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This discussion has been archived.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: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:45PM (12 children)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:45PM (#828344)

    subacute sclerosing panencephalitis, a devastating complication of measles that will eventually kill up to one in 609 who get the disease

    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]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2) by stormwyrm on Friday April 12 2019, @01:35AM (11 children)

    by stormwyrm (717) on Friday April 12 2019, @01:35AM (#828424) Journal

    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)

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Friday April 12 2019, @03:00AM (#828446)

      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.

      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)

        by stormwyrm (717) on Friday April 12 2019, @04:33AM (#828479) Journal
        Besides the story of Rick Perry, which even people like Dr. David "Orac" Gorski [respectfulinsolence.com] acknowledge ("Now, believe it or not, there are valid reasons to criticize Perry for this decision not because Gardasil is harmful or not a good vaccine but because of the conflict of interest there appeared to be.") was fraught with conflicts of interest despite Gardasil being solid, do you have any other examples of such vaccine mandates being similarly driven? It should be easy to tell this with the standard CDC schedule which I originally brought up, but no, that one looks more motivated by actual science than anything else. The CDC itself has a helpful article [cdc.gov] (PDF) explaining the rationale behind its own schedule, and even includes links to the actual science they used to justify it. Here's another article [annals.org] on how they develop their immunisation recommendations.
        --
        Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
        • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday April 12 2019, @01:55PM (8 children)

          by JoeMerchant (3937) on Friday April 12 2019, @01:55PM (#828587)

          that one looks more motivated by actual science than anything else.

          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)

            by stormwyrm (717) on Friday April 12 2019, @02:48PM (#828619) Journal
            No, I'm saying the CDC's recommended schedule is motivated by science.
            --
            Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
            • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday April 12 2019, @09:57PM (6 children)

              by JoeMerchant (3937) on Friday April 12 2019, @09:57PM (#828754)

              I'm saying the CDC's recommended schedule is motivated by science.

              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)

                by stormwyrm (717) on Saturday April 13 2019, @12:29AM (#828805) Journal

                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)

                  by JoeMerchant (3937) on Saturday April 13 2019, @01:14AM (#828814)

                  We are not epidemiologists, immunologists, or even medical doctors.

                  No, but I have played with medical doctors, devices and the industry in general for 3 decades now at work...

                  I'd rather trust people with the expertise in things like this

                  And I thoroughly respect that as your right, for your own body and the bodies of your minor children.

                  Yeah, since at one time scientists thought lead in paint and gasoline was a good idea and they turned out to be wrong

                  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.

                  more refined studies about epidemiology and vaccines must also be wrong too!

                  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)

                    by stormwyrm (717) on Saturday April 13 2019, @02:46AM (#828852) Journal
                    "Science that has barely been established for a generation"? Vaccines have been around since the days of Edward Jenner, and thanks to the efforts of his twentieth-century successors, they fought the smallpox and finally won. That horrible disease which has been the scourge of humanity for the past ten thousand years and more, finally ended its cruel reign forever thanks to the science of vaccines. Another disease that is on the point of eradication but persists thanks to a combination of geopolitics and anti-science thinking of the sort you seem to encourage is polio. The measles could also be eradicated in the same way as well, since it's one of those diseases like smallpox and polio that only hosts in humans, but thanks to people who think like you, that possibility is remote.
                    --
                    Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
                    • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday April 13 2019, @03:46AM

                      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Saturday April 13 2019, @03:46AM (#828859)

                      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

                      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 13 2019, @09:11AM (#828915)

                      >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

                      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Saturday April 13 2019, @12:08PM (#828940)

                      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]