine reactions on that page? Where can we do the actual cost/benefit analysis?

Anonymous robwbright February 04, 2015 3:52 PM  

The WHO claims:

"Measles is a highly contagious, serious disease caused by a virus. In 1980, before widespread vaccination, measles caused an estimated 2.6 million deaths each year."

They cite the same number of deaths here:

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs286/en/

However, at that second link, they state:

"In populations with high levels of malnutrition and a lack of adequate health care, up to 10% of measles cases result in death."

"In 1980, before vaccination was widespread, there were around 4 million cases of measles and an estimated 2.6 million deaths from the disease worldwide."

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110525/full/473434a.html

2.6 million deaths out of 4 million infections worldwide in 1980 would be a 65% mortality rate - not 10%... and obviously much of the world has decent nutrition and health care. 65% mortality is black death levels of mortality and contradicts their own estimates of mortality rate:


What a bunch of liars. Then again, the UK did have TWENTY-SIX deaths in 1980:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/measles-deaths-by-age-group-from-1980-to-2013-ons-data/measles-deaths-by-age-group-from-1980-to-2013-ons-data

In the U.S. "During 1971-75, an average of 35.4 measles-related deaths were recorded each year; one death for every 1,000 measles cases reported."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1619577/

Here's the killer (pun intended) study re: developed nations:

"One hundred years ago in Scotland, the measles case-fatality rate was 30–40 deaths per 1000 cases. In the United States, mortality from measles decreased from 25 per 1000 reported cases in 1912, to 1 per 1000 reported cases in 1962. In New York State, measles mortality decreased by >15-fold long before the introduction of measles vaccination. US and UK case-fatality rates were ∼1 per 1000 reported measles cases from the 1940s through the 1980s. During the past 13 years in the United States, the case-fatality rate has averaged 3 per 1000 reported measles cases. This increase is most likely due to more complete reporting of measles as a cause of death, HIV infections, and a higher proportion of cases among preschool-aged children and adults. Annual US measles deaths have declined from 408 in 1962 to 0 from 1993-present."

Appears to be useful info here:

http://vaxtruth.org/2012/01/measles-perspective/

Anonymous Gecko February 04, 2015 3:53 PM  

@Stephen J.

A proper double-blind study that actually uses the scientific method would be a good place to start.

Anonymous Stephen J. February 04, 2015 3:54 PM  

Danby: "And if the information in government databases were faked and reporting were conducted by pseudo-scientific idiots who only report what is told them by the people who profit from vaccination, would you ever see that case?"

No, but I also wouldn't see an invisible cat if there happened to be one in my chair; just telling me "What would you expect to see if there were?" is not in itself evidence for the cat being there.

What evidence do you have for this asserted widespread falsification of data?

Anonymous catahoula February 04, 2015 3:55 PM  

Native Baltimoron 2:52 PM

Four years ago my husband got ill with the Miller-Fisher variety of Guillian-Barre. Every doctor he had contact with asked if he had gotten the flu shot--he had not--and his rheumatologist very gingerly suggested he never get another vaccine of any type. Thanks to a neurologist that would see a case of Miller-Fisher every 5 years, husband recovered.

Anonymous Stephen J. February 04, 2015 3:56 PM  

@Gecko: "A proper double-blind study that actually uses the scientific method would be a good place to start."

And how would the conductors of this study get around the ethical concerns of deliberately exposing their control population (who would, of necessity, have to be children) to risk of infection?

Anonymous Gecko February 04, 2015 4:00 PM  

@Stephen J.

Indeed. They might not be able to get around the ethical concerns of administering a vaccine without first knowing if its benefits actually outweigh its risks.

Anonymous red-headed step-child February 04, 2015 4:00 PM  

Many of these "vaccine preventable diseases" are being linked to vitamin deficiencies. Which is why in many of these third world countries, you are still seeing high rates of death. Sanitation and hygiene also play a huge rule in the mortality of the disease. Unfortunately, a lot of discussions go back and forth between US numbers and global numbers, with global deaths being used to justify US vaccinations.

Anonymous red-headed step-child February 04, 2015 4:01 PM  

"And how would the conductors of this study get around the ethical concerns of deliberately exposing their control population (who would, of necessity, have to be children) to risk of infection?"

Same way they get around the ethical concerns of testing the vaccines on the general public without proper studies.

Blogger Danby February 04, 2015 4:03 PM  

@Stephen J
I have, as detailed above, seen it with my own eyes.

Blogger JCclimber February 04, 2015 4:04 PM  

During the movie Captain America - Winter Soldier, the would be world overlords (evil Nazis of course) identified 20 million people worldwide who would resist taking away freedom. The first 700,000 people were targeted in the Washington DC area for immediate killing to prevent uprising against tyranny.

At that point in the movie, I started laughing out loud. I guess in comic book land, or Hollywood, they somehow think that the DC area is filled with a bunch of freedom loving patriots.

*Snort of laughter.*

Anonymous Stilicho February 04, 2015 4:04 PM  

And how would the conductors of this study get around the ethical concerns of deliberately exposing their control population (who would, of necessity, have to be children) to risk of infection?

There are plenty of voluntarily unvaccinated children who could serve as a control group. No one would be exposed to risk of infection by the conduction of the study.

Blogger ashepherd February 04, 2015 4:06 PM  

Jehu: "we're not talking about the world here..."

But no group is an "island" anymore. You can't just talk about one nation or geographical locale in isolation. Disease spreads all over the globe and rather quickly. That's why they change the flu vaccine every year and probably why there has been an "unexplained" rise in repository diseases recently - then there's all the flap about Ebola spreading.

The main issue for me about the vaccine issue is being forced. Every single medical treatment has risks. Then there is the moral issue. IMO everyone should make up their own mind. But we live in a world that is trying to force everyone into a mold and crying out that everyone has to be forced to act a prescribed way so some people can have the illusion of safety.

Anonymous waGuy February 04, 2015 4:06 PM  

@gecko, that is why medical science is not often science. ethics overrule the 'science', so you get lots of pseudo-science and statistics.

Public health is the primary domain of pseudo-science stupidity. Doctors should treat only the patient, and have no concern about 'public health'. Focusing on public health at the expense of your patient is unethical.

Blogger Danby February 04, 2015 4:07 PM  

@Stilicho
That study could not be double-blind.

Blogger Giraffe February 04, 2015 4:13 PM  

@Giraffe.
The number of reactions are faked. About 4 hours after my elsdest daughter got the DPT vaccine at 8 months, she went into convulsions and was more-or-less unconscious for 3 days. It was reported to CDC as a "mild neurological reaction, perhaps related to DPT vaccine" by the hospital.

Vaccination is a religious ritual of the American Civil Religion. Those who do not participate are witches and must be driven out.


I'm sorry to hear that. I just wish there were enough honest people on both sides to get the true information out. You know some are lying, but you don't know to what extent.

Blogger Jehu February 04, 2015 4:15 PM  

Ashepherd,
Give a million people measles in the US---result, maybe hundreds of deaths. Give a million people measles in a 3rd or 4th world country, its thousands, perhaps tens of thousands. Sanitation, nutrition, nursing care, etc all make huge differences now just as they did prior to the release of said vaccine. Eradicate measles in the US like it was for quite some time and maintain the damned borders and admission control and you don't need to vaccinate anywhere near as widely any more. That's the ideal circumstance.

Using worldwide numbers in the attempt to anchor assumptions and fear in the minds of readers who are themselves genuinely mostly interested in their own milieu is misleading at best.

Blogger Roger Cook February 04, 2015 4:16 PM  

According to http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1815949/, the hospitalization rate for measles in the UK in 1963 was 9.4 hospitalizations/1000 cases. According to http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/publicat/cig-gci/cedv-cemv-tab-eng.php, the reactions to the MMR vaccine that require hospitalization (low platelet count and encephalitis) are 1/30000 cases.

Whether you trust the statistics is your own call, but from the looks of everything, the odds of injury are worse with the disease than with the vaccine.

Blogger CM February 04, 2015 4:22 PM  

The main issue for me about the vaccine issue is being forced. Every single medical treatment has risks. Then there is the moral issue. IMO everyone should make up their own mind. But we live in a world that is trying to force everyone into a mold and crying out that everyone has to be forced to act a prescribed way so some people can have the illusion of safety.

This is my biggest issue, as well. While we do vaccinate, I do not think people should be forced by law to vaccinate their children.

I don't think they should be forced to breastfeed, punished for drinking wine while pregnant, or banned from buying baby bumpers for their child's crib.

I'm exhausted by the liberal blowhards on my Facebook feed. It's times like this that VP becomes an oasis >. <

Blogger Marissa February 04, 2015 4:24 PM  

Someone mentioned the immunization rate in Mexico -- but what about the infection rate? I wonder if infection is much higher due to worse sanitation, nutrition, etc.

Anonymous Non-Anonymous Sockpuppet February 04, 2015 4:29 PM  

My kid hasn't been vaccinated. If I have an argument with a rabid, frothing-at-the-mouth pro-vaxxer, I just say this:

"Of course my child benefits from herd immunity. We just let the public school kids take the risk from vaccines."


I prefer a more Socratic approach to make a similar point.

"If vaccines are so effective, and you and your children have all got them, then why are you worried about me and my kids refusing to get them? Should your worst fears come true, I and mine will suffer the consequences of our choices while you and yours are already protected, right?"

"If only vaccinated humans survived communicable disease outbreaks, it will only be a matter of a few decades before all the anti-vaxxers are weeded out by the process of evolution, no? In short, if you support forcible vaccination of all, you are getting in the way of the evolutionary progression of the species! Why do you hate science?"

Anonymous Stilicho February 04, 2015 4:32 PM  

@danby, no, but it would be damned sight better than anything the pro-vax crowd has done. Every argument you see from them assumes at some level that the value of a polio or smallpox vaccine applies equally to all vaccines.

It is undisputed that vaccines are only appropriate once a child has reached a certain age and also undisputed that it is not appropriate to administer them all at once. Yet, if you raise questions about what the appropriate age should be or whether they should be administered together, the pro-vax crowd starts shrieking "not-rabbit" and making wild accusations.

Anonymous Vaccine myth denier February 04, 2015 4:32 PM  

"Immune systems aren't binary. What 'immunity' vaccines give you is better understood as a better chance to fight off the disease or infection on the part of your immune system. Only in a few cases is said immunity close enough to 100% for it to meet that standard definition of immunity."

Actually, this is not true.

1. Consider Polio. The Oral vaccine was much better than the current injectible type because it immunizes your intestinal epithelial cells, which are your first line of defense against Polio.

2. Look at the stats on Wikipedia on how many people get paralysis or die from a Polio infection and then compare the claimed immunity rates from vaccination to the immunity rates from simply contracting polio. They suggest to me that those who gain immunity from vaccination would also gain immunity from contracting Polio and that vaccination has done nothing about those who would actually have adverse affects from contracting Polio.

Blogger Vox February 04, 2015 4:32 PM  

The change in measles mortality risk is from 1 in 11,010 in 1909 to 1 in 457,200 in 1962 and an estimated 1 in 1,287,02 in 2014. I'll show my work tomorrow.

Blogger Phunctor February 04, 2015 4:36 PM  

When I was doing my Comp Sci master's program they gave me an IBM 1130 (so, this predated the existence of a measles vaccine) to play with and told me to use it to understand some differential equations describing measles epidemics. And to this day I think I understand measles epidemics better than the average bear.

So, there's some number N of infectious individuals roaming around. Where they come from could be an epidemic, endemic presence of the disease or migration, doesn't matter.

Each one of them has E potentially infectious encounters during the infectious phase of their disease. (Typhoid Mary had quite the E, her infectious phase was "permanent"!). Quarantine is all about reducing E.

Of these encounters, some are with susceptible individuals. Susceptibility is not a binary. You can be more or less susceptible. You can talk about the average susceptibility, but it's really a distribution. Vaccination shifts the distribution to less susceptible.

Highly susceptible individuals are added to the population primarily by birth. In the absence of an epidemic or vaccination, then, the proportion of highly susceptible individuals increases over time.

If over the course of an individual's infectious phase E * S > 1, you have an epidemic. (N divides out.). Each case more than replaces itself. Exponential growth in cases, until you run out of susceptibles, either by their developing immunity or ... being removed from the population. An epidemic flares until E*S < 1, then it dies out.

This produces a characteristic epidemiological signature; long periods of quiet followed by sharp epidemic spikes in infections. (This pattern is somewhat local, as E usually depends on being in the same place. It's washed out in aggregate stats except for truly global e.g. influenza 1917.)

This rather closely resembles a Los Angeles e.g. brushfire problem. It not only reduces your risk of losing your home for you to trim your brush, but it's neighborly too. Would you give your teen a chainsaw and send him down to cut the brush on the slope? I would, you might not.

See? It's possible to discuss this topic without impuning anyone's motives. Who knew?

Blogger Martian Warlord February 04, 2015 4:36 PM  

test

Blogger Danby February 04, 2015 4:40 PM  

@Giraffe
"You know some are lying, but you don't know to what extent."

My point exactly. There are no reliable numbers. None.

The American public has accepted that Vaccines Are Good. It is no longer acceptable to raise any questions about any vaccine, no matter how dangerous or ineffective. Most people forget that the first polio vaccine was pulled after killing dozens of children, including the grandchildren of the CEO of the Pharma company that was producing the vaccine.

Blogger Jehu February 04, 2015 4:47 PM  

Denier,
The Polio vaccine is miles more effective than most other vaccines looked at from an individual perspective (i.e., in the current environment my child is in, how much risk will this mitigate versus the potential of side effects). That was particularly true during its roll out phase, where polio was a serious going concern in the US. MMR and heaven forbid, the flu vaccine are nowhere near as effective.

Blogger Danby February 04, 2015 4:53 PM  

For a truly scary take on all this, read Dr Mary's Monkey.
The author's contention is thatthe oral polio vaccine administered in the 1950's and 1960's was cultured with monkey tissues contaminated with viruses known to cause soft-tissue cancers in monkeys, and that the explosion in cancer rates in the 1970's to today are the result of this.
Of course, he also ties in Lee Harvey Oswald, the Mafia, and biological weapons research. So YMMV

Anonymous Noah B. February 04, 2015 5:13 PM  

I know! Let's take an utterly corrupt and immoral government and give them legal authority to force people to inject whatever substances the government deems appropriate into their bodies. And absolve big pharma of any and all liability for whatever happens as a result of these vaccines/drugs/substances/toxins.

Brilliant!

Blogger S1AL February 04, 2015 5:14 PM  

@Danby - Uhhh, there is no "explosion" in cancer rates once you correct for age (which is directly correlated with rate) and increase in reporting rate...

See, this is where I take issue with the whole concept being debated - it has been reduced to an all/nothing, and that's far too simple.

Blogger Thordaddy February 04, 2015 5:18 PM  

And what else do they have in common?

They will not hold these "recruits" to an equal academic standard to their white cohorts.

Anonymous Noah B. February 04, 2015 5:26 PM  

Want to stop deaths from infectious disease? Just outlaw sodomy.

Anonymous FP February 04, 2015 5:31 PM  

"Cost-Benefit February 04, 2015 12:37 PM

An obvious question is what does it cost to vaccinate annually versus what does it cost to treat 542,000 cases a year, and what is the cost of 450 deaths, if you don't vaccinate.

The cost of those cases will include not only medical care but time off school, parents time off work, long-term care for those who are seriously affected with possible secondary effects, etc.

Seems pretty obvious that vaccination will be a winner on those grounds."

Heh, bring up the cost benefit analysis of sudafed to various politicians who've banned it and they'll call you a nutter because "we've saved childrens lives who won't live or die in a meth lab!" At the expense of people not having a good cheap remedy for the cold/cough. Just make everyone go get a prescription and infect more people in the doctor's office and triple the cost or more.

But hey, who needs closed borders and limited immigration... we get all that great new culture stuff like more mexican restaurants. That and more drug dealers importing meth instead of home grown stuff.

Blogger Rick Caird February 04, 2015 5:33 PM  

Vox Day is a free rider. He is relying on other people to vaccinate to keep down the incidence of the diseases. How about this: the parents are free to not vaccinate their children. However, those children will not be allowed to attend school, go to playgrounds, or a variety of other events where there will be a lot of children, all of who are vaccinated.

Blogger Marissa February 04, 2015 5:38 PM  

However, those children will not be allowed to attend school,

Promise?

Also what happens when they get to be adults?

Anonymous red-headed step-child February 04, 2015 5:43 PM  

@ Rick Caird, will that include those kids who can't be vaccinated? I mean, if we're going to be fair and all, it shouldn't matter if someone can or can't get vaccinated, if they're unvaccinated they should be shunned from society.

Anonymous Noah B. February 04, 2015 5:45 PM  

"However, those children will not be allowed to attend school, go to playgrounds, or a variety of other events where there will be a lot of children, all of who are vaccinated."

I think you're on the right track. And how about this: If they don't get the use of public services, then they don't pay taxes.

Anonymous Will Best February 04, 2015 5:52 PM  

Vaccines may also be related to autoimmune diseases.

A lot of things are linked to autoimmune have been on the rise over the last 50 years. Some at alarming rates (like the more than doubling of peanut allergies over the last 20 years).

There seems to be an increasing awareness of this new threat, even if most people can't express it, and it manifests itself in a number of different coping strategies designed to reduce environmental insults to the body.

It is unsurprising that much of the preventative measures being employed are basically the result of looking back at the 1950's and trying to replicate those living conditions.

Organic/Non-GMO food, no/delayed/reduced vaccinations, a reduction in the use of plastics.less processed foods, etc.

Captain America....the Washington DC area for immediate killing to prevent uprising against tyranny.

This made perfect sense to me. It is only natural that the current tyrants would be less than thrilled with a new tyrant.

Anonymous Anubis February 04, 2015 5:57 PM  

"Has anyone identified patient zero yet of this case? "
Her name is Latrina Coontswella

"I mentioned the Tuskegee Syphilis experiment."
I actually had to print off info about Herxheimer Reactions for a nurse that thought blacks where infected on purpose in Tuskegee and the Herxheimer reactions that killed off people with later stage syphilis was just made up as an excuse. Herxheimer recognized the reactions but didn't understand why they killed people for years. Syphilis and Lyme disease can both have Herxheimer reactions if the disease is killed off too fast. By the time a cure for syphilis came out the standard treatment of a single megadose of PCN was too risky for those in the experiment, but that's the reason antibiotics are taken over 10+ days now.

Blogger Vox February 04, 2015 6:38 PM  

Vox Day is a free rider. He is relying on other people to vaccinate to keep down the incidence of the diseases. How about this: the parents are free to not vaccinate their children. However, those children will not be allowed to attend school, go to playgrounds, or a variety of other events where there will be a lot of children, all of who are vaccinated.

That's idiotic. First, how would you know that I am a free rider. Nothing I have said has anything to do with whether I have been vaccinated myself or not. You're a fucking moron who is resorting to ad hominem attack rather than addressing the actual argument.

Second, your idea is absolutely stupid. Those children at school are more at risk from dying on the way to school than from measles, even if NO ONE IS VACCINATED. 800 children die every year from transportation to and from school. 404 people of all ages died of measles in 1962, before the vaccine was invented.

If you actually care about reducing the risk to children's lives, ban all travel to school.

Anonymous map February 04, 2015 6:38 PM  

I don;t think anyone is arguing against vaccination. I think people are against the very aggressive vaccination schedule that has ever increasing dosages given more frequently at younger ages. Parents are seeing negative consequences to these actions.

Anonymous red-headed step-child February 04, 2015 6:43 PM  

"If you actually care about reducing the risk to children's lives, ban all travel to school."

If it saves just one life....

Blogger Outlaw X February 04, 2015 6:43 PM  

Sorta OT. Forced compliance and PC-equality.

The future is here


OpenID cailcorishev February 04, 2015 6:48 PM  

I'm sure the flood of immigrants has absolutely nothing to do with it.

I assume all the people who think doctors should pressure people to get their kids vaccinated would also be in favor of simply vaccinating all immigrants as they come through customs -- or in the case of illegals, vaccinate them the moment they're caught. After all, they don't have to come here, so by entering the US, they consent for a big old syringe of goodies.

How could anyone who considers vaccines critical to public health oppose that?

Anonymous red-headed step-child February 04, 2015 6:57 PM  

"How could anyone who considers vaccines critical to public health oppose that?"

We wouldn't want to impose on them now...

Anonymous clk February 04, 2015 6:58 PM  

"The burden actually rests with with the pro-vax crowd to demonstrate that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks. The default/negative position is to simply not vaccinate."

Thats been proven right here .. discussing the numbers of fatalities form the vaccine vs the number that die from measles. 450 deaths/year from measles and 11/year from vaccines.... pure math, no rhetoric....

But if you kid is one of the 450 or even the 11 .. it would suck.

Blogger Thordaddy February 04, 2015 7:03 PM  

Last measles surge... 1989... 1986 amnesty, anyone?

Anonymous red-headed step-child February 04, 2015 7:04 PM  

"How could anyone who considers vaccines critical to public health oppose that?"

We wouldn't want to impose on them...

Anonymous Vaccine myth denier February 04, 2015 7:37 PM  

"How about this: the parents are free to not vaccinate their children. However, those children will not be allowed to attend school, go to playgrounds, or a variety of other events where there will be a lot of children, all of who are vaccinated."

Did you think before opening your mouth?

How are unvaccinated children a threat to vaccinated children under your ideology? Also, the vaccinated children are not a threat to the unvaccinated, in your ideology.

It is only the unvaccinated who should be a threat to the unvaccinated under your ideology, and surely you would be happy if they killed each other with their diseases.

Blogger S1AL February 04, 2015 8:08 PM  

@Vaccine myth denier - You should look into effective immunization rates and herd immunity. Your comment is just silly... not that it's any worse than the original to which you're responding.

Anonymous Vaccine myth denier February 04, 2015 8:18 PM  

"@Vaccine myth denier - You should look into effective immunization rates and herd immunity. Your comment is just silly... not that it's any worse than the original to which you're responding."

You forgot to explain why it is silly, or are you simply afraid of exposing your ignorance?

Also, what is this herd immunity you speak of? Is it like group selection?

Blogger S1AL February 04, 2015 8:43 PM  

Vaccines aren't 100% effective because of natural resistances, therefore even people who have been vaccinated can still be at risk from contagions generated by the infected. This isn't confusing or new science... hence, there is a very genuine reason to be concerned about non-vaccinated children being a problem for (a small percentage of) vaccinated children.

And I don't even know where you're trying to go with the group selection/herd immunity comparison, unless you think that any terminology indicating a plurality renders a comparison reasonable (hint: it does not).

Blogger CM February 04, 2015 9:02 PM  

S1AL,

Granted I'm no exp expert, but being an expectant mother with a sister who thought she had pertussis, here's what I learned concerning vaccinations:

The vaccinated are just as likely to carry contagious diseases as the unvaccinated.

Only what's worse is that the vaccinated is not likely to show any symptoms and more likely to spread a disease under the false assumption they are "safe".

The best way to prevent the spread of disease is hygiene and cleanliness.

Blogger S1AL February 04, 2015 9:22 PM  

@CM - I don't disagree on the whole. Vaccination is an airbag - intended to prevent fatalities in the extreme end of the spectrum. There are a host of other arguments to be made with regards to sick time, loss of productivity, etc.

The most effective vaccinations have been is in virtually eliminating the nastiest of diseases, such as polio. That's one concern I have with the focus on measles: it's not a major vaccination as far as the danger prevented. It's really more akin to a successful vaccination against the flu.

Anonymous Mark K. February 04, 2015 10:14 PM  

Stephen J said: "A perfectly sensible stance. The problem is, what do you do when somebody says, 'But refusing vaccinations, or even objecting to the schedule we want to use, is by definition *not* sane *or* law-abiding, and I can therefore disregard your consent or lack thereof'? "

If I responded at all, I'd be inclined to respond: "Try."

Sometimes, the price to protect blood cannot be paid in any currency except blood. A prudent man works hard to avoid letting those situations arise.

Sometimes the price to be paid for freedom is likewise only payable in something that history has shown to be even more precious than blood: freedom itself. By that I mean that we have a long tradition of denying what would otherwise be fundamental human rights to certain classes of people that spring to mind - criminals and the insane or incompetent (and children fall into this category, by the way--that's why their parents make decisions for them). The military is another such class, but a special temporary exception. Formerly, slaves were such a class.

For centuries, perhaps for as long as there has been even the most primitive civilization, people have had sanctioned ways of establishing if a member of that society is a criminal or incompetent. In our current society, if a person is a duly convicted felon, there is already a precedent for government taking an interest in subsequent choices made by that person. His rights are curtailed. If the person has been judged by a court of law to be not of sound mind, there is also a precedent.

Howevever unjust this may work out to be in practice, on the whole, people have gone along with this, and I go along with it.

But if the parent in your question is not a convicted felon, and has not been ruled by a court of law to be insane or incompetent, then someone's opinion of the state of the parent's mind or morality, while fascinating, is not relevant to the law or the principles of human rights I spoke of in the comment you reference here. Thank God.

Anonymous Anonymous February 04, 2015 10:19 PM  

How many people die in a year from adverse reactions to vaccines? Measles has claimed 0 since 2003.

ChiRho

Anonymous The other skeptic February 04, 2015 10:28 PM  

The most effective vaccinations have been is in virtually eliminating the nastiest of diseases, such as polio.

MPAI. Have a look at the SIR models of epidemics and think about what happens. (Susceptibles, Infected, Recovered).

In particular, it seems to me that all these oh so effective vaccines have become available at a time when those who were genetically susceptible to these diseases have died off.

In any population that has never encountered a particular pathogen before, there will be:

1. Those who are completely susceptible, and who will likely die if infected.
2. Those who are partially susceptible and who will likely recover if infected.
3. Those who are immune.

When the pathogen hits, it kills a large proportion of those who are completely susceptible and a much smaller proportion of those who are partially susceptible. It does nothing to those who are immune.

After repeated applications of the pathogen we end up with pretty much the whole population being those who are immune, because usually the immunity is something genetic, like having more mucus in your lungs with lots of Hemagglutin in it to trap the Influenza virus so it cannot get to those all important epithelial cells.

Anonymous JJM February 04, 2015 10:40 PM  

"The change in measles mortality risk is from 1 in 11,010 in 1909 to 1 in 457,200 in 1962 and an estimated 1 in 1,287,02 in 2014. I'll show my work tomorrow."

That is helpful. Immigration might be a huge factor. What was occurring heavily in early 20th century? Immigration. In 1960, population was very stable in terms of immigration / demographics. In 2014, mass immigration of a degree unheard of in history.

It seems like one could make a case that vaccines would have been unnecessary or minimally needed given a stable population base (little to no immigration), but in the face of our insane open borders policy vaccinations become necessary.

Of course, the latter assumes vaccinations truly work and have a.) minimal risk and b.) no long-term consequences. I can't answer either of those....

These are just thoughts off the top of the head, so I could be wrong. It just seems that immigration is a HUGE variable in all of this.

Blogger S1AL February 04, 2015 11:29 PM  

@the other skeptic - that's not really how pathogens work, especially those that are less lethal. Try applying that logic to the flu and see where it gets you. Also, polio is not one of the diseases with debated timelines. It's very obvious that vaccination eliminated it, especially given that it was actually increasing while similar diseases were declining.

Baby, bathwater, etc.

Anonymous rtp February 04, 2015 11:30 PM  

The following pretty much destroys any notion that vaccines have served any purpose (well any good purpose anyway).

Disability rates for the US as per the US census data:

http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v18n6/v18n6p20.pdf for 1954 (ie pre-widespread use of vaccines) and http://www.census.gov/people/disability/publications/sipp2010.html (Table A-4) for 2010

Showing a tenfold increase in the rate of disabilities since the widespread use of vaccines. And before you come up with a straw man, I am not saying disabilities necessarily *caused* this astronomical rise, merely that they have, at the very least, been useless at preventing it.

Healthcare expenditure data: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1200478

Showing a fourfold increase in the US as a per cent of GDP (it is 3 fold for the UK and Australia).

Infectious disease mortality rates pre and post-vaccination: www.childhealthsafety.com/graphs

This is more than sufficient to prove that they are all worthless but the following quote is pertinent.

http://www.cdc.gov/.../pubs/surv-manual/chpt07-measles.html

"To minimize the problem of false positive laboratory results, it is important to restrict case investigation and laboratory tests to patients most likely to have measles (i.e., those who meet the clinical case definition, especially if they have risk factors for measles, such as being unvaccinated, [...]"

Just to demonstrate precisely what has happened: we don't have any measles/polio/diphtheria/Hib etc cases because - and only because - doctors refuse to diagnose these diseases when they see it and instead diagnose something else (you can easily google the name of the original disease and differential diagnosis to see what they get renamed as). That is why they haven't led to any real world benefits.

For example measles vaccine was supposed to reduce the amount of encephalitis. It has not.

Polio vaccine was supposed to reduce the number of crippled children. It has not.

Rubella vaccine was supposed to reduce the number of children born with defects. It has not.

Hepatitis vaccines were supposed to reduce the rate of liver disease. They have not.

Hib was supposed to reduce meningitis, pneumonia, sepsis, airway obstructions. It has done none of those things.

They are the greatest lie in history. None of them work. None of them could work. A ridiculous and dangerous answer to a question that nobody should have ever asked. We all have c100 trillion bacteria/viruses etc on and in us all the time. The notion that preventing a dozen of them (even assuming that were possible) through vaccines is like taking a bucket, dipping it into the ocean, pouring the contents onto land and declaring the days of drowning to be behind us.

Anonymous The other skeptic February 04, 2015 11:45 PM  

@the other skeptic - that's not really how pathogens work, especially those that are less lethal.

So tell us how they work, or don't you know?

Blogger S1AL February 04, 2015 11:59 PM  

@rtp - those graphs are comparing 2 *completely* different definitions of disability. Using that as your baseline means the entire argument is severely flawed.

As for your assertion that the rate of crippled children (specifically due to polio) has not dropped, I would love to see some data.

Same goes for encephalitis and liver disease. All of the data I can find indicate that vaccinations are WAI.

And that last comment, about bacteria and viruses, simply betrays a stunning lack of information regarding the differences between bacteria, viruses, and pathogens.

Blogger S1AL February 05, 2015 12:09 AM  

First, you are incorrect in your assertion that the result is primarily genetic; while true for a very few pathogens, the majority of results are determined by environment/nutrition and treatment.

Second, pathogens can evolve and hit different segments of the population (see: influenza).

Third, a great many sicknesses can be caught simply because a person has suffered a blow to the autoimmune system. I rarely get sick under normal circumstances, but stress or lack of sleep can result in me catching any number of minor bugs very rapidly.

But, as stated above, actually look at the polio data. It was a disease on the rise is the most advanced countries on the planet into widespread adoption of the vaccines. In other cases, such as measles, the timeline is much more debatable.

Blogger Stan Hai February 05, 2015 12:11 AM  

What's interesting to me is that most vaccines don't grant lifetime immunity, but the pro-vaxx crowd isn't pushing boosters for adults very hard. They just want to get needles into kids, for some reason.

Anonymous The other skeptic February 05, 2015 12:16 AM  

And that last comment, about bacteria and viruses, simply betrays a stunning lack of information regarding the differences between bacteria, viruses, and pathogens.

So tell us the important differences.

Also, tell us why RNA viruses, which typically have a mutation rate of 1.5 * 10^-5 per nucleotide, don't show all that much change in lethality or infectiousness. How do those mutations happen? What happens if they affect packaging or the ability of Neuraminidase to cleave sialic acid or the ability of Hemagglutin to bind to sialic acid ... etc.

You talk big but you have not demonstrated an ability to articulate the details.

Anonymous The other skeptic February 05, 2015 12:33 AM  

But, as stated above, actually look at the polio data. It was a disease on the rise is the most advanced countries on the planet into widespread adoption of the vaccines.

So provide a link to your favorite data.

However, any claimed rise is likely a result of numbers being counted in countries where they were never counted before.

The data on the wiki page on polio is very useful in understanding the risks of polio and tell us that genetic resistance is now widespread, although not as widespread as the resistance to Influenza in the US which kills at a rate of about 1 in 10,000. (Based on CDC numbers cited here: How many people die from Influenza

The answer to this dilemma is more statistics – methods that use the CDC data to estimate the number of deaths caused by influenza. In the paper cited below, the authors calculated an average of 41,400 deaths each year , for the years 1979 – 2001, in the US due to influenza. Remember that this is an average, and the actual numbers may vary substantially each year.

From here: Influenza 101

Anonymous rtp February 05, 2015 12:38 AM  

"@rtp - those graphs are comparing 2 *completely* different definitions of disability. Using that as your baseline means the entire argument is severely flawed."

Who says they are different definition? At any rate, even if you only include severe disabilities from 2010 you still get a five fold increase from 1954.

"As for your assertion that the rate of crippled children (specifically due to polio) has not dropped, I would love to see some data."

Why don't you provide it given that *you* believe in the polio vaccine not me. At any rate the disability data takes care of that.

"Same goes for encephalitis and liver disease. All of the data I can find indicate that vaccinations are WAI."

http://news.cancerconnect.com/incidence-of-liver-cancer-on-the-rise/

You can find your own data on encephalitis.

"And that last comment, about bacteria and viruses, simply betrays a stunning lack of information regarding the differences between bacteria, viruses, and pathogens."

No idea what you are talking about. Are you saying that bacteria and viruses are separate to pathogens? Or are you saying that some are pathogenic and some are not.

The problem is that even many of those we deem to be pathogenic such as e coli, strep, Hib, diphtheria, pertussis, etc are on and in us all the time.

Anonymous WhateverIUsedLastTimeIDontRemember February 05, 2015 1:17 AM  

Good Republicans know Obama always lies and says evil things. Obama is pro-vaccine. Therefore, Obama is trying to get rid of Republicans by undermining their faith in the efficacy of vaccines, thus causing their children to suffer from horrible diseases.

Blogger You're full of shit February 05, 2015 1:21 AM  

http://m.jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/189/Supplement_1/S1.long

Blogger Thordaddy February 05, 2015 2:21 AM  

The bait and switch that can be read over and over again to keep this debate rolling is unvaccinated = infected so that then the unvaccinated becomes a "health risk" to the proximate population. The reality is that those without infection whether they be unvaccinated or "vaccinated" WITH A "dead" VIRUS that theoretically fails to induce infection cannot be a "health risk" to others. But, those who are "vaccinated" with attenuated live virus "vaccines" CAN MOST CERTAINLY be a health risk to both the unvaccinated and vaccinated alike.

Blogger Thordaddy February 05, 2015 2:30 AM  

At this late date, the demand for Total Equality = total "vaccination" of the global population.

BUT...

"Vaccinations" are a finite "resource" that must then be distributed with extreme discrimination.

So how does the anti-Supremacist solve this dilemma?

By opting out in an oh-so subtle manner if desired while still maintaining his tyrannical demand that his enemies get the needle and propheteering off his ignorant allies with tales of disease-free Utopia.

Anonymous Jack Amok February 05, 2015 3:05 AM  

A lot of things are linked to autoimmune have been on the rise over the last 50 years. Some at alarming rates (like the more than doubling of peanut allergies over the last 20 years).

No doubt. My best friend in middle school was deathly allergic to peanuts. He was the only person I met with a peanut alergy until I was nearly 30. Since then, almost every group of any size will have at least one peanut allergy.

At the risk of oversimplifying a bit, allergies are sort of your immune system over-reacting to an otherwise mostly harmless agent. Something is driving this massive increase in overactive immune systems. It's not necessarily vaccines, but they absolutely have to be one of the suspects we consider.

Anonymous Toby Temple February 05, 2015 5:20 AM  

Natural immunity produces carriers: Typhoid Mary, Someone vaxxed can't be infected. CANT FUCKING CARRY

Either this person is lying or completely ignorant of the facts.

Vaccinations do not guarantee immunity.

Blogger CM February 05, 2015 7:32 AM  

Either this person is lying or completely ignorant of the facts.

Vaccinations do not guarantee immunity


Lack of infection does not mean you are not a carrier. You simply are not affected by what you are carrying.

I may have a mild sneeze and be carrying a cold virus around. I might not be affected by it (noticeably sick) because I may be engaging in behaviors that boost my immune system. But I'm still carrying and capable of passing it on.

Probably a bad example, but point still stands... you could be vaccinated and be an un-infected carrier, which completely obliterates this "herd immunity" principle.

Anonymous bw February 05, 2015 8:24 AM  

with tales of disease-free Utopia.

The root of this entire psy-op via Propaganda (this is but one, but the weaponized language and methods are the same) is to instill the TrueBelief that the Corps and State are benevolent and are in it to truly help and save people, despite evidence to the contrary in every institution and establishment that they run and Propagandize about.
The more it is pushed front and center and backed by "the rule of law for your own good", the more you know it is Propaganda and Big Business, ie. Power and Control - or something worse that might involve the Population Council or DNA.

Don't look at the Revolving Doors at FDA or SEC or follow the money and the "experts" and their ties. Don't overthrow your overlords - the true abusers. Just fight amongst yourselves and defend your ego and the lies to the hilt exactly because you believed them and participated in them.

There was a time when a free people would've easily seen through it and traded Mercury for Lead...

Blogger CM February 05, 2015 9:04 AM  

The more it is pushed front and center and backed by "the rule of law for your own good", the more you know it is Propaganda and Big Business, ie. Power and Control - or something worse that might involve the Population Council or DNA.

What frustrates me the most is how people who I generally wouldn't consider fools are foolish about this but people who I generally consider fools, I find myself defending on this.

Anonymous Toby Temple February 05, 2015 9:05 AM  

Lack of infection does not mean you are not a carrier. You simply are not affected by what you are carrying.

I took the "can't be infected" to mean becoming immune. Its already a fact that vaccines does not guarantee immunity. And you are correct. An immune person can still carry the disease causing microbes. He/she is still carrying it despite being unaffected.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts