Upping the “Anti” on Vaccines
You wouldn’t know it from much of what you read online and hear, but vaccines were created to benefit our lives and make us healthier; a study published in the November 14th Journal of the American Medical Association notes that death rates for 13 diseases preventable by childhood vaccinations are at an all-time low in the US. The study, Historical Comparisons of Morbidity and Mortality for Vaccine-Preventable Diseases in the United States, was done by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; historical records dating back to the 1900s were reviewed to gather estimates of cases, hospitalizations, and deaths for the diseases that children have been routinely vaccinated against. From the November 13th New York Times:
For nine of the diseases, rates of death or hospitalization had declined by more than 90 percent since vaccines against them were approved — and in the cases of smallpox, diphtheria and polio, by 100 percent.
For only four diseases — hepatitis A and B, invasive pneumococcal diseases and varicella (the cause of chicken pox and shingles) — did the rate of deaths and hospitalizations fall by less than 90 percent. Those vaccines are all relatively new — the one for chicken pox, for example, was adopted nationally only in 1995. Also, some diseases like hepatitis typically strike adults, who are less likely to have been immunized.
Dr. Paul A. Offit, chief of diseases at Children’s Hospital in Philadelphia, is quoted about who tends to get vaccinated today and who does not:
Until the 1990’s, he said, incomplete vaccination was most common among poor children with no health insurance. But the Vaccines for Children Program, created in 1994 by the Clinton administration, helped end that. It provides vaccines free to any eligible child, which includes 45 percent of American children, Mr. [Curtis] Allen [a CDC spokeman] said.
Now, Dr. Offit said, it is more common for children from wealthy or middle-class families to lack some or all shots, presumably because their parents have read about side effects or visited one of the many anti-vaccine Web sites. Most children are immunized as part of routine infant care or before they enter day care or school, but the number of states that allow religious or “philosophical” exemptions has increased.
“Anti-vaccine activists” who “contend that the shots given to children trigger autism, seizures or other serious side effects” are, notes the New York Times, in a “continuing stuggle” with public health officials. This week’s Time magazine seeks to account for distrust of vaccines:
Why, then, is there so much concern about vaccines? In the U.S., few health issues get people as riled up as the persistent, though almost completely discredited, argument that routine childhood immunizations cause autism. In the U.K., doctors and policy makers are debating whether to encourage universal vaccination against chickenpox, a step that U.S. medical authorities took in 1995. Even that debate — focused not on the vaccine’s safety, but on whether it’s really necessary — has become surprisingly bitter.
Vaccines, like any drug, do carry some risk — but in healthy children, that risk is minute. A very small number of immunized children will have an allergic reaction to the vaccine, sometimes so severe it kills them. The trouble is that people are very bad at translating the practical danger from such miniscule statistical risks. [my emphasis Most people, given the choice to vaccinate their kids and run a tiny risk of an allergic reaction, or not to vaccinate their kids and — as in the case of polio — face a risk of contracting a crippling, sometimes lethal disease, can’t figure out what to do: So, they’ll ask a doctor. And doctors know that most people can’t assess the risks clearly, which is why they get frustrated when a parent refuses to vaccinate a child.
On hearing of even a minute risk to a child’s health, the Time magazine article suggests, parents do something akin to panicking and try to avoid any dangers, even though other risks (such as catching a disease such as measles) are then possible. In our day and age, it is hard not to hear about the dangers of vaccines and autism.
My brief attendence at the National Autism Association last Saturday in Atlanta confirms this, anecdotally: There wasn’t a terribly huge crowd of parents being filmed with Jenny McCarthy about vaccines and autism, but their views why their children have autism were unanimous: Vaccines were the undeniable culprit and doctors, and pediatricians in particular, were blinded and disbelieving. The American Association of Pediatrics was referred to unfavorably amid discussion about mercury in the wicks of candles and fears that vaccines sent from “us” to “third world countries” are producing autistic children “throughout the world.” Throughout the filming, McCarthy spoke mostly in single sentences and made sure the camera and microphone were at hand.
With the combination of “vaccines and autism” getting the VJ treatment (and the top brass of various autism and “mercury causes autism” organizations meeting up in Atlanta), the “anti” about vaccines looks like it will have at least 15 more minutes of fame.
55 opinions for Upping the “Anti” on Vaccines
Regan
Nov 14, 2007 at 6:37 am
Kristina–
Do you have access to the full JAMA article? I am toying with purchasing it if there is any tabulated chronological data.
Kristina Chew, PhD
Nov 14, 2007 at 10:42 am
I’m trying to find it—if I do, I’ll let you know!
Chuck
Nov 14, 2007 at 10:57 am
Vaccines were also created to boost the profits of the manufacturers who make them, and doctors over vaccinate to help those profits. Here is the NEJM abstract to back that up.
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/357/19/1903
Gunther
Nov 14, 2007 at 12:16 pm
Maybe Chuck can explain which part of the paper he refers to says or supports the idea that doctors over vaccinate to help the profits of vaccine manufacturers. Otherwise it might be thought Chuck was pulling random words out of his a***.
From this paper:
“A greater than 92% decline in cases and a 99% or greater
decline in deaths due to diseases prevented by vaccines recommended
before 1980 were shown for diphtheria, mumps, pertussis, and tetanus.
Endemic transmission of poliovirus and measles and rubella viruses has
been eliminated in the United States; smallpox has been eradicated
worldwide.”
Damn those evil Pharma sharks!
Marla
Nov 14, 2007 at 12:23 pm
Good over view on this subject.
Chuck
Nov 14, 2007 at 1:14 pm
Hey Gunther,
Doctors create artificial unnecessary demand for medical treatments, like vaccinations, in order to increase profits, office visit fees for them and a better bottom line for the vaccine manufacturer.
It is called economics.
I have no problems pulling random words out of my a*** and serving them to you.
Kristina Chew, PhD
Nov 14, 2007 at 2:27 pm
What would happen if we returned to a pre-vaccine pre-modern medicine state……
Chuck
Nov 14, 2007 at 2:53 pm
A better question to ask given the subject of this thread would be,
What would happen if we returned to a pre-vaccine state with current medical and sanitation technology?
Cliff
Nov 14, 2007 at 2:59 pm
That’s contradictory, Chuck, because vaccines are a medical procedure, and going back without them is pre-modern regardless of anything else.
Cliff
HCN
Nov 14, 2007 at 3:54 pm
Chuck said “A better question to ask given the subject of this thread would be,
What would happen if we returned to a pre-vaccine state with current medical and sanitation technology? ”
Then you would have Japan between 1994 and 2006. That is when they no longer mandated the use of their MMR (it is different than the one used in the UK and USA, the biggest difference is the Urabe mumps strain in the vaccine that caused problems). Check out the rate of measles in this chart:
http://www.who.int/vaccines/globalsummary/immunization/timeseries/TSincidenceByCountry.cfm?country=Japan
Last spring there was a measles epidemic that closed several university campuses. Many were hospitalized, and over the last decade about 50 people per year die of measles in Japan.
Japan is a very modern country with up to date medical facilities and sanitary practices. The only difference between the early 1990s and the early 2000s were the number of people being vaccinated.
By the way, in 2006 a two does measles vaccine program was re-started in Japan (not using link, since I used one already):
: Vaccine. 2007 Apr 20;25(16):3101-4. Epub 2007 Feb 15.
Current problems of measles control in Japan and Western Pacific Region.
“Measles is still the leading cause of childhood death and is a vaccine-preventable disease globally. Even countries in which measles had been eradicated still remain at risk of importation from countries that have not yet eliminated the disease. Although two dose of immunization program with combined measles and rubella (MR) vaccine has been started since April 2006, there are still estimated 5-10 thousands measles cases annually in Japan. ”
Now, Chuck, you need to answer this question:
Which provides more money to pharmaceutical companies, hospitals and doctors:
Giving a two MMRs to a kid at a cost of about $100 total… Or providing a hospital bed, nursing care, respiratory support, IV fluids and other medical equipment for the people who get measles and become hospitalized. The companies that manufacture vaccines also manufacture the IV-fluids, the respiratory support meds, the sterile medical supplies and monitoring equipment.
Remember that the last time the USA had an epidemic of measles (1989-1992) the death rate was about 1 in 500, with several more who were hospitalized and survived (and of course, you can read about that in the measles chapter of the CDC Pink Book).
HCN
Nov 14, 2007 at 3:56 pm
Chuck said “A better question to ask given the subject of this thread would be,
What would happen if we returned to a pre-vaccine state with current medical and sanitation technology? ”
Then you would have Japan between 1994 and 2006. That is when they no longer mandated the use of their MMR (it is different than the one used in the UK and USA, the biggest difference is the Urabe mumps strain in the vaccine that caused problems).
Last spring there was a measles epidemic that closed several university campuses. Many were hospitalized, and over the last decade about 50 people per year die of measles in Japan.
Japan is a very modern country with up to date medical facilities and sanitary practices. The only difference between the early 1990s and the early 2000s were the number of people being vaccinated.
By the way, in 2006 a two does measles vaccine program was re-started in Japan (not using link, since it won’t let me post):
: Vaccine. 2007 Apr 20;25(16):3101-4. Epub 2007 Feb 15.
Current problems of measles control in Japan and Western Pacific Region.
“Measles is still the leading cause of childhood death and is a vaccine-preventable disease globally. Even countries in which measles had been eradicated still remain at risk of importation from countries that have not yet eliminated the disease. Although two dose of immunization program with combined measles and rubella (MR) vaccine has been started since April 2006, there are still estimated 5-10 thousands measles cases annually in Japan. ”
Now, Chuck, you need to answer this question:
Which provides more money to pharmaceutical companies, hospitals and doctors:
Giving a two MMRs to a kid at a cost of about $100 total… Or providing a hospital bed, nursing care, respiratory support, IV fluids and other medical equipment for the people who get measles and become hospitalized. The companies that manufacture vaccines also manufacture the IV-fluids, the respiratory support meds, the sterile medical supplies and monitoring equipment.
Remember that the last time the USA had an epidemic of measles (1989-1992) the death rate was about 1 in 500, with several more who were hospitalized and survived (and of course, you can read about that in the measles chapter of the CDC Pink Book).
HCN
Nov 14, 2007 at 4:01 pm
There is a table from the World Health Institute (who.int) that shows the incidence of many diseases in Japan. I tried to post it, but the message went into a kind of limbo ether. Anyway, here is my second try (and if this does not work I’ll be breaking it up so that it can be cut and pasted):
http://www.who.int/vaccines/globalsummary/immunization/timeseries/TSincidenceByCountry.cfm?country=Japan
KimJ
Nov 14, 2007 at 5:05 pm
It’s also easy to see among our current (communicable) diseases that still lack vaccines. Hospitals are still rife with Staph, including MRSA, and TB. People are still contracting AIDS from organ donors. We all probably know (or are) people that suffer from the after effects of Chicken Pox (shingles).
Kristina Chew, PhD
Nov 14, 2007 at 5:08 pm
Chuck, I’m not sure that we can just say “what is there were not vaccines but every other medical development in the modern era.” Your question offers an interesting thought experiment, but I don’t think we can simply extract one historical phenomenon out of the the broader picture.
HCN, it’s the “curse of too many URLS and the SPAM filter.” I just found a comment from you i the SPAM pile and it should be showing up.
Regan
Nov 14, 2007 at 5:10 pm
I want to look at the data that HCN posted and the paper from JAMA itself, but just to throw one example, which I realize does not represent the typical, but was certainly on the radar a few years ago–
Chuck asked:
“What would happen if we returned to a pre-vaccine state with current medical and sanitation technology?”
If the particular disease was smallpox, what would happen is that there would be no current specific medical treatment and you would be subject to the disease pretty much as pre-vaccination and subject to the potentials of blindness, severe scarring and death. FWIW, it is acknowledged that smallpox vaccine does carry some risks…small, but real. Fortunately, that is one vaccine program that reached a sucessful end by 1982, and as a wild-type disease–smallpox is considered erradicated globally.
Sorry for the segue–I want to look at the data from JAMA in the original because there were a couple of things in the NYT that didn’t seem to mesh and I want to read it first hand.
Kristina Chew, PhD
Nov 14, 2007 at 5:19 pm
Also FWIW, another article from Reuters on the JAMA study (I may be able to access the full text in a few days).
Chuck
Nov 14, 2007 at 5:56 pm
Actually Cliff,
What I am asking is the basis of scientific and economic analysis “Ceteris paribus”, or all other things being equal.
What would the effects be on the current world without vaccines, ceteris paribus? This eliminates all external variability not addressed by the variant in the model, vaccines.
HCN,
Then you would have Japan between 1994 and 2006. That is when they no longer mandated the use of their MMR
Not true to my question as some were vaccinated.
Given your data the death rate over the last ten years is 1 death per 1,500 cases of measles, average within an unknown general population. What is the most recent death rate per case for the last decade prior to the introduction of the MMR vaccine in Japan? That would be an apples-to-apples comparison.
Which provides more money to pharmaceutical companies, hospitals and doctors:
Giving a two MMRs to a kid at a cost of about $100 total… Or providing a hospital bed, nursing care, respiratory support, IV fluids and other medical equipment for the people who get measles and become hospitalized. The companies that manufacture vaccines also manufacture the IV-fluids, the respiratory support meds, the sterile medical supplies and monitoring equipment.
Lets separate the wheat from the chaff.
The companies that manufacture vaccines also manufacture the IV-fluids, the respiratory support meds, the sterile medical supplies and monitoring equipment
This is not a true statement as many companies supply medical professionals the necessary tools, equipment, supplies that do not manufacture vaccines. Profits from an epidemic would be more diversely spread among more economic entities. Check a flu season that ‘drifted” from the vaccine for proof of that.
There will obviously be a re-distribution of profits and wealth to a society without vaccines. The plague caused many individuals, town, and societies to become prosperous and thrive. Was the advents of post plague Europe costly or beneficial to you now?
Any economic analysis would be based on that type of scenario, but the ability of the medical and sanitation professionals within the culture will determine the scope of the analysis.
Regan
Nov 14, 2007 at 6:22 pm
Thanks Kristina. I would be interested in your thoughts if you get/read the original article.
Cliff
Nov 14, 2007 at 6:49 pm
Your question was not ceteris paribus, Chuck, and if that’s what you meant you should have probably said so in a form or another. But, despite the fondest wishes of many here, vaccines are a part, perhaps integral, of modern medicine.
Unfortunately, there’s an issue of data, because the data you are looking for, in many of these cases, doesn’t really exist to the best of my knowledge. But mathematically if you have passed the high threshold individuals are relatively safe as a population. I don’t have the energy or time to do a thorough analysis. You might want to look at this, though, for some basic models; http://www.sph.umich.edu/~jkoopman/Web606/Ex6606/Ex6.htm
Cliff
HCN
Nov 14, 2007 at 8:06 pm
Actually it was ONE link, which is why I am listing the name of the paper not the PubMed link.
Chuck, the study this blog posting refers to is about the money saved by vaccinating versus allowing people to become sick, hospitalized and letting them die for want of a $5 to $50 vaccine.
By the way the death rate from measles was 2.54 to 2.83 per 1000 cases. From:
J Infect Dis. 2004 May 1;189 Suppl 1:S69-77.
Acute measles mortality in the United States, 1987-2002.
So Chuck, is this acceptible to you? To let measles come back just like it did in Japan, and just figure that the 1 in 500 who die is just collatoral damage to stave off the imaginary risk of autism?
Also, remember that death is not the only side effect. As many who actually die, there are as many if not more who contract measles that become disabled with blindness, deafness or in the case of a child in the UK, paralyzed (TimesOnLine article titled “Focus: The real victims of Britain’s MMR scare”, dated April 4, 2004)
Do you really want us to go back to the days where it was fairly common for families to have their children disabled and die from measles, mumps, rubella, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, Hib, polio, chicken pox and influenza just because you don’t like the fact that companies make money from vaccines?
As for your assertion of “it doesn’t count because some were vaccinated” does not mean much (the vaccine is really onlly 90% effective), and was just a silly strawman statement. Also from the paper noted above “Overall, 90% of deaths reported to the NIP occurred in persons who had not been vaccinated against measles.”
And for the argument that the people who were sick or hospitalized were already sick, that same paper has this in its conclusions “Preexisting conditions related to immune deficiency were reported for 16% of deaths in the NCHS system and 14% in the NIP; “
Toxic
Nov 14, 2007 at 8:43 pm
I notice you don\’t comment on the article that was in the news recently about Americans being overvaccinated. Nor do you comment on the article in the news today about the girl being paralyzed from gardasil, and the thousands of adverse reactions it has caused.
It\’s disgusting to sweep the children that have been harmed from vaccines under the carpet just so you can have a blanket statement that vaccines are good.
You argue that Jenny McCarthy\’s statements are dangerous? I argue back that you, Kristina Chew, make dangerous statements. You would like all people to believe vaccines are safe, and they aren\’t. Stop sweeping our children that were harmed by vaccines under the carpet.
Kassiane
Nov 15, 2007 at 12:06 am
Jenny McCarthy sweeps autistic adults under the carpet. There is PROOF we exist.
That PLUS “oh whooping cough (which almost killed me but I dont exist so I dont matter) and measles and diptheria and rubella and mumps and POLIO dont hurt people!! DEATH IS BETTER THAN AUTISM!” are the dangerous sentiments.
Cliff
Nov 15, 2007 at 1:56 am
Hilariously, though, it’s fairly mainstream to think autistic adults don’t exist, though in terms of “autism is a irreversible childhood illness”. It’s is pretty scary thought, yet amusing. What DO they think happens?
But, back on subject. It’s interesting that the dangers that themerisol might present, which are statistically very slim, get thrown up as more potent than large-scale population-altering diseases. Since that point is apparently disputed, and I’m not going to honestly give much time to put this argument out again, I’m going to throw in a review that gets much of the general highlights; Herd Immunity: History, Theory, Practice
Fine Epidemiol Rev.1993; 15: 265-302.
I have yet to hear anything solid yet to say that vaccines are really a threat; the potential mercury levels themselves never get high enough to be toxic (in accordance with FDA and WHO), and are in a compound, and are of a weaker variety. Outside of mercury, there hasn’t been any argument I’ve seen for its possible relation to the rise of autism (even when that rise isn’t really clear in and of itself).
Also, the argument that money is involved is ultimately a faulty one. You could, using that form, say that because real estate agencies get money from selling houses, and houses can *sometimes* (doesn’t need to be quantified, because any minimal risk does) be dangerous, therefore people shouldn’t buy houses.
Cliff
Kristina Chew, PhD
Nov 15, 2007 at 3:14 am
And then there’s cars which (at least from the number I see pulled over on my ways to and from work) seem to have their dangers, too. On herd immunity, an old post—-
I doubt Jenny McCarthy will ever have a hard time not being heard, at least in the near future.
Toxic
Nov 15, 2007 at 10:46 am
Kassianne, Did I say we shouldn\’t vaccinate? You\’re putting words in my mouth.
You replied: That PLUS “oh whooping cough (which almost killed me but I dont exist so I dont matter) and measles and diptheria and rubella and mumps and POLIO dont hurt people!!
My comment was that Kristina implies vaccines are all safe. They are not.
Any other product on the market has recalls when they cause death or hurt someone.
Vaccines need to be safe.
By constantly implying vaccines are safe, Kristina is basically labeling those of us that have had our kids damaged by vaccines liars.
Chuck
Nov 15, 2007 at 11:08 am
HCN,
Children currently die from measles, mumps, rubella, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, Hib, polio, chicken pox and influenza even when vaccinated. The current outbreak of polio in India was from the oral vaccine. The chickenpox vaccine has caused more severe complications to the general public then it has prevented. The influenza vaccine is probably only 30-40 percent effective in any given year and the stated death rate by the CDC never changes regardless of the effectiveness or percent of population vaccinated.
My family has five documented cases of vaccine failure and three documented cases of adverse reactions. Figure out the odds of that for me would you? I am the only person in my family that is not suffering life long complications that can be directly related to vaccines. Until all vaccines are proven safe and effective they should be treated like any other optional medical treatment that involves risk.
Cliff
Nov 15, 2007 at 11:39 am
She isn’t implying an all, but a generally, Toxic. She isn’t saying vaccines are necessarily safe, but that the risks are overstated and not the cause of autism. You’re now putting words in her mouth, if anything.
Now, people do get cases of various diseases usually protected by vaccines. But they do not even remotely equal the number that would be without any protection at all. Influenza, the way, doesn’t have the vaccines rates needed for that kind of protection, as they are usually given to “vulnerable” groups and just that, which gives the diseases some room to mutate and bypass the vaccine.
Cliff
Kassiane
Nov 15, 2007 at 5:02 pm
Where is your proof, Toxic, that your child was “damaged” by vaccines? Did you know it is damned insulting to refer to anyone as “damaged”? This is a lacking social skill amongst those who wish to see vaccines banned.
Nothing is 100% safe. Nothing. Vaccines are a lot safer than the diseases. Ask someone who has seen them or has survived them.
Regan
Nov 15, 2007 at 7:41 pm
Kristina–
I just submitted a comment but it either evaporated, got stuck in the spam filter or double posted (don’t know which, yet). :-/.
(sorry–wonky computer day).
resilientmom
Nov 15, 2007 at 8:44 pm
Reading all 29 responses here, I believe that many of us are preaching to the choir, when worrying about our children. However, isn’t the case of vaccines a risk-benefit proposition? We are not ignorant, in that every action presents a reaction. Sometimes we have to proceed with informed caution.
Years ago, when my children were infants, I had a cough, followed by a fever. I called the doctor who prescribed cough medicine.
My husband was out doing errands, when he came home, heard a thud and ran upstairs to find me passed out on my bathroom floor. He drove me to the doctor and my blood pressure was 60/40. I had the flu complicated with double pneumonia, and was admitted to the hospital.
You can bet that every year following that event, I got a flu shot!
Call me superstitious, or just plain scared, I’ll take the chance.
simone
Nov 16, 2007 at 7:36 am
Hi all.
My daughter who is seven years old has not had a single vaccination,ever, not even vitamin k.
I did not vaccinate her because I didn’t want her to end up with autism. She ended up having autism anyway.
Just thought this may be of interest for you.
simone
Nov 16, 2007 at 7:43 am
Just read back over the posts and noticed that people are disregarding and disrespecting other’s opinions.
That is a shame, considering we could be supporting each other seeing as we share some common ground.
So,I’m out of here, but all the best on your journeys with your children with ASD.It is not easy!
Toxic
Nov 16, 2007 at 11:44 am
Kassianne, it doesn\’t have to be either one or the other. You indicate the choice is either (unsafe) vaccine or (unvaccinated) death. I argue that there is no reason the vaccine can\’t be made safer.
Chuck
Nov 16, 2007 at 11:56 am
Toxic is on the money with that last statement.
Kristina Chew, PhD
Nov 16, 2007 at 12:28 pm
Thank you for posting here Simone—–a lot of emotions on this topic, as you can see.
Kassiane
Nov 16, 2007 at 6:48 pm
You never indicated any respect for your child, Toxic.
DO YOU ACKNOWLEDGE that it is disrespectful and harmful to refer to people as harmful and toxic? Or not?
Go for it. Make the vaccines safer. But in the meantime we have to live with what we have and refusing to take what we have isn’t the answer. Old anticonvulsants arent all that safe (phenobarbital, anyone?) but they beat the hell out of SUDEP and status epilepticus.
Regan
Nov 16, 2007 at 7:12 pm
(Try it one more time)
I think that the issue is one of informed consent, and I don’t believe that it serves personal or public interest to exaggerate in either direction.
http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/4608.html
There are potential benefits and risks to vaccines, (and most anything for that matter). The benefits, individually and collectively, of vaccination programs are the meat of the article and story. There is also the matter of herd immunity and the various percentages associated with that, and the risks to those who cannot be vaccinated when overall percentages drop. (There is an interesting table on that in Wikipedia). However on the flip side there are the adverse events, which is the reason that the VAERS exists. The number may be few, relatively speaking, but if my child was one of the 8 who developed paralytic polio from a side-effect of the live polio vaccine in a year, I think that I might be angry, even in the knowledge that without it that the risk would be substantially higher with the potential of 21,000 wild-type cases pre-Salk/Sabin. As I saw, the medical field recognized that risk and recommended a change in the type of vaccine administered.
I sound like I am talking out of both sides of my mouth, but as I said, I don’t think that it serves, esp. on a rhetorical basis, to paint vaccination as all-dangerous or completely without risk. I don’t believe that the studies support an autism-vaccine link at this time, I do not believe that my daughter’s autism is a function of vaccination, but I do ask our doctors lots of questions and READ those informed consent background forms about the adverse effect rate of the shots we get and when/who should not get them. I guess the information coming in, and time will let us know whether I am misguided or correct.
Cliff
Nov 16, 2007 at 8:59 pm
Making vaccines safer isn’t an issue, and I don’t think that anyone’s disputed that. I think what is in contention is the overall danger (statistically, it seems at least to me to be pretty minimal), and whether it is related to autism.
Cliff
Chuck
Nov 16, 2007 at 10:48 pm
Refusing to take a vaccine that you have observed to fail and cause adverse reactions that you have experienced is a very appropriate answer. Asking for unbiased objective effective rates for all vaccines that only increase with time and have a continually decreasing number and severity of adverse reactions should be the ONLY driving expectation when vaccines are introduced to the general public.
The debate is still WIDE open on the dangers and causes of autism. There isn’t a single cause that has been suggested or studied that can reach the scientific level of causation for the general population of ASD. Potentially there could be a cause for a sub-set of ASD individuals, but determining the sub-set and cause could reduce the ASD population as yet another group of the “mis-diagnosed”.
Cliff
Nov 17, 2007 at 12:11 am
The general line of inquiry of “when you’ve seen it observed to fail” lends itself to the extreme. I’m getting on a plane tomorrow. Oh, wait, I shouldn’t get on a plane tomorrow; I’ve seen one crash on television.
And there’s going to be no convincing a skeptic of unbiased study isn’t going to be possible, either. But scientific data, which follows a well acceptable standard, has dismissed these claims. But if you put the standard above the world, you won’t ever get it.
And of course the debate is happening. We’re kind of having it right now. And I’m not asserting the cause of autism (though genetics seem to fit the bill in terms of causation). But I still can say that I have not seen sufficient evidence to be alarmed by vaccines any more than I have seen sufficient evidence I shouldn’t get on a plane tomorrow.
Cliff
Why Be Wary of Wi-Fi?
Nov 17, 2007 at 1:39 pm
[…] advanced our society has become—technological innovations like wireless technology and, yes, vaccines—are often pointed to as “causes of autism.” Is there some assumption that, […]
Chuck
Nov 17, 2007 at 6:43 pm
Cliff,
Would you get on a plane if 50% of them crashed? Would you get on them if 1 out of 10 crashed? What if you lived in Maryland and you were forced by law to get on a plane that crashed 50% of the time, and when it did crash, it also hurt people on the ground as well.
Why is it acceptable for vaccines to fail up to 50% of the time, depending on the vaccine and be mandated by the government and it is unacceptable to have airplanes that are voluntarily used crash with the same percentages. There are more federal regulations protecting you when you get on that plane then when that needle is jabbed into you. Why is that?
Kassiane
Nov 17, 2007 at 7:08 pm
Vaccines DON’T fail 50% of the time. 10% is the highest incidence of failure reported, IIRC, and it’s largely because of failure to get boosters for whatever reason.
Nor do they have catastrophic side effects 50% of the time. Or 10% of the time. Nor severe for that matter. And yes, these are 2 different categories.
Example: Seizures, as a side effect, are severe, unless they go to status epilepticus. Then they become catastrophic. Encephalitis is catastrophic. The latter can cause the former but the former can exist without the latter.
Chuck
Nov 17, 2007 at 9:03 pm
Beg to differ with you but CDC web site sited an influenza vaccine study of high-risk individuals with a 49% effective rate. The high-risk individuals were newborn children. That would be a 51% ineffective rate. There is absolutely no way to determine exactly how INEFFECTIVE the vaccine truly is in any given year.
Every single member of my family has had at least 1 diagnosed case of vaccine failure. One member of my family has life long problems (I don’t know if YOU would classify it as severe) due to adverse reaction to vaccine. Another member of my family has had 3 ( yes that is three) diagnosed cases of vaccine failure with lifelong severe medical problems.
Kassiane
Nov 17, 2007 at 9:25 pm
I’ve had 2 vaccine failures. I also couldnt get my final vaccines because of allergies, and when people are going “OMGZ VACCINES EAT BABIES!!!” it rather decreases effectiveness, yes? Mumps and pertussis. Ever cough so hard you dislocated ribs, plural, at a time? No? I advise against trying it, rather painful and no one is very good at putting them back.
Severe and catastrophic are different things. I’ve got severe health problems, too. Health problems suck but I don’t see how that means vaccines are eating people. The logic isn’t there.
Chuck
Nov 18, 2007 at 1:52 am
If vaccines do noting, then why bother getting them in the first place? The logic isn’t there either.
Kristina Chew, PhD
Nov 18, 2007 at 1:55 am
It’s not just vaccines that seem to be under discussion here, but modern medicine more generally.
Kassiane
Nov 18, 2007 at 2:37 am
Youre the one saying vaccines do nothing.
For the majority of people, theyre effective. For the people who they dont work for–thats what this whole herd immunity is about. Id never have had pertussis if these people werent convinced SHOTZ EET BABIEZ OMGS!
Chuck
Nov 18, 2007 at 9:45 am
Herd immunity doesn’t work for flu or chickenpox and both of these vaccines are ineffective, so why bother using them?
Stephanie
Nov 18, 2007 at 5:18 pm
This seems to be an overly polarized issue - why does it have to be so black and white? I had my older son vaccinated right on schedule, just as was recommended by my pediatrician and every mainstream book out there - and he was diagnosed with autism at the age of two. He didn’t “disappear” or change dramatically after his MMR, and I don’t really believe that being vaccinated resulted in his autism. However, after doing some research I did decide that it seemed like the recommended vaccination schedule was a lot to slam an infant’s immune system with before the age of two. As a result, I’ve slowed down the rate of vaccination for my younger son, and plan to have him up to date by the time he hits kindergarden.
I know that people feel strongly about a lot of things to do with autism, but surely moderation and practical precautions is a better path to understanding than strident fear tactics and conspiracy theories? After all, each family has to make their own choice. If it’s coincidental that the MMR shot and the average age of diagnosis fall in the same range, why not simply choose to vaccinate later, after the child turns four or five, but before they begin school?
I don’t think I’m mistaken about the vaccination schedule - I have strong memories of lining up for shots at the nurse’s office in grade school. Anyone know the real reasons that immunizations are crammed into such a short period of time? Is it just to ensure compliance, or is it cheaper?
Go, Mouse
Dec 23, 2007 at 8:20 pm
[…] 5 years old attending licensed day care or preschool beginning must take annual flu and pneumonia vaccines, and that sixth-graders (this will be Charlie next year) take two additional vaccines, one against […]
Mr Stiller
Jan 2, 2008 at 11:29 pm
My child had to be on life support after receiving the Merck recalled vaccines!! If you had a same experience please contact me!
Kristina Chew, PhD
Jan 3, 2008 at 12:20 am
I am very sorry to hear that this happened and hope your child is all right.
Mr Stiller
Feb 29, 2008 at 12:51 am
He is doing well.Thank you for your kind words.I never had an opinion one way or another all I know is I literally watched my baby cling to life on life support machines.He got the recalled vaccine and we arent sure if he had a reaction to the vaccine or if it was from the recalled lot.There is nothing like it in the world.I cant explain what I went threw honeslty it put me out of my mind I have never been so scared.I am still not okay to be honest it scared me sooooo bad.We are happy he is here with us someone was watching over him we do know! :O
Kristina Chew, PhD
Feb 29, 2008 at 1:46 am
Really glad to hear about how your child is doing and hope things continue to go well for him.
Have an opinion? Leave a comment: