So what are the anti-vaccination people saying now that their evidence has turned to fraudulent poo?

Great Debates
41

OK, going to “out” myself as an “anti-vaxer” (in the sense that I do not take vaccines OR vaccinate my children but am 100% pro-choice and don’t try to sway anyone to my pov). Some very violent sentiment here, and I must represent a bit. Everyone who questions vaccination is NOT a flake or an idiot. Some of us have done our homework and have valid rationales.

Wakefield’s work was never, imo, credible due to his conflicts of interest and methodology. I DO happen to think his thesis of a permeable gut and live virus persistence IS a credible theory in autism. Too bad he mucked it up so terribly.

But this final, official discrediting of his study is moot. His work is hardly the fulcrum upon which “anti-vax” opposition rests. I feel no need to defend him or his study, and those who do make us ALL look bad, imo.

A bit of history: I hold a degree in child development and spent about 15 yrs. working with young children. I spent 5 yrs of that time working in a school with a very high percentage of unvaccinated children.

When my son was born (1992) I hadn’t really gotten around to looking into vaccination in any depth (hell, had the circ or not, the cloth vs. disposable, the BF vs. bottle, the co-sleep vs. crib, etc…to deal with…just was not a high priority)

So I ended up taking him in at 2 mths old to get his vaccines (at that time, the oral polio, the DPT, and the new Hib). He was a perfectly healthy baby, born at home, breastfed, no family history or anything to speak of. I was motivated by fear and ignorance and decided to do it “just in case” while I reached a more informed decision.

Within 10 minutes of the injections (which he tolerated fine…not a tear) he was crying and fussing. Within 20 minutes, the injection site of his DPT had swelled to the size of a tennis ball on his tiny thigh and was red and very tender to the touch.

Within 30 minutes or so, he had begun SCREAMING in a very high-pitched way and stiffening and arching his back in my arms, staring at me in a disturbing way, then going limp for a moment then doing it all over again. This went on for 6 hours or so.

I called the nurse…she assured me it was all normal. I tried to explain that his symptoms were far more severe than the “normal” ones which sounded similar (fussiness, crying, slight local reaction, etc…) she poo-pooed me. I, being an idiot new mother, wasn’t sure. So I paced with my baby, trying to comfort him.

After about 6 hrs, he finally fell asleep. An atypically deep sleep from which I was unable to rouse him to nurse. Lasted about 12 hrs. The next day, he seemed fine except for the still irritated leg, which he favored for many months, even after the swelling went down. (he learned to crawl with that leg held out at a right angle) .

His father came home in the midst of his reaction, and was shocked. We decided then and there that unless we could find any reason to vaccinate again that overrode this reaction, we wouldn’t.

I began my research that same day. I didn’t have the internet then…I sought out medical journals in the library. I learned that his reaction was a “classic severe reaction” to the pertussis component of the DPT (studies going back 50 YEARS documenting it) and that his “stiffening and staring episodes” were SIEZURES and a sign of “central nervous system involvement.” That his “high-pitched screaming”, aka the “encephalitic cry”, was another sign of CNS “involvement/damage”. And that his excessive sleepiness was another CNS symptom, a near coma, and yet another sign of a severe reaction.

I learned that a significant number of children who’d had a similar reaction had been rendered brain damaged and/or motor impaired with their first or subsequent doses. (much later, I knew a girl the same age as my son who ended up profoundly retarded and a paraplegic as a result of her 3rd DPT dose, afer reacting to her 1st as my son did…according to her Drs and VAERS, which of course, never admits anything…why it was set up)

I checked out the product insert, which informed me that any reaction like his was grounds to never allow a future dose. (this has since been changed; his reaction, considered for half a century to be “severe” and a “contraindication to further doses” is now classified as “moderate to moderately severe” and doses should continue. Yeah, right. What other bridge do you want to sell me?)

I continued my research. This episode piqued my curiosity, so I learned everything I could about all vaccines and vaccination in general, and continue to do so, and what I found convinced me that the practice is risky at best (for the individual and for the species as a whole) and of dubious benefit (ditto).

One thing I have learned is that this is a very complex issue, involving everything from individual variations to epidemiological considerations, and both those who are 100% “anti-vax” and those who are 100% “pro-vax” are often simplistic in their understanding.

FTR, anecdotal as it is, my son, now almost 18, and my daughter, now 10, have been and continue to be extremely healthy (based on my many yrs of experience with children) and have never experienced any adverse effects as a result of their un-vaccinated status. Even considering their association with other un-vaxed children and adults).

I realize I am considered a pariah here, and I have no problem with intelligent debate (my kids’ latest Dr. spent an inordinate amount of time trying to convince me to vaccinate them for all manner of things, lol, but even he had to admit that I was the most informed person he had ever debated the issue with ( he made SEVERAL false statements I simply HAD to rebut!) and we simply ended up agreeing to disagree.

All I ask. I and my children are NOT risks to YOU and yours, not if the vaccines you so believe in WORK. If so, you are immune. And actually, the vaccines you use can pose a threat to those of us who choose not to get them.

I don’t expect any here to grasp any of that last paragraph. Thing is, if any here had actually done the research I have, they would know what I refer to. Most have not. They have simply read the CDC talking points and other mainstream, dumbed-down propaganda and called it good. And concluded that any who conclude differently are idiots.

42

No citations, why should anyone trust the research you did then InterestedObserver?

Even the cases that claimed to be the ones with the best evidence that showed vaccines as the cause came up short:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/02/12/health/main4796512.shtml

43

What work is it then that you feel proves a causal connection between vaccination and autism?

This is silly. Vaccination has possibly saved more lives than any single technological development in the history of mankind, depending on what you’d consider a technological development. It has eradicated diseases that killed or impaired millions and millions of people. To say that it is of dubious benefit is utterly ridiculous.

It’s only because you’ve grown up in a world where certain horrible diseases are unheard of BECAUSE OF vaccination that you feel like there’s not really any need for them. You might as well say “why do we need a polio vaccine? Who gets polio, anyway?” - but it’s exactly because there’s a polio vaccine that no one gets polio (for example).

I can’t really speak to your personal anecdote, and you don’t seem crazy or stupid, so I’m not going to treat you that way. But to say that vaccines have been of dubious benefit is so absurd that it absolutely undermines your credibility. Even if you fully believe that vaccination causes autism in some small amount of people, it does nothing to boost your case to dismiss the millions and millions of people they have saved.

This is because most of those diseases are effectively wiped out because there’s a sufficient herd immunity that they won’t spread anywhere. But that can change - if vaccination rates drop low enough then your children would absolutely be at risk. The more people that make the decision not to vaccinate, the more danger you’re all in.

This isn’t true. For various reasons, depending on the particular vaccine, somewhere around 3-10% of people either cannot receive the vaccine or will not develop the proper antigenic response. These people are susceptable to whatever disease the vaccine was for. Since we’ve had near-universal vaccination, these people have been protected by the herd immunity. However, as vaccination rates drop, previously eradicated diseases are making a comeback. The more we drop below herd immunity levels, there’s more danger, not only for the children who were not vaccinated, but also for the people who through no fault of their own are not able to develop a proper vaccine response.

There have been huge, well funded studies and the connection simply isn’t there. Even if we didn’t understand the mechanism, we could still see that vaccinated people develop autism at a higher rate than unvaccinated people, and that has not been the case, despite extensive study. There’s also the false notion that autism rates are skyrocketing, but that’s actually just the result of more aggressive diagnosis, and a larger array of disorders being grouped under the category of autism spectrum disorders. There was a study released a few months back that compared the autism rates currently with historical autism rates had you adjusted their criteria for what we now group under autism spectrum disorders. If autism actually were on the rise, you would expect more young people to have autistic spectrum disorders than older people, but when you adjust the criteria so that they’re on a level playing field there is not.

Quite simply - there is no link. If there was, even if we didn’t understand it, it would be evident from an easy statistical study.

44

Are anti-vaxxers against all vaccines or just certain ones? Have they forgotten about small pox and polio? Vaccines are easily the most important medical discovery in history. I just don’t understand people some times.

45

Wakefield’s disgrace is hardly “moot”. He has been and continues to be a hero to antivaxers (in particular the “autism is caused by vaccines” movement), despite his ethical deficiencies and poor quality work. The “legitimization” of antivax activities through Wakefield’s paper being published in a major journal (the Lancet, whose reputation has been tarnished by association with him), had been a big boost to antivaxers, which is a big reason why they cling to him even now.

I am sorry to hear that your child had an apparent severe reaction to the DPT vaccine. In any discussion of vaccine reactions, it should be pointed out, though, that reactions of the type you describe are quite rare, and that the diseases vaccines prevent themselves cause great harm, which is magnified when they occur in epidemic form. Pertussis (whooping cough) is often a serious illness (both my brother and sister had it as kids and were miserably sick; I luckily avoided it as there was no vaccine for it back then). Pertussis can cause severe neurologic reactions and death.

“•CNS complications such as seizures and encephalopathy…are thought to result from severe paroxysm-induced cerebral hypoxia and apnea, metabolic disturbances such as hypoglycemia, and small intracranial hemorrhages.
•Reported deaths due to pertussis in young infants have substantially increased over the past 20 years.5,6,7 From 1990-1999, the case fatality rate was approximately 1% in infants younger than 2 months and less than 0.5% in infants aged 2-11 months.
•Pertussis has been reported as a cause of sudden infant deaths.”

I do not think that “research” means what you think it does. It appears that, as with many antivaxers, “research” means “scouring antivax websites and other sources for cherry-picked data and false claims that support my prejudices”.

Um, no. There is no “happy medium” in which the truth lies somewhere in the middle and avoiding vaccination is a reasonable response to the evidence. The facts are that immunization has been a tremendous success providing protection against once-common severe diseases at very low risk. The news media has often made the mistake of doing stories in which public health experts are given equal billing with Google-educated antivaxers like Jenny McCarthy, in order to “hear both sides”, but they’re learning better given debacles such as the Wakefield affair.

Yours and those other, unvaccinated children and adults are lucky they’ve not come down with serious illness. The rest of us have been put at risk from them due to lowered herd immunity, as alluded to by Senor Beef. It is nonsensical to allege that vaccinated children threaten your and your family’s health. On the contrary, they’ve made it possible for your family to avoid vaccine-preventable diseases - although that herd protection can and will fail if enough parents fall for antivax propaganda.

(Irony meters hit overload).

I don’t know about your being a “pariah”, but it’s worth noting that in other posts on the Dope you’ve engaged in scaremongering about fluoridated water (referring to it, among other things, as a tool of Nazi mind control) and stated a belief in 9/11 conspiracy theory. If there is intelligent debate to be had from you on vaccination, I hope it will involve more than anecdotes and links to Bizarro World antivax sites.

46

Instead of re-inventing the wheel, I’ll just re-post all the research I did a couple of years ago.

Yes, children may have a (rare) reaction to the vaccinations, and I wouldn’t make light of that, but ask a parent from the forties or fifties what they think about the chance of a rare reaction to the vaccination versus watching their babies sicken and die from these diseases.

47

Why would a baby who reacts poorly to a vaccine have any easier time with the actual vaccine preventable illness?

If your child has a bad vaccine reaction there’s two logical steps to take. First consult with your pediatrician about further vaccines. If the baby clearly has a problem then you should take his or her advice about vaccination. You may have to stop vaccinating.

In that case your baby cannot get vaccinated and will not have any protection against vaccine preventable illnesses. Under such circumstances the only rational reaction is to lobby heavily in favor of vaccination. Herd immunity is the only thing that will protect your child against terrible diseases such as pertussis and measles.

Having a child who cannot get vaccinated yet scare mongering against vaccinations is just about the dumbest thing you can possibly do.

48

The True Believers are against them all. The argument is that the diseases you mention were on the decline anyway, so vaccines didn’t really “cause” the decline. They also argue that it is “better” in some unspecified way to contract the exposure naturally, and that smallpox has been eliminated so that experience doesn’t count.

I was involved in an argument on the other board with someone who maintained that measles is a trivial disease, and that the risk of vaccines is greater than the risk of measles itself. I have a minor hearing loss in one ear as the result of contracting measles (this was before the vaccine came into widespread use).

They simply insisted that my hearing loss was caused by overuse of antibiotics. My counter-argument that I did not receive antibiotics for my measles (measles is viral and antibiotics don’t affect it) was simply dismissed - they insisted that I must have received the antibiotics and that was the cause.

The really committed anti-vaxxers are not susceptible to evidence, and your anecdote isn’t as good as the one they heard from their next door neighbor’s best friend, whose child got autism from the MMR. And all the statistics from the CDC are just put there by the big drug companies.

Regards,
Shodan

49

As I believe I’ve written before the anti-vax nuts are only immune to reason.

These are people who have somehow managed to get nostalgic about diphtheria and polio.

Hell here’s Ms. Anti Vax herself Jenny “I got my doctorate from google and I can turn my son autistic or non autistic on a whim” McCarthy on the subject of botox:

Yeah because injecting toxins in your face so you look like a barbie doll is fine. But injecting toxins in your body so you don’t drop dead from tetanus or pertussis is just plain evil.

Nutters the lot of them.

50

A vaccine (or any other way of combatting disease) does not have to stop 100% of new infections to have the desired effect. The main goal is to make sure that every person that falls ill infects, on average, less than one person before they recover, so that the outbreak dies out on its own. Even if someone lucks out and falls ill despite the vaccination, they are unlikely to infect anybody else.

Think of it like stopping a fire. Even if accidents are going to happen and houses are going to catch fire, you can try to stop the fire spreading, so that it runs out of fuel and dies out. If the firefighters sometimes don’t catch one in time and a neighbour’s house also goes up, that’s no reason to just throw your hands up in dispair and forget about the whole thing.

51

Another example of antivaxers “recanting and apologizing” (not) when their favorite claims are blown up can be found in David Kirby, “journalist”. Kirby is the guy whose book Evidence of Harm was predicated on the belief that the thimerosal preservative that used to be common in vaccines was causing an “epidemic” of autism. After thimerosal was removed in 2001 from all routine childhood vaccines as a precautionary measure (with the exception of inactivated influenza vaccine, for which a thimerosal-free alternative exists), we’d have expected autism rates to plummet if Kirby’s theory was correct. Instead, the incidence of autism remained stable or increased. Did Kirby apologize and admit he was wrong? Nope. He’s still proudly flogging his book and dubious investigative reporting credentials.

As for Wakefield, Kirby has published a piece in the Huffington Post (a favorite forum for crank medical theories) entitled “The Lancet Retraction Changes Nothing”. It follows the Wakefield-as-martyr line and continues Kirby’s pattern of deceptively cherry-picking case reports and studies with limited to no relevance to his grandiose claims about an autism-vaccine connection (he does seem to be rather drastically de-emphasizing thimerosal as a villain).

With Kirby, as with many other antivaxers, that line “when you lose sight of your goal, redouble your efforts” comes to mind. Their responses to the Wakefield affair are based on fanaticism, not common sense - and certainly not on good science.

52

OMG, that’s terrible. What did the emergency room doctors say and do about this?

Wait - you didn’t go to the ER, but called the nurse? And then stayed home doing nothing more than trying to comfort him? Something about this story doesn’t pass the sniff test.

53

USA Today’s 2/16 edition has a good editorial on the Wakefield debacle and the vaccine-autism manufactroversy. There’s also a typically bizarre, Alice-through-the-looking-glass “rebuttal” by Mark Blaxill, the guy whose Age of Autism piece I linked to earlier.

He continues to ignore all the ethical and scientific failings by Wakefield that led to the Lancet retraction of his article and wails about “censorship”.

Gee, if you can’t break the rules and publish any old piece of crap in a prestigious journal*, it’s…it’s like Mao and Stalin and oh my!

*some might question calling Lancet prestigious these days.

**another dubious Wakefield paper has been withdrawn by the editor of the journal Neurotoxicology. Maybe he can resubmit it to the Journal of Irreproducible Results, or Rave On With Jenny McCarthy.

54

Ugh, reading the comments on that editorial is sickening. One guy, JB Handley from Generation Rescue, claims that there have never been any studies comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated children! Jesus, these people are loons.

55

As a new mother who had never before witnessed the side effects of vaccination, I was woefully uneducated on the matter; I had read the information given to me, and his symptoms fit the possible side-effects listed.

Swelling and redness at the injection site
fussiness, crying
sleepiness
All “normal” according to the paperwork given to parents when their child is vaccinated.
When I called seeking clarification, I was told I was being overly protective and that his symptoms were normal. I knew they were not normal for HIM, but perhaps they were normal reactions to the shots? :confused: I had nothing to compare the severity to (as the information I was given in the Health Dept. handout was sorely lacking in specific descriptions of moderately severe to severe reactions, other than to reassure me that they were “very rare”.)

It was not until I went and looked up the product insert (for DPT) and medical journal articles on the subject that I realized that his symptoms had been classified for over 50 yrs as “severe”. That his local reaction was extreme compared to what was considered typical. That his “high pitched screaming” and “stiffening and staring” and “inconsolable crying” were NOT mere “fussiness and discomfort” (it resembled a tantrum, which is what the nurse said to me; “Some babies throw tantrums. It’s normal.”) but indications of “central nervous system involvement” (seizures and CNS irritation/damage resulting in the “enchaphalitic cry”).
And that the deep sleep he fell into afterwards was not just because he was exhausted from his “tantrum” but also a sign of CNS issues.

You may call me an idiot for trusting the very dumbed-down information I was given and what I was told by the nurse (I agree 100%…I was) but please refrain from insinuating that I am a liar. :mad:

56

I find it amusing that I am asked for cites, when the “debate” at hand is simply whether “anti-vaccination” people will change their tune now that one study has been officially denied.

Where are all the cites for all the posts expressing contempt for those who question vaccines? Hmmm? Right. :dubious:

I offered my opinion, AS someone who does not vaccinate, that Wakefield is, imo, irrelevant. I feel no need to defend him or his work, as my position was/is in no way based on his theories or reputation. Can’t speak for anyone else.

BUT….despite the fact that this is not a thread entitled “vaccines, yes or no and why or why not”, I will answer a few issues.

Vaccines are often cited as one of if not THE primary reasons for improved public health and lifespan. Yet most medical historians I have read grant far more weight to things like clean water, decent housing, refrigeration and access to fresher, better food, improved air quality, indoor plumbing, garbage pick up, and other such basic measures.

Makes sense that they should, as mortality from infectious diseases, including the “vaccine preventable” ones, had already declined astoundingly in the US and Europe long before vaccines came into the picture in any significant way.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00056796.htm
“Control of infectious diseases has resulted from clean water and improved sanitation. Infections such as typhoid and cholera transmitted by contaminated water, a major cause of illness and death early in the 20th century, have been reduced dramatically by improved sanitation. In addition, the discovery of antimicrobial therapy has been critical to successful public health efforts to control infections such as tuberculosis and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). “

Here you can view a graph showing the decline in deaths from infectious diseases from 1900 to 1997. The mortality rates of the vaccine preventable illnesses (measles, mumps, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis) had, in line with the overall trend, declined 80 to 95% BEFORE vaccinations against them or even antibiotics were introduced.

http://www.whale.to/vaccines/decline1.html

Here, you can view a series of graphs documenting the same phenomenon, but with more specific reference to the vaccine preventable childhood illnesses. I do not expect anyone here to accept this strongly biased site at face value, but I have verified the rates cited, jftr. If anyone cares to dispute them, please offer links to the original studies. (most of my research is on floppy disc, and I currently do not have access to it.)
This is not to say that INCIDENCE had declined so dramatically…(that is a common error some “anti-vaxers make, and like the claim that vaccines are “injected directly into the bloodstream“, it is inexcusable) it remained high, with these illnesses being common childhood events, but with improved sanitation, improved nutrition, living conditions, and access to medical care for complications, the death rates plummeted.

The charts and statistics showing dramatic declines post mass vaccination are far less dramatic when considered in context…that is, mortality had already declined by up to 95% BEFORE the vaccine era, so a decline of 85% from a post-vaccine date to present reflects a decline from an all-time low. The pre-vaccine era declines were much greater.

And then there is the issue of natural vs. vaccine-induced immunity, the former being widely known to be superior in strength and endurance. Why we have boosters for pertussis now (since the vaccine immunity wanes so rapidly, leaving teens and adults vulnerable to infection and transmission to infants, the population most likely to suffer serious harm.)

“While most young children in the United States have received vaccinations against Bordetella pertussis since the 1940s, in recent years “whooping cough” has made a comeback.
Many in public health believe an increase in pertussis cases over the past decade is partially the result of waning immunity 5 to 10 years after vaccination, leaving adolescents particularly vulnerable and creating a potential reservoir of infection in adults. This pertussis reservoir in turn increases the risk of disease transmission to highly vulnerable unvaccinated newborns. The approval in 2005 of two new combination booster vaccines means that now almost all adolescents and adults will be able to be protected against pertussis infection.
Since 1976, when a low of 1060 cases were reported, pertussis prevalence has risen to a reported 40-year high of 25 000 in 2004, with an estimated one third of all cases occurring in adolescents….”
Why we have a shingles vaccine to try and prevent the epidemic of this condition in naturally immune adults since the chicken pox vaccine has eliminated so much of the natural boosting which used to keep their antibody levels high throughout most of their lives.

“New research published in the International Journal of Toxicology (IJT) by Gary S. Goldman, Ph.D., reveals high rates of shingles (herpes zoster) in Americans since the government’s 1995 recommendation that all children receive chicken pox vaccine. Goldman’s research supports that shingles, which results in three times as many deaths and five times the number of hospitalizations as chicken pox, is suppressed naturally by occasional contact with chicken pox.

Dr. Goldman’s findings have corroborated other independent researchers who estimate that if chickenpox were to be nearly eradicated by vaccination, the higher number of shingles cases could continue in the U.S. for up to 50 years; and that while death rates from chickenpox are already very low, any deaths prevented by vaccination will be offset by deaths from increasing shingles disease.
….Goldman’s analysis in IJT indicates that effectiveness of the chickenpox vaccine itself is also dependent on natural boosting, so that as chickenpox declines, so does the effectiveness of the vaccine. “

Why the push is to vaccinate for measles earlier, since mothers with vaccine immunity pass on antibodies to their infants which wane far sooner than those passed on by naturally immune mothers.

“Since MMR vaccination of infants was introduced in Switzerland after 1985 and vaccination against measles and mumps had previously only been offered on an individual basis (38), we expected that the mothers of infants tested in this study would predominantly have naturally acquired immunity against measles and mumps viruses, which would provide passive protection to their infants for a longer period than would vaccine-induced maternal immunity (4, 23, 30). Even if some mothers had been vaccinated, their antibody levels would have been boosted by the continuing circulation of wild-type viruses, a phenomenon which has been well documented (13). …With an increasing proportion of women with vaccine-acquired immunity, a further shift to the left of the seroprevalence curve in the infant population is expected to occur. As predicted by Wilkins and Wehrle (37), by the time most infants are born to vaccinated mothers, vaccination recommendations must be adapted, because of the premature loss of maternally derived antibodies “

The fact that periodic boosting is a necessary component of vaccination immunity is unknown by many, ime. The myth that only the unvaccinated spread these illnesses is widespread, but highly inaccurate. Most vaccines rely upon periodic boosting through exposure to wild-type or live virus vaccine strains to maintain immunity (the same principle natural immunity functions upon).

It is not only possible but necessary that vaccinated individuals contract and spread these illnesses on a regular basis. However, because their cases tend to be asymptomatic or mild, they usually go undiagnosed, whereas the unvaccinated individual tends to experience a clinical case and get the blame for “starting” the outbreak, even thought the odds are they contracted it from a vaccinated contact. Without some degree of “wild” boosting, vaccine immunity would fail even sooner than it does. Yet widespread vaccination also serves to reduce the wild boosting to such a degree that the naturally immune can lose their immunity. Hence, the goal of eradication is elusive, not even considering the shifts in strains vaccination encourages (aka vaccine-induced pathogen strain replacement)

http://rsif.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/5/18/3.full
(told you it was complicated!:p)

“We tested 46 fully vaccinated children in two day-care centers in Israel who were exposed to a fatal case of pertussis infection. Only two of five children who tested positive for Bordetella pertussis met the World Health Organization’s case definition for pertussis. Vaccinated children may be asymptomatic reservoirs for infection.”

“The remaining 333 vaccinees came into contact with wild measles virus, and this permitted evaluation of the protective effect of the measles vaccines tested: 4 children experienced very mild clinical measles, and 329 experienced subclinical infection, including 12 who had had undetectable haemagglutination-inhibition antibodies for 9-10 years.”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TD4-4C8899V-1&_user=10&_coverDate=09%2F28%2F2004&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1215916863&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=ccf8f352bd0f9e199ed8128db393e07a

“Following the introduction of vaccination against measles, levels of clinical infection have dropped markedly. As we move further into the vaccine era, increasingly many individuals owe their measles immunity to vaccination and have had few (if any) exposures to wild virus. A number of recent reports suggest that vaccinated individuals with low levels of immunity may be at risk of subclinical measles infection…Simulations of our model demonstrate a rise in the levels of subclinical measles infection over time, and a corresponding rise in clinical measles infections if vaccination levels are too low.”
Seems most here are content to hurl insults and make subjective comments about those who disagree with their position, so I wonder why I even bother to respond in anything like an intelligent manner. :rolleyes:

As you were…Feel free to talk amongst yourselves. :wink:

57

Some of us were not “amused” when you jumped into a thread about the Wakefield debacle to relate an anecdote and make this statement:

Is it any wonder that you’d be asked for cites for these idiotic claims?

I’ve now seen a very few antivaxers try to (at least in part) dissociate themselves from Wakefield (including the antivax pediatrician Jay Gordon), while minimizing or outright avoiding any condemnation of his pathetic science and ethical failings. Thoughtful House, the Austin, TX-based facility that offers supposed treatment and research into autism, has announced the resignation of Wakefield from their staff. It’s likely that the scandal was responsible. One would think that having Wakefield on board would not be conducive to maximal fundraising.

I see that the rest of InterestedObserver’s post is a Gish Gallop of the type favored by antivaxers and alties, the hope being that respondents will be drowned in the weight of glurge and not able to respond to everything. Resisting the temptation to say that anyone citing the lurid and laughable conspiracy-oriented website whale.to has automatically lost the debate, I’ll address this typical antivaxer claim:

InterestedObserver then goes on to cite a CDC article that talks about successful non-vaccine-related efforts to control a host of diseases, including cholera, tuberculosis and STDs. Makes sense, since there are no effective vaccines available against these diseases (excepting ones newly in use against HPV). Vaccine-preventable diseases like Hemophilus meningitis, measles, mumps, polio etc. cannot be vanquished by “better hygiene”, “better food” and so on. It is dishonest to claim that “most medical historians” give little credit to vaccines’ effectiveness in curbing infectious disease (who are these “medical historians” who think, for example, that smallpox was eradicated by “better food”?) On the contrary, public health experts give full credit to the importance of vaccines in eliminating or drastically reducing such diseases.

The old canard about how vaccine-preventable diseases were supposedly on the way out before vaccine and antibiotics is ludicrous for anyone with knowledge of history. Polio cases in the U.S., for example, were peaking in the early '50s shortly before the introduction of polio vaccines, and after vaccination dropped to low levels. It takes an enormous amount of wishful antivax thinking to suppose that all those timelines showing diseases rates dropping precipitously after vaccine introduction are due to magical improvement in hygiene, or whatever.

Regarding the bad joke of an article on whale.to by Raymond Obosawin on how vaccine-preventable diseases were supposedly on their way out before vaccines came into use, I see that his graphs deal with stats from England and Wales and appear to have been cobbled together from unknown sources (no references are provided). While the crazies at whale.to and their enablers elsewhere love him(Obosawin is cited on at least one chiropractic website), contrast his claims with statistics supplied to us by the Centers for Disease Control, which clearly indicate how these diseases have dramatically declined or been eliminated since the introduction of vaccines.

I’ll consider if any more of InterestedObserver’s Gish Gallop is worth responding to, but it seems desperately weak - including gripes about how pertussis vaccine isn’t effective enough. Apparently IO would like us to return to those wonderful days of yesteryear, when no protection at all was available.

For now, see this site prepared by Paul Offit M.D. and his colleagues at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia for a good overview and detailed information on the history of vaccination, how vaccines have saved millions of children from death and disability, and answers to all sorts of questions about vaccination.

I guess that means you’ll be off now, avoiding debate while spreading your wisdom to appreciative audiences elsewhere about 9/11 conspiracies, the dread dangers of fluoridated water etc., eventually returning to drop another heap of festering glurge on us.

I can hardly wait.

58

#57 Today, 05:24 PM
Jackmannii
Guest
wrote:

“I see that the rest of InterestedObserver’s post is a Gish Gallop of the type favored by antivaxers and alties, the hope being that respondents will be drowned in the weight of glurge and not able to respond to everything.”

WTF? You demand cites and when I give them you cry foul (“OMG, too much GLURGE…I am so overwhelmed, I simply cannot respond with anything other than general attacks and denials!!!” ) Buck up and do even a fraction of the research I have done. Don’t blame me because you can’t be bothered to read the information I offered for consideration.

“The old canard about how vaccine-preventable diseases were supposedly on the way out before vaccine and antibiotics is ludicrous for anyone with knowledge of history. Polio cases in the U.S., for example, were peaking in the early '50s shortly before the introduction of polio vaccines, and after vaccination dropped to low levels. It takes an enormous amount of wishful antivax thinking to suppose that all those timelines showing diseases rates dropping precipitously after vaccine introduction are due to magical improvement in hygiene, or whatever.”

Now THIS is an esp. interesting topic…the polio epidemics of the early 50s in the US. Entire studies and histories written on the subject, none of which, I suspect, you’ve ever seen. In fact, polio IS the exception to the hygiene rule in that prior to improvements, virtually all infants and young children were exposed to it and gained immunity (via fecal contamination in water supplies) at a time when the risks of complications were lowest. With the advent of cleaner water supplies, a large percentage failed to gain immunity in infancy and, when polio flared up again in the early 50s, many in middle childhood or adulthood got hit hard.

And those who got a polio vax prior to ‘62 or so also got hit hard with a high probability of being infected SV40, a known cancer causing simian virus contaminating the vaccine as a result of it being cultured on infected monkey tissues.

As for all the other “VPDs”, the data is there…the mortality rates declined by 80% or more BEFORE vaccines came along. (in the US and in Europe)

Oh my, you cite Ofiit….do you not realize he is as unreliable and extreme a source as Whale to whale? He has long been the mouthpiece of the pro-vax camp, on the payroll of the vaccine makers and on call to deliver sound-bite, dumbed-down versions of the facts. Tell you what…you give me the whale to whale link and I’ll give YOU offit…they are both about as credible to anyone with anything more than an entry level knowledge of the issue. :stuck_out_tongue:
“I guess that means you’ll be off now, avoiding debate while spreading your wisdom to appreciative audiences elsewhere about 9/11 conspiracies, the dread dangers of fluoridated water etc., eventually returning to drop another heap of festering glurge on us.

I can hardly wait. “
No, means I am off to write papers for and attend my classes and live my life. (why I was away so long since my initial post on this thread). In my absence, you might want to consider actually checking out some of the studies I cited. Or not. Suit yourself. I can see you prefer to uphold your status quo and respond with a knee-jerk reaction instead of serious debate. :rolleyes:

59

Right, interesting.

http://factsnotfantasy.com/vaccines.html

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/polio/dis-faqs.htm

http://www.marchofdimes.com/professionals/14332_1283.asp

60

Better iron lung technology. Wooo.

See, there’s no end to it.

My Uncle John - the guy who’s fallen for eveyr pyramid scheme ever concocted - is now spreading anti-vaccination bullshit on Facebook. There’s no end to it. The world is full of fools.