Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by mrpg on Friday February 08 2019, @05:50PM   Printer-friendly
from the will-this-end? dept.

Submitted via IRC for Bytram

'It will take off like a wildfire': The unique dangers of the Washington state measles outbreak

[...] "You know what keeps me up at night?" said Clark County Public Health Director Alan Melnick. "Measles is exquisitely contagious. If you have an under-vaccinated population, and you introduce a measles case into that population, it will take off like a wildfire."

[...] Anti-vaccination activists, for their part, contend that state officials are twisting facts to stoke public fear.

"It shouldn't be called an outbreak," Seattle-area mother Bernadette Pajer, a co-founder of the state's main anti-vaccine group, Informed Choice Washington, said of the measles cases, arguing that the illness has spread only within a small, self-contained group. "I would refer to it as an in-break, within a community."

[...] Clements eventually changed her mind, deciding to give her kids the shots after a doctor at a vaccine workshop answered her questions for more than two hours, at one point drawing diagrams on a whiteboard to explain cell interaction. He was thoughtful, factual and also "still very warm," she said.

[...] In Washington, state lawmakers supporting tougher vaccine requirements are mounting their second effort in the past three years to make it harder for parents to opt out of vaccinations.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Friday February 08 2019, @06:02PM (34 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Friday February 08 2019, @06:02PM (#798436) Journal

    If the vaccinations work, and if you've vaccinated all the kids you care about, then the "outbreak" doesn't really concern you.

    If the "outbreak" kills a bunch of kids, they aren't your kids. And, if all of that happens, it will only strengthen your position, and convince other anti-vaxxers to get their kids vaccinated.

    So, just put all the authoritarianism aside, and let nature take it's course.

    And, one more thing, Melnick. Get you some Ambien, or Lunesta. You really don't need to lose sleep over this problem.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   -2  
       Flamebait=1, Troll=3, Insightful=2, Total=6
    Extra 'Troll' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   -1  
  • (Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08 2019, @06:16PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08 2019, @06:16PM (#798448)

    They suspect that the vaccines have waned or never took in a large percentage of people. If there is ever a real outbreak the false immunity they created is going to lead to the biggest outbreak ever. We are in what is called the honeymoon period and it is what happens when large-scale vaccination programs fail to eradicate:

    The second scenario represents the impact of a vaccination programme that reaches high levels of coverage (85% of all new-borns) which are, nevertheless, not high enough to lead to eradication of the agent. However, for the first 15 years after the introduction of vaccination, it appears as if eradication has been achieved, there are no infections. Then, suddenly, a new epidemic appears as if from nowhere. This is an illustration of a phenomenon known as the ‘honeymoon period’. This is the period of very low incidence that immediately follows the introduction of a non-eradicating mass vaccination policy. This happens because susceptible individuals accumulate much more slowly in a vaccinated community. Such patterns were predicted using mathematical models in the 1980s6 and have since been observed in communities in Asia, Africa and South America7. Honeymoon periods are only predicted to occur when the newly introduced vaccination programme has coverage close to the eradication threshold.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12176860 [nih.gov] [nih.gov]
    https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=8267&cid=205163#commentwrap [soylentnews.org]

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08 2019, @07:20PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08 2019, @07:20PM (#798485)

      So you should go get your vaccine because... see, it turns out, that for many (most?) people the vaccines didn't actually... um, work.

      • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08 2019, @07:41PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08 2019, @07:41PM (#798504)

        The original idea behind vaccinations was to eradicate the virus. This morphed into the current policy of needing to pay for vaccines into the indefinite future once the predictions of measles eradication in 1967 failed.

        The Center for Disease Control (CDC) led in mounting the program with a formal paper at the American Public Health Association annual meeting in Miami in the fall of 1966. Two colleagues and I wrote the “official statement” which outlined in detail unqualified statements about the epidemiology of measles and made an unqualified prediction. My third position in the authorship of this paper did not adequately reflect my contribution to the work.14 I will make but two quotes:

                1. “The infection spreads by direct contact from person to person, and by the airborne route among susceptibles congregated in enclosed spaces.” (Obviously the ideas of Perkins and Wells had penetrated my consciousness but not sufficiently to influence my judgment). 2. “Effective use of (measles) vaccines during the coming winter and spring should insure the eradication of measles from the United States in 1967.” Such was my faith in the broad acceptance of the vaccine by the public and the health professions and in the infallibility of herd immunity.

                [...]

                There are many reasons and explanations for this rather egregious blunder in prediction. The simple truth is that the prediction was based on confidence in the Reed-Frost epidemic theory, in the applicability of herd immunity on a general basis, and that measles cases were uniformly infectious. I am sure I extended the teachings of my preceptors beyond the limits that they had intended during my student days.

                In the relentless light of the well-focussed retrospectiscope, the real failure was our neglect of conducting continuous and sufficiently sophisticated epidemiological field studies of measles. We accepted the doctrines imbued into us as students wikout maintaining the eternal skepticism of the true scientist.

                [...]

                Clearly we must revise our theory and recognize that these outbreaks must be airborne in character involving exposure to aerosols presumably created by the rare super-spreader who contaminates a large populated enclosed space such as a school auditorium or gymnasium. These have happened sufficiently often to prove the far sightedness of Perkins and Wells when the rest of us were smugly secure in our epidemic theories, our traditional faith in contact infection and herd immunity.

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6939399 [nih.gov]

        By 1968 they already realized what they had done:

        Campaigns such as the one described have altered the epidemiology of measles. No longer will the disease contribute as much to maintaining herd immunity. The prevention of measles epidemics will now require constant maintenance immunization programs.

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1228954/ [nih.gov] [nih.gov]

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by realDonaldTrump on Friday February 08 2019, @06:20PM (1 child)

    by realDonaldTrump (6614) on Friday February 08 2019, @06:20PM (#798450) Homepage Journal

    They're worried about the kids that didn't get the shots. But, also the ones that did. Because the shots aren't 100%. They don't always work.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08 2019, @08:21PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08 2019, @08:21PM (#798528)

      I think you forgot to log out of your troll account.

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by mrpg on Friday February 08 2019, @06:21PM

    by mrpg (5708) Subscriber Badge <reversethis-{gro ... yos} {ta} {gprm}> on Friday February 08 2019, @06:21PM (#798452) Homepage

    When you have a child,
    you have the son of the house and the whole street,
    you have the one who rides in the carriage of the beggar woman
    and the one in the car that pushes the English governess

    When you have a child, you have so many children
    that the street is full
    and the square and the bridge
    and the market and the church
    and it's our any child when it crosses the street
    and the car runs over him
    and when he looks out on the balcony
    and when he approaches the pool.

    Andrés Eloy Blanco
    Los hijos infinitos

    https://www.poeticous.com/andres-eloy-blanco/los-hijos-infinitos [poeticous.com]

  • (Score: 5, Informative) by bob_super on Friday February 08 2019, @06:25PM (20 children)

    by bob_super (1357) on Friday February 08 2019, @06:25PM (#798454)

    STOP REPEATING LIES !!!
    Dangerous ones at that.

    Vaccines aren't 100% effective. Not 100% of people who want them can get the vaccines, because of real allergies.

    So, for the people who can't, and the people who did but it didn't take, just do your fucking part to get the population to the 90+% required for proper herd immunity that prevents catastrophic spread.
    AND STOP SAYING/TYPING LIES THAT GET PEOPLE HURT, MORONS !

    Because this is 2019, and this is "the greatest country in the world", so why the fuck are we discussing measles outbreaks ?

    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Friday February 08 2019, @06:27PM (7 children)

      by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Friday February 08 2019, @06:27PM (#798460) Homepage

      Because goddam Christian nutbag rednecks don't vaccinate their damn kids! [vox.com]

      And I'm sure all that third-world filth pouring in through our Southern border isn't going to help things much, either.

      • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Friday February 08 2019, @07:04PM

        by hemocyanin (186) on Friday February 08 2019, @07:04PM (#798472) Journal

        If you had used a Fox citation along with the Vox citation to argue the same point, THAT would have been pretty epic.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08 2019, @07:05PM (4 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08 2019, @07:05PM (#798473)

        If you are to be believed* about your ancestry then I'd say you have a solid point....

        *hawhaw

        • (Score: 1, Funny) by Ethanol-fueled on Friday February 08 2019, @07:08PM (3 children)

          by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Friday February 08 2019, @07:08PM (#798475) Homepage

          I'm more Hispanic than Beto and more Native American than Elizabeth Warren, that's for goddamn sure.

          • (Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08 2019, @08:16PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08 2019, @08:16PM (#798524)

            So you admit you're third world filth huh? Given any thought to running in 2020? I'm sure the Trumptards would overwhelmingly support a racist minority, then they get to say "but we elected a mexican!" while continuing to be (mostly) awful people.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08 2019, @09:41PM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08 2019, @09:41PM (#798553)

            ...and stupider than a potted plant.

            • (Score: 2, Informative) by Sulla on Friday February 08 2019, @11:46PM

              by Sulla (5173) on Friday February 08 2019, @11:46PM (#798594) Journal

              As we can see from the Democrats love of AOC and Spartacus they aren't exactly qualifying their people on their intellect, I think EF would fit right in.

              --
              Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08 2019, @09:39PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08 2019, @09:39PM (#798552)

        That's just stupid of you.

    • (Score: 0, Troll) by noneof_theabove on Friday February 08 2019, @07:39PM (3 children)

      by noneof_theabove (6189) on Friday February 08 2019, @07:39PM (#798501)

      HERD IMMUNITY means absolutely nothing except that when the vaccine fails 100% of those vaccinated are going to have a bad week.

      The only one I have had [got sick] is mumps and I still my tonsils, so being born in 1954, I watch for any illness that jacks with my throat.

      #1 WAG - wild ass guess
      #2 EWAG - educated wild ass guess

      Will this years vaccine for the flu work, usually results in a #1 answer.

      Natural immunity is the best, second to natural remedies.

      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by bob_super on Friday February 08 2019, @07:57PM

        by bob_super (1357) on Friday February 08 2019, @07:57PM (#798512)

        Either you're trolling or you're an ignorant idiot, and a dangerous one at that.
        May I invite you to take a one-way trip to central Africa?

      • (Score: 4, Informative) by SemperOSS on Friday February 08 2019, @08:19PM (1 child)

        by SemperOSS (5072) on Friday February 08 2019, @08:19PM (#798526)

        If I understand it correctly, you are saying that herd immunity is not a fact but a (possibly educated) guess?

        Not so.

        CDC — and similar institutions all over the world — have more than just simulations and other calculations to show the reality of the herd effect, they have actual observations supporting it. Not understanding this is just plain asinine.

        --
        I don't need a signature to draw attention to myself.
        Maybe I should add a sarcasm warning now and again?
        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by HiThere on Friday February 08 2019, @11:23PM

          by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Friday February 08 2019, @11:23PM (#798589) Journal

          Not understanding it is defensible. Not understanding it and having a strong opinion is... Well, someone who does that doesn't deserve to live through it.

          --
          Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
    • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08 2019, @10:30PM (5 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08 2019, @10:30PM (#798566)

      Also, please STOP SHOUTING HALF TRUTHS!!!

      Not only are the vaccines not 100% effective in those who get them, they are also not 100% harmless. Proving vaccine injury in court to collect from the fund is excessively difficult, only a very small percentage of the vaccine injured even attempt it.

      Fever spike of 105F+ in the hours following a standard round of 30 month old vaccinations, combination of ibuprofen acetaminophen and ice pack therapy got it down to 103 after 2 hours in the E.R. - luckily without seizures. Lasting effects? Undoubtedly, but what's the cost of trying to prove that in court?

      • (Score: 4, Informative) by bob_super on Friday February 08 2019, @10:45PM (4 children)

        by bob_super (1357) on Friday February 08 2019, @10:45PM (#798573)

        The risk/reward math always falls on the "reward" side, for those highly-transmissible killers.
        At the society level.

        At the personal level, it really sucks when you're the one with the adverse effects.

        But that makes it even more important that anyone who doesn't have a strong reaction to vaccines DO get them, to protect the ones who can't.
        No non-medical exemptions.

        • (Score: 3, Informative) by sonamchauhan on Saturday February 09 2019, @04:45AM (2 children)

          by sonamchauhan (6546) Subscriber Badge on Saturday February 09 2019, @04:45AM (#798704)

          Good point.

          Typically, you won't know you need a medical exemption until after the adverse reaction hits.

          In the meantime, you can take sensible precautions. Wait until older. Spread out doses. Never combine vaccines. Read ingredients, and select less harmful versions. Don't immunise against low risk illnesses (e.g., the flu, if you're not going to die from having it)

          • (Score: 2) by Dr Spin on Saturday February 09 2019, @09:13AM

            by Dr Spin (5239) on Saturday February 09 2019, @09:13AM (#798760)

            I don't know about America, but in most of the world, all the related risks are very low, however the risks of delaying the vaccine (and thereby increasing the time you are a potential victim of the disease) are considerably greater than the reduction in risk of the vaccine, at least in part because if you are at risk from the vaccine, you are at much higher risk from the actual disease.

            --
            Warning: Opening your mouth may invalidate your brain!
          • (Score: 0, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 09 2019, @02:09PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 09 2019, @02:09PM (#798817)

            Read ingredients, and select less harmful versions.

            This is what is referred to as paranoia or border line delusional schizophrenia. In a world where you are surrounded by chemicals of all sorts, that you eat and breathe or otherwise absorb, you are worried about a mass-fucking-produced tiny vaccine that has been checked and verified for safety? You are seriously worried about "harmful ingredients" there?? But I guess you are also one of these people that doesn't buckle seat belts because they will trap you in a burning wreck and prevent your miraculous escape?

            Rational fucking thinking - go get some.

            Don't immunise against low risk illnesses (e.g., the flu, if you're not going to die from having it)

            Except the flu is not a vaccine that actually works well, so you picked the worse fucking example. And every disease is low-risk, until it kills you.

        • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 10 2019, @08:08PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 10 2019, @08:08PM (#799196)

          you wouldn't be such a suck ass if you had kids or grand kids that were vaccine damaged. except that you probably do, you just don't know it b/c they were only damaged enough to drop their iq by 20 points.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 09 2019, @03:04AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 09 2019, @03:04AM (#798669)

      SN will really hit the big time when such an informative rebuttal as this causes the OP's outright worthless POS post to never see the light of day.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by dry on Saturday February 09 2019, @03:39AM

      by dry (223) on Saturday February 09 2019, @03:39AM (#798680) Journal

      Being the "greatest country in the world" includes having the greatest measles outbreaks. Glad I live in a regular country where about the only great thing you can say about us is that we're not Americans.

  • (Score: 1) by Sulla on Friday February 08 2019, @07:41PM (3 children)

    by Sulla (5173) on Friday February 08 2019, @07:41PM (#798505) Journal

    So specifically with this vaccine you can't get it until you are a year old. So there is going to be a large group of people who could not get the vaccine if they wanted to who could run into problems.

    --
    Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
    • (Score: 2) by SunTzuWarmaster on Friday February 08 2019, @08:14PM (2 children)

      by SunTzuWarmaster (3971) on Friday February 08 2019, @08:14PM (#798522)

      Luckily we keep all of the 1 year olds away from the un-vaccinated 2 year olds.
      /sarcasm - needed because we are talking about life/death here.

      Freaking vaccinate.

      • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Sulla on Friday February 08 2019, @10:12PM (1 child)

        by Sulla (5173) on Friday February 08 2019, @10:12PM (#798563) Journal

        When my kids were born the doctors seemed very cautious about asking whether we planned to vaccinate. When we told them that we were fine with any vaccinations that they had the doc said she was greatful to not be yelled at. I live on the west cost though so I guess freaking out at the doctors is the norm here.

        --
        Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
        • (Score: 2) by Gaaark on Friday February 08 2019, @10:53PM

          by Gaaark (41) on Friday February 08 2019, @10:53PM (#798577) Journal

          When we went in to see the team of doctors about our sons diagnosis of autism (he was around 3-4 years old) it was like walking in to a funeral:

          we had already guessed he was autistic (when you look down on him and he looks to the side, yeah...pretty good diagnostic guess)... i guess the doctors are so used to parents crying, wailing and gnashing their teeth (possible rending of clothes?) that it was LIKE pulling teeth to get them to say the diagnosis. We finally just said "He's autistic, right!".
          there was this quiet let out of breath from the team and then they got down to business.

          I guess everybody hates being yelled at and confirming parents worst fears, lol.

          --
          --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
  • (Score: 2) by sjames on Friday February 08 2019, @09:58PM (2 children)

    by sjames (2882) on Friday February 08 2019, @09:58PM (#798557) Journal

    If vaccination was 100% effective, could be given safely and effectively at birth, and no medical condition whatsoever would prevent effective vaccination, you would be right. But none of those are true.

    With sufficient exposure, vaccinated kids can get measles. The first dose at 1 year old is 93% effective, the second dose at 4 to 6 years brings it up to 97%. That leaves babies and children with various immune deficiencies unprotected.

    Not that long ago, when vaccination rates were higher, there were no outbreaks of Measles. Isolated cases were considered remarkable.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 10 2019, @06:47PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 10 2019, @06:47PM (#799167)

      Babies are protected by maternal antibodies until they are about 1 year old (less if the mother was vaccinated instead of had measles).

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 10 2019, @06:59PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 10 2019, @06:59PM (#799170)

      Source:

      The recommended age for vaccination in the US changed from 9 months in 1963 to 12 months in 1965 and 15 months in 1976 in response to data showing higher seroconversion rates at older ages in absence of maternal antibodies [7].
              [...]
              The first two studies comparing both groups of infants were conducted in the US [29] and the UK [30]. Women vaccinated with live attenuated measles vaccine had lower amounts of antibodies and passed on shorter term protection against measles to their children (up to the age of 8 months) than naturally infected mothers (up to the age of 11 months). Lennon and Black [29] calculated the proportion of children expected to be susceptible to measles infection and responsive to vaccine by infant's age and mothers birth year cohort in the US. The children of younger mothers appeared to be sooner susceptible to measles infection: measles GMT declined sharply among women with birth-years between 1955 and 1961. This was the cohort vaccinated at the start of vaccination programmes in the US.

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21133659 [nih.gov]