Mandatory vaccinations vs. right to choose
POSTED BY: canttakesky
UPDATED: Thursday, December 7, 2006 07:56
VIEWED: 21145
PAGE 19 of 21
CTS asked what was the point of my adding links and posting verbiage other than the quotes she selected. I'm probably the only one interested in following her quotes, so if there are complaints about the length of this post I'll delete it.
CTS posted The documentation speaks for itself.
What I saw (after finding the sources and reading the summaries in full) was the post was highly edited. And all of the abstracts came from http://www.vaccinationnews.com/scandals/july_5_02/outbreaks_in_highly_
vaccinated.htm (In the interests of providing a potential trail for anyone to follow who might be interested - yeah, right 
- I’ve provided other links as well.)
CTS’s point in this post was that Vaccine Effectiveness in Question
I provided some extra text from the summaries to provide a fuller picture, and links so you can see if her claim stands up.
-----------------------------
Examples of outbreaks in fully and highly vaccinated populations:
Pertussis
--1997 Pertussis outbreak -- Vermont, 1996. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1997 Sep 5;46(35):822-6
http://www.cdc.gov/MMWR/preview/mmwrhtml/00049244.htm
CTS selection: This report describes a statewide outbreak of pertussis in Vermont (1995 population: 584,771) in 1996 in a highly vaccinated population, affecting primarily school-aged children and adults, and underscores the need to include pertussis in the differential diagnosis of cough illness in persons of all ages.
Rue selection Among 19 case-patients aged 7-47 months who were eligible to have received three or more doses of pertussis vaccine, five (26%) had received less than 3 doses. … Available pertussis-containing vaccines are not approved for use on or after the seventh birthday ...
-- 1991 Strebel P, Hussey G, Metcalf C, Smith D, Hanslo D, Simpson J. An outbreak of whooping cough in a highly vaccinated urban community. J Trop Pediatr 1991 Mar;37(2):71-6
http://tropej.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/37/2/71
Coverage studies for pertussis vaccine in Cape Town indicated that between 81 and 93 per cent of children were fully immunized by 13 months of age...However, it was not able to prevent a moderate scale outbreak, even in the presence of high vaccination levels.
In 1950 a whole-cell pertussis vaccine was introduced in Cape Town and was followed by a marked decline in reported whooping cough mortality and morbidity. (No indication of either single injection, or of recommended repeat injections.)
-- 2000 Simondon F, Guiso N. [Genetic evolution under vaccine pressure: the Bordetella pertussis model (French title)] Bull Soc Pathol Exot 2000 Jul;93(3):202-5
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&l
ist_uids=11030058&dopt=Abstract
Outbreaks [of pertussis] in highly vaccinated populations have been reported, raising the issues of vaccine efficacy, of the long-term effect of vaccines on the transmission of the disease, and of genetic selective pressure.
Read entire summary
Measles (Rubeola)
-- 2002 Transmission of measles among a highly vaccinated school population, Anchorage, Alaska, 1998. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1999 Jan 8;47(51-52):1109-11
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00056144.htm
This was the largest outbreak of measles in the United States since 1996.
33 confirmed * measles cases were reported to the Anchorage Department of Health and Human Services and the Alaska Department of Health and Social Services
Beginning in September 1996, all students entering kindergarten or first grade were required to have two doses of MCV. As a result, school records indicate that virtually all students in kindergarten through third grade as of fall 1998 had received two doses of MMR. However, the proportion of students in grades 4-12 that had two doses was unknown.
1 index case (imported from Japan)
1 16 year old high school student developed measles
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wow Rue, you do do the research!
Time for one of my unscientific swweeeppping generalizations:
Vaccines are like police; more often than not they do a good job.
Can we agree on that?
Donner Cut-nut Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Actually yes we can.
----------------
That's what I find almost sad about CTS's posts. I think vaccines are generally useful, but not universally so. And I think she could have said - you know, vaccines are probably mostly OK, just not for me and my kids. And I think it would have been reasonable and I would have been behind her all the way on that. But she goes on to try and paint them as so unproven and so potentially dangerous that the decision is a wash either way for everyone. And I have to wonder why. So what I think I read behind that is a lot of fear.
(added: also, I think some of the things she's trying to say are irresponsible.)
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Reads to me more like resentment.
Originally posted by rue:
So what I think I read behind that is a lot of fear.
I, myself, have had SO many dealings with truly crappy doctors, that I can feel some of CTS's frustration with the system.
Heck, it's got to the point where my first question to a new doc is "Did you see the movie Serenity?" If I get a no, I'm outta there
.Cutting through the felgercarb Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I guess I've been lucky. I've worked in hospitals for so long and have so much educational background that when I run across a stellar physician I hang on for years. And if I run across even a mediocre one, I let him/ her drift out of my life. And I'm not shy about arguing LOUDLY in the interests of family. My biggest issue is that I'm not into looking after myself so I don't get to the doctor until I'm in the ER. Which is going to be my new year's resolution (again) - I WILL take good care of myself.
Anyway Chris, is all - I need to haul off, dry some laundry and such. And it's late there, dude. So have a nice one and see you all on the other side ....
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:LOL.
Originally posted by freeradical42:
However, I'm not convinced that what CTS calls "inert" is the same as what a qualified doctor would call inert. There is a certain degree of medical expertise that they have that CTS does not.
You really don't need any medical expertise to know that a substance cannot be inert and "effective" at the same time. Vaccines are supposed to be "effective," are they not (or the FDA wouldn't license them)? That means they DO something, and are not inert, and should not serve as null controls.
Can't Take My Gorram Sky
----------
A disciple said to him, "I am ready, in the quest for God, to give up anything: wealth, friends, family, country, life itself. What else can a person give up?"
The Master calmly replied, "One's beliefs about God."
--Anthony de Mello, S.J.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:The point is, they DO fail.
Originally posted by rue:
What I see is this: examples go back 20 years. That’s a lot of time to find examples to show ‘failure’.
Quote:If vaccines are as effective as portrayed (90-95% effective), then the small percentage who experience vaccine failure should have been protected by herd immunity in a highly vaccinated population. They weren't. This raises the question if herd immunity works the way people think it does.
Cases of vaccination ‘failure’ are due to either normal rate of effectiveness (no vaccine is 100% effective),
Quote:They didn't expect waning of immunity until these outbreaks occurred. They used to think the immunity was lifelong, remember? The existence of these outbreaks document that vaccines DO fail after a while. And how long immunity lasts can sometimes be hard to predict. So people think they are buying a product that will last so long, and then they find out it breaks earlier.
expected waning of immunity with age - as in pertussis, or failure to receive the full complement of vaccination.
Quote:That IS interesting. People risk vaccine side effects in order to be protected. Then they find out they are taking a risk for a strain that isn't even the one out there. It's a good excuse for failure, but it doesn't change the fact that the vaccine failed to protect.
One interesting failure was due to the fact that the strain in the vaccine was not the infective strain.
Quote:I stand by my assertion that none of these studies is good science. But as I've said before, you can still interpret them very carefully, making sure the conclusion is very limited and supported by the actual data within the paper.
Finally, saying that there is “no good science” on vaccine safety and effectiveness, and then citing science to make your case is contradictory.
And here is the limited conclusion supported by all these papers: Vaccines and/or herd immunity DO fail in unexpected ways. Unexpected means the benefits for which you risk your health may not be the benefits you actually end up with.
You can quote the entire text of all the papers if you want. But I found that unnecessary. Nothing you can quote from these papers change the fact that vaccines and/or herd immunity do sometimes fail in unexpected ways.
Can't Take My Gorram Sky
----------
"I wish to become a teacher of the Truth."
"Are you prepared to be ridiculed, ignored and starving till you are forty-five?"
"I am. But tell me: What will happen after I am forty-five?"
"You will have grown accustomed to it."
--Anthony de Mello, S.J.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yes, but gelatin might qualify as inert, or other things might that you may think are "drugs." Sometimes saline is considered too little in the way of a positive control.
"See, morbid and creepifying, I got no problem with, long as she does it quiet-like."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Thanks Rue.
CTS- You really do pick and choose your facts, don't you?
I tried posting to this from a different angle, unfortunately my post got lost in cyberspace. What I noticed was that the papers referred to "outbreaks", not "epidemics", so I went hunting down the CDC definitions. Those terms are usually used interchangeably, but for common contagious diseases (like the flu, measles, pertussis etc) the CDC has a complex formula that flips over to "epidemic" when the number of deaths rises above a statistically significant level. Ergo, the difference between an epidemic that causes 9000 deaths and an outbreak of 33 cases with no deaths.
---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:The outbreaks apparently died off relatively quickly. But what this is telling me is that UNvaccinated children CANNOT depend on "herd immunity". Kind of argues in favor of vaccination, don't you think?
If vaccines are as effective as portrayed (90-95% effective), then the small percentage who experience vaccine failure should have been protected by herd immunity in a highly vaccinated population. They weren't. This raises the question if herd immunity works the way people think it does.
Quote:I dunno. I seem to remember needing regular tetanus boosters. As I recall, the knowledge was out there that at least SOME immunity wasn't lifetime. But that's the same with getting an actual infection. Some people just keep getting re-infected with certain viruses (like mono) over and over again...
They didn't expect waning of immunity until these outbreaks occurred. They used to think the immunity was lifelong, remember?
Quote:And people risk disease for a chance to get their temporary immunity the good old-fashioned way.
That IS interesting. People risk vaccine side effects in order to be protected. Then they find out they are taking a risk for a strain that isn't even the one out there. It's a good excuse for failure, but it doesn't change the fact that the vaccine failed to protect.
---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME