So in your opinion, what specific vaccines are good and should be given to children and/or the general population?
Any?
What level of vaccine safety would satisfy you? A 50% reduction in the (already very low) incidence of serious side effects? No serious side effects at all? No side effects of any kind whatsoever?
Answers would be appreciated.
1. what should we be vaccinated against
??? - We should be vaccinated against all common endemic infectious diseases for which a vaccine exists. At this time there are 13.
** 2. at what age should children get those vaccinations **
If you’d done any research, you’d know that children should be vaccinated as their immune system is developing and begin to increase their social interactions in their first years and their boosters should be before school age to increase their chance of immunity.
3. should the vaccines be lumped together with other vaccines into a mega vaccine
Yes, there maybe some cases of side effects but the benefits greatly outweigh them.
**4. could the vaccines affect certain people differently **
Yes, there maybe some cases of side effects but the benefits greatly outweigh them.
**5. what chemicals and preservatives should be part of vaccines **
Those that have been proven to be reliable and safe with minimal side effects through scientific method based on empirical or measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.
6. could vaccines have side effects
Yes, there maybe some cases of side effects but the benefits greatly outweigh them.
** 7. should the pharmaceutical companies who make the vaccines be shielded from liability suits.**
They are not shielded from liability in cases in which they have demonstratively been negligent, deceptive, or erroneous.
I wish Jenny McCarthy and the rest of her flock of anti-vaxxers could be held liable for the damages–and deaths–they’ve caused through their demonstrated negligence, error, and deception. Oh, and in case you’re into numbers, check out the body count as of a year ago. I’m quite fond of the zero count’s heading.
Clean water and sanitation certainly help, but the elimination of these diseases could happen only with vaccination.
These are good questions. Perhaps we should get the best experts, give them access to the data, give them funding for research, and listen to their results. We could have different centers for researching and controlling the various diseases. Perhaps call them collectively the “Centers for Disease Control.” Yeah, I like it, let’s do that.
More good questions. The Centers for Disease Control that I proposed above could look into these too! Only the best science, where we look at the potential side effects and balance those against the benefits to the population from limiting these terrible diseases that maim and kill kids. Keep a database of the adverse reactions that people have reported after having vaccines - not just the reactions that are proven to result from them, but everything so researchers can comb through the data looking for patterns. Of course this database will have lots and lots of listed reactions that were not caused by the vaccines, but I’m sure intelligent people can understand that.
Since the vaccines are produced by private companies, and there’s very little profit in them, and in our litigious society anyone can win money from a big corporation whether they were at fault or not, we’d be crazy to not protect them from lawsuits from adverse reactions that are not a result of their negligence. Perhaps what we could do would be to set up a fund for those known but rare adverse reactions, so that the parents of kids who have them can be compensated, but it wouldn’t drive the pharmaceutical companies out of the vaccine-producing business.
So thank you for your questions, UrbanRedneck. You highlighted several issues which society should address by:
Here’s my biggest problem with the “sanitation” argument: The last US polio epidemic happened long after indoor plumping and soap were invented. My aunt was crippled from childhood polio…she lived in a suburb of Chicago as a little girl. Hardly living a dirty pioneer lifestyle. We’re talking about the 1950’s, not 1550’s.
Not just Urbanredneck here, but for the group in general anywhere. Decisions were made and then evidence was accepted or rejected based on that, not the other way around.
Crazy talk. No nation could ever afford such measures.
And Polio was just utterly eliminated in India, where some parts have horrific sanitation.
Ideally it will give us the tools to convince you to not spread misinformation that will harm people.
Over the course of the last century, there have probably been multiple thousands (or tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands) of pages produced by doctors and researchers to document data, debate that data, and decide how to respond to it to advice the best possible outcome in an imperfect world. Many organizations, laws, medical school courses, and research institutes have been established on the back of the thousands of pages of research and debate.
If you read through the data and the debates surrounding it, it would be difficult for you to doubt whether sufficient care had been given to the topic. Granted, you might be 80 years old by the time you finished reading it all (ignoring new research and debate which came out while you were busy reading stuff from the last century), but you wouldn’t feel like the state of the world as we know it was some slap dash, aiming from the hip nonsense. And if you do feel that way, why do you?
It’s too bad LavenderBlue and Kolga don’t seem to be active here anymore but maybe the OP would be interested in reading the book they co-wrote: https://www.amazon.com/Your-Babys-Best-Shot-Vaccines/dp/144221578X?ie=UTF8&tag=viglink20265-20
Isn’t this just fishing for clicks in Andrew W’s name? And his movie too? Doesn’t this kind of promotion drive things up trending charts? Or not?
The OP Isn’t interested in dialogue or debate, not looking to be informed, why bother responding to any questions? And says as much openly!
They probably contain bug repellent the same way bridges are made of paper. They contain some ubiquitous chemical that is also in bug repellent.
Actually, I read a pretty thorough and well-reasoned argument that sanitation contributed to the polio epidemic of the 1940s-50s.
It was two-pronged, and went something like this: the original reason for the push to bottle over breast feeding was that bottle feeding was more sanitary, since bottles could be sterilized, and so could formula. No one knew about antibodies in breastmilk at the time.
At the same time that breastmilk antibodies were removed from children, their home environments were much more sanitary. People cleaned with vacuums, and bleach, and babies and toddlers were not allowed to play in dirt like they once had been, so they didn’t encounter wild polio when they were protected by their mother’s antibodies (or when they were newborns, and still protected by the antibodies they were born with-- people started keeping older children away from newborns). Anyway, children’s immune systems might encounter polio for the first time when they went to school, or were otherwise around lots of other unrelated children.
It’s interesting, but it’s also important to remember that polio in the US actually rose with the introduction of lots of hand-washing and other sanitation. Dozens of other diseases declined, but polio in particular rose. Some other diseases rose with the move to cities-- the measles was one. Some diseases aren’t good at being washed away, which is why vaccinations are so important.
Some children with certain problems cannot be vaccinated. That is one reason why it is so important to vaccinate everyone else who can be. If you let a bunch of parents not vaccinate their kids, they are putting these other kids - who are innocent - at risk. Just because the parents don’t understand the science and fall prey to the words of quacks like Wakefield? I don’t think so.
Take a look at the PDR. Everything has side effects. All medicines affect people differently. If that is a problem for you, you shouldn’t be taking anything.
My wife is working on a reasonably large book on vaccines, under contract, which I think will be out in 2017. There is a chapter on the Controversy. She is not planning on being fair and balanced. 
We can stir up the discussion again when it comes out. She gets royalties.
And this … CDC could have a center just for infectious disease , maybe call it a National Center for Respiratory and Infdctious Diseases
And maybe have a regulatory agency that checks into the safety of foods and drugs, perhaps a Food and Drug Administration
Oh, and we could call that adverse event thing something like "Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System
Will there be anything on how long vaccines are good for? I had asked my PCP about that and she said they don’t really know. I asked about getting a booster shot (because it’s been 40 years since I had chicken pox) and she said the insurance companies don’t pay for them for adults. The conversation came up because my middle son and oldest son had come down with chicken pox at the ages of 12 and 16. The youngest son had had 2 doses of CP vax, the middle had had 1 dose and the oldest had had a mild case of CP as a toddler (before the vax was around).
CDC has approved the shingles vaccine for adults over 50, but only recommends it for those over 60. Your insurance is much more likely to approve it at that point, although some do cover it at 50.
And we could have research on vaccine safety, including safety of giving multiple vaccines.
Post-marketing surveillance would also be nice.
But, but, what if all of that, along with the other nifty suggested “solutions”, don’t come up with the exact same answer that smoking hot* naked chick does?
*FTR: I don’t think that stupid bint, JM, is hot, anyway.