Why did Jesus tell some believers not to vaccinate their kids, but not the rest? He didn’t say anything to my parents, so we got all our shots. Is there a special sign, like a burning Rite-aid, to let you know that Jesus isn’t a fan of vaccinations? I’m so confused…
You’re welcome, my pleasure!
Subclinical infection means infected with the germ (as documented by a rise in antibodies, culture of the germ, or other test such as PCR) without any clinical sign of being ill, hence infected without clinical disease. Most likely people with subclinical infection are not contagious but it is theoretically possible that they may be to some limited extent. This is different than break through disease which is often contagious but to a much lesser degree than disease in unvaccinated individuals.
Charging Mr. A higher premiums because he might infect Mr. B makes sense only if A’s insurer is the same company as B’s insurer.
(Of course this leads to another one of many many arguments favoring single-payer medical care, but such a Communistic system would never be acceptable in the Land of the Free ®. )
I was not arguing in my post the pros or cons of vaccination. Believe it or not, I am not “anti-vaccine”. I AM in favor of individuals retaining the right to accept or reject any or all vaccinations and have personally chosen not to vaccinate myself or my children. I respect the right of everyone else to make their own decision based on their own circumstances and/or beliefs.
Just for the record. I have zero interest in “converting” anyone or even in “arguing” for or against. But I refuse to have my experience and educated decision or that of others attacked as ignorant or selfish without pointing out some of the faulty logic and unfounded bias such attacks are based on.
In my post I was simply pointing out that the vaccinated can and do serve as a reservoir of and vector of infection (something that, admittedly, has not been as widely explored as some other aspects, but has been frequently cited as the most probable scenario and/or a very probable phenomenon in general and worthy of more focused study) AND that periodic boosting through exposure to the “wild” agent and subclinical re-infection in the vaccinated is a crucial component of persistent vaccine immunity, as it is for persistent natural immunity.
Dseid, that last point is NOT a “bullshit comment”…it is a well-documented and widely accepted scientific FACT.
Again, not arguing whether or not it is better or worse or neutral to have high levels of vaccine-immunity or natural immunity in a population…just stating the fact that boosting in the form of periodic exposure is a crucial component of BOTH and to single out the unvaccinated as the only possible “carriers” and a dire threat is erroneous . Not only are they not the only possible vectors of contagion, the circulation of wild agents they sometimes facillitate is vital to the “herd immunity” so lauded by vaccine proponents.
Look at the varicella vaccine, for instance. Natural immunity has historically been very persistent, and shingles an affliction of mostly elderly or immune-depressed patients. Following mass vaccination of children, shingles is emerging as a much more common affliction and affecting much younger populations. Why? Hell, we knew why beforehand: mass vaccinations (even as piss-poor as this one is at preventing even clinical illness) reduces the periodic boosting through exposure to the wild virus that has historically kept adult immunity high. So now we have KIDS and young adults getting shingles, which carries a significantly higher rate of complications and death than chicken pox in children does, and a new vaccine to artificially boost the immunity of both the naturally immune and vaccine immune.
Or take Rubella… There is ample evidence from numerous studies spanning decades that sub clinical infection is common among vaccinated populations with high antibody levels and apparently persistent vaccine immunity. And that such “re-infection” is more common in the vaccinated than it is in the naturally immune. AND there have been multiple documented cases in which a vaccinated and apparently immune woman developed a sub clinical rubella infection in her first trimester and passed it, in a clinical form, to the fetus.
If boosting only occured via booster doses of vaccines, the immunity of the vaccinated would wane much more rapidly than it often does. In this sense, the unvaccinated who contract the clinical infection serve a valuable function, triggering subclinical infections in the vaccinated and boosting their immunity between booster doses of the vaccine. And since natural immunity is almost always more persistent and reliable than vaccine immunity, the unvaccinated who have gained natural immunity protect others in that way as well.
Consider that the main reason the measles vaccine is being urged to be given at younger ages is that naturally immune mothers pass on antibodies which persist much longer than vaccine immune mothers do…as a result, most infants are now vulnerable to measles at an earlier age than ever before, at an age when infection is much more dangerous than the traditional age of contraction.
And the boosting of measles immunity in older childen and adults does not just occur in Africa…it is a critical factor in the developed, mostly vaccinated world as well. Without it, the doses of vaccine would have to be much more frequent and it is well known how difficult it is to acheive anywhere near adequate compliance among adults.
Absolutely, the course of infection in vaccinated subjects tends to be much milder or subclinical, which is a perfectly valid justification for vaccinating yourself and your children. It is not, however, a sound argument for villainizing the unvaccinated as “selfish” or a serious threat to the vaccinated or herd immunity.
FTR, re’ the OP, my kids (now almost 19 and 11) have NEVER incurred any medical costs due to illness, only some due to injuries (stiches, a mild concussion) and are almost amazingly healthy compared to the the thousands of kids I’ve worked with over the years. Maybe 1 cold a yr which resolves in a few days, some other viral illness every several years, no chronic conditions or complaints. My son’s case of chicken pox at age 3 was very mild, almost subclincal, and didn’t require an office visit, very like 99% of the thousands I’ve seen over the years.
WTF should WE have to pay higher premiums when we hardly ever NEED a Dr? Annual check-ups and clean bills of health is our norm. :dubious:
A few cites which speak to transmission and “wild” boosting:
JAMA 1978 Dec 8;240(24):2635-7
“…Despite the persistence of antibody titers, there was evidence of subclinical rubella among both groups of vaccinated students…”
Pediatrics 1975 Sep;56(3):380-7
“…Subclinical reinfection evidenced by antibody increase was commonly seen in persons who had been vaccinated, much as follows the natural infection.”
Biken J 1978 Mar;21(1):25-31
“…None of the 35 subjects in a previously vaccinated group developed rubella, although the rate of subclinical reinfection in this previously vaccinated group was higher (35%) than that in the naturally immune group (17%). Three cases of subclinical reinfection were detected even among 6 previously revaccinated subjects.”
Med J Aust 1982 Jun 12;1(12):514-5
“…We report a case of a patient who had a subclinical rubella infection in the first trimester of pregnancy which resulted in the delivery of a baby suffering from congenital rubella. Rubella virus vaccine, liver attenuated (Cendevax) vaccine had been administered to the mother nearly three years before, with proven seroconversion from a rubella haemagglutination-inhibition titre of 1:10 to 1:80.”
Eur J Pediatr 1988 Feb;147(2):195-6
“…A newborn boy was admitted with a congenital rubella infection. Seven years previously his mother had been vaccinated against rubella; 3 years previously rubella immunity had been confirmed. Therefore, intrauterine transmission must have occurred after maternal reinfection during pregnancy.”
J Infect 1997 May;34(3):273-6
“…We report a documented case of rubella reinfection during pregnancy in a previously vaccinated woman with residual antibody titre to rubella of 15 IU/ml….which resulted in transmission of the virus to the fetus. Umbilical cord blood drawn by cordocentesis was found to be strongly positive for rubella IgM antibody. After termination of the pregnancy rubella virus was isolated in cell culture from fetal tissues.”
Re’ boosting:
Rev Infect Dis 1985 Mar-Apr;7 Suppl 1:S91-4
“…The high percentage of women with persistent rubella antibodies 15 years after vaccination might be explained in part by the presence of subclinical reinfections due to a wild rubella virus.”
Vaccine 1989 Aug;7(4):345-8
“…During a serological survey to examine the immunity status of the vaccinees, it was discovered that a temporary increase in measles antibodies took place in the majority of the population 2-4 years after the vaccination. This was not accompanied by clinically observed measles. Most likely, it was due to an inapparent measles infection in a population considered highly immune after vaccination.”
J Egypt Public Health Assoc 1992;67(3-4):369-78
“…Seropositives represented 77.4% (24/31) of Group III preschool children and the majority of them 75% (18/24) showed high antibody level which was significantly higher than the comparable in Group II infants, most probably due to subclinical infection in addition to successful vaccination.”
Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi 1996 Apr;17(2):70-2
“…The rate of subclinical infection of the three classes was between 18.5%-75.0%, with an average of 45.1%……The epidemiological significance of subclinical measles infection lies in that it can actively keep and consolidate the level of immunity to certain extent in a crowd who had been inoculation (sic) against measles."
Thank you, Dseid.
For someone who allegedly isn’t “anti-vaccine” you sure are coming across that way, Interested Observer. That’s a fairly common gambit with the anti-vax nuts. They argue they aren’t against vaccines just in favor of safer vaccines. Then they basically argue that no vaccines are safe so we shouldn’t vaccinate.
I personally do not respect the choice not to vaccinate a healthy child. That choice is stupid, dangerous and puts other very vulnerable people at risk. As someone who is presently pregnant I am infuriated at the thought that someone else’s lack of understanding of this subject may put myself or my unborn child in danger of getting a disease uncessarily.
The anti-vaxxers are a dire threat to many vulnerable populations. For example unvaccinated childrenare 23 times more likely to get whooping cough. You are completely downplaying such risks. ’
You’re also ignoring the very real dangers of these disease. Congenital rubella infection is rare today. You know why? Because we vaccinate. Measles is also thankfully rare today. Again because we vaccinate.
Statements like, “and since natural immunity is almost always more persistent and reliable than vaccine immunity, the unvaccinated who have gained natural immunity protect others in that way as well,” are simply arrogant, obnoxious, ill informed, infuriating bullshit.
Vaccination is a form of natural immunity. And a far safer one than getting getting diphtheria or infected with polio. The unvaccinated who get such diseases don’t do the rest of us some sort of favor. They spread needless disease, impose medical costs on people and unfortunately suffer when they don’t have to. There’s nothing good about a baby with whooping cough. There’s nothing to be said for a child covered in chicken pox sores or infected with hib.
Nothing at all.
I don’t need to get measles to protect my baby from measles. I got the shot more than twenty years ago. What I need is for people like you to stop spreading misinformation until my baby can get vaccinated at the appropriate time.
FYI, my vaccinated daughter hardly ever get sick. She hasn’t been home from school a single day this entire year. I suppose that’s anecdotal evidence but it’s as good as anything you’ve presented here in your little love letter to infectious disease.
No, you conflated theoretical possibility with proven fact.
Hard to believe, given your history of ill-informed antivax posts. Similarly, I’d have trouble accepting you as not being anti-fluoridation, since you’ve posted here previously on the alleged evils of fluoridation (including the hilarious “fact” that fluoride is a byproduct of nuclear bomb manufacture). Crank magnetism at its finest.
In other words, you’re against the mandatory vaccination programs that have eliminated or hugely reduced the incidence of serious, crippling and fatal infectious diseases. But you’re not anti-vaccine. Got it.
InterestedObserver continues to try to misinform us about the effect of vaccination on disease transmission - claiming without evidence that a “reservoir” of infection is maintained in the vaccinated. This is, to use a DSeidian term, bullshit. It makes no sense, given what we know about outbreaks of vaccine-preventable disease that are heavily associated with cases of demonstrated clinical illness imported into the U.S. and mostly spread through the unvaccinated.
The following links debunk IO’s claims about the varicella (chickenpox) vaccine, including the dogmatic statement that it has increased shingles incidence (not established, plus we have a vaccine against shingles that reduces shingles incidence/severity in the elderly), that it is ineffective (it actually provides immunity in 90% after two shots) and that natural immunity is lots better than vaccine immunity (reoccurrence/reinfection can occur after you have “natural” chickenpox, plus the vaccine has a good record of inducing long-term immunity).
I’m running out of patience with the rest of this Gish Gallop of ignorance (lovingly culled from what antivax site, we can only guess), but to address one last claim:
In this through-the-looking-glass world, unimmunized people who transmit potentially deadly diseases to kids (and immunosuppressed adults) are performing a public service, you see. :rolleyes:
According to this logic, to hell with seat belts if you’ve never been in a car accident, toss out those smoke alarms if your house has never been on fire etc. Of course, IO’s family has been leeching off the herd immunity of the vaccinated all these years, otherwise she’d know what measles, whooping cough and so on are really like.
God knows what dreck we’d be seeing from IO if she actually was anti-vaccine. 
You’ve been around here long enough to know that anecdotal evidence is not valid in discussions like this. Your stories of your oh-so-healthy children must be taken into the context of the rest of the data regarding children’s health, and the data regarding the societal costs of non-vaccination.
You are anti-vaccine, in spite of your protestations to the contrary, and your posting history on this issue is evidence of this. At least have the honesty to admit your particular bias in this issue.
I will ignore the rest of your nonsensical Gish gallop as others have addressed it sufficiently.
It is obvious from your post that YOU are the “radical” here, not me. Not only do you not respect my right to choose (as I do yours) you actively attack me as a threat and ignorant and some of the FACTS I share (e.g. that natural immunity is almost always stronger and more persistent than vaccine immunity and serves to protect others in the same manner but even more reliably than vaccine immunity…(A FACT, look it up) as “infuriating”. Sweet. Actually, that fact IS rather infuriating, considering the epidemiological implications of waning immunity, lack of compliance with booster doses and shifting strains but now I am getting all complex again…forgive me. 18 years of research into all aspects of a subject will do that to a gal.)
I fully support your choice to vaccinate your children. You won’t find me attacking you for your decision, even if I, personally, have made a different one. Even if I find your arguments simplistic and erroneous, just regurgitations of the dumbed-down, standard public presentations put forth by vaccine cheerleaders. See? We DISAGREE…that’s ok. You have insulted MY intelligence and character so don’t even TRY to act like my comments above are some sort of horrible slander in an otherwise civil discussion. :rolleyes:
You wanna talk as one mom to another? As one reasonable intelligent, decent individual to another? (probably not..you apparently already have me pegged as the enemy:smack:).
When my son, now on the verge of 19 and making straight A’s at the same university I attend currently (WOW, they DO grow up so damn fast it makes your head spin! :eek:), was 2 mths old, I took him in for his first round of vaccines (at the time, oral polio, DPT, and the recently added Hib..a hell of a lot more vaccines and doses on the schedule NOW than in 1992, and more on the way, each a bit of a crap-shoot..good luck and I support your right to acept some and refuse others as you see fit).
He took the shots and oral dose fine..never so much as whimpered. He was a perfectly healthy, full-term, born at home, breastfed, happy baby with no family history of neurological disorders (aside from a great uncle on my side who was narcoleptic) or other pre-existing conditions. I didn’t think twice about taking him in on schedule. I was a Child Development professional (a degree and about 8 years experience in the field at the time) and never gave it a second thought. It was just what you DID.
15 minutes after we left the clinic, he started crying and acting oddly. By the time we got home a few minutes later, he was SCREAMING and thrashing in my arms. His little leg (at the injection site) sported a hard, hot, red, painful inflammation slightly smaller than a tennis ball.
I called the nurse and reported his symptoms. I was poo-pooed as a “overprotective new mother” and told the symptoms were “normal.” WTH did I know? Maybe they WERE. They DID sort of seem similar to the “common reactions” listed on the handout they sent me home with. Feeling properly chastised, I hung up.
He went on to experience 6 hours of “stiffening and staring” (seizures), “high-pitched screaming” and “collapse” (other evidence of “central nervous system involvement”), and eventually fell into a 12 hour period of “unrousable sleep” (near coma). I called back twice, describing his symptoms and was told he was “just fussy/angry/sleepy all perfectly normal mild reactions following vaccination.” and told to give him Tylenol and relax.
BullSHIT! But I was woefully ignorant re’ what constituted “normal” and what “abnormal” and allowed my concerns to be brushed off. :o
As I later learned through my research in medical journals at the library (I didn’t even HAVE internet then or have any idea there was any such thing as “anti-vax”) his was a “classic” severe reaction to the pertussis vaccine, considered a “contraindication to further doses of the product” and that subsequent reactions could be, based on the evidence, more severe, possibily even permanently disabling .
Years later, I met a young woman of about his age, the daughter of a girlfriend of an old friend, who was profoundly retarded and a parplegic as the result of her 3rd dose of DPT…she had reacted in exactly the way my son had with her first, but her mother had been urged to continue on schedule. She had a similar reaction with her second dose but the Drs’ STILL pushed the schedule. She got a settlement from VAERS, based on the testimony of several attending physicians that the vaccine was the direct cause of her disability. There but for the grace of God go me and my kid, I thought, and still do. 
Needless to say, his father (who had come home in the midst of the chaos) and I decided to say HELL NO to any further doses until we had looked into the matter further. I soon found the culprit (the pertussis component of the DPT) and went on to research the other vaccines and vaccines in general.
My ultimate decision was based on my growing awareness of the complex nature of the issue and what I concluded was in the best interests of my child(ren) AND everyone else.
It does not bother me that you disagree, even strongly, with me on my conclusion. It DOES bother me that you apparently see me as selfish, ignorant and seeking to influence or deny YOUR right to choose what YOU conclude is best for your kids/yourself/everyone.
MY kids are no threat to yours. Yours are protected, right? Isn’t that the whole point of vaccinating them? :rolleyes: Even IF either of mine had ever spread some VPD. If they had, they’d have most likely simply boosted YOUR kid’s immunity via a subclinical infection.
But you go right on thinking that you are the selfless one, sacrificing your children for the good of humanity, while the irresponsible, selfish non-vaxers place us all at horrible risk, being so selfish as to actually contract clinical illness, boost both natural and vaccine immunity and gain natural immunity themselves. :eek::rolleyes:
Yeah, I’m a bit snippy. The tone of this thread and of your post pisses me off.
Btw, if you want to protect your new baby from pertussis, as we all should be concerned with, isolate her/him and/or carefully monitor contact with others for the 1st several months. The vaccine wanes by as early as age 7, resulting in widespread asymptomatic infections in older kids, teens and adults and takes 4 doses to confer an estimated 85% immunity to infants (by which time they are well past the age of highest risk for complications). The booster dose is not yet widely complied with and not always 100%, as with any vaccine/immunity in general.
LOTS of folks, vaccinated and otherwise, going around carrying pertussus, most with mild or no symptoms. One cough or sneeze could infect your new baby. So be cautious.
We do not respect your right to choose because your right to swing your fist ends at our nose. If you want to cripple yourself, go ahead, but don’t put everyone else at risk by spreading contagious diseases out of some misguided belief that you have the right to do so.
And people will regard you as a threat and ignorant when you choose to protect measles and other diseases from extinction out of ignorance.
Interested Observer,
I see you a threat because you are a threat. You are arguing in favor of measles, chicken pox, mumps and a few dozen other contagious diseases. How is that not a threat to the rest of us?
If I vaccinate nothing happens to you and your children. If you don’t vaccinate for non-medical reasons you can easily serve as a serious threat to my children. If you had really “done your homework” as you claim you would know that a) vaccines don’t work all the time and b) young babies cannot get many vaccinations until they are older.
I DON’T WANT VACCINE PREVENTABLE DISEASES.
If you do, find a little island and enjoy feeling your reproductive organs swell up from mumps, your hearing go away from measles and your throat close over from diphtheria. Because that’s how you get immunity that way. You get the disease. And it sucks. The anti-vaccine nuts are always yelling about vaccine reactions yet they insanely seem to welcome dangerous diseases that are fifty thousand times worst.
Reading anti-vaccine websites and posting unsubstantiated claims about vaccines does not constitute research.
A booster shot is not the end of the world. Vaccines have greatly reduced infant mortality rates. Natural immunity doesn’t always work (for example you can get chicken pox more than once as well as whooping cough and diphtheria) and carries serious risks.
From one mother to another mother do you know what a “real mother” was back before vaccines? A “real mother” was a mother who had lost a baby. Do you know anyone who has lost a baby to a vaccine preventable illness? Do you know anyone who recently had a child who died from measles or polio or diphtheria or tetanus or hib?
Well neither do I.
This is not ancient history.
I was reading the book Inside the Victorian Home by Judith Flanders a few months ago. Do you know what she wrote?
“as late as 1899 more than 16% of all children did not survive to their first birthday." page 77 "by the time they reached the age of five 35 out of every 45 children had had either smallpox, measles, scarlet fever, diptheria, whooping cough, typhus or enteric fever.” pg 80
I have a grandmother who was born in 1898.
If your child had a vaccine reaction they may not be able to get further vaccines. The dumbest thing you could possibly do in that case is to argue against vaccines for everyone else who can. They serve as your son’s only protection against dangerous and contagious diseases. Without vaccination such diseases will be back. Your unvaccinated children will be at huge risk then. My newborn gets protected by people vaccinating their children. All the handwashing in the world isn’t going to protect her from hib.
FYI, my daughter had a vaccine reaction at two months. Thanks to people like yourself who spread misinformation on this subject I spent hours and hours terrified I’d ruined her life.
She’s fine now. Just like your son. A vaccine reaction is not the end of the world. Better to have a scary bout of high pitched crying than months of turning blue and cracked ribs from whooping cough.
You’re annoyed? Believe me you aren’t a hundred as annoyed as I am by anti-vaxxers like yourself and your nuttery. This issue is NOT all that complex. Parenting is complex. Parenting is hard work. Parenting is confusing and frustrating. Wonderful but scary as hell.
Work at home or stay home? Breast feed or bottle feed? How do you teach your child to be a kind and generous person? How do you cope with a preschooler who won’t go to bed? A small child who isn’t potty trained at three? A reluctant reader?
That stuff is hard. That stuff is scary.
Do you know what isn’t scary? Vaccines. Vaccines are actually the easiest of parenting decisions. If you can get your child vaccinated you should get your child vaccinated. If you can’t you should beg others to do so or your baby can get seriously ill.
Please stop making the easy stuff hard and then whining when people get upset at you.
oh!
I see you weren’t talking about a dumb tax in this thread.
Well, I guess my vote is yes on two levels then.
I will reiterate the FACTS that 1. the vaccinated rely upon periodic boosting via “wild” exposures and widespread subclinical infection to sustain their immunity 2. natural immunity is far more persistent and reliable than vaccine immunity 3. the vaccinated typically experience subclinical infections in the event of exposure as opposed to the clinical cases typically seem in the unvaccinated.
No-one, for all their angry objections, has yet adequately challenged ANY of those FACTS. Yet they expect to be allowed to base their arguments on foundations which ignore or reject these facts. :rolleyes:
Shit, I could just as easily claim that YOUR vaccinated kids are placing MINE at risk by denying them natural immunity in childhood to infections which are far more dangerous later in life and otherwise eroding natural immunity.
This thread is long on personal, ideological attacks and short on serious, factual debate on the facts of epidemiology, immunology and other aspects of vaccination. No surprise…the knee-jerk reaction of the rabidly “pro-vax” faction is in full force, as always.
You have yet to prove that I or my children are placing you or anyone else at risk. You have not even bothered…hell, it’s a given, right? :dubious:
You speak of “extinction”(erradication)..that’s an interesting topic. It is increasingly apparent that this a much more complicated proposition in most cases than previously assumed (the wild virus turning out to be crucial in sustaining vaccine immunity and capable of mutating under the pressure of mass vaccination).
Not to mention evidence of the symbiotic relationship between many of these organisms and the development of the human immune system which increasingly suggests eliminating these once common childhood immune challenges/infections/immunities is resulting in increased rates of immune disorders and chronic disease.
Perhaps it is semantics, but I must say again: I am NOT “anti-vax”. I am PRO-CHOICE and PERSONALLY opposed to vaccination FOR ME and MINE. Does that maybe help clear it up for those who can’t seem to wrap their brains around the idea that someone could not vaccinate but STILL support freedom of choice and respect the opinions and decisions of others and also NOT be active in any movement to convert others? Not that difficult of a concept. :smack:
Since when is it radical to use advancements in medical technology and understanding to save lives? Since when is it radical to use improved knowledge to improve people’s existences?
By choosing not to vaccinate your children, you participate in the process of putting all other children and other members of our society at risk. And you do it because you’ve been duped by people who do not have your best interests at heart.
You are a threat to herd immunity. You’ve been told, numerous times, by medical doctors and other people who are highly educated and for whom medical knowledge is their specialty, that many of your shared so-called facts are incorrect. You choose to disregard that information. That makes you not ignorant, but actively participatory in the passing on of incorrect information in the service of conspiracy-minded nutbags.
Eighteen years of reading biased information is not research. Eighteen years of only paying attention to information that confirms your pre-existing opinion is not research.
If you did, you would understand WHY vaccination is the right choice for everyone’s children, barring established medical health issues (such as actual reactions diagnosed by medical professionals and not frightened untrained parents).
Is there a point to this bragging? Other children, some of whom have even been vaccinated, are also capable of making straight As. Does his current status have a connection, in your mind, to his vaccination history? If not, why do you keep bringing up irrelevant descriptive information?
Your son had what must have been a scary reaction. It’s understandable that you’d be suspicious. It should also be understandable to someone who CLAIMS to have a degree in “Child Development” (whatever that is - an education degree?) that some children will have reactions to vaccines. Some of those reactions will be minor. Some of they may be more severe. Those reactions in NO WAY are indicative that vaccines, as a whole, should not be given to children as a group. Your understanding of sampling and the use of aggregate data is clearly problematic.
VAERS is a system by which parents and professionals can report vaccine reactions. Because it is based on self-report, and anyone (for example, a parent who is not a medical professional) can enter data into it, it is a contaminated source of information. It, being a database system, by definition cannot be the source of any so-called settlement.
There have been legitimate instances of unusual and unexpected reactions to vaccines. That’s true for any medical technology. The vast majority of people who understand statistical analysis recognize that the benefits (both actual and potential) of vaccines far outweigh the highly unlikely and exceedingly uncommon negative reactions.
Many people have “researched” and “found” information that supports their already-established opinions, but have failed to take into consideration information that disconfirms those opinions. It’s especially likely to occur when the “researcher” is highly emotionally involved in their “research,” and determined to find one particular outcome. It’s more especially likely to occur when performed by people who are untrained in the scientific method.
You simply do not understand epidemiology, medical science, herd immunity, or any of the other concepts that have been presented in numerous debates on this issue. By definition, you and your children, and the millions of people like you, ARE a threat. To other children. To other adults. To the health of society.
Tell us, do you believe that we’ve eradicated polio and smallpox in this country through vaccination? Or are you postulating hidden reservoirs of “subclinical infection” for these diseases which prevent people from getting sick?
Ludicrous, yes - but no sillier than claims that measles, rubella and the like are still circulating in quantity and that “subclinical” or overt illness is what’s keeping the vaccinated healthy.
No amount of fingers-in-the-ears while screeching “FACT!” will result in this making sense.
Another common antivax meme. By this logic we’d be even healthier if yellow fever, cholera, malaria and other diseases were still endemic. Our immune systems would be super-tuned up and everything would be hunky-dory, except for the dead, debilitated and chronically ill. (this view is a weird counterpoint to the argument that infants’ pristine immune systems are overloaded by vaccination, instead of the reality that vaccine antigens are a drop in the bucket compared to the daily antigenic challenges we all face).
Of course you’re antivax, and trying to convert others to your view. You wouldn’t have devoted so much time to “research”* (i.e. scouring antivax websites and the like) and posted so many long screeds if you weren’t. Open hostility to the entire idea of vaccination is a poor selling point when it comes to convincing others to follow your lead, which is why acknowledgement of being antivax is such a rarity.
*Just as “research” does not equal “echoing bogus information from like-minded people”, “evidence” is not synonymous with “an appealing theory I heard the other day”.
I am waiting for any CITES in support of the positively RABID, emotional attacks being hurled here…la la…
I keep reading that I am WRONG, IGNORANT, EMOTIONAL, SELFISH, MISINFORMED, DELUDED, a NUTTER, ANTI-VAXER, INCAPABLE OF INTERPRETING COMMON ENGLISH OR SCIENTIFIC THEORY, blah, blah, fucking BLAH…
But I have YET to find a serious taker who can actually provide PROOF/cites, anything actually relevent to the few basic, simple claims I have made, NONE of which were, unlike some of the “rebuttals”, based on “partisan” opinions regarding the politics of vaccination but on scientific aspects of the practice.
“Bullshit comment” does not suffice to rebut what is a widely acknowledged FACT.
It only expresses a disagreeement with my personal opinion and a refusal to debate/engage based on a strong loyalty to a pre-existing personal opinion.
I am accused of basing my views on “anti-vax sites” and “misinformation” even after I stated that I did all my research in medical journals. 
Gee, I must be LYING. :mad:
It is obvious that I am seen as “ANTI-VAX!” regardless of my repeated declarations that I am, in fact, “Pro-choice” on this issue…gee, I guess the concept of someone holding personal views regarding something but NOT seeking to impose them on everyone else is beyond the mental capacity of my fellow Dopers. :smack:
You guys are great overall, but you really SUCK when it comes to this issue…no serious, scientific debate or openess to ANYTHING that seems to contradict the party line, just violent lashing out, attacks on anything or one which raises ANY point which can be seen to challenge your deeply held beliefs. :eek: It is always a fucking blood-fest slash circle-jerk which virtually assures no dissenting opinions. ENJOY! 
Eh…I knew it when I first posted. Nevermind. Go ahead with your CDC and Offit dumbed-down talking points and feeling all superior to the selfish, unvaccinated fools. Please, go ahead…don’t let anything more complex get in the way of your simplistic understanding of the issue. :rolleyes:
You’ve been given cites, both in this thread and in the numerous other threads in which you’ve posted your anti-vaccine diatribes. You’ve ignored all of them.
You’ve been told why many of your statements are incorrect, and based on your inaccurate understanding of medicine, biology, and epidemiology. You’ve ignored that information.
It’s been pointed out to you that you repeating the word “FACT” over and over again does not make it so, and that many of the “FACTS” that you’ve listed…aren’t. You’ve continued to repeat the word “FACT” without responding to those statements.
People have attempted to explain to you why biased Googling and searching for cherry-picked and wrongly-interpreted data is not research, and why you are not an unbiased reporter of your own experience and your so-called knowledge. It’s been pointed out to you that you’ve misinterpreted a number of the articles you’ve posted in this thread. You don’t care.
You’ve been told how your supposed “pro-choice” arguments all, conveniently and coincidentally, echo the anti-vax websites and their talking points, and how it is highly unlikely that you are “pro-choice” when every single post from you about this issue is about how vaccines are terrible, horrible, no-good, very-bad things. Your response is to get defensive.
Enjoy your martyrdom.
Buried in IO false statements of “FACT” and twisted thought process that exposing kids to potentially deadly diseases is a good thing (because while a few will get disease, most will not, and of that majority who do not get the disease will be some who are better protected from the next exposure to an idiot anti-vaxxer’s child) is a key piece of the psychology behind the politics of the anti-vaxxer. It’s all about “choice”; where the line should be drawn. Yes, for many of the vaccines it is clear: people do not have the freedom to douse their kids in gasoline, give them a box of matches, and put them class with other kids … even if many of those kids never go up in flames and if the other kids are wearing flame retardant school uniforms. But a small number of mandated vaccines have not met a greater public health good threshold high enough to make that analogy fit, and the mandating of those vaccines motivated some to push back with overly broad brush strokes. The main I am thinking of is Hepatitis B. The risk that an unvaccinated to Hepatits B child poses to other children is extremely low as exposure requires blood or other body fluid contact. I believe that Hepatitis B immunization in childhood is good public health policy and good medicine but I cannot honestly say that someone who chooses to make what I see as a stupid decision is putting other elementary school children at risk and without that the line is not crossed. Yet it is a mandated vaccine. I point this out because I trace the current anti-vax movement to push-back against that mandate, which occurred in most states in the mid to late 90’s, and which was the political and psychological backdrop against which Wakefield’s MMR fraud was perpetrated.
Just providing some context. Yes, I have been at this a while. I’ve seen meningitis and overwhelming sepsis from Hib and from pneumococcus essentially disappear as mass immunization was implemented. I’ve taken care of babies in the PICU with pertussis.
And I am just too tired to come up with a good rabies vaccine joke.
Can we develop a vaccine against the overuse of smileys and emoticons in a single thread?
The fact that you are not familiar with these arguments and are demanding cites is a clear indication that you have not done any unbiased research outside of your anti-vax crowd. The scientific fact behind vaccinations is easily available, easy to understand (even for a layman) and goes back decades and encompasses millions of pages of data. It is clearly useless to provide them, and it’s my bedtime in any case.
I guess you won’t learn until your children get polio. I feel sorry for them.