SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
If using the law to corral antivaxxers doesn’t work at first, try, try again. At least, that seems to be the lesson learned by New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio. On Tuesday, he declared a state of emergency and mandated residents of the Williamsburg neighborhood, where an outbreak of measles has been raging since last fall, get vaccinated for the viral disease. Those who choose not to will risk the penalty of a $1,000 fine.
https://gizmodo.com/new-york-city-orders-williamsburg-residents-to-get-vacc-1833917175
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
New York City Orders Williamsburg Residents to Get Vaccinated for Measles or Face $1,000 Fine
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 99 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
A list is only as strong as its weakest link.
-- Don Knuth
(Score: 5, Informative) by JoeMerchant on Thursday April 11 2019, @12:30PM (71 children)
Autism hasn't been linked to vaccines in a scientifically accepted study, yet. Neither has it been adequately explained in a manner that makes it preventable, curable, or even reliably predictable.
Freedom to choose, has been an on again, off again, foundation of U.S. society. Call it religion, call it control over one's own body - this will continue to be an issue.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by isostatic on Thursday April 11 2019, @12:37PM (2 children)
You're free to walk around without being vaccinated. You're free to have sex. You aren't free to do these things in public.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:38PM
So, are we going to lock up all the Amish, too? And they aren't the only ones - plenty of "religions" out there with some crazier taboos than injecting their developing infants with vaccines.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 12 2019, @05:44AM
Having sex in public should be absolutely fine, since it harms no one, unlike not being vaccinated.
(Score: 2) by driverless on Thursday April 11 2019, @12:45PM (31 children)
I think there's a solution that would keep both sides happy, all those who choose to remain unvaccinated can live together somewhere, lets call it Petridishville, and those who get vaccinated can live somewhere other than Petridishville. Then after a couple of years they disinfect the remains of the place to kill any remaining bacteria/viruses/whatever, and the problem is solved.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @12:53PM (29 children)
You've got it opposite, who got wiped out by disease when Native Americans met Europeans? Populations relying on vaccination will be screwed if anything ever interrupts the supply, it is basically heroin addiction of an entire country. The original plan to eradicate measles made sense, not this.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @01:10PM (24 children)
LOL.
That's not an argument against vaccinations. That's an argument against civilization. You can substitute basically any modern development for 'vaccination' and that sentence will make exactly as much sense.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @01:19PM (22 children)
Except those other things have great value, measles vaccinations not so much. "If you're gonna get sick, can't beat the tamales" -brady bunch
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @01:49PM
Tamales is autocorrect for measles.
(Score: 3, Informative) by stormwyrm on Thursday April 11 2019, @02:28PM (20 children)
I see your Brady Bunch and raise you subacute sclerosing panencephalitis, a devastating complication of measles that will eventually kill up to one in 609 who get the disease.
https://respectfulinsolence.com/2016/11/01/measles-is-more-dangerous-than-we-thought-and-vaccines-are-as-safe-as-we-thought/ [respectfulinsolence.com]
There is no cure, but it doesn't affect someone who never got the measles, either because they were vaccinated or were very lucky. Most cases are from people who got the measles as infants before they were old enough to be vaccinated. It's like the shingles people get after chickenpox, but much worse, as it's almost uniformly fatal.
Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @02:44PM (6 children)
1 in 609 is total bullshit. How many people were diagnosed with that back when everyone got measles? We're talking millions of people every year getting measles so there must have been tens of thousands getting SSPE. Just think about how idiotic that claim is.
I see they arrived at that number from 17 cases out of measles cases reported to them in 1988-1991 (looks cherry picked). The number of reported cases is going to be some small fraction of the total.
https://idsa.confex.com/idsa/2016/webprogram/Paper56915.html [confex.com]
See my post below for actual complication rates of measles and mmr, not made up nonsense.
(Score: 3, Informative) by martyb on Thursday April 11 2019, @03:27PM (5 children)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measles [wikipedia.org]:
Wit is intellect, dancing.
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @03:33PM (4 children)
You can't compare measles complications in developing countries to the US. Instead look at the US/UK in the 1960s. Rate of complications had already dropped at least two orders of magnitude in those countries by then.
(Score: 3, Disagree) by martyb on Thursday April 11 2019, @03:44PM (3 children)
Why can't they be compared? It is because of vaccinations in those countries that the number of deaths was dramatically reduced. What you are advocating could KILL people. Especially those who are immunocompromised or on anti-rejection drugs because of organ transplants. Those people depend on "herd immunity" to reduce the number of active cases and so protect them from coming into contact with this extremely contagious disease.
This is analogous to driving without a fastened seatbelt on the off-chance one would be in an accident where being flung from the vehicle would save one's life, ignoring the far more common cases where it would prevent/reduce injury or death.
Wit is intellect, dancing.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @04:18PM (2 children)
No, the deaths were drastically reduced before vaccinations.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1815980/ [nih.gov]
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1522578/ [nih.gov]
Not sure where I advocated anything. What I would advocate is either:
1) Go all out and eradicate measles and be done with it
2) Only vaccinate select people like healthcare workers, etc.
Right now, we are vaccinating just below the eradication threshold which is known to cause giant epidemics:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12176860 [nih.gov]
Meanwhile the immunity of hundreds of millions of adults is waning:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15106101 [nih.gov]
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22966129 [nih.gov]
Can you imagine what is going to happen when tens or hundreds of millions adults all get measles at the same time? Because that is what is going to happen if we keep doing what is advocated by the CDC. We should have never altered the epidemiology of measles to begin with if you ask me, but now that we have...
(Score: 3, Informative) by martyb on Thursday April 11 2019, @09:16PM (1 child)
Okay, maybe I am misunderstanding what you are advocating. Are you suggesting that, because of complications, people should not be vaccinated? Or that we should go all out and vaccinate everyone we can until we can eradicate the disease?
I sensed you were advocating for no vaccination. If you were advocating otherwise, I would appreciate a statement of what you are advocating.
According to the WHO (World Health Organization) in 2014 [archive.org] (emphasis added):
Their stated goal (emphasis added):
Unfortunately, recent reduced vaccination rates has precluded attaining that goal:
As I understand it, the World Health Organization is advocating for MORE vaccination participation with a goal of eradicating this disease. That makes sense to me.
Wit is intellect, dancing.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @09:27PM
First, there isn't a single reference on that page so I have no idea where those numbers are coming from. There isn't even an author to hold responsible, so I don't consider it a reliable source.
Read carefully, they talk about "eliminating" instead of "eradicating":
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15106085 [nih.gov]
This is a huge difference, because eradication means there is no longer any excuse for the vaccine. Elimination means buying the vaccine for every new generation forever.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:45PM (12 children)
I guess I'm just not one of the two "unlucky ones" in my high school who's dying of that. We pretty much all had the measles back in the day, and more people died of things like drunk driving than childhood diseases. By this point, lots of us have already kicked off from cardio-vascular disease, random cancers, depression->suicide, etc. Subacute sclerosing panencephalitis just isn't on the radar as one of the big killers.
Don't get me wrong: many vaccines are great things. Polio and tetanus vaccines, for instance, are all kinds of awesome. On the other hand, there's a smorgasbord of vaccines that pediatricians push at all the new parents as part of the "standard schedule," and the political posturing tries to push people into for-all or against-all groups. It's no wonder that so many new moms simply say: NO. to all of them.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by stormwyrm on Friday April 12 2019, @01:35AM (11 children)
The 1 in 609 stat I quoted is for those people who got the measles as infants. I was one by the way, as I caught the disease when I was six months old, too young to be vaccinated, and since it's now nearly 43 years later it seems I dodged that bullet. The rate appears to go down as the age at which you get the measles goes up as I understand it. The point is that if someone gets the measles very young, not only does their risk of dying of the disease go up, even if they survive there's a chance that they might die anyway from a major complication that manifests eight or nine years later. This is why community immunity needs to be strong, to protect these very people who can't be vaccinated yet.
The CDC, by the way, didn't pull that standard vaccine schedule that is part of the standard of care for all American paediatricians out of thin air, nor did it do so at the behest of Big Pharma. It's backed by a lot of independent scientific studies, and unless you have the training to actually understand the scientific evidence they use to justify it, whining about the "smorgasbord of vaccines" is just a load of Dunning-Kruger.
Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday April 12 2019, @03:00AM (10 children)
Keep telling yourself that - then investigate the rollout of the HPV vaccine in Texas - mandated by order of the Governor, and it was clearly demonstrated that he was in the manufacturers pocket when he did it. It turned out to be a good thing, but at the time there was nowhere near enough data to REQUIRE an HPV vaccination for teenage girls to attend Texas schools. This is just one story, one that managed to get told.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by stormwyrm on Friday April 12 2019, @04:33AM (9 children)
Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday April 12 2019, @01:55PM (8 children)
Are you saying that Rick Perry was motivated by actual science? You obviously didn't live in Texas at the time.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by stormwyrm on Friday April 12 2019, @02:48PM (7 children)
Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday April 12 2019, @09:57PM (6 children)
I'll go along with that, though at the time Rick Perry was mandating Gadrasil for attendance in Texas Public Schools, the science and the CDC weren't there yet - didn't stop Rick from getting his law passed.
I've lived long enough to hear the government [which I include the CDC as a politically controlled part of, just like the FDA, EPA and other agencies founded to enrich and protect the public health but ultimately answer to legislators for their budgets (read: salaries.)] spew such gems as:
Lead in paint and gasoline, it's good for the economy and harmless to your health.
Mercury in dental fillings and vaccines, harmless and besides - other stuff is needlessly more expensive.
Asbestos in treated lumber, as used in childrens' playgrounds - no cause for concern.
Thalidomide for morning sickness... oops.
and lesser known gems, mostly in the field of radiotherapy, where the science is well established since the 1960s, the safety protocols flawless, and, still, anecdotal cases of "rare ideopathic cancers" seem to crop up at alarming rates.
In other words, faith in science, particularly government funded science, is still faith, perhaps an order of magnitude more reliable than other well known faith based beliefs, but ultimately I prefer the "first, do no harm" approach to interventions to the "for the greater good, I'll take this one for the team" approach.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by stormwyrm on Saturday April 13 2019, @12:29AM (5 children)
This sounds awful like a discussion you and I have had about cryptography some years back... In this case however, I don't think either of us have any expertise in any of this whatsoever, while back then I could at least point to a career that had something to do with computer security at some point. We are not epidemiologists, immunologists, or even medical doctors. Frankly, just as I'd rather trust someone like Bruce Schneier or Vincent Rijmen for my cryptography, I'd rather trust people with the expertise in things like this than my own arrogant ignorance. And when my decisions affect other people, like with the decision to vaccinate my kids or not, it doesn't come down "first, do no harm". Not vaccinating can cause plenty of harm, and not just to you and yours, but to the population of very young children who can't be vaccinated, to people who have compromised immune systems or other conditions that prevent them from getting vaccinated. It is not just data security that is at stake this time, but the lives of people, the lives of children, in fact. Whole groups of
Yeah, and keep on arguing that science was wrong before. Science is always wrong, it only gets less wrong over time. Yeah, since at one time scientists thought lead in paint and gasoline was a good idea and they turned out to be wrong, so today, their more refined studies about epidemiology and vaccines must also be wrong too! So since science was wrong before, they must also be wrong about anything I don't like!
Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday April 13 2019, @01:14AM (4 children)
No, but I have played with medical doctors, devices and the industry in general for 3 decades now at work...
And I thoroughly respect that as your right, for your own body and the bodies of your minor children.
If you haven't seen a dramatic treatment of it, look up the story of how long it took to convince the government that lead in paint and gasoline was a bad idea _after_ the science was demonstrated to a fairly overwhelming level. It's not that I don't trust scientists and science, it's that I don't trust the whole conglomerate of a system that includes scientists as a weak component of government, whereas industry tends to form a much stronger component of government that has repeatedly pushed bad science to counter genuine honest (repeatable) science. And, it is incredibly hard to really tell who is paying for your science, particularly when it comes out of a government organization, like the CDC.
Through my life/work experience I've seen, firsthand in Rockville Maryland, how politics trumps everything at the FDA. How lobbying influences what gets permission to market from the FDA and what doesn't. How "science" and I'm talking about dozens of articles from the most prestigious journals with the best independence and repeatability among the researchers, can conclude a 1/3 effectiveness rate for a particular device for a particular indication, while another perspective on the available literature with equal credibility can come to a 3% conclusion instead of 33% - and what literature people pack in their briefcase when they go on "thought influencing missions" of all kinds has everything to do with who is paying them: I have also seen a head of marketing personally flip from the 33% story to the 3% story in a heartbeat, when he got hired by the competing company.
Not that it must be wrong, but that it is most likely not telling the whole story.
There's no perfect government on Earth, and our shining carrot top is a beacon of reality about what can happen in the U.S., but... one of the things that keeps me here is the relatively high level of respect for personal choice, freedom of the individual to choose not what is best for the country in the opinion of the government, but to choose what is best for them in their own ignorant and limited perspective on the world. School shootings, Klan rallies, and crappy social support (aka 1000 points of light) for the homeless and otherwise needy, are all negative outcomes, in my opinion, of this system. But, just as science moves slowly forward, I think the U.S. also moves slowly forward with things like slavery, discrimination, abortion, etc. On that scale, I'd prefer to see the right to choose to vaccinate stick around, at least as long as the right to purchase and own assault rifles.
And, I'm happy to keep my unvaccinated children home from school when there's a potential outbreak of a disease they haven't been vaccinated for, but not to discriminate against them 100% of the time just to pressure compliance with "science" that has, in many cases, barely been established for a generation.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by stormwyrm on Saturday April 13 2019, @02:46AM (3 children)
Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday April 13 2019, @03:46AM
Just offhand, Gadrasil, now a solidly recommended component of the CDC plan, was an absolutely unknown quantity 20 years ago. Is it safe? seems to be so far... I would count Jonas Salk's Polio vaccine as the earliest significant player in the field, and Salk himself was born around the same time as my grandparents, the vaccine was just barely available to my parents. As late as the 1970s, there were no widespread vaccinations for varicella, mumps, or measles - at least in my family, my children were the first to have those available in their "childhood schedule."
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 13 2019, @09:11AM
>Vaccines have been around since the days of Edward Jenner
And nutrition is necessary for the human body, this allows you to eat randomly picked mushrooms, right?
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday April 13 2019, @12:08PM
Eradication of smallpox does seem to be a victory, and I'd love to see polio follow - I'm actually not sure about the measles... what if all 22 diseases or, let's be a bit more realistic, 16 of the diseases on the CDC vaccination schedule were eradicated completely from the face of the earth within the next 20 years, would that be a great victory for mankind? It might be, it might also re-regulate the human biome's gene activity to be more vulnerable to evolving threats and, like antibiotics, after 50 years or so of relative freedom from these diseases, we might well be facing new more horrible scourges that our best antibiotic & vaccination efforts can't do anything about - scourges that wouldn't have had a chance to take hold in an unvaccinated population that had been naturally building immunity to such things over tens of thousands of years, but suddenly had no need to fight and so de-expressed that gene activity.
Were I immortal, I would hope to see humanity evolve/mature to co-exist with threats like sharks in the ocean, tigers in the jungle, alligators in the swamps, and other "deadly threats" that can be avoided by the masses. As long as these threats exist, with a population of billions of humans a few are going to end up interacting with them and dying, and as long as that is by choice, I think that's not only fine, but a good thing. Coexisting with microbes that give unpleasant temporary sickness is another aspect of that. Sure, wash your hands, avoid outbreaks, but occasional microbial irritation has been part of mammal life since there have been mammals and "conquering" the microbial world is much less likely than driving the lions, tigers and bears to extinction - in the real world. This is not an argument to keep around deadly or permanently debilitating diseases like smallpox or polio, but characterizing measles as deadly almost feels like shooting every alligator on sight because of what it might do when it grows up, and certainly we are starting to dig deep with the current CDC schedule away from deadly and debilitating into borderline annoying / nuisance diseases. Should everyone get the measles? No, there is a vaccine, and a choice to vaccinate yourself and your children. There is also good monitoring of outbreaks, excellent communication of outbreaks in progress, and relatively good tracking of who is vaccinated and who is not, and even the vaccinated have a choice to stay home from school when there is an outbreak.
Put another way, my personal choice, my "religious" or at least philosophical stance is: I'll take my seasonal flu and occasional Rotavirus as it comes, and if that's the death of me when I'm 86 years old and frail, that was my choice, I'm fine with that. Maybe my natural exposure will give me superior immunity by then, or not, but I choose to opt-out of the annual flu vaccination experiment, and I expect to retain the right to pick and choose which vaccines I put into my children, at least until they are of an age and mental capacity to tell me that they choose otherwise. Do my pediatricians know more on the subject that I do? Perhaps, but when they can't budge from the "party line" of: ALL 22 vaccines on the CDC schedule are highly recommended, including the 15 in the first 15 months of life, plus a couple more if you are "lucky enough" to get them... I, somewhat sadly, find myself moving away from that stance and just a bit in the direction of the "kooks" like Jenny McCarthy (and Ivanka Trump, apparently) who have been lampooned in the media as "OMG, what idiots would follow them?" Perhaps the same kind of idiots who opted out of mercury fillings while their dentists, who know much more about the topic than them, all told them they were perfectly safe.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Thursday April 11 2019, @06:18PM
Actually, this is a very old system of social control, dating back to at least Ancient Egypt. Provinces not supportive of the current pharaoh were subject to being denied water. In China they were more direct, and in times of famine the army came into rebellious provinces, took their food, and distributed it into loyal provinces.
So it's a real problem, and it has to do with the nature of humanity more than anything else. In particular, those in power prefer to support those who support them. And, to make things more current, this is why the police can get away with murder.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @01:59PM (1 child)
I didn't know Native Americans died because they were vaccinated. I thought they died because they were NOT vaccinated, because vaccination is basically exposing yourself to germs in a safe way.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Thursday April 11 2019, @06:22PM
Actually, they died because their ancestors hadn't grown up exposed to the disease. Vaccination is sort of a work around, but it does allow those with weaker immunity to a disease to propagate. So shouldn't we reintroduce smallpox?
OTOH, if technical civilization survives, immunity will be improved via gene-line alteration, and if it doesn't the survivors will live in such small groups that diseases that depend on large dense populations will die out. So perhaps the problem isn't worth worrying aboutl
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @04:12PM
The unvaccinated Native Americans. Next.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday April 11 2019, @07:04PM
Only those who have forgotten medical history would be wiped out. Most vaccines can be cultured using 19th century technology or even less.
For measles, we could resort to either arm to arm innoculation (far from ideal, but a lower mortality than just letting nature take it's course), or cowpox innoculation.
It's still possible to eradicate measles, only fear and superstition have stopped us.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:35PM
Nobody is forcing the Amish to stay in their towns....
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @12:49PM (27 children)
Call it man slaughter or murder (250 dead children each year related to measles infections that could have been prevented by vaccinating and group immunity)... The dark ages are over people, no more legitimized murdering in name of religion.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @12:55PM
Mortality rates for measles and mmr are about the same in societies with decent sanitationsystems.. Really the rates of pretty much all complications are about the same. In both cases there is very little risk.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @01:18PM (25 children)
Have you examined the rates of vaccine injuries to compare?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @01:45PM (24 children)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1815949/ [nih.gov]
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6343620/ [nih.gov]
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @03:10PM (20 children)
Oh look! Decontextualized numbers with only half-assed sourcing. The stock in trade of conspiracy theorist. GTFOH you mental defective.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @03:15PM (19 children)
Half assed sourcing? The links to the studies describing where the numbers came from are right there. What more help do you need? It isn't like these are book length sources, they are a couple pages long.
But we really know that you really just want an excuse to ignore evidence you don't like, so you came up with that ridiculous one. I'm cracking up over here, too funny.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @03:35PM
And also, doesn't anyone find it strange that the cdc doesn't have a table like this on their web site?
Quite odd that I should be forced to cobble one together.
(Score: 2) by martyb on Thursday April 11 2019, @03:36PM (1 child)
The first source was dated July 11, 1964 or over 54 years ago.
The second source was much more recent (August 29, 2018). It advocates FOR high vaccination rates (emphasis added):
Wit is intellect, dancing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @04:23PM
Sorry, I do not get the purpose of your post. The relevant part of those sources is the data on complication rates. I think I got all of it in these quotes:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6343620/ [nih.gov]
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1815949/ [nih.gov]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @03:44PM (1 child)
No they are not. You provided no sources, no context to the numbers you are comparing the mmr & measles numbers to.
Nor any description of the severity of the complications in each case because temporarily going deaf for a month from an ear infection is not the same as dying from the measles.
At best, you are just another dimwit who doesn't even realize when he's lying to himself. GTFOH
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @04:25PM
If you can't find them, I don't know how to help you. It was not a long post.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday April 11 2019, @07:59PM (13 children)
Yes, half-assed. You're comparing a vaccine that confers immunity to THREE diseases to the effects of getting just ONE of those diseases. You're also tipping the scale by equating mild to moderate congestion to life threatening pulmonary failure.
Consider, if the vaccinated person gets a fever of 37.5 and the unvaccinated person with the disease gets a fever of 40.5, you can claim both got a fever, but that misses the difference between the mildly uncomfortable vaccination fever and the delerium inducing and life threatening fever of the disease.
The studies themselves are fine, but they were not designed to be directly comparable.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @08:27PM (12 children)
There is nothing half-assed about it. That is the most comparable I found. The detailed data you want reported simply doesn't exist afaict. If you can find better please share it. Convenient that no clean comparison exists though, isn't it?
There has actually never been a blinded RCT published for any measles vaccine. Merck lies and says there was:
https://web.archive.org/web/20091231032205/http://merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/a/attenuvax/attenuvax_pi.pdf [archive.org]
None of those published studies are blinded RCTs.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday April 11 2019, @08:31PM (11 children)
If that's the best you can find, your correct report is "I've got nothing".
If I want to compare the apple harvest this year to the past 5, there is no point in even bothering to report if all I can find is figures for oranges in 1953. Actually, even trying to draw a conclusion from those two sets of figures would be fraud, just like your worthless claims.
So, yes. HALF-ASSED!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @08:55PM (10 children)
Not that I agree, but... are you capable of continuing along your line of thought to the logical conclusion? That there is somehow no good data available regarding whether measles vaccines are a good idea or not? Because that is what you are saying.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday April 11 2019, @09:22PM (9 children)
No, what I'm saying is that your data and research were not adequate to the task. The data likely IS out there but it's on a high shelf and so cannot be reached without getting up from the armchair.
Since the data you are looking for is decades pre-internet, you will likely need to spend some time in a medical school's research library. The good news is that the internet probably has an instructional video on using a microfiche reader.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @09:36PM (7 children)
No, there isn't. I have searched high and wide and have much experience with the medical literature. And if it did exist I know a table like the one I created would be presented proudly on the CDC home page (unless they wanted to hide the results for some reason).
You can't prove a negative but my search has been exhaustive. My conclusion is there is simply no way for us to directly compare the risks of measles vs the vaccine. We need to approximate it (my plan) or give up (your plan).
I have never been unable to find a medical paper I wanted online (and I am talking about tens of thousands over the years, many of them pre-WWII). This is a non-issue.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:03PM (6 children)
And yet you seem to be unaware of how common febrile seizures are in infants or that they are generally uncomplicated.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:11PM (5 children)
Umm.. What are you basing that on?
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:14PM (4 children)
The fact that you used it as a throw-in in your table.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:50PM
It was reported by the people who ran the vaccine trial, is there some reason I should not have included it?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:55PM (2 children)
Anyway, whatever... now you're just doing weird nitpicking so you have some reason to ignore the facts. It is clear you don't have any useful input here.
Please find this non-existent clean data you think is required, or admit that there is no way to make a direct comparison between measles and vaccination complications. Therefore there is no empirical basis for recommending vaccines... Because if you demand clean data it really is one or the other.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday April 11 2019, @11:27PM (1 child)
You're the one who was making an assertion. It's your duty to either back it up with read facts of retract it.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @11:50PM
Don't even know what assertion you are referring to, you are just attempting to waste the time of someone who has clearly put more effort into understanding this topic than you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @09:48PM
Prove me wrong. Find reference to a single paper about a double blind RCT of a measles vaccine so we can do a direct comparison of complications. I would love to see it.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:20PM (2 children)
Excuse me as I have no time to delve deep into these but a cursory glance talks about REPORTED stuff.
A better stats is done by observing X guys, seeing how many get measles, and see how many end up with complications. Because the rate I see in the '63 study is harsh compared to my 1970s experience (vaccination only for only polio, tbc and tetanus) with measles AND rubella AND parotitis and a couple others.
Translate and look at this, instead.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190411221522/https://www.sanita.puglia.it/documents/36126/4921952/Sorveglianza+degli+eventi+avversi+a+vaccino+in+Puglia+Report+2013-2017/9db6decb-5aaf-426f-b8fe-c9474e9e8468 [archive.org]
Account abandoned.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:59PM (1 child)
Yes, those are the ~15% of cases that got reported which would tend to be worse on average. I suspect there were even some cases of measles with no classic rash, etc.
Is there some easy way to translate that I am missing?
(Score: 2) by Bot on Saturday April 13 2019, @09:31AM
page 26 of the state bureaucracy sponsored pdf, whose summary says vaccination is good so is quite devoid of antivax bias, tells about a 4 percent GRAVE adverse reactions when you ACTIVELY monitor the subjects, and a causality assessment of 75%. So 3 out of 100 kids had grave problems with that multivaccine shot and that is 300x the figure passive surveillance yields. So, what happens in practice?
- *shot*
- a week later
- Doctor my daughter is expelling green stuff, might it be the papilloma shot she had earlier?
- I don't think so, there are no reports of this. Anyway take these medicines that treat the symptom.
and nothing gets reported.
The Italian army also had a pretty big investigation over enriched uranium and illnesses getting soldiers killed with cancer and sclerosis. It uncovered vaccines for guys sent in war zone as a pretty suspicious correlation, more than exposure to uranium itself.
But all of these is irrelevant.
Fact: our governments don't care about illnesses, because they let illegals in without quarantine, with the full propaganda machine of the mainstream media AND the arts world devoted to the cause.
Fact: pharmaceutical industry treats people like cattle, because any other industry big enough does, because they are the operative branch of the biggest scam ever, the financial system.
If you consider these two facts, there are two possible outcomes: Vaccines are not as safe and contribute to control of population in number and stamina. OR The antivax movement is a fraud to make people get less vaccinations, so you can point the finger at them when immigrants bring old and new illnesses in their new country of adoption. Pulling stats that you didn't contribute or closely monitor is ultimately IRRELEVANT.
Now, go ahead and label me right wing nazi aryan supremacist about to go on a shooting spree, that's what the propaganda wants you to think and I am not even bothering justifying my position, it does not work.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @01:40PM (6 children)
The crazy thing about anti-vaxx is that the guy who started it all in 1998, Andrew Wakefield, is a total sociopath who did it because he wanted to get rich. He was paid nearly £400,000 by a law firm that was trying to sue a vaccine manufacturer [briandeer.com] and he was trying to patent his own alternate vaccine [briandeer.com] and he hoped to make over $40M per year selling fake diagnostic kits [washingtonpost.com] advertised to detect if someone's autism was 'caused' by the MMR vaccine.
Or maybe that's the most prosaic thing ever - con artist preys on people's fears to get rich and wrecks their lives in the process.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @01:54PM (3 children)
I've never met anyone "anti-vaxx" who gave a shit about Andrew Wakefield. Sounds like a strawman.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @02:49PM (2 children)
Yeah, that's the problem. If you suckers knew the origin of the scam, you might stop being suckers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @02:54PM (1 child)
How about discussing actual numbers instead of strawmen:
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=31033&page=1&cid=827912#commentwrap [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @03:15PM
Projection is the first refuge of the conspiracy nut.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Thursday April 11 2019, @03:21PM (1 child)
Setting aside for a moment all the problems with anti-vaxx to begin with, what the hell would be the point of this, if you can't do anything to fix it anyway? Sue somebody?
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @03:40PM
Exactly. That was his plan - anyone can use his kit for "free" but he gets a cut of any settlements/awards due to litigation because he provides and 'certifies' the results.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @08:38PM
New York is a wonderful place where a woman can abort a third trimester baby yet pay a fine for not getting a vaccination. Her body her choice!