Vaccination plunge

Post Reply New Topic

Yep.

You have to compare childhood mortality rates and you also have to balance problems legitimately caused by vaccines against not just deaths but other side-effects caused from these diseases as a result of not vaccinating (either by choice or lack of access.)

I have never heard of that person other than in relation the anti-vax movement. You can find a PHd somewhere to say anything, I would imagine. I am also not familiar with the incident in Quebec to comment.

However, this is in relation to an incident in Cali:

http://www.wired.com/2015/01/vaccinated ... accinated/

"That’s why the CDC recommends two doses of the vaccine: After the first dose, 5 to 7 percent of people won’t have a good enough antibody response to protect them. A second dose ensures that enough people get antibodies above that protective threshold to control the disease. “And even with two doses, you can get some failure,” says Wallace, “whether it’s because the initial response isn’t perfect, or because the response waned in some people.”

So how does that explain what happened in Disneyland? If you have a group of 1,000 people concentrated in a small space—like oh, say, hypothetically, an amusement park—about 90 percent of them will be vaccinated (hopefully). One person, maybe someone who contracted measles on a recent trip to the Philippines, moves around, spreading the virus. Measles is crazy contagious, so of the 100 people who aren’t vaccinated, about 90 will get infected. Then, of the 900 people who are vaccinated, 3 percent—27 people—get infected because they don’t have full immunity.

Now the Disneyland numbers—six vaccinated infections out of the 34 cases with known records—start to make more sense. (And considering the 16 million or so visitors the park gets every year, we might reasonably expect that number to go up.) Once vaccination levels dip below 90 or 95 percent, there aren’t enough protected people to keep the disease in check—the herd immunity that epidemiologists like to talk about so much. In the US, we’ve been doing pretty well keeping those numbers up. “But there are some fluctuations,” says Cristina Cassetti, program officer at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, “and if vaccination levels dip down a little, you get a situation like Disneyland.” "

Edited b/c the link showed up weird.

Yep. But that cuts both ways. Independent researchers are denigrated by corporate researchers for publishing research about a topic that the corporate researchers haven't researched (at least adequately). Should corporate researchers be denigrated for failing to publish the research that the independent researchers found necessary and, by doing so, refuted corporate presumptions? In other words, who is to blame?

Even if vaccines are somehow related to some cases of autism, I'd still have to say that autism beats the hell out of contracting diseases such as polio and smallpox.

It should be pretty obious to everyone that vaccines work pretty well. In the Netherlands measles only spreads in areas that have low vaccination rate for religious reasons. In the rest of the country the disease is gone.

In the U.S, we were well on our way to eliminating it as well before the whole anti-vax thing became popular with so many.

I think that anti-vax stuff came at a really bad time, since many of the diseases that people are vaccinated against are no longer within living memory. People do not fear those diseases anymore.

Read of a study that reckons hospital super bugs will kill more than cancer by 2050 and I''m too lazy to link this.

I've told them she is not having the HPV jab until she is older

Amen

It appears that Dr. Diane Harper was correct in 2008 when JudicialWatch.org reported that "[t]here are numerous critics of the Gardasil vaccine, but perhaps the most important is Dr. Diane Harper. Not only is she a specialist on HPV, she also helped to develop the Gardasil vaccine. In a television interview with CBS News on May 7, 2008, the doctor said that she viewed making the vaccination mandatory as 'A real danger zone,' adding: '...the vaccine has not been out long enough for us to have post-marketing surveillance to really understand what all of the potential side effects are going to be.' While Dr. Harper said she believes that the vaccine will be beneficial in the long run, she cautions: 'To put in process a place that says you must have this vaccine means that you must be part of a big public experiment and so we can’t do that. We can’t have that until we have more data.' It is unacceptable to mandate any vaccine without first testing it for effectiveness, safety, and long-term side effects. The Gardasil vaccine may be an important step in preventing cervical cancer, but it is a step that may cause other harms" https://www.judicialwatch.org/documents ... ecords.pdf at page 18.

Does it not seem at least slightly plausible that consideration of effects on subsequent generations should be evaluated? So many studies look at the effect only on the vaccinated, but how many studies have been done on the effects on children or grandchildren of vaccinated? Especially for a condition which is rapidly increasing and without any reasonable explanation so far and for a product that the Gardasil program shows can have adverse effects on the reproductive system?

Do you know what that would cost
And who do you think will pay for it
(Yes, I am being sarcastic)

I don't want to get into a vaccine war either (not much point, I don't suppose anybody will change their mind), but I do want to share a personal anecdote, just because I find they generally get shared a lot on the the anti-vax side of things.

Both of my kids are diagnosed with autism, but only my younger son regressed. He regressed starting around 13 months, which is right around the time he received MMR. This was in 2003, so closer to the Wakefield study and I definitely panicked and thought OMG he got autism from MMR. Our doctor was pro-vaccination and he told me with my older son (who was born in 1999, thus right after that study came out) that the study was BS. He told me that no way did my son get autism from the vaccines. I had conspiracy theory thoughts and thought "oh yes he did".

I thought about it a lot and realised that 4 other things coincided with my son's regression:
1. His first tooth came in.
2. He had his first taste of ice cream.
3. He got a little bit of sunburn on his arm for the first time.
4. He slept with a pillow for the first time

So why is it that I didn't think any of these caused autism? The only reason I could think of was that there was no study suggesting that they do. This is poignant (I think anyways) now, because that one study has been shown to be fraudulent, so there isn't really that study.

Maybe the sudden influx of sugar from the ice cream went to his brain and messed it up. Maybe the pillow slightly cut off his airway for a minute and caused his brain to be damaged. Maybe the UV rays messed up his brain. Maybe the pain from the tooth coming in messed up his brain. Could be.......

Also, the interesting thing about #1 on the list, is that this ALSO coincided with my older son's appearance of autism. I started to notice there was something "weird" about him when he was 4 months old. He also got his first tooth at...you guessed it... 4 months old. So WHY isn't there a study about getting your first tooth causing autism?!? It MUST BE that, right? But then again, it could just be a coincidence... kind of like how the vaccines timing could have been a coincidence...

My son actually has a really strong immune system- he is so rarely sick. Generally when talking about vaccines "triggering" autism, they talk about poor immune systems...well that does not apply here. Whatever the case may be, I do vaccinate my kids, and neither has ever had any other reaction to them. I have decided that I do not believe MMR caused my son's autism, despite the fact that they were correlated, and I've made this determination based on other things that I've learned about the nature of autism (such as, but not limited to, it being around since before MMR, and in fact knowing someone currently who has a kid with similar regressive autism who was not vaccinated at the time of regression).

Maybe I've been duped, but regardless, a decade afterwards, I am pro-vaccination.

Guess what, DD's first tooth came through somewhere around 3-4 months too. She lost her first milk tooth by the time she was 4. She got polio and diptheria jabs but never went with MMR and was diagnosed when she was 9 with HFA.


For as weird as this may sound though, early tooth development might be an indicator of having AS neurology ?
Is early tooth eruption common in AS children?

I wish there was a study on that somewhere...

Well, my second child (also autistic) got his first tooth at 12 months, which is late. That said, neither of mine have Asperger's (AS) so that doesn't provide evidence for or against anything specifically pertaining to AS. I guess it could be. If I recall correctly, I have a friend whose son has AS, who lost his first tooth at 3 years old- which is early for losing teeth (I do not know when his first teeth came in though).