Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Monday June 01 2015, @10:47AM   Printer-friendly
from the nuke-it-from-orbit dept.

Steve Cochi is a 63-year-old physician and epidemiologist who thinks its time to totally wipe out Measles:

[F]or the past 25 years, Cochi has been pushing one of the boldest—and some might venture foolhardy—ideas in public health. He wants the world to undertake a huge new effort to eradicate measles. Not just tame the virus or control the outbreaks re-surging across the globe, but to obliterate it, wipe it off the face of the earth, as has only been done once for a human pathogen, smallpox, in 1977, and as the world fervently hopes will happen soon with polio.

Measles is the most contagious virus on Earth, infecting virtually everyone who is not vaccinated.

It would cost a lot of money. And a large percentage of people, when presented with the idea think Measles is not worth the cost or the effort, because measles is, in their opinion, only a nuisance. Indeed the CDC has stated that Measles was eliminated in the US in the year 2000. Subsequent outbreaks earlier this year served as a brief wake up call, but nobody died, and people have largely written it off and attributed it to anti-vaxers.

But more than half of the estimated 10 million infected with measles each year in the developing world fare far worse. The virus suppresses the body's defense system, especially in those already immune-compromised or with malnutrition or vitamin A deficiency, leaving them vulnerable to secondary bacterial infections. The problems are compounded by a lack of health care. Pneumonia is the most common cause of death; diarrhea and dehydration is a close second. Measles is one of the top five preventable causes of blindness. Deafness is common. Inflammation of the brain can cause seizures and sometimes permanent brain damage. In poor countries, the fatality rate is 2% to 15%, soaring to 25% in the worst outbreaks.

In 2013, there were 145.700 measles deaths globally – about 400 deaths every day or 16 deaths every hour.

The article appearing on Science Mag's site outlines the problems involved, and the heartbreak of having Polio almost beaten, only to see it linger. It has a full discussion on why it should be doable, and why there are pitfalls.


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This discussion has been archived.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 edIII on Tuesday June 02 2015, @01:54AM

    by edIII (791) on Tuesday June 02 2015, @01:54AM (#190985)

    I'm loathe to call them idiots when the entire medical community, and most especially, the FDA and pharmaceutical companies leave them with nothing to have faith in.

    You can't call them complete idiots when there is a huge issue of trust and accountability in the room. Although, any anti-vaxer that derives those views purely from religious beliefs may be called an idiot more so than those who refuse blood.

    I'm most assuredly anti-vac, as you put it. Why? I can't justify putting unknown, untrusted, unverified, and unaccountable chemical compounds into a child, especially my own that I would love more than myself. There is simply no way I would expose them to the risks of being serviced by U.S pharmaceutical companies, until we can have a truly impartial discussion about the failure of the FDA, and the lack of accountability and trust in the science and products.

    The greatest problem you have with these "idiots", is that they may ask you to justify and prove the science, methods, and manufacturing processes. Guess what? You can't do that, because the scientific and medical community in the US hasn't even done that. We had a single study (not even in the US), that turned out to be faked, but that nonetheless, is still desperately needed to shine light on these companies. The "idiots" lack of trust in these companies, and doctors, and the entire infrastructure is incredibly well founded and one of the reasons we argue so bitterly about medical and the costs these days.

    Instead of just abusively calling them idiots, why don't you rise above them, and provide all of the science, audits, paperwork that shows the specific drug and medical product going into their child has been cleared by X amount of studies, this science here and over there, accompanied by all the records showing correct actions audited by the FDA. Good luck. The FDA will go against their own rules, and allow companies to still exist, even after it was proved they knowingly killed people for profit. That's an unfortunate fact most people don't want to discuss, and the unwashed masses just need to suffer. One would figure just how easy it would be to create an information site to inform the misinformed, but that's highly unlikely with inconvenient facts in the way like corporation X was found guilty of killing Y people, but you can most assuredly believe Report 44123658.dj6 about their facilities on 02/15/2009 right?

    Now if you just want to blindly trust these corporations and their manufacturing processes , go right ahead. Just don't call the anti-vac people idiots for not doing it with you. It's a choice they made, and it's not unreasonable. May turn out incorrect, or wrong, but it wasn't unreasonable given the circumstances we face.

    --
    Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2) by sjames on Tuesday June 02 2015, @08:16AM

    by sjames (2882) on Tuesday June 02 2015, @08:16AM (#191067) Journal

    Studies such as that are necessary to introduce a new treatment. The MMR is nothing like new. We have a study size of millions AKA the general population over a multi-decade time frame. Everyone around you got it (probably including you). No 1000 subject study covering a couple years is going to turn up anything not already turned up.

    If you have genuine concerns about the FDA's failure, import the vaccine from Canada.

    • (Score: 2) by edIII on Tuesday June 02 2015, @08:55PM

      by edIII (791) on Tuesday June 02 2015, @08:55PM (#191265)

      Studies such as that are necessary to introduce a new treatment. The MMR is nothing like new. We have a study size of millions AKA the general population over a multi-decade time frame. Everyone around you got it (probably including you). No 1000 subject study covering a couple years is going to turn up anything not already turned up.

      I'm not asking for a study to prove the science of immunization, and how it can affect viruses. The science is fairly conclusive on that. What I want studies on are specific side effects that may have been reported, as the claims of autism don't relate to the science of immunization nearly as much as they relate to the manufacturing controls and choice of chemical compounds (mercury) they use. It's sincerely unfortunate that anti-vac people are just ignored, when regardless of their motives, there *are* things we should be studying. Why just be arrogant and claim they're idiots, when we can impartially conduct a study, and say the science shows us *this* over here? Fear is eradicated by information, not denigration and marginalization. Likewise, trust is eradicated over time by honorable and respectable behaviors being punished (whistleblowers), and bad behaviors being rewarded (Senators get re-elected all the time). I sincerely doubt there are enough true religious objectors to immunization, and most just don't trust that the vaccine is everything it's supposed to be due to endemic corruption everywhere else in our country.

      While I'm not a doctor, the anti-vac people have a pretty damn good point about the sheer volume of shots in a short period of time. That multi-decade study is only in relation to *one* vaccine. Where is the study that shows the effects of multiple vaccines in short succession? There's a couple of points that I've been made aware of by the anti-vac movement that I can't easily dismiss as the ignorance of the misinformed. These requests they have are interesting, and quite frankly, not exactly incredibly expensive compared to military funding and war. Corporations just don't want to pay for what should be paid for, and the easiest solution is to conduct the studies required to respond to their arguments.

      If you have genuine concerns about the FDA's failure, import the vaccine from Canada.

      I believe you have the correct answer to the problem, and essentially Americans should vote with their wallets. However, what about the poor (who's DNA suffers greater degradation than the rich), and their children? They are without those choices, and are forced to push these products into their children, with other US citizens milling about screaming at them that refusal is tantamount to child abuse and indicative of a religious nutter who doesn't love their children. A little more difficult for them to make that choice I think? I have absolutely no doubt about taking my non-existent children out of the country. Should I have children, I would wish to make sure they were born in France, or some other suitably advanced country with respects to medical (U.S is a 3rd world country for medical care according to published statistics). Whatever I needed to do to ensure adequate health care, and the removal of their interaction with U.S pharmaceutical companies, would be mandatory for me as a parent.

      Yes, I do consider the FDA to be an abject failure, and basically just a bureaucratic arm of Big Pharma where they game the system for their own profits. That's really my reason for a vote of no confidence in their activities and honor, and why I consider myself anti-vac, while strongly recommending they get their children immunized anyways. What choice do they have? I think that's truly terrible for a parent to suffer; knowing their child needs something, but not trusting the source.

      For these reasons, I could never make the shots mandatory. Not when it's so ridiculously easy (compared to going to the Moon), to just reform the FDA, and make some actual fucking accountability for once FOR THE NON MEDICAL EMPLOYEES, MBA'S, SUITS, THAT ARE MAKING MEDICAL DECISIONS BASED ON MONEY AND NOT THE HYPOCRATIC OATH OR THEIR MEDICAL SKILLS WHICH ARE NON-EXISTENT. Seriously, how can I tell another U.S Citizen that they need to put up with something that sounds straight out of Animal Farm?

      • (Score: 2) by sjames on Tuesday June 02 2015, @10:25PM

        by sjames (2882) on Tuesday June 02 2015, @10:25PM (#191314) Journal

        The anti-vax claims of autism WERE studied and found nothing at all.No fear was eradicated. Some of the vaccines no longer carry the feared , no fear was eradicated. The originator of the original paper claiming an autism link was shown to be a fraud who cooked the numbers. No fear was eradicated. Millions got the same damn vaccine over a period of decades, no statistical correlation with autism shown, no fear eradicated.

        So what's left? All we can do now is mock the people repeating the same fraudulent study.

        As for the poor, first, they are not as likely to fall into the anti-vax crowd as the wealthy. Second, the Canadian vaccine is likely cheaper than the American one (as is common for so many drugs).

        Yes, the FDA is a massive screw up, no argument there. At this point, I am of the opinion that it should be totally disbanded and we start over with a new agency with a charter set in stone.

        I personally do not advocate forcing any medical treatment on anyone if they don't consent, but I reserve the right to laugh at them if the reason they withhold consent is silly.

        • (Score: 2) by edIII on Wednesday June 03 2015, @12:13AM

          by edIII (791) on Wednesday June 03 2015, @12:13AM (#191354)

          The anti-vax claims of autism WERE studied and found nothing at all.No fear was eradicated. Some of the vaccines no longer carry the feared , no fear was eradicated. The originator of the original paper claiming an autism link was shown to be a fraud who cooked the numbers. No fear was eradicated. Millions got the same damn vaccine over a period of decades, no statistical correlation with autism shown, no fear eradicated.

          Alas, the fear was never eradicated. That was my main point, is that the fear wasn't based on the opinion of God, but based on the opinion about the intentions of U.S corporations the medical community. I still hold the corporations and doctors directly responsible and accountable for these people having no faith in them. If the medical community truly lived by the Hippocratic Oath, I just don't think these people would have any leg to stand on at all.

          You can't eliminate that fear with a singly study, but only by a longer term dedication to transparency and accountability, of which the U.S medical system has surprisingly little of. I just can't blame them that harshly when I can't bring myself to trust doctors either, which is based off reason, logic, and precedent. When you don't believe that the man or woman looking after your child's health cares about you, or your child, like a doctor historically would, how can you trust them with health? Historically, doctors didn't check in with monied interests in the financial capitols before deciding on appropriate treatment and care. It was almost explicitly about health, and never about the financial compensation a doctor could receive.

          but I reserve the right to laugh at them if the reason they withhold consent is silly.

          Fair enough on your position, however, do you consider having no trust in the source to be silly? That's my only real impetus to speak up during these conversations, is to make my opinion known that it's not silly at all to withhold consent in some circumstances. Or at the very least, it's reasonable for them to withhold consent, even if you don't agree with their assertions. Being incorrect, or wrong, isn't the same thing as being silly. More than anything, I would love to be wrong about this. Those diseases really sucked.

          --
          Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
          • (Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday June 03 2015, @08:21AM

            by sjames (2882) on Wednesday June 03 2015, @08:21AM (#191498) Journal

            For many new drugs, I share some of your skepticism. I am not convinced that the studies for safety or efficacy are adequate and often it turns out that the new expensive drug is no better than the old cheap drug for the vast majority of the population.

            However, I am convinced of MMR's safety and efficacy because of it's long track record Hundreds of millions have had it in the U.S. alone.. We know the stats on it.We know the stats on the diseases it prevents. It's a no-brainer.

            I'm guessing very few of the objectors also avoid all OTC drugs.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 03 2015, @02:54AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 03 2015, @02:54AM (#191409)

          Now the correlation with vaccination rate (there is admittedly only crap data on that, which is why you only see those charts with "year vaccine licensed") and obesity remains to be examined.

          While vaccine manufacturing regulations require elimination of exogenous retroviral infections from source chickens, these regulations do not address the presence of endogenous retroviruses because such particles were not previously known to be associated with chick cell-derived vaccines.

          http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC114852/ [nih.gov]

          The more you look into this measles thing the more strange stuff appears. The vaccines have been found to be contaminated with a virus that causes obesity in chickens?

          Canine distemper virus (CDV) was the first virus linked to obesity.4 CDV is a morbillivirus antigenically related to measles, which infects dogs and a wide range of carnivores.
          [...]
          Avian leucosis viruses (AVL) are retroviruses that may induce neoplastic growth such as B-cell lymphomas, proliferative disorders such as osteopetrosis and chronic degenerative diseases, such as anaemia and immunosuppresion.5 Rous-associated virus 7 (RAV-7) is an AVL that causes an obesity syndrome in chickens.
          [...]
          Moreover, human viral vaccines (mumps, measles, yellow fever) that are manufactured by growing the vaccine-virus in chicken eggs may carry AVL.25, 26

          At present there is no report of RAV-7 human infection and whether humans are susceptible to AVL infection is a matter that requires investigation.26

          http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17420782 [nih.gov]

          Of course without a good mechanism it is impossible to say if this is relevant. It is extremely weak evidence, the problem is whether anyone is willing to fund something that finds out. This is the cost of doing science without strong theory in the background, you need to rule out tons of stuff.

          • (Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday June 03 2015, @08:33AM

            by sjames (2882) on Wednesday June 03 2015, @08:33AM (#191501) Journal

            If humans can be infected with AVL (highly questionable), then vaccines aren't the problem, eggs are. I don't see what distemper has to do with vaccine safety.

            Nevertheless, it probably should be looked at for public health reasons but pretty much everyone currently alive has been exposed even if never vaccinated.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 03 2015, @01:31PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 03 2015, @01:31PM (#191577)

              This flippant attitude towards vetting vaccines is going to cause a huge problem one day, if it isn't already. These are things that people want to mandate for the entire human population. Shouldn't the standard of evidence be rather high? When someone finds out the vaccines are contaminated with anything at all it should be a big deal, we should know the contents to >99.9% purity (what is that % in reality?). When the correlation between vaccination rate and obesity is better than that with prevalence of the virus, it should concern us enough to look into it right away.

              Even one specific contamination is not an issue, how did they miss it for 30 years? What else is in there they are not checking for? What if someone purposefully messes with a batch or some upstream step?

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 03 2015, @04:39PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 03 2015, @04:39PM (#191669)

                When someone finds out the vaccines are contaminated with anything at all it should be a big deal, we should know the contents to >99.9% purity

                If the "contaminant" isn't harmful then it isn't a big deal. When the FDA realized a class of vaccines contained a porcine circovirus they were initially worried but it had no ill effects. The SV40 that was in the poliovirus vaccine also had no ill effects.

                Human cells have about 25000 proteins and we do not understand all of them. Bacteria have about 10000 and viruses have a broad range from 10s to 1000s. Even if we knew everything that was in a vaccine we still would not understand what it meant.

                Healthcare decisions should be made with a cost-benefit analysis in mind and there will always be a cost.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 03 2015, @06:27PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 03 2015, @06:27PM (#191710)

                  Even if we knew everything that was in a vaccine we still would not understand what it meant.

                  As you note, it is widely admitted that our knowledge of the human body, and biology in general, remains rudimentary. I doubt any cost-benefit analysis could be anything more than wild speculation. Is there any evidence that previous cost-benefit analyses on similar issues have been accurate?

  • (Score: 2) by urza9814 on Tuesday June 02 2015, @04:36PM

    by urza9814 (3954) on Tuesday June 02 2015, @04:36PM (#191187) Journal

    I'm most assuredly anti-vac, as you put it. Why? I can't justify putting unknown, untrusted, unverified, and unaccountable chemical compounds into a child, especially my own that I would love more than myself. There is simply no way I would expose them to the risks of being serviced by U.S pharmaceutical companies, until we can have a truly impartial discussion about the failure of the FDA, and the lack of accountability and trust in the science and products.

    That happens every time they play in the dirt then touch their mouths. Hell, that's what you're doing every time you *feed them*. Are you a chemist? Do you have a lab in your basement where you test every single object that they ever come into contact with?

    Of course not. You trust others to do that testing, right? So why are vaccines the ONE THING where that doesn't hold?

    • (Score: 2) by edIII on Wednesday June 03 2015, @12:57AM

      by edIII (791) on Wednesday June 03 2015, @12:57AM (#191362)

      That happens every time they play in the dirt then touch their mouths. Hell, that's what you're doing every time you *feed them*. Are you a chemist? Do you have a lab in your basement where you test every single object that they ever come into contact with?

      Why? I played in the dirt and touched my mouth constantly. I'm not a clean freak or some scared parent that can't let their child be exposed to *anything*. However, we aren't talking about the possible statistical likelihood of a pathogen or toxic chemical in dirt. We are talking about the likelihood that a product deliberately contains the pathogen, or known dangerous chemical(s), since government corruptly cleared it for the masses, and some executives actively made the decision to keep pushing it.

      Not the same kind of risk, or situation.

      Of course not. You trust others to do that testing, right? So why are vaccines the ONE THING where that doesn't hold?

      I don't trust others to do the testing. Not at all. Not even remotely. Not anymore. Almost all testing is accompanied by the preferred results, and monied interests ready to punish the incorrect results. Maybe a little cynical, but my answer is a firm no to your question. For most things, the harm may be slight, and the odds may be low. Kind of like how the urban poor has consistently more damage to their DNA than the rich. Just those little differences adding up over time, and that from chemicals of all things in the cheaper and lower quality processed foods :)

      Vaccines are not the "one thing" that doesn't hold, it's just the "one thing" where there has been a HUGE amount of information that shows you CANNOT trust them to do the testing. Even if the tests are accurate, we've seen where they were deliberately ignored for the sake of profit.

      Man, this isn't new, or even remotely isolated to the pharmaceutical industry either. It's just a hell of a lot more risky and emotional when that statistic about to happen, that allows an executive to live better than the rest of us, happens to be a little boy or girl to be affected for the rest of their lives. THAT, is NOT SUPPOSED to happen under a DOCTORS CARE.

      If you trust them to do the testing, that's fine. I'll respect your decision over your risks, I only ask you to do the same for me please, as I don't trust them to do the testing, which is not an unreasoned position by any stretch.

      The only difference between us and China, is that China really will just drag those fuckers out into the street and shoot them as an example to the rest. Over in the U.S.A, the executives don't go to jail, but are transferred by limo the civil courthouses to hear statements from the victims instead during their trial where the executives typically lose nothing themselves, and probably not even sleep.

      --
      Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.