|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,419 Year: 3,676/9,624 Month: 547/974 Week: 160/276 Day: 34/23 Hour: 1/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Childhood Vaccinations – Necessary or Overkill? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2191 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
Found a study regarding castor oil absorption through the skin for you:
Meridian Institute - Home Page
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
Measles - Vaccinations for measles was implemented in 1968. Death from measles had already declined by 99% before the vaccination was implemented according to the graph. The graph shows that a lot of measles deaths had already declined before vaccination. That means that vaccination is not the only method for combating disease. Which of course, is known. If we look at the data from 1950-1979 we see the following:
The data is also missing the last twenty years - when the MMR vaccine made it to the UK (your data is just for England, but we can ignore that because the data for England and the UK is essentially the same.) I don't have 1988-1992 but here is 1993 onwards:
It also misses out the number of cases of measles. Which before 1988 was between 50,000-100,000. In recent times this is closer to 10,000. A drop of 90% I don't see any reference to the location of outbreaks and measles take up. A lot of cases are from traveling families (not families that go on holiday but 'gypsies') - such as with the single death we've had this year or from areas which have had low take up in vaccines. It also is suspicious in picking a small wealthy island nation with a notorious history of eradicating disease (eg rabies, which exists in France is basically extinct in the UK). If we look at global statistics we get a different picture entirely. In Africa, for example (where 50% of measle deaths happen), measles is the fifth biggest killer. Deaths in Africa (and globally) have been reducing significantly, in line with improved vaccination programs. I have seen similar stats for whooping cough. Cases increase as immunization decreases and vice versa. The unsourced stuff here does have sources, but my browser is having a fit. If you don't accept something, I'm sure I'll be able to find the source again. This was just what I could find in thirty minutes that leads me to be suspicious of the data being presented by the anti-vaccine crowd.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6409 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
The larger problem, and I think this is where vaccination became an "issue", is forced vaccination programs. That is to say prophylactic programs when there is no current factual risk of exposure to a contagion.
I disagree with this way of looking at it. By being vaccinated one voluntarily enters a realm of risk. Though the risks may be small, some are there. Without vaccination one does not automatically face the statistical risks posed for example on that chart at PDs link. One would first have to be exposed to the actual contagion which itself is a statistical risk, which may be alleviated using OTHER methods. What your analysis ignores, is that the reason there is no factual risk of exposure to contagion is that most of your neighbors have vaccinated their children. The low risk of exposure is a benefit you receive from the society. Don't you have an implied obligation to contribute your share of providing this benefit by vaccinating your children?
Tetanus for example certainly can be avoided throughout a lifetime with proper care and hygiene. Careful planning and quarantine could also prevent issues like mumps, and measles, and chicken pox.
For tetanus, your assessment might be correct. For mumps the risk might not be too bad either, as it is not very infectious. However, there have been recent outbreaks of mumps at several midwestern universities, so even the widespread use of vaccination may not be a complete protection. Measles and chicken pox are more highly infectious. If it were not for the widespread use of vaccination by your neighbors it would be difficult to avoid infection. And measles is a dangerous enough disease that you would want protection. Just say no to McCain 2008; he abandoned principle when he caved on habeus corpus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3478 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:And I'm getting vaccination apologetics. The links provided have nothing to do with being "my favorites", but I needed to show what is out there. That's what the average person runs into on the internet. Besides if I didn't, someone would ask where I read it.
quote:Which means there have been and still are issues to address with vaccines. Is it a bad straing. Is it a problem of combining the strains together? Some people are going to Canada to get the vaccinations separately. Maybe it is just an issue of changing the delivery system. But it needs to be addressed and options provided. Maybe they need to find out what causes reactions in some children and not in others and figure out how to test before the vaccination. Doctors used to say cigarettes were safe also, now they don't. Studies can be wrong, so show me how one determines which MD is right and which MD is wrong using information available to the average person. "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
please disregard
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2191 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: quote: This is a large part of the problem. All "evidence" is far from equivalent, especially what is available on the internet. There is far, far, far more baseless garbage and outright quackery available on the internet on this subject than there is reliable, well-researched, well-documented, science-based information. That's because it's far easier to make stuff up and sell it to the uninformed and fearful than it is to do an exhaustive literature search, collect the data, make sure you have the background to understand the data and be able to detect any problems and issues with it, and then put it all together into an easily-understood format for the layperson. (Such a place does exist, however, here, and you already linked to it. It's like when I was researching the claim that castor oil packs, when laid on the skin over the liver, could cleanse the liver of excess estrogen. No matter what search terms I used, the vast majority of hits were of people (most were selling something) simply asserting that this sort of "treatment" was effective. I only found a single report of an honest attempt at verifying this claim, with negative results. So, am I to believe, or even give a moment's consideration to all of those sites which make this unfounded claim just because that's what the average person is going to run into? Or should I maintain my strict standards of what I will accept as legitimate evidence and reject those bald assertions? Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent H Member (Idle past 5840 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
the reason there is no factual risk of exposure to contagion is that most of your neighbors have vaccinated their children.
I understand what you are saying, but that is not quite accurate. It is not like if everyone was not vaccinated suddenly a factual risk would be there. The point would be that if no one was vaccinated the possibility for factual risk emerging would be greater because it could travel faster and farther. However that also assumes containment/hygiene procedures are not improved. Do we have any specific data suggesting what actual risk of contraction would exist without vaccinations?
Don't you have an implied obligation to contribute your share of providing this benefit by vaccinating your children?
This is a value issue which PD did not want discussed. But I might raise the question, why would it matter to people who HAVE been vaccinated what I do? Presumably they are not likely to be effected by any illness my children might get. Essentially it will only be those that do not get vaccinations that would share the increased risk together. That they might enjoy a benefit from those that do get vaccinated is not a cost to the latter and so not a debt for the former. This argument would likely only work if those that vaccinated did so ONLY to protect others and not to protect themselves.
If it were not for the widespread use of vaccination by your neighbors it would be difficult to avoid infection. And measles is a dangerous enough disease that you would want protection.
Why would improved testing and containment methods not reduce risk? Or maybe I should ask to what degree could it impact these infectious diseases? Just because something is highly infectious does not mean it is not containable. Only that the initial spread may be greater than otherwise would have been. holmes "What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2191 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
I think that with so many children in daycare these days, containment will be a much greater issue than in the fairly recent past.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3478 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
So if the stats are correct and the vaccinations are keeping the diseases at bay, then we have the next issue especially those interested in evolution.
MeaslesIt has greatest incidence in children under 2 years old, and mortality is about 10%. By contrast, measles cases had recently dropped to virtually none in the USA, Canada and the UK, but there has been a recent increase due to resistance of parents to the MMR vaccine. If we hadn't intervened, would mankind have eventually developed an immunity to the disease? Are we instead developing a resistance to the vaccine? Developing a resistance to the MMR apparently doesn't give us immunity to the disease. Where does that leave us and our children? "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent H Member (Idle past 5840 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
I think that with so many children in daycare these days, containment will be a much greater issue than in the fairly recent past.
That's a valid point, but I'm not sure if it refutes the position I was taking on nonvaccination itself. It certainly means if most people decided not to vaccinate, we shouldn't continue doing things as we do now, which are based on assumptions of common vaccination. holmes "What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2191 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: I don't think that vaccines work like that. Is it even possible to develop resistance to vaccines? Wouldn't that be like developing a resistance to one's own immune system? Since what a vaccine does is induce the body to produce antibodies to a pathogen without actually having to get the full-blown disease, I really don't understand how resistance to it would work.
quote: Sure it's possible, but not all that likely. It's more likely that, like in species in the wild, we would be plagued by outbreaks of various diseases that result in death and maiming of a certain percentage of offspring. Some years it infects many, fewer in other years, but it's always there. OTOH, vaccinations have literally or virtually eliminated many of these diseases.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3478 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:So when do we get to stop the vaccinations? "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6409 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Why would improved testing and containment methods not reduce risk?
I'm not sure what you mean by "improved testing." Keep in mind that some of these diseases are highly contagious before there are any noticable symptoms. Are you proposing daily blood tests for everybody, so you can get an early warning before the symptoms show? As for containment, sure I agree with that. At present, mass vaccination is our most effective method of containment. Since you are arguing for containment as an alternative to mass vaccination, it is up to you to suggest an alternative containment method. Just say no to McCain 2008; he abandoned principle when he caved on habeus corpus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2191 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: When the disease is completely gone, and gone for a long time. The thing is, that is a very difficult thing to bring about. For example, we don't vaccinate people against smallpox anymore. However, we do keep strains of it alive in secure labs, just in case it emerges and we need to make vaccines again. AFAIK, all of the diseases we currently vaccinate againt still exist, many thriving, elsewhere in the world.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2191 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
but there has been a recent increase due to resistance of parents to the MMR vaccine PD, I think that the report meant "resistance" in that the parents were "resitant" to getting their children vaccinated, not "resistance" like "antibiotic resistance". IOW, we see this outbreak of Measles because parents didn't vaccinate their children against it.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024