Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday April 11 2019, @12:06PM   Printer-friendly
from the disease-outbreak-spotted dept.

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


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This discussion has been archived.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: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @12:49PM (27 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @12:49PM (#827879)

    Call it religion, call it control over one's own body - this will continue to be an issue.

    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

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @12:55PM (#827884)

    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)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @01:18PM (#827891)

    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)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @01:45PM (#827912)

      Rates of complications:
      Ear Infections
      Measles_1963 = 0.025
      MMR_2018 = 0.015

      Respiratory tract afflictions
      Measles_1963 = 0.038
      MMR_2018 = 0.1

      Encephalitis
      Measles_1963 = 0.001
      MMR_2018 < 0.0007? (febrile convulsions = .002)

      Mortality
      Measles_1963 = 0.0002
      MMR_2018 < 0.0007

      Fever
      Measles_1963 ~ 1.0 (assumed)
      MMR_2018 = 0.3

      Rash
      Measles_1963 ~ 1.0 (assumed)
      MMR_2018 = 0.25

      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)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @03:10PM (#827993)

        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)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @03:15PM (#827999)

          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

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @03:35PM (#828021)

            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)

            by martyb (76) Subscriber Badge on Thursday April 11 2019, @03:36PM (#828022) Journal

            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):

            The introduction of vaccines against measles, mumps, and rubella in childhood immunization programs has led to considerable reductions in the incidence of the diseases and the associated morbidity and mortality caused by these viruses.1–3 However, occasional measles, mumps, and rubella outbreaks still occur, often caused or aggravated by sub-optimal vaccination coverage in certain areas or population groups.3–7 Sustained high vaccination coverage is therefore crucial for optimal disease prevention.8–11 Combined live attenuated measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccines help simplify childhood immunization schedules and therefore facilitate achieving high coverage.12

            --
            Wit is intellect, dancing.
            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @04:23PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @04:23PM (#828082)

              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:

              The incidence of fever reported as solicited general symptom during the 43-day post-vaccination period was also similar between groups, with 31.1% of MMR-RIT and 32.3% of MMR II-vaccinated children reporting fever ≥ 38.0°C, and 4.0% and 2.7% reporting grade 3 fever (> 39.5°C) (Figure 2 and Supplemental table S1). Medical advice for fever was sought for 13.1% and 10.1% of children in the MMR-RIT and MMR II groups, respectively.
                      [...]
                      Rashes were reported for 24.4% of MMR-RIT and 27.4% of MMR II-vaccinated children. Approximately two thirds of the rashes were localized and occurred without fever. Measles/rubella-like rashes were reported for 5.8% and 4.7% of children; varicella-like rashes (as a possible consequence of the co-administered varicella vaccine) for 3.6% and 4.0% (Table 3). Medical advice for rashes was sought for 11.2% and 12.4% of children in the MMR-RIT and MMR II groups, respectively.
                      [...]
                      A total of 51.4% (95% CI: 48.5%, 54.3%) and 48.4% (44.3%, 52.6%) of children in the MMR-RIT and MMR II groups, respectively, reported unsolicited adverse events (AEs) during the 43-day post-vaccination period; upper respiratory tract infection (9.5% and 12.8%) and diarrhea (8.2% and 8.0%) occurred most frequently.

              https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6343620/ [nih.gov]

              Neary 67 per 1,000, or about 1 in every 15 persons with measles in this survey, suffered from at least one complication. The most numerous were severe affections of the respiratory tract (38 per 1,000) and otitis media (25 per 1,000), followed by neurological disturbances (4 per 1,000) and a small number of others (2 per 1,000). Twelve of the children studied (0.2 per 1,000) are known to have died after measles, and 610 (11.5 per 1,000) were admitted to hospitals as a direct result of the disease.

              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)

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @03:44PM (#828036)

            Half assed sourcing? The links to the studies describing where the numbers came from are right there.

            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

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @04:25PM (#828086)

              You provided no sources

              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)

            by sjames (2882) on Thursday April 11 2019, @07:59PM (#828219) Journal

            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)

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @08:27PM (#828238)

              The studies themselves are fine, but they were not designed to be directly comparable.

              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:

              Efficacy of measles vaccine was established in a series of double-blind controlled field trials which demonstrated a high degree of protective efficacy.2,10,11 These studies also established that seroconversion in response to measles vaccination paralleled protection from these diseases.12
              [...]

              2. Hilleman, M.R.; Buynak, E.B.; Weibel, R.E.; et al: Development and Evaluation of the Moraten Measles Virus Vaccine, JAMA 206(3): 587-590, 1968.
              10. Unpublished data: Files of Merck Research Laboratories.
              11. Cutts, F.T.; Henderson, R.H.; Clements, C.J.; et al: Principles of measles control, Bull WHO 69(1): 1-7, 1991.
              12. Rosen, L.: Hemagglutination and Hemagglutination-Inhibition with Measles Virus, Virology 13: 139-141, January 1961.

              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)

                by sjames (2882) on Thursday April 11 2019, @08:31PM (#828239) Journal

                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)

                  by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @08:55PM (#828254)

                  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)

                    by sjames (2882) on Thursday April 11 2019, @09:22PM (#828278) Journal

                    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)

                      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @09:36PM (#828288)

                      The data likely IS out there but it's on a high shelf and so cannot be reached without getting up from the armchair.

                      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).

                      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.

                      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)

                        by sjames (2882) on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:03PM (#828306) Journal

                        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)

                          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:11PM (#828310)

                          Umm.. What are you basing that on?

                          • (Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:14PM (4 children)

                            by sjames (2882) on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:14PM (#828313) Journal

                            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

                              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:50PM (#828350)

                              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)

                              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:55PM (#828352)

                              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)

                                by sjames (2882) on Thursday April 11 2019, @11:27PM (#828370) Journal

                                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

                                  by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @11:50PM (#828386)

                                  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

                      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @09:48PM (#828301)

                      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)

        by Bot (3902) on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:20PM (#828319) Journal

        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)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:59PM (#828356)

          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.

          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

            by Bot (3902) on Saturday April 13 2019, @09:31AM (#828919) Journal

            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.