Missed vaccines weaken 'herd immunity' in children

[HuckleB]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2010-01-06-childhoodvaccines06_CV_N.htm

"Brendalee Flint did everything she could to keep her baby safe. She nourished her with breast milk; she gave her all the routine vaccines. But Flint never realized how much her daughter's health would depend on the actions of her friends, neighbors and even strangers.

...

Flint rushed the baby to the hospital, where she was diagnosed with meningitis, a swelling of the lining of the brain, caused by a severe case of Hib, or Haemophilus influenzae type b. Julieanna was one of five children in Minnesota hospitalized with Hib in January 2008, the state's biggest outbreak since 1992.

Three of the other Minnesota children hospitalized for Hib were unvaccinated, including one who died, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Experts worry that such outbreaks — along with mumps outbreaks on the East Coast and more than two dozen measles outbreaks around the country in 2008 — represent cracks in the country's protection against terrifying childhood diseases that were once virtually eradicated.

..."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Yeah, I know. I know. "Duh." Right? But, hey, it's a fairly thorough piece, especially for USA Today, and I thought, why not post it?

:shrug:

:hi:

[conscious evolution]

1. A child came down

with a disease she was vaccinated for?
Why is my irony meter going crazy?

[HuckleB]

2. More on herd immunity ...

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=516

"...

The decrease in the number of disease carriers is vital to the prevention of bacterial infections. Vaccines are never 100% effective. Some people are genetically unable to respond to the vaccine, some have immunodeficiencies that preclude receiving vaccines or developing a response to the vaccine, some haven’t gotten around to vaccination or are too young to receive a vaccine. If you vaccinate a large number of people, besides preventing disease in an individual, it helps protect the vulnerable in a population. Vaccines prevent disease propagation.

A recent example of beneficial effects of the vaccine mediated decrease in carriers occurred with the conjugate pneumococcal vaccine that is given to children. The conjugated pneumococcal vaccine is directed against the 7 most common disease causing strains. Pneumococcus is a nasty bacteria, causing pneumonia, sepsis, and meningitis.

The use of the vaccine lead to a decrease in the incidence of meningitis of 64% for the vaccine strains in children less than 2 years old, but, due to a general decrease in the carriage rates in the community, the rates of meningitis also dropped in the greater than age 65 group by 54% and a decrease in meningitis for all ages by 73% (4). The use of the vaccine in children has also lead to the decrease in invasive pneumococcal disease in adults (3).

Herd immunity at work. Part of herd immunity functions to decrease the number of people in a population who carry the disease so that an at risk population are not exposed. Part of herd immunity functions by preventing the spread of some, especially viral, diseases. If there are not enough vulnerable people in a population, the disease cannot spread and perpetuate. However this mechanism for herd immunity is less helpful with bacteria, which can colonize or cause less obvious disease.

..."


----------------\

This piece does a good job of explaining how that can happen, among other things.

[mzmolly]

7. What the article (Orac) fails to mention is that we have HIGHER vaccination

rates than we've ever had in the US. So how is it that we're in danger of a resurgence of disease given we take credit for wiping out XYZ with far lower coverage levels?

http://cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/G/coverage.pdf

Big pharma can not have it both ways.

This child should have been protected by "herd immunity" if there is valid claim to such a thing. Also, who did this "vaccinated" child spread disease to because the Mom felt she was "protected"?

It's fine to say "vaccinate to help protect your child against ..." (which did not work in this case) but it's not ok to suggest that when a vaccine fails, it's someone else's fault.

[HuckleB]

9. "Big pharma."

Sorry, but this has nothing to do with "Big Pharma."

That's what I call fear mongering, and running to the emotional target, rather than trying to discuss.

It appears that you are choosing to ignore why this child was infected, both from the explanation in the USA Today article, and from the explanatin in the Mark Crislip piece.

Further: read up on that data and how it's not that generalizable... http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/stats-surv/nis/how-to.htm

I would be shocked if you had not seen the stories about pockets where immunization rates are lower, and that those pockets are where we've seen these outbreaks. Oh, yeah, that's in the original story from USA Today, as well. You didn't read the first story before responding?

Oh, and there is also this from the story:

"Exemption rates are alarmingly higher in pockets of the country, however. In Ferry County, Wash., 27% of children have a non-medical exemption from school vaccine requirements, the article says."

But here's a bit more: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=436

And another example: As Vaccination Rates Decline in Ireland, Cases of Measles Soar

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/08/world/as-vaccination-rates-decline-in-ireland-cases-of-measles-soar.html?pagewanted=1

Please respond to the whole of the story. Questions are usually better for everyone than knee-jerk responses to one small part of the information. Thank you.

(Oh, and since when is Mark Crislip "ORAC?")

[mzmolly]

16. The nation contained larger "pockets" in the 60's - 70's and 80's by your logic.

Yet we supposedly tackled disease effectively? Again, explain that to me. In addition, your assertion that the CDC doesn't adequately measure vaccine coverage levels does not help your case. The trend is clear. WE have GREATER vaccine compliance rates in the US than we ever have. There have been and will always be people who are not fully vaccinated, or whose vaccines are no longer acting in a protective manner.

I've also read the nonsense about Ireland previously and have debated it here, several times.

The article states:

Across the Irish Sea, however, public health officials blame latent fears about the M.M.R. vaccine — for measles, mumps and rubella — for a measles outbreak. The vaccination rate has fallen to 63 percent in parts of Dublin and 72 percent nationally; the internationally accepted level for controlling the disease is 95 percent.

So tell me, how did the US and the world for that matter, see a dramatic decline in disease when vaccination rates were LOWER than those noted above?

And this is also contradictory to your argument that a decline in vaccination rates is causing an uptick in measles:

'It goes back generations; we've always had an appalling vaccination rate in Ireland,'' said Dr. Maurice Gueret, a general practitioner in Dublin. The widely publicized fear that the M.M.R. vaccine causes autism is ''a convenient way for the health authorities to let themselves off for the fact that we're very, very bad about vaccinating our children,'' he said.

This attempt to suggest that people are refusing vaccinations in greater numbers than in days gone by, is simply unsubstantiated. The child in MN got ill because her vaccine failed to confer PROTECTION, period.

[HuckleB]

20. You're choosing to make many assumptions, instead of responding to actual information.

I'm not playing the assumption game.

[mzmolly]

23. I'm not making assumptions

the article authors are. Various local department(s) of health put out press releases full of propaganda, and various reporters take the bait. Happens all the time.

[HuckleB]

25. Oh, yes you are.

But I'm tired of having to point out the holes in every piece of propaganda that you offer.

Your agenda is clear, and I'm not wasting any more time correcting your spin.

[mzmolly]

28. I posted links quoting the

CDC. Not spin.

Goodnight. :hi:

[HuckleB]

30. So what?

You didn't bother to put the links in context, or to look at the other side of the data?

Or do you really not get it?

[mzmolly]

32. There is no other data. There is spin and there is

common sense. I prefer the later.

[HuckleB]

40. You're not using "common sense."

First of all "common sense" is just an excuse to ignore the full picture.

You are ignoring some big parts of the picture in order to push your propaganda.

[mzmolly]

54. Bullcrap.

I'm not ignoring anything. I'm refusing to buy into the assertion that A. Vaccines protect and B. vaccine failure is the fault of one child. You can't have it both ways.

[HuckleB]

56. Oh, you're ignoring some big pieces.

But you're so obsessed with your agenda that you can't step back and see them.

[mzmolly]

63. I don't have an agenda

other than truth.

[HuckleB]

65. You don't care about the truth.

That much is very clear.

[mzmolly]

67. You're certainly entitled

to your opinion on my motives for addressing this issue.

[Confusious]

89. A. Vaccines protect

Smallpox. Look it up. Stop stewing in your own ignorance.

[CreekDog]

79. Why don't you decide what's propaganda and what isn't for us

and we'll just go with whatever you say is truth.

sounds fair. :eyes:

[HuckleB]

15. Another story on pockets/clusters of non-vaccination actors.

http://www.oregonlive.com/kiddo/index.ssf/2008/08/post_2.html

And...

Vaccine refusals fuel jump in measles outbreaks
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26333787/

And...

As Polio Returns To The US, Polio Vaccination Decreases Among Toddlers.
http://www.englewoodhospital.com/medservices.cfm?pageid=622&bc=0,27,145

[mzmolly]

17. In 1980 we had lower vaccination rates in the entire country, than Oregon does of late. So

I ask once again, how did we combat disease if there was no herd immunity? Also, regarding Oregon, they have a 20% lower infant mortality rate than the US average. So, I think you need a better boogyman?

In addition the article claiming that "Polio returns" is another example of false information being used to sell vaccines. Not only has polio NOT returned, (we had ZERO cases according to the CDC in 2006, 2007 and 2008...)

See here: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/Pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/G/cases&deaths.pdf

The SINGLE 2005 case was a whole cell vaccine related case of Polio that no one can explain.

And as noted previously, vaccine coverage levels have NOT declined, they've INCREASED in recent years.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/Pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/G/coverage.pdf

For example, in 2007 (the latest year the data has been crunched) the national average for Polio vaccination coverage was 93%. To give you a bit of perspective, the coverage level in 1985 was 61%. Yet we're supposed to panic because we see a normal fluctuation of 1%-2% in a state or two? Again, GIVE ME A BREAK. If you don't like how the CDC calculates data, take it up with them. The fact remains that the trend is clear. Americans are vaccinating in large numbers - about 90% in recent years. Compliance has IMPROVED DRAMATICALLY IN RECENT DECADES. No amount of spin can counter this fact.

Regarding the MSNBC article, on the one hand the article states we have a high vaccine coverage level so we have not seen an increase in mass disease, on the other we're to panic because a few homeschooled kids supposedly haven't been vaccinated?

I'm sorry but the propaganda does not hold up to scrutiny.

Here is some info about disease outbreaks in highly vaccinated populations.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/113/3/455

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1861205

http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol6no4/demelker.htm

http://www.wvve.info/issues/outbreaks.html

Perhaps you should address vaccine failure and seek to improve efficacy, before you try to convince others that they must vaccinate in order to protect others?

[HuckleB]

21. I'm not giving you a break.

You are only looking at one-half of the data picture, and that's apparently because you are coming to this with preconceptions. Heck, you've posted information in this post that is shown to be nonsense in earlier posts on this board. Do you not read what others post?

You can't keep asking the same question, when it has already been answered. Apparently, until hundreds of kids get sick and die, you don't think this issue should be addressed.

I find that to be very unethical.

[mzmolly]

26. I'm looking at the big picture. Not calling two kids a "pocket" in order to sell

a product. Those who use deceit in order to push vaccines, knowingly or not, actually harm the cause. The science used to "sell" vaccination should be based on integrity, not smarmy used car salesmen like tactics.

Peace

[HuckleB]

29. No, you're not.

You want to wait until many kids die to do anything. You want to ignore evidence at all costs, and you want to push your BS that it's all about selling a product.

"BIG PHARMA!?"

:eyes:

[mzmolly]

33. Ah, the "you want kids to die" card.

That didn't take long.

I'm done kicking the thread.

[HuckleB]

41. Ah, the "you can't handle looking at the full picture card."

:rofl:

[CreekDog]

78. Big Pharma is conspiring to harm its opponents

by rending them unable to think.

:eyes:

[roguevalley]

37. I have taught for 27 years and the immunities I built up being around

kids year in, year out like that is still with me. People drop like flies right and left and I miss everything.

[tinrobot]

82. self-delete

[Lisa D]

11. According to the article, she has a rare immune deficiency

that was discovered after she contracted Hib. This makes her body unable to respond to a vaccine.

[mzmolly]

18. How many other such children are being vaccinated

unnecessarily?

[HuckleB]

24. Oh brother.

Nice spin. First, you rant about how on earth could she have gotten it, and then you rant because she was immunized.

I'm done wasting my time on this matter with you.

It's clear that you have an agenda, and you are looking down a pipe while the rest of story is in the outside world.

[mzmolly]

31. Again, I'm looking at data provided by the CDC.

:hi:

[kath]

36. Delete -- that's what I get for posting before reading the whole thread!

I DID at least read the article linked in the OP, though -- would recommend that others do likewise before posting.

[mzmolly]

3. How many unvaccinated will "ruin" herd immunity?

Fear mongering at it's worst, IMO. This kind of propaganda is partly why those "selling" vaccines are not considered trustworthy. A vaccinated child got a disease they were vaccinated against and everyone but pharma is to blame. Fascinating...

[HuckleB]

4. Please read the piece in post number 2.

This is not fear mongering. It's dealing with how the process works, and how it can break down.

[HuckleB]

5. I forgot to say hello to the unrec crowd!

Hi!

The diseases in question thank you for your assistance.

:eyes:

[Liberal_in_LA]

6. lol n/t

[mzmolly]

8. I rec fair articles on vaccination. But this is poorly researched spin.

Sorry.

[HuckleB]

10. This is a very fair story.

Your responses indicate that you did not even read the story before posting, btw.

[mzmolly]

13. I read the story.

I stand by my assertion.

[HuckleB]

14. Your posts above indicate otherwise.

And the reasons for the indication are noted in my responses, and the responses of others. You've given no valid reason for your "assertion."

[mzmolly]

19. I've given several

reasons.

[HuckleB]

22. Not one stood up to the evidence presented.

Can't you be honest about that?

[mzmolly]

34. Well given you didn't have time to read my

responses, it's clear your statement is based upon ... well, nothing.

[HuckleB]

42. Now that is some BS.

I'm a little surprised by your crap on this thread, but now I know.

[Confusious]

72. I don't think you would find

anything that paints vaccines in a good light, and people who don't get them in a bad light, anything other then "poorly researched spin"

[trotsky]

12. Very simple fact that people need to realize.

Their decision NOT to vaccinate their precious brood puts others at risk. REAL risk. Crazy liberal principle about the tiny shared risk, but the vast shared reward that these people just don't get.

[HuckleB]

27. +1

Have at it! I'm done with the DU anti-science crew. I may be slow, but I finally know there's no point.

[trotsky]

35. All I see is that someone named "Ignored" is positively obsessed with getting the last word in.

And apparently doesn't understand one thing about vaccines. Not surprising.

[lizerdbits]

38. Hey, me too! NT

[HuckleB]

45. Indeed.

And, as usual, I find it disheartening, while I should just let it go.

[Celebration]

39. This seems like an anecdote?

And therefore not science??

Guess anyone can find anecdotes to fit their agenda, right?

:shrug:

So I am told.

[HuckleB]

43. I guess you only read part of the article.

Why does that fail to shock me?

[Celebration]

47. I'm sure you can

point me to the portion of the article that talks about placebo controlled trials of the flu vaccine, right?

Of course I read it, and I saw no mention of same.

[HuckleB]

48. That's funny.

I point out that your criticism is BS, and you go off into another direction entirely.

Seriously, since red herrings are all you can offer, maybe you should rethink your ideology, and try to understand science instead of continuing with the knee-jerk rejection nonsense.

:rofl:

[Celebration]

49. again, you are making no sense

the whole article is anecdotal, not science. Science is peer reviewed, controlled trials. Where are they with flu vaccines? Where? Where? Why are they not required?

[HuckleB]

50. You can keep saying that, but it doesn't make it true.

Your posts never follow the discussion, btw, they go off in one direction and then another and then another, without ever responding to the actual content of the posts of others -- all of which makes it very clear that science is not what you care about.

[Celebration]

51. wrong

What I state is crystal clear, and has been from the beginning of the discussion.

The article in the OP is not science, it is anecdote.

I see no scientific evidence that if enough people take the flu vaccine that it provides herd immunity.

There is only an assertation of same, but no evidence at all given that shows that, with regard to the flu vaccine, that such a thing as herd immunity exists.

Where are the placebo controlled trials that the flu vaccine works at all to reduce death?

Where?

Where?

[trotsky]

52. HuckleB is right. All you have to bring to a discussion is red herrings.

I see no scientific evidence that if enough people take the flu vaccine that it provides herd immunity.

Great. So maybe you can explain why the hell that has ANYTHING AT ALL to do with the OP, which is about standard childhood vaccines like Hib in particular?

[HuckleB]

53. Once again, all you have is a repeat of the same diversion you offered two posts ago.

The bottom line: Your posts are ludicrous.

[Confusious]

74. Why don't you try reading a little about science

Smallpox would be my suggestion, and then you can look up how they eradicated it.

That would give you an inkling about how herd immunity works, since you seem so ignorant.

[Confusious]

73. Someone else who doesn't know the first thing about science

Maybe we should recalculate gravity every day too? Tie up a couple of super computers, just to make sure it's not going anywhere?

[Confusious]

90. Funny. The guy who believes in homeopathy

talking about peer-reviewed controlled trials. I need a new irony meter. Mine just exploded.

[HuckleB]

44. You can’t hide in the herd

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=3569

[HuckleB]

46. Australia’s rate of childhood vaccinations at 7-year low

http://vaccinenewsdaily.com/news/211719-australias-rate-of-childhood-vaccinations-at-7-year-low

[mzmolly]

55. If as the article points out, 90% confers protection in terms of herd immunity,

how did we combat disease with a much lower coverage level 50-70% in the 70's and 80's?

I like you Huck. And, I try to be fair when it comes to this issue. But, I don't think anyone can honestly reconcile the blatantly contrary information that comes from those selling vaccination.

[HuckleB]

57. If you don't know, then you don't know enough to be discussing this issue.

Your agenda is clear. Your one-track, one-trick posts have made that crystal clear.

Do you have anything but pointless rants to offer?

[mzmolly]

61. Educate me

if you can. I asked a question, and it's not been answered.

[HuckleB]

64. I'm tired of playing that game with you.

And then having you offer up some benign generality in order to ignore the knowledge that you could have easily obtained yourself, and would have obtained if you truly had an open mind and cared about the truth. All this takes is for you to stop and think. I'm doing that for you, anymore. Your attitude coming into this discussion sucked, and you are clearly focused on nothing but your propaganda push. I'm tired of that routine.

[mzmolly]

66. You have yet to answer the question.

When you have an answer, I'll be glad to entertain it.

Peace

[HuckleB]

68. I've answered plenty of questions.

Every answer is either dismissed without logic, ignored as "opinion," or responded with another diversionary question.

When you can get out of your ludicrous game playing, then I might entertain the possibility that you have more to offer than an agenda.

[mzmolly]

69. Still no answer.

Agenda? Ah yes the "killing children" thing. :eyes:

Goodnight Huck. I'm done with this conversation. I think you're a good person, a fair person and you care about people. We simply disagree about what is factual in this area.

:hi:

[HuckleB]

70. You keep telling yourself that.

I know you will. And way to put words in my post again.

:eyes:

[Confusious]

75. Waste of TIME

SOOOOOO much a waste of time. Sometimes, you just have to give up and move on. It's a little piece of wisdom, knowing when to try and when to move on. The minute you answer on vaccines, it's time to move on.

[HuckleB]

58. The price exacted by the anti-vaccine movement

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2010/01/the_price_exacted_by_the_anti-vaccine_mo.php?utm_source=sbhomepage&utm_medium=link&utm_content=channellink

[HuckleB]

59. Avoiding Chickenpox Vaccine Has Consequences, Study Finds

http://www.usnews.com/health/blogs/on-parenting/2010/01/05/avoiding-chickenpox-vaccine-has-consequences-study-finds.html

[HuckleB]

60. Baseless vaccine fears damage public health

http://westernfrontonline.net/2010011511726/columnist/baseless-vaccine-fears-damage-public-health/

[HuckleB]

62. Editorial: Autism report shows there's no substitute for science

http://www.aurorasentinel.com/articles/2010/01/04/opinion/editorials/doc4b42aad9e3276240447172.txt

[HuckleB]

71. Expectant Mom's Flu Exposure Stunts Baby's Brain Development

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/177132.php

[HuckleB]

76. Drop in vaccinations raises risk at some California schools

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/mar/29/local/me-immunization29

[Iggo]

77. Just for fun.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8493753.stm

[iverglas]

80. may I be a case in point too?

Or heck, an anecdote. ;)

I had rubella twice as a child, c1960. (Never vaccinated, the vaccine was too late for me.)

When I realized a lot of my friends were getting pregnant, in the late 70s, and was idly considering it myself, I decided I should maybe look into this. I was tested, and found not to be immune to rubella.

I decided to get the vaccine. Now, I have a possible egg allergy, so my birth control clinic wouldn't do it and said I had to go somewhere else and get a rabbit embryo syrum vaccine. I'm pretty positive I'm allergic to rabbits. So I put it off a while, then went to my family practice clinic and we talked about it and they decided to go ahead as long as I was observed for half an hour afterward. So I did. No problem.

Now, if I'm like the girl in the report, I'm probably still not immune to rubella.

So if there had been rubella making its way around other non-immune people in the vicinity, I could have contracted it and been a risk to pregnant women I came in contact with -- or, had I been exposed while pregnant myself, my fetus could have been severely damaged.

Not my fault. I did what I could -- suffering two bouts of rubella and going to some lengths and possible risk to get vaccinated.

Some things we do just have to rely on other people to do, through no choice or fault of our own.

That's why I'm a social democrat.

I'll pay my high taxes to pay for your kids' schools and healthcare (hey, this is Canada); 'you' get your damned kids vaccinated!

[Chemisse]

81. I feel there is a limit to how responsible we have to be for others

While I think most vaccinations are really important, I don't care for the notion that we have to get them to protect others. Those who cannot be vaccinated, for whatever reason, need to do what they have to do to protect themselves, not rely upon - and expect - herd immunity.

That is akin to banning all foods and substances that can cause severe allergies (peanut butter, latex, etc) in order to protect the handful of people who suffer from those reactions. Those who are subject to such responses need to act to protect themselves.

[trotsky]

83. Wow, that's one of the foulest, libertarian things I've ever read on DU.

The weakest among us "need to do what they have to do to protect themselves"?

So they need live in a plastic bubble all their lives, forsaking any human contact?

That is absolutely disgusting. I never thought I'd see such garbage on here. All in the name of uninformed zealotry against vaccines.

[xchrom]

84. +1

[HuckleB]

86. +2

[LeftishBrit]

100. Actually I've seen much fouler and more RW-libertarian...

I have actually seen people say that vaccinations and other aspects of modern medicine create a culture of dependency on vaccines, drugs and surgery (akin to the economic Right talking about financial help for poor people). I have read a post that said that I have seen people say that those who use modern medicine or go to doctors do so because they just can't be bothered to take responsibility and educate themselves about their bodies. I have seen a post which said that the current levels of vaccinations, together with other aspects of modern safety rules and consumer protection, create a 'society of wimps'. I have seen links to Ron Paul supporters, the Daily Mail, and even teabagger sites. This post is mild in comparison.

[Chemisse]

101. I am not RW, nor am I libertarian - and in fact, I am not antivaccine

I just think people need to work to protect themselves. It's called personal responsibility.

It would be nice if everybody got vaccinated - and therefore conferred 'herd immunity' - but people do not have an obligation to them to do so, just like we don't have to ban peanut butter to protect those with severe allergies. Thankfully, we have the freedom to make choices in our lives.

People are quick to condemn anything other than posts that show 'herd thinking' that agrees precisely with theirs. It's embarrassing really to see that we Democrats can be just as narrow minded and intolerant as the Republicans.

By the way, I'm pretty sure I just said what other people were thinking - but were afraid to post!

[iverglas]

85. thank you, I am so grateful for your concern

Those who cannot be vaccinated, for whatever reason, need to do what they have to do to protect themselves, not rely upon - and expect - herd immunity.

Yes ... so, because I was UNABLE to acquire an immunity to rubella (not unable to be vaccinated), I should have remained confined to my sterile bathroom for the duration of whatever pregnancy I might have undertaken. I guess. Or hell, just had my own self sterilized and forego reproducing, rather than ask you to inconvenience yourself slightly.

Herd immunity has always been an aim, and a perfectly legitimate aim, of public vaccination programs.

Your position is consistent with a particular perversion of particular 18th century thoughts.

In a slightly later lexicon, it was expressed as Fuck you, Jack, I'm all right.

Never found the ideology or its adherents particularly attractive, myself.

[iverglas]

87. what I should have pointed out

was that in terms of my own post, you have actually quite improperly muddled your apples and oranges.

Those who cannot be vaccinated, for whatever reason, need to do what they have to do to protect themselves, not rely upon - and expect - herd immunity.

I'm the one who is evidently unable to become immune to rubella -- but I was the one attempting to acquire immunity in order to protect others, not myself.

I had no way of knowing who in my entourage might not be immune to rubella (remember, my cohort preceded the vaccine). I happened to have an indication that I might not be immune, having had the disease twice. I didn't feel at risk myself at the time; I felt like a potential Typhoid Mary.

Speaking of whom -- Typhoid Mary -- should the rest of the world have just acted to protect themselves in that case? In case you aren't familiar: she was immune to typhoid, but was a carrier. She refused to adhere to instructions not to work in food preparation, for instance. Should the rest of the world just never have left their homes?

Why should people capable of being disease carriers not have the onus of not infecting other people?

You can't just walk around the world punching other people in the face. Why would it be acceptable to walk around the world spreading disease?

[trotsky]

88. I've seen anti-vaxers right on this board...

who stop just shy of admitting that those who get sick and die shouldn't be part of our gene pool anyway. The worst of these touted her own family's supposed hardiness as proof. To this day that person remains on my Ignore list. There are some vicious, foul, nasty people on the anti-vax side. They certainly don't meet any definition of "liberal" that I've ever seen.

[HuckleB]

91. Hippocrates would puke: Doctor hoaxed parents into denying kids vaccine

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2010/02/06/2010-02-06_hippocrates_would_puke.html

[HuckleB]

92. In a nutshell: Recanting well and good, but damage already done

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/fyi/recanting-well-and-good-but-damage-already-done-83703837.html

"IN 2007, an epidemic of mumps began in the Maritimes, linked to a virus originating in Britain. This was surprising, because hardly anybody gets the mumps anymore. In fact, I may have been the last recorded natural case of mumps in the industrialized world, being stricken by the disease as I was in the 1950s.

Fortunately -- there are people who may differ on the choice of that word -- I suffered neither the sterility nor death that the mumps can sometimes cause, and only a few people have suffered from mumps since because of the availability of a vaccine against childhood diseases such as the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine -- that offers immunity from these former plagues.

At least, only a few people would have suffered from it were it not for an egregiously wrong and harmful medical study published in the prestigious British medical journal The Lancet 12 years ago. The paper, written by Dr. Andrew Wakefield and a train of lesser colleagues, purported to link the MMR vaccine to autism, which was then and still is on the rise in Western societies.

The sparked an international public hysteria that saw parents in Britain, Europe and North America refusing to vaccinate their children against MMR for fear of infecting them with autism. The result was a resurgence in these ancient diseases, which we had been in a position to eradicate, but no decline in the rate of autism as it developed among our children. In this context, it was the worst of all possible worlds.

..."

[HuckleB]

93. The damage of the anti-vaccination movement

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/05/opinion/la-oe-fumento5-2010feb05

[trotsky]

94. Great OpEd.

Lack of herd immunity is what killed Gabriella "Brie" Romaguera. The New Orleans baby died of pertussis, or whooping cough. At one time, this disease afflicted more than 250,000 American children yearly, killing 9,000. Vaccinations reduced that to just 1,000 new cases annually by 1976; but by 2008, cases had soared to more than 10,000 annually.

Brie contracted the disease when she was a month old, too young for her first pertussis vaccine. "I'm not laying blame," her mother, Danielle, told me. "But people need to know they can infect other people's babies. It kills. People think these diseases don't exist anymore, but that's only because children are being vaccinated."

According to a certain poster above, I guess that baby should have just taken precautions. Stupid baby! :sarcasm:


On edit - the paragraph right after those deserves to be quoted here too. Just way too good to pass up. :)

Romaguera is especially upset by "celebrity science," as exemplified by Jenny McCarthy. The actress and former Playboy playmate claims vaccines made her son autistic but that she "cured" him. There is no cure. McCarthy's antics include yelling at three physicians on "Larry King Live," and exclaiming: "My son died in front of me from a vaccine injury!" Her son is alive, as she later acknowledged.

[HuckleB]

96. Exactly!

Great pulls. I doubt the poster above gives a crap, however.

[HuckleB]

95. Additional Evidence Refutes Vaccine-Autism Link (yet another study)

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/178638.php

[HuckleB]

97. 14 monkeys

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2010/02/14-monkeys/

[HuckleB]

98. The “EPA Mercury Limit” Canard

http://www.autismstreet.org/weblog/

[HuckleB]

99. Vaccines Don’t Cause Autism -- Smithsonian

http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/2010/03/04/vaccines-dont-cause-autism/

[trotsky]

102. Everyone knows the Smithsonian is just a tool of BIG PHARMA!

:P