Amid a Growing Measles Outbreak, Doctors Worry RFK is Sending the Wrong Message
Amid a growing measles outbreak, doctors worry RFK is sending the wrong message:
[...] Two people have now died in the growing measles outbreak in west Texas and New Mexico.
New Mexico Health officials on Thursday confirmed the death of an unvaccinated adult who tested positive for measles. The first death was a school-age child in Gaines County, Texas last week.
News of a second death comes as infectious disease doctors worry that the federal government's messaging about the outbreak is putting more emphasis on treatments like vitamin A than on vaccination, even as misinformation about some of these treatments is spreading online.
Those concerns come in the wake of recent comments made by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Kennedy addressed the growing measles outbreak in an editorial for FOX News published on Sunday, also posted on the HHS website.
While mentioning the value of vaccination for community immunity, Kennedy said "the decision to vaccinate is a personal one." He emphasized treatment for measles, saying that vitamin A can "dramatically" reduce deaths from the disease. In an interview with FOX News Tuesday, he said Texas doctors are giving steroids and cod liver oil to their measles patients and "getting very, very, good results."
In his editorial, he said good nutrition is "a best defense against most chronic and infectious illnesses." That emphasis on nutrition and vitamin A to treat measles is concerning some infectious disease doctors.
"Mentions of cod liver oil and vitamins [are] just distracting people away from what the single message should be, which is to increase the vaccination rate, " said Dr. Amesh Adalja, an infectious disease physician and senior scholar with the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.
While vitamin A can play a role in preventing severe disease, discussion of vitamins, "doesn't replace the fact that measles is a preventable disease. And really, the way to deal with a measles outbreak is to vaccinate people against measles," says Dr. Adam Ratner, a member of the infectious disease committee of the American Academy of Pediatrics.
Kennedy did acknowledge that measles is highly contagious and that it poses health risks, especially to people who are not vaccinated. He said vaccines not only protect individual children from measles, but also protect people who can't be vaccinated. But he didn't strongly encourage people to get their children vaccinated — which is usually a key part of the public health response during an outbreak.
In 2019, when a measles outbreak was raging in the U.S., then health secretary Alex Azar came out with a statement strongly supporting vaccination and warning of the risks of under-vaccination.
When it comes to vitamin A, studies conducted decades ago in low and middle-income countries found that the vitamin can reduce the risk of severe disease and death, in children who are malnourished and have vitamin deficiencies, says Adalja.
There's also evidence that, even in the absence of a pre-existing deficiency, measles seems to deplete the body's stores of vitamin A. Both the World Health Organization and the American Academy of Pediatrics recommend giving two doses of vitamin A to children who have the disease, especially if they are so sick they are hospitalized.
But, Ratner stresses that vitamin A does not prevent measles.
A false idea circulating online is that giving children high doses over long periods of time can prevent measles, says Ratner. He says that's not only wrong but can be quite dangerous.
"Vitamin A can accumulate in the body," he says. "It can be toxic to the liver. It can have effects that you don't want for your child," like liver damage, fatigue, hair loss and headaches. Ratner works as a pediatric infectious disease specialist in New York City. He says that similar misinformation about vitamin A made the rounds during the city's measles outbreak in 2019.
Scott Weaver, director of the Institute for Human Infections and Immunity at the University of Texas Medical Branch, says he worries people might look at a vitamin bottle and think, "Well, maybe if I take two or three times this amount, I'll be even better protected against measles."
"I'm concerned that people think that vitamin A or other nutrition is a substitute for vaccination to prevent infection and to prevent spread," Weaver says.
Second measles death reported as outbreak grows in Southwest
Second measles death reported as outbreak grows in Southwest:
A second person has died from measles as the outbreak of the disease in Texas and New Mexico continues to grow, according to the New Mexico Department of Health.
The person was unvaccinated and a resident of Lea County, N.M., where at least 10 cases of the disease have been reported. It lies just across the state border from Gaines County, Texas, where the current measles outbreak began in January.
A total of 159 measles cases have been identified in Texas since January with 53 of those cases in children under the age of 4, according to the Texas Department of Health and Human Services.
A school-aged child in Texas late last month became the first person to die of the virus in the U.S. in the last decade.
The child was unvaccinated and died after being hospitalized in Lubbock, Texas.
The New Mexico Department of Health is still investigating the official cause of death for the Lea County resident, but the agency's laboratory did confirm the presence of the measles virus in the deceased person.
The person did not seek medical care before passing, according to the department.
Second Measles Death Reported in Ongoing Outbreak
Second measles death reported in ongoing outbreak:
The New Mexico Department of Health said Thursday that the state had its first measles death.
[...] The adult, who was unvaccinated, didn't seek medical care before dying, the Health Department said.
Measles is spreading rapidly in West Texas, with 159 cases as of Tuesday. Most of the cases are in Gaines County. In neighboring Lea County, New Mexico, 10 cases have been identified.
[...] Experts say the most effective way to prevent measles is the MMR vaccine. Two doses are 97% effective.
Original Submission #1 Original Submission #2 Original Submission #3
(Score: 5, Insightful) by epitaxial on Sunday March 09, @05:19AM (8 children)
They voted for this.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by weirsbaski on Sunday March 09, @05:39AM (7 children)
I get your meaning, but the first death and many of those infected are kids who didn't vote for jack. Now if it was unvaccinated adults dying...
(Score: 1, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 09, @05:54AM (4 children)
Tbh, I don't have much hope for those who are raised by such dumbasses, so fuck 'em too. Probably better off dead than what their lives would have turned out as (and the effect they'd be raised to have on others), anyway.
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 09, @06:05AM (2 children)
Watch out what you're wishing for.
Chances are those states will breed out a population that is impervious to both measles and rational thinking. But they'll still vote.
(Score: 4, Informative) by ChrisMaple on Monday March 10, @03:42AM (1 child)
Measles has been around for a long time, and susceptibility to it has not been bred out. It will not be bred out even in a few centuries, because most people don't die from it.
In the 1950s, it was considered to be one of the four "childhood diseases" that everybody got.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 10, @03:33PM
Now do polio :)
(Score: 3, Touché) by Thexalon on Monday March 10, @10:46AM
Here's the thing: I can guarantee you if you go back through your own ancestors, you'll find some dumbasses. Assuming you aren't a dumbass, and your parents aren't dumbasses, that was due to somebody in a previous generation deciding "you know what, my parents are dumbasses, but I'm not going to be." And it could very easily be any of these kids, except that their parents are dumbasses, not vaccinating them, and getting them serious sick or killed because they believed a Playboy model or a politician about issues of health instead of doctors.
Another thing worth mentioning here is that the people currently running the United States pretty much universally got lead poisoning in their younger years, which among other effects makes them more of dumbasses than they otherwise would have been.
"Think of how stupid the average person is. Then realize half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
(Score: 5, Insightful) by epitaxial on Sunday March 09, @07:51AM (1 child)
You're right. How about some thoughts and prayers?
(Score: 2) by weirsbaski on Sunday March 09, @10:33AM
Fair enough.
(Score: 4, Touché) by Barenflimski on Sunday March 09, @07:38AM (2 children)
Who is listening to RFK anyway?
I am pretty sure anyone paying attention to anything that RFK is specifically saying wasn't on their way out the door to get a vaccine.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Beryllium Sphere (r) on Sunday March 09, @09:15PM (1 child)
One encouraging thing about the public response is that there's been so much demand for MMR shots that supply has been challenged.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 10, @03:35PM
Well, that needs to be stopped. Can't have people embarrassing Leadership like this. It erodes authority.
(Score: 1, Troll) by DadaDoofy on Sunday March 09, @11:42AM (9 children)
"Kennedy did acknowledge that measles is highly contagious and that it poses health risks, especially to people who are not vaccinated. He said vaccines not only protect individual children from measles, but also protect people who can't be vaccinated. But he didn't strongly encourage people to get their children vaccinated"
So, if he is telling the truth, but isn't shilling for big pharma, it's "sending the wrong message"?
If the public health officials hadn't spread false messages, or more accurately, outright lies about the Covid vaccines, perhaps they wouldn't have squandered the public trust and we wouldn't find ourselves were we are today with vaccination rates.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by turgid on Sunday March 09, @12:55PM
Perhaps if the keyboard warriors of anti-social media had stopped spreading Alt-Wrong propaganda the world would be in a better state.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 1, Disagree) by VLM on Sunday March 09, @03:46PM (3 children)
We see it as squandered. They see it as their intentional goal. The measles thing is the inevitable result a few steps down the line.
Like all products, some vaccines work, some of them work really well, and others... much, much less so. A "free market" would fix that up pretty quickly, but the "bad guys" decided to make it a political identity issue to declare religious-level authoritarian devotion to a bad product, not for health reasons but basically for the sheer joy of being bullies. Those people are the cause of kids getting sick from the public rebelling and later on not using a relatively safe and fairly effective product.
Its sad, but everything those people touch turns into something like this, so public opinion seems to be strongly turning against them over the last few years and they're not happy about that and blaming everyone for everything all the time while people increase their avoidance of them and their ideas.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Thexalon on Monday March 10, @11:02AM (2 children)
You're hinting that a vaccine that went through about a year of clinical trials to prove it was safe and significantly effective at keeping people alive, and has not had any scientifically proven long-term side effects, is a "bad product". It's not "religious devotion", it's "studies that find it helps beats a lack of studies that it doesn't".
And also, the MMR vaccine was getting anti-vaxxer attention prior to the release of that vaccine, because of the faked study by Andrew Wakefield that started the whole anti-vax movement in an effort to make a quick buck. Anti-vax has always been at least as much of a grift as big pharma.
"Think of how stupid the average person is. Then realize half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
(Score: 1, Informative) by DadaDoofy on Monday March 10, @03:02PM (1 child)
"it was safe and significantly effective at keeping people alive"
I guess that depends on how you define "significantly". According to data published by the UK's Office for National Statistics, it was actually more effective at killing people than the virus itself.
"The Office for National Statistics recently published an update on deaths by vaccination status in England and it has shockingly revealed that the vaccinated population accounted for 95% of COVID-19 deaths in the 12 months between 1st June 2022 and 31st May 2023, and 94% of those deaths were among either the triple or quadruple vaccinated population."
Here is the data:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/deathsbyvaccinationstatusengland [ons.gov.uk]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by pTamok on Monday March 10, @04:27PM
Seriously misleading reporting of statistics there.
Take a population of 1000 people. Vaccinate 95% - so 950 people vaccinated and 50 unvaccinated.
The vaccine is not 100% effective. Say 2% of vaccinated people exposed to Covid die. That's 19 people (2% of 950)
Say 4% of unvaccinated people exposed to Covid die. That's 2 people (4% of 50)
Total people dead: 21.
- Percentage of the dead who were vaccinated 19/21 = 90.5%
- Percentage of the dead who were unvaccinated 2/21 = 9.5%
So even though the death rate of unvaccinated people is twice as high as vaccinated, they are a small percentage of the total because so many people were vaccinated compared to unvaccinated.
That is what the statistics tell you: that vaccination was highly effective at preventing deaths.
https://www.reuters.com/article/fact-check/vaccinated-people-in-britain-are-not-dying-at-a-higher-rate-than-the-unvaccinate-idUSL1N2RP28I/ [reuters.com]
https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/why-do-vaccinated-people-represent-most-covid-19-deaths-right-now/ [kff.org]
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/oct/29/alex-berenson/covid-19-death-rate-england-much-higher-among-unva/ [politifact.com]
(Score: 3, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 09, @07:11PM (1 child)
> but isn't shilling for big pharma,
You say "shilling for big pharma" and the rest of us read vaccination as "betterment of overall public health, creating more than a zero-sum for society overall." He's just acknowledged(?) the benefits of vaccines while strongly campaigning against them for fallacious reasons.
The measles vaccine isn't a big expense.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines-for-children/php/awardees/current-cdc-vaccine-price-list.html [cdc.gov]
individual's cost: $95. What's the public-health and private health total in these areas for measles outbreaks? Would you pay $95, once, to potentially save your kid's life? how about to prevent severe, potentially debilitating disease? How about if your kid has to have it to be sure that others' kids don't get it, even if they *do* make this investment? (Shall we shun those people to the fringes of society and prohibit them from entering populated, civilized areas, as a matter that the populated group has shown is necessary for their safety?)
As a separate thought, should we start disassembling medical insurance, because all it really is is a way for expensive people to make healthy people pay for their medical costs? Let individuals negotiate their medical expenses with hospitals. If you don't need it, don't use it, don't pay for it. Right? -- oh, but still expect it to be there when you *do* need it!
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 09, @07:28PM
He's a troll. Don't feed him. But the information is very much appreciated.
(Score: 4, Funny) by janrinok on Sunday March 09, @07:59PM
Ten moderations for this comment so far - and it hasn't moved very far from where it started!
I am not interested in knowing who people are or where they live. My interest starts and stops at our servers.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by ElizabethGreene on Monday March 10, @02:09PM
+1 agree. Back during the pandemic, I said it was a mistake to equate the safety and efficacy of decades-proven e.g. MMR vaccines with the new and novel Covid-19 vaccines. That prediction has come true, and it will cost us for decades.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Gaaark on Sunday March 09, @04:19PM
It's just people.
People die all the time, right?
Here's hoping the 'Black Death' comes back and kills all teh dumb-asses... anti-biotics will take care of it, but if Trump says anti-biotics are like cancer, then his supporters will die and Uncle Dad Bob is your uncle-dad!
I mean, it's just people, right?
Don't worry about lowering prices. Don't worry about taking jobs away. Don't worry about deporting all the people willing to harvest your vegetables... all you have to worry about is taking revenge against those who did YOU harm. You, the PEOPLE ... why give a shit about YOU?
Putin has been nice to Trump by not releasing the secrets they have on him, so Trump treats Russia nicely, but Zelensky? Shit, Ukraine has not been very 'respectful' to Trump, so fuck 'em. Mexico? Fuck 'em. Canada? Fuck 'em.
America? Fuck 'em.
And you who voted for him? Has he taken your job away? He doesn't care... you are just 'WE, THE PEOPLE'... not someone important... you can die. Vaccines, like you, are a cancer.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 09, @05:30PM (2 children)
Kennedy said "the decision to vaccinate is a personal one."
Just like deciding how fast to drive in school zone should be!
(Score: 2) by turgid on Sunday March 09, @06:43PM
It should be personal, but the person should be in command of all the facts, not Alt-Wrong propaganda. How can someone be expected to make a sensible decision if other peoples' stupid has been given the same implied validity as actual facts?
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Beryllium Sphere (r) on Sunday March 09, @09:17PM
Strikes home for me because someone very close to me is immunocompromised. Every unvaccinated person is a danger to them.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 09, @11:56PM (7 children)
... that Americans cared more about human life than anybody, I mean that's why we won the war, right? But... not anymore... Now? Everybody sucks... The whole planet is doomed
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Thexalon on Monday March 10, @12:33PM (6 children)
And from that statement, I am going to conclude that you are probably white and probably middle-class or richer and probably cisgender and heterosexual and either Christian or non-religious, because those are the only citizens of America that America has been ever all that interested in keeping alive.
"Think of how stupid the average person is. Then realize half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
(Score: 2, Insightful) by pTamok on Monday March 10, @04:55PM (4 children)
Well, some appear to care a great deal about potential lives in development before birth. Not so much after birth..
It's a very Roman Catholic philosophy: that life is to be prized, above even ameliorating suffering. Abortion is a mortal sin. Suicide is a mortal sin. But suffering "offers Christians the chance to identify with the suffering of Christ".
https://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/abortion/respect-for-unborn-human-life [usccb.org]
https://www.sju.edu/centers/icb/blog/catholic-churchs-position-suicide-physician-assisted-suicide-declaration-euthanasia [sju.edu]
https://www.chausa.org/publications/health-progress/archive/article/june-1993/care-of-the-dying-a-catholic-perspective [chausa.org]
Not everyone is convinced of certain attitudes to suffering: Mother Teresa and the fatal love of suffering [patheos.com]
But it seems the actions of many Christians in the USA are compatible with Catholic theology.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by cmdrklarg on Monday March 10, @07:23PM
And like the rest of Xtian faith nonsense it's meant to convince those suffering people of how good it is to be suffering instead of looking to do something about those who are behind said suffering.
I was raised Catholic. I got better.
The world is full of kings and queens who blind your eyes and steal your dreams.
(Score: 2) by quietus on Monday March 10, @09:20PM (2 children)
So, based upon a literature study by a number of psychoeducation professors, we should accept without questioning that Mother Teresa spent her life among the poor in India because that was her ingenious way to become a multimillionaire, while fulfilling her deep desire to see other people suffering?
You know, alternatively, she might just have been a decent human being.
(Score: 1) by pTamok on Monday March 10, @11:02PM (1 child)
It is true, she might just have been a decent human being.
On the other hand, dismissing the work because of your interpretation of provenance of its authors is a little peremptory.
A review is here:
Mother Teresa: Anything but a saint… - Researchers dispell [sic] the myth of altruism and generosity surrounding Mother Teresa - Peer-Reviewed Publication - University of Montreal [eurekalert.org]
The actual paper (free to read and download) is here, not in the edition of the publication named in the review:
Sage Journals: Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses Volume 42, Issue 3, September 2013, Pages 319-345 [sagepub.com]https://doi.org/10.1177/0008429812469894 [doi.org] - Les côtés ténébreux de Mère Teresa
All except the summary is in French (this is Québec, after all), but I guess translators are available to you.
More accessible, but without references is Christopher Hitchens' publication: The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice [wikipedia.org]
Sometimes it is possible to separate the myth from the person. Mother Teresa was multi-faceted, just like everyone else, and it is legitimate to look at the facets not displayed in every hagiography [wikipedia.org].
As for psychoeducation [wikipedia.org], a quick dip into Wikipedia gives you:
Given that Mother Teresa's work was specifically described as being support for people with illness, it is not unreasonable that someone might take an interest in her approach - it's not as off-track as you might think.
For example: J Relig Health 2021 Sep 13;61(1):443–466. doi: 10.1007/s10943-021-01345-z Religion-Adapted Cognitive Behavioral Therapy: A Review and Description of Techniques
Given that Mother Teresa's charity, the 'Missionaries of Charity', operated 517 missions, it is not unreasonable that academics in the field of psychoeducation (providing support to patients so they can cope better with illnesses) might want to look at the techniques used to see if they were generally applicable. It appears they found more than they expected.
The Wikipedia article on Mother Teresa gives other examples of criticism [wikipedia.org]
On the other hand, it also has links to rebuttals of the criticism, such as this: National Review, Jim Towey, May 26, 2021 6:30 AM: Reject the Smears against Mother Teresa [nationalreview.com]. The author makes the point:
Redemptive suffering [wikipedia.org].
Catholic theology regards redemptive suffering as a good thing. Wikipedia points out that it is voluntary. I used Mother Teresa as an example to show its acceptability within Catholicism. As an example, it is somewhat clouded by accusations that not all of the people hosted by the Missionaries of Charity necessarily volunteered for it.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by quietus on Tuesday March 11, @06:13PM
Agreed -- I went out of line there.
I also gladly admit that I had to research the word peremptory :P
(One learns something new each day, eh)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 10, @07:12PM
Yeah, you're right. Poor black Americans don't give a shit. And from your very presumptuous statement, I have to conclude that you are just plain racist.