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
(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.