PDA

View Full Version : Vaccines



John Smith
01-28-2015, 10:41 AM
Larry Wilmore's show (Nightly Show following Daily Show) had a panel debating vaccines, triggered by the Measles outbreak in Disneyland.

Measles is not a pretty thing, and it had been pretty well wiped out. Then came the debate over the danger of vaccines causing Autism.

Question is whether parent should have the choice or not to give this vaccine to their child.

I think that all things in life involve some risk, real or perceived. In this case it is the child who suffers or dies. I say vaccinate.

jclays
01-28-2015, 10:46 AM
Agreed.

Keith Wilson
01-28-2015, 10:51 AM
Question is whether parent should have the choice or not to give this vaccine to their child.Hell no! No exemptions, none, unless there's a very good medical reason. To do otherwise is child abuse.

George Jung
01-28-2015, 11:22 AM
Vaccine denialists are out of the same mold as AGW denialists; lots of conspiracy theories, not a lick of common sense or belief in science. They spring up like mushrooms when vaccines have been effective for awhile, knowing full well the population has the attention span of a gnat. They shrink back under the rocks for a spell when there's an epidemic.

They're the gift that keeps on giving.

ron ll
01-28-2015, 11:30 AM
. Then came the debate over the danger of vaccines causing Autism.



There is no debate about that. Only a couple of people like Jenny McCarthy who think there is, and somebody gave her a microphone because she has big tits.

Keith Wilson
01-28-2015, 11:34 AM
And the bizarre thing is that vaccines are the least intrusive and most 'natural ' kind of medicine imaginable - a tiny intervention, no drugs, using the body's own immune system, and duplicating the process of disease resistance after illness, but without the inconvenience and danger of actually having the disease.

F***ing idiots. (Sorry; as I said, stupid ideas that kill children get me riled up.)

Shang
01-28-2015, 11:42 AM
Vaccinate.

woodpile
01-28-2015, 11:54 AM
In general, yes to all the above, however, they seemed to have missed the boat on this years flu vaccine, from both our PCP and daughter, an NP at Yale, they both agree that the effectiveness of this years flu vaccine to be about 50% at best.

George Jung
01-28-2015, 11:57 AM
It's not an exact science - they gather data each year, compile the 'most likely' varieties, and then propagate those viruses for vaccine manufacture. But RNA viruses mutate easily; the Influenza A we're seeing is apparently such a critter. Those who received a fluvax don't seem to get as ill as those who didn't - so some protection. But we're seeing lots of flu.

John Smith
01-28-2015, 12:35 PM
One of the complaints by a vaccine opponent was the drug company is making a lot of money. I found that a bit odd, in that this is one reason there is a vaccine. I wouldn't expect most would give it away, as Salk did.

I had the Measles when I was kid. It was no fun.

I guess we get into a larger question of when do we allow people to make their own decision vs when we want a nanny state. A lot of things have gotten better because the "nanny" state dictated.

John Smith
01-28-2015, 12:38 PM
In general, yes to all the above, however, they seemed to have missed the boat on this years flu vaccine, from both our PCP and daughter, an NP at Yale, they both agree that the effectiveness of this years flu vaccine to be about 50% at best.

Even at 50% isn't it a good idea? Science is great, and we put a lot of faith in it, except when we find it inconvenient.

Weather forecasting is not an exact science, but we listen all the time. It gets better since satellites. Still, it's an educated guess; more educated than it used to be. Flu vaccine is similar.

I can't imaging parents opting out of the polio vaccine and then their kids getting polio. I have trouble understanding why so many aren't deterred in their thinking by the outbreak of Measles where vaccines were declined.

ccmanuals
01-28-2015, 12:52 PM
I say we quarantine Disney world and all the people that are there. Cut off all flights to California and anyone who has been to CA within the past year must also go into quarantine. Remember this strategy worked so well for ebola. :)

RonW
01-28-2015, 01:28 PM
George Jung -
Vaccine denialists are out of the same mold as AGW denialists;

Amen ... brother Jung............

John of Phoenix
01-28-2015, 02:13 PM
I had mumps, chicken pox, measles and finally a near fatal case of pneumonia all when I was 5 and living in Libya. My folks took me to the Air Force hospital and I vaguely remember being dunked in an ice bath to lower the fever from 105 to something less critical. I was under the impression that the major danger with measles was the risk to pregnant women. Should have know from personal experience that there's more to it.


Complications of measles may include:


Ear infection. One of the most common complications of measles is a bacterial ear infection.
Bronchitis, laryngitis or croup. Measles may lead to inflammation of your voice box (larynx) or inflammation of the inner walls that line the main air passageways of your lungs (bronchial tubes).
Pneumonia. Pneumonia is a common complication of measles. People with compromised immune systems can develop an especially dangerous variety of pneumonia that is sometimes fatal.
Encephalitis. About 1 in 1,000 people with measles develops encephalitis, an inflammation of the brain that may cause vomiting, convulsions, and, rarely, coma or even death. Encephalitis can closely follow measles, or it can occur months later.
Pregnancy problems. If you're pregnant, you need to take special care to avoid measles because the disease can cause pregnancy loss, preterm labor or low birth weight.
Low platelet count (thrombocytopenia). Measles may lead to a decrease in platelets — the type of blood cells that are essential for blood clotting.

RonW
01-28-2015, 03:14 PM
This might be interesting, maybe george could run this down .......


A major focus of the Gates Foundation has also been invested in vaccination campaigns, although Western media has completely ignored major ethical issues brought up by medical experts in countries such as India, where more than 47,500 children were paralyzed shortly after one of Gates’ campaigns.

ccmanuals
01-28-2015, 04:09 PM
This might be interesting, maybe george could run this down .......

Ron, you have already been shown this is not true. If you are quick enough maybe you can delete your post before someone notices.

John of Phoenix
01-28-2015, 04:16 PM
Ron, you have already been shown this is not true. If you are quick enough maybe you can delete your post before someone notices.


Troll.
More like "liar".

George Jung
01-28-2015, 07:14 PM
Nasty piece of work, RonW. Shame on ya!

Keith Wilson
01-28-2015, 07:34 PM
Before you vaccinate your child, you HAVE to read this! (link here (http://nightofthelivingdad.net/2014/08/13/why-we-didnt-vaccinate-our-child/)) :d

John of Phoenix
01-29-2015, 10:04 AM
Interesting link, Keith.

This especially may come in handy -

http://nightofthelivingdad.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/ebola1.png
This might be interesting, maybe george could run this down .......

John Smith
01-29-2015, 10:15 AM
Life is a game of odds. Every time we take a ride in our car there is a small risk of something bad happening, but we still drive. The benefit outweighs the risk.

If there's a one in a million chance your child is have a problem from a vaccine, but there's a much better chance he'll get a nasty disease if not vaccinated, the vaccine is a far smaller risk.

Norman Bernstein
01-29-2015, 10:23 AM
As Keith's link says,


Only a moron would risk their child contracting a known, debilitating illness against unsubstantiated rumors of statistically insignificant side effects of vaccines that have been given to large populations for many years.

John Smith
01-29-2015, 10:47 AM
As Keith's link says,

And this is where our 'news' media fails us. Again we'll have a 'news' anchor playing moderator between a person who believes vaccines are bad and one who believes vaccines are good. Just like we had with the swift boat ads and Global Warming "discussions"

George Jung
02-02-2015, 09:29 AM
As we're seeing more localized outbreaks, 'the media' seemingly is climbing more to the 'for' side of the argument.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/02/us/a-discredited-vaccine-studys-continuing-impact-on-public-health.html

Anything for a buck.

varadero
02-02-2015, 09:43 AM
This sums it up for me..
https://scontent-b-fra.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/10649764_850745484995462_4517899817512590337_n.jpg ?oh=68408ece47b9ffb67d02122651a2ccb1&oe=55660758

David W Pratt
02-02-2015, 10:22 AM
Also, measles vaccine is usually given with mumps and rubella (MMR). Rubella can cause birth defects if a pregnant woman is exposed to a child with rubella

John of Phoenix
02-02-2015, 10:43 AM
It's interesting to read about the number of doctors who refuse to treat patients, entire families, who refuse inoculations.

WszystekPoTrochu
02-02-2015, 11:01 AM
vaccines are the least intrusive and most 'natural ' kind of medicine imaginable - a tiny intervention, no drugs, using the body's own immune system, and duplicating the process of disease resistance after illness, but without the inconvenience and danger of actually having the disease.

Technically even donated blood becomes a drug, but leaving that aside - vaccines contain adjuvants. All that post vaccination inflammations, fevers, itching - adjuvants. These often contain various bad stuff, by design. This is where all autism claims come from, not the vaccine itself. Some accuses are pretty viable: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X14004769

Of course, even if there was adjuvant - autism correlation, net effect would be positive. There is a question when net effect justification is still ok, and when it becomes totalitarianism.
I only wonder why there are no attempts to satisfy the worried parents with adjuvant free vaccines, probably for ten-firfty times the price as this is the difference adjuvants make.

George Jung
02-02-2015, 11:01 AM
We've a few in this community, as well - I can't/won't do that. We try to educate; we try to be advocates.

John of Phoenix
02-02-2015, 01:18 PM
A father's story. http://www.roalddahlfans.com/articles/meas.php
----------------
Roald Dahl

Olivia, my eldest daughter, caught measles when she was seven years old. As the illness took its usual course I can remember reading to her often in bed and not feeling particularly alarmed about it. Then one morning, when she was well on the road to recovery, I was sitting on her bed showing her how to fashion little animals out of coloured pipe-cleaners, and when it came to her turn to make one herself, I noticed that her fingers and her mind were not working together and she couldn't do anything.

"Are you feeling alright?" I asked her.

"I feel all sleepy," she said.

In an hour, she was unconscious. In twelve hours she was dead.

The measles had turned into a terrible thing called measles encephalitis and there was nothing the doctors could do to save her. That was twenty-four years ago in 1962, but even now, if a child with measles happens to develop the same deadly reaction from measles as Olivia did, there would still be nothing the doctors could do to help her.

On the other hand, there is today something that parents can do to make sure that this sort of tragedy does not happen to a child of theirs. They can insist that their child is immunised against measles. I was unable to do that for Olivia in 1962 because in those days a reliable measles vaccine had not been discovered. Today a good and safe vaccine is available to every family and all you have to do is to ask your doctor to administer it.

It is not yet generally accepted that measles can be a dangerous illness. Believe me, it is. In my opinion parents who now refuse to have their children immunised are putting the lives of those children at risk. In America, where measles immunisation is compulsory, measles like smallpox, has been virtually wiped out.

Here in Britain, because so many parents refuse, either out of obstinacy or ignorance or fear, to allow their children to be immunised, we still have a hundred thousand cases of measles every year. Out of those, more than 10,000 will suffer side effects of one kind or another. At least 10,000 will develop ear or chest infections. About 20 will die.

LET THAT SINK IN.

Every year around 20 children will die in Britain from measles.

So what about the risks that your children will run from being immunised?

They are almost non-existent. Listen to this. In a district of around 300,000 people, there will be only one child every 250 years who will develop serious side effects from measles immunisation! That is about a million to one chance. I should think there would be more chance of your child choking to death on a chocolate bar than of becoming seriously ill from a measles immunisation.

So what on earth are you worrying about? It really is almost a crime to allow your child to go unimmunised.

The ideal time to have it done is at 13 months, but it is never too late. All school-children who have not yet had a measles immunisation should beg their parents to arrange for them to have one as soon as possible.

Incidentally, I dedicated two of my books to Olivia, the first was 'James and the Giant Peach'. That was when she was still alive. The second was 'The BFG', dedicated to her memory after she had died from measles. You will see her name at the beginning of each of these books. And I know how happy she would be if only she could know that her death had helped to save a good deal of illness and death among other children.

John Smith
02-02-2015, 01:43 PM
I don't know how different states handle this stuff, but my kids couldn't go to public school without a record of their shots being provided.

This is another area where I find it strange that people who believe in science in so many aspects of their lives turn their back on science for some ideological or philosophical reason.

Keith Wilson
02-02-2015, 03:35 PM
I have zero patience with this bullsh!t. Like I said, vaccinations should be required by law, medical exceptions only. If you won't do it voluntarily, the police and a nurse should come to your house and vaccinate the child. If you try to avoid it by more extreme methods, you should be charged with child abuse - which it certainly is, every bit as much as locking your kid in the basement and not feeding him, with the difference that it also endangers others.

Shang
02-03-2015, 08:59 AM
CNN

Paul, who is an ophthalmologist, also asserts that he's heard of cases where vaccines have caused "profound mental disorders."

"I've many tragic cases of walking, talking, normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines," Paul said. "I'm not arguing vaccines are a bad idea. I think they're a good thing. But I think the parents should have some input."

Asked for evidence of those claims, Paul campaign spokesman Sergio Gor didn't address them and instead said that while Paul largely supports vaccines, "many" should be voluntary.

"Dr. Paul believes that vaccines have saved lives, and should be administered to children. His children were all vaccinated. He also believes many vaccines should be voluntary and like most medical decisions, between the doctor and the patient, not the government," he wrote in an email to CNN.

Flip...flop...flip...flop...flip...flop....

Keith Wilson
02-03-2015, 09:06 AM
Paul, who is an ophthalmologist,Self-certified ophthalmologist. (details here) (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2013/11/08/rand-paul-has-another-problem/)

slug
02-03-2015, 09:06 AM
CNN

Paul, who is an ophthalmologist, also asserts that he's heard of cases where vaccines have caused "profound mental disorders."

"I've many tragic cases of walking, talking, normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines," Paul said. "I'm not arguing vaccines are a bad idea. I think they're a good thing. But I think the parents should have some input."

Asked for evidence of those claims, Paul campaign spokesman Sergio Gor didn't address them and instead said that while Paul largely supports vaccines, "many" should be voluntary.

"Dr. Paul believes that vaccines have saved lives, and should be administered to children. His children were all vaccinated. He also believes many vaccines should be voluntary and like most medical decisions, between the doctor and the patient, not the government," he wrote in an email to CNN.

Flip...flop...flip...flop...flip...flop....

hmm....are you, he, implying that some children may by geneticaly predisposed to adverse vaccine reactions ? Is there somekinda test to determine this ?

Keith Wilson
02-03-2015, 09:10 AM
Shang's not supporting Rand Paul, just quoting him. Paul's taking the standard libertarian line that pretty much everything should be voluntary; no surprise there

slug
02-03-2015, 09:19 AM
Its a crazy idea coming from the mouth of a professional . Presently there are clusters of unvaccinated children in the US. These regional clusters are a result of the paranoia introduced by local witchdoctors and irresponsible media talking heads.

Its natural that a parent asks a doctor before any drug or substance is introduced into their child. The doctor must give the correct advise, not confuse the parent with improbable or theoretic scenarios.

John Smith
02-03-2015, 09:38 AM
To say this sort of thing should be left up to the parent, then why not drinking age be up to the parent, driving age be up to the parent, etc.

Our government is supposed to promote the public welfare. If vaccines don't do that, what does?

htom
02-03-2015, 11:55 AM
Maybe charge them with child endangerment, rather than child abuse. When the child comes down with the preventable disease, then charge them with child abuse.

Osborne Russell
02-03-2015, 12:04 PM
Pregnancy and disease keep the poor motivated. Vote GOP

John of Phoenix
02-03-2015, 12:20 PM
Shang's not supporting Rand Paul, just quoting him. Paul's taking the standard libertarian line that pretty much everything should be voluntary; no surprise thereDon't forget the reds' anti-science platform.

Lew Barrett
02-03-2015, 12:31 PM
Maybe charge them with child endangerment, rather than child abuse. When the child comes down with the preventable disease, then charge them with child abuse.

The problem with waiting for the disease to take root prior to punishing the Luddite is that the child can contract the disease in the interim while risking the infection of others. If morons don't want their children vaccinated, let them consider what happens in ISIS controlled regions to health workers trying to vaccinate for polio. They are hunted down and killed. Hence the morons align themselves with neo-Islamic attitudes. Let them chew on that.

Lew Barrett
02-03-2015, 01:44 PM
Christie's in on the lunacy as well. (http://www.latimes.com/local/abcarian/la-me-ra-christie-vaccination-20150202-column.html)
Bobbing and weaving, these guys just can't seem to stop stepping on themselves. There's nothing quite like being a slave to an ideology that doesn't align with facts and lock-stepping to the beat of a drum out of time.

TomF
02-03-2015, 02:03 PM
Why stop with vaccinations? The biggest health successes ever have to do with taxing people, and providing treated water and efficient sanitation.

It's theft at gunpoint that people pay taxes in return for taking a drink of water. The species survived for thousands of years with rivers, lakes, and wells dug downhill from the barn. And damned if I should pay to have my shyte taken away - can't I express my Liberty in shytting exactly where I want to? If it bothers you, then you shift it.

Vaccines, paaugh! That's bush league stuff. I'm all for the return of Typhus, Cholera, and the big kids of infectious disease. We can only hope that folks' Liberty to abuse antibiotics will develop nice resistant strains in the interim.

Keith Wilson
02-03-2015, 02:05 PM
Oh, Tom, you're a bad, bad man. :D

TomF
02-03-2015, 02:13 PM
Oh, Tom, you're a bad, bad man. :DWell, a Librul at least. :D

Keith Wilson
02-03-2015, 02:18 PM
'Oh, no, my dear, I'm a very good man; I'm just a very bad wizard.' :d

George Jung
02-03-2015, 02:25 PM
Maybe. Stuff happens!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huPDP5-NfbE

htom
02-03-2015, 03:05 PM
The problem with waiting for the disease to take root prior to punishing the Luddite is that the child can contract the disease in the interim while risking the infection of others. If morons don't want their children vaccinated, let them consider what happens in ISIS controlled regions to health workers trying to vaccinate for polio. They are hunted down and killed. Hence the morons align themselves with neo-Islamic attitudes. Let them chew on that.

I was trying to punish them twice. Having thought about it, we can also charge them with endangering all of the children that their sick children expose to the virus. Three bites (as well as a sick kid.)

John Smith
02-03-2015, 07:15 PM
I really don't get the opposition. Seems like they oppose it simply because Obama is for it.

Is there any adequate punishment for a parent who fails to vaccinate a child who gets Polio?

We used to have a policy about accepting checks at the window. The Clerk needed to get ID or write "known to clerk" on the check. One window clerk commented this was foolish, as it would prevent the check from bouncing.

I replied, "True, but it will keep you from having to pay for it if it does."

Maybe some severe consequences for parents who decline vaccinations would be a good thing.

John Smith
02-03-2015, 07:37 PM
I find it ironic that those who want to drug test welfare recipients don't want to give adults the option of doing drugs, but want the parents to have the option to put their kids at great risk.

Although it does go with their record of being very concerned about the fetus and not at all concerned with the child.

Michael D. Storey
02-03-2015, 07:47 PM
I had the Measles when I was kid. It was no fun.


Even back then it was considered so dangerous that quaranteening was regularly used when there was an outbreak

Osborne Russell
02-03-2015, 08:10 PM
No vaccination, no school. Private schools won't let your children in either. If you start a school for non-vaccinated children, the health department will shut it down.

Get ready to prove that you've home-schooled your children up to the standards of No Child Left Behind or get ready to pay some stiff fines and/or have your children taken into protective custody, where they will be vaccinated and educated. You can visit on weekends, if you behave.

George Jung
02-03-2015, 08:14 PM
Man! When they make you King, Osborne, 'there will be blood'!

Can't wait.

Peter Malcolm Jardine
02-03-2015, 09:17 PM
My stepson is currently finishing up his doctorate in immunology, researching a vaccine for streptococcus. He is an incredibly smart guy, all scientist now, and when we talked about this he just shakes his head. He has read the history of some of these diseases, and knows the science of vaccines inside and out. Personally, I don't believe that children without the normal cluster of vaccines should be allowed to go to public schools, and parents should have to make a declaration to any organized group of children they wish their own children to join. I wouldn't want my kids around other kids without vaccinations, and up here, you can't put your kid in school without them

Worse yet, the Naturopaths have 'herbal vaccines' they suggest will work instead of the regular ones. It's total black magic, but people eat it up. Like I said, I don't get it.

George Jung
02-04-2015, 09:50 AM
They had a nice piece on this, on NPR, this morning. A woman who previously was a denialist, went 'natural', even cloth diapers, 'all natural foods' for her kid - relented after her child developed autism - without an preceding vaccinations. Breaking from her 'group' (primarily an internet group with similar interests) was difficult - and these groups flourish when there's a commonality. They don't trust govt., science, Pharma - and have a 'us against the world' attitude. Difficult to breach that with logic. And of course, we have 'help' in that regard - folks playing politics with our health:

http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/

Osborne Russell
02-04-2015, 03:04 PM
Man! When they make you King, Osborne, 'there will be blood'!

Can't wait.

No need. The scenario I describe is the way things are now.

It is easily imaginable that there would be an epidemic bad enough and a refusal of inoculation bad enough to justify martial law and inoculation at gunpoint. Perfectly constitutional. There is no right to be contagious.

George Jung
02-04-2015, 06:11 PM
I happen to agree - but it's not a popular position! (and don't worry - I'll vote for ya!)

Lew Barrett
02-04-2015, 06:26 PM
You don't get to vote for the king!

Thanks for the reply, Tom. I read you now.

Keith Wilson
02-04-2015, 06:46 PM
Vaccination of children should be imposed by force of law, medical exemptions only. If you don't do it voluntarily, the cops show up at your house with medical personnel and do it for you. Enough of this bullsh!t.

John Smith
02-04-2015, 06:51 PM
What puzzles me is if they don't believe in vaccines, why believe in doctors at all? Do they take aspirin or similar if they have a headache? Do they see a dentist if they have teeth problems?

If they have a heart attack, will they have surgery?

Selective belief in science is a strange thing to me.

George Jung
02-04-2015, 07:09 PM
Medicine has gone away from what Keith advocates - a paternalistic system. That's good - except the pendulum has swung too far to the other extreme.

RodB
02-04-2015, 07:16 PM
I really don't get the opposition. Seems like they oppose it simply because Obama is for it.

Is there any adequate punishment for a parent who fails to vaccinate a child who gets Polio?

We used to have a policy about accepting checks at the window. The Clerk needed to get ID or write "known to clerk" on the check. One window clerk commented this was foolish, as it would prevent the check from bouncing.

I replied, "True, but it will keep you from having to pay for it if it does."

Maybe some severe consequences for parents who decline vaccinations would be a good thing.

Statement is bold again illustrates your illogical leftwing sickness and hatred for the right...even when what you infer is totally false. ...ie., Jenny McCarthy for one is a liberal FYI...

Immunizations follow the laws of statistics as with most medical treatments. We live with those odds every day with every medical treatment having risks. . The risks we take with immunizations every day are worth the elimination of the diseases we minimize or completely get rid of. Its a no brainer... even for the mentally challenged such as some liberals on this forum...

http://www.immunizeforgood.com/fact-or-fiction/benefits-vs.-risks


But... the following seems to offer a different take on this issue. I offer this for balance.

http://www.nvic.org/vaccines-and-diseases/Vaccinations--Know-the-risks-and-failures-.aspx



RodB

John Smith
02-04-2015, 07:44 PM
Statement is bold again illustrates your illogical leftwing sickness and hatred for the right...even when what you infer is totally false. ...ie., Jenny McCarthy for one is a liberal FYI...

Immunizations follow the laws of statistics as with most medical treatments. We live with those odds every day with every medical treatment having risks. . The risks we take with immunizations every day are worth the elimination of the diseases we minimize or completely get rid of. Its a no brainer... even for the mentally challenged such as some liberals on this forum...

http://www.immunizeforgood.com/fact-or-fiction/benefits-vs.-risks


But... the following seems to offer a different take on this issue. I offer this for balance.

http://www.nvic.org/vaccines-and-diseases/Vaccinations--Know-the-risks-and-failures-.aspx



RodB

I refer to those in positions to make laws, not just uninformed advocates.

George Jung
02-04-2015, 08:05 PM
Statement is bold again illustrates your illogical leftwing sickness and hatred for the right...even when what you infer is totally false. ...ie., Jenny McCarthy for one is a liberal FYI...

Immunizations follow the laws of statistics as with most medical treatments. We live with those odds every day with every medical treatment having risks. . The risks we take with immunizations every day are worth the elimination of the diseases we minimize or completely get rid of. Its a no brainer... even for the mentally challenged such as some liberals on this forum...

http://www.immunizeforgood.com/fact-or-fiction/benefits-vs.-risks


But... the following seems to offer a different take on this issue. I offer this for balance.

http://www.nvic.org/vaccines-and-diseases/Vaccinations--Know-the-risks-and-failures-.aspx



RodB


Highlighted/bolded suggests you protesteth too much! The liberals may be aghast at some of the wacked out ideas you (and yours) espouse here - but I'd challenge you to find any statements remotely approaching your characterization of those who disagree with you. Honestly, you sound rabid. You can say differently; but that's how you come across.

Peter Malcolm Jardine
02-04-2015, 08:17 PM
Honestly, you sound rabid. You can say differently; but that's how you come across.

I think there is a vaccine for Rabies. :D


Rand Paul just came out in favour of choice for parents in regards to vaccines. Quote: "The state does not own children. Parents own children."
Remarkable. I didn't know parents owned their children. In fact, I thought the state had to right to be the guardian to a child that was being neglected.
Chris Christie came out with the same endorsement of choice. These people are morons! The website RodB came up with is full of quackery, (as usual). Incredible.

Osborne Russell
02-04-2015, 08:24 PM
Rand Paul just came out in favour of choice for parents in regards to vaccines. Quote: "The state does not own children. Parents own children."

No one owns children and the rights of parents have their limits. See, e.g. compulsory education.

Peter Malcolm Jardine
02-04-2015, 08:32 PM
Tell Rand Paul.

ccmanuals
02-04-2015, 08:42 PM
No one owns children and the rights of parents have their limits. See, e.g. compulsory education.

See also child car seats.

Arizona Bay
02-04-2015, 08:52 PM
http://www.creators.com/editorial_cartoons/1/31313_thumb.jpg

varadero
02-05-2015, 03:57 AM
A writer living in Nigeria turned the tables on American’s overreaction and fear that travelers from African nations might bring Ebola into the United States, expressing his concern for “the measles-ravaged country America” on Twitter.
Elnathan John, a writer and lawyer living in Abuja, Nigeria, wrote (https://twitter.com/elnathan/status/561822765402324994): “Our thoughts are also with the measles-ravaged country America. I hope we are screening them before they come to Africa.”
Concerns about citizens of African nations bringing Ebola to America reached epidemic proportions of its own last year, with members of the public signing aWhitehouse.gov petition (http://www.fox8live.com/story/26701666/white-house-petition-urges-faa-ban-from-ebola-stricken-countries) stating, “The Ebola virus has reached unprecedented epidemic proportions in West Africa. The citizens of the U.S. are scared. We do not want any more Ebola-infected individuals bringing the epidemic to our shores.”


John’s comment on Twitter was retweeted over 7,000 times, with a majority of commenters joining in on the mocking.
One writer (https://twitter.com/opinionatrix/status/561860446219952129) added, “OMG maybe we should build a big fence to make sure they don’t bring it to Canada!!” while another wrote (https://twitter.com/scttfrnks/status/561940459124424705), “Pray for us. All we can do is sit here and wait for the Nigerian aid to arrive.”
Another mocked American’s short attention span for over-hyped crises, writing (https://twitter.com/seyitaylor/status/561943050008920064), “every 30 mins, a child in America catches… Oh look, ‘Dancing with the Stars’ is on!”

Osborne Russell
02-05-2015, 10:44 AM
See also child car seats.

Many things.

Back when we lived in lawless dog eat dog anarchy we had a lot more freedom. At least we owned our children.

Osborne Russell
02-05-2015, 10:46 AM
A writer living in Nigeria turned the tables on Americanís overreaction . . .


Irony depends on a certain mentality in the audience.

John Smith
02-05-2015, 11:41 AM
There are many areas of life where, for the common good, the government passes laws.

Some are big on individual choice. To them I ask: Should we make stopping at a red light optional?

I don't think vaccines should be optional. I had Measles. Trust me, I'd have preferred a shot to prevent it.

Canoeyawl
02-05-2015, 11:42 AM
Highlighted/bolded suggests you protesteth too much! The liberals may be aghast at some of the wacked out ideas you (and yours) espouse here - but I'd challenge you to find any statements remotely approaching your characterization of those who disagree with you. Honestly, you sound rabid. You can say differently; but that's how you come across.

Listen to the good doctor Rod...

Shang
02-05-2015, 12:03 PM
http://themetapicture.com/angry-scientist-finds-uneducated-internet-comment-and-delivers-badass-response/

Peerie Maa
02-05-2015, 12:24 PM
Many things.

Back when we lived in lawless dog eat dog anarchy we had a lot more freedom. At least we owned our children.

Yep, literally.

In the deep south.

John of Phoenix
02-05-2015, 12:49 PM
If only some of this delightful mocking and ridicule had any effect on the intellect of these idiots.

Lew Barrett
02-05-2015, 02:45 PM
Yep, literally.

In the deep south.

Other people's children, actually.

Keith Wilson
02-05-2015, 03:02 PM
Very often not other people's. Thomas Jefferson owned six of his own children. None of them were vaccinated. Only four lived to adulthood.

TomF
02-05-2015, 03:05 PM
Very often not other people's. Thomas Jefferson owned six of his own children. None of them were vaccinated. Only four lived to adulthood.Damn that Obama, eh? Somebody's gotta pay.

Keith Wilson
02-05-2015, 03:07 PM
Yeah, if we only had enforced the miscegenation laws like we shoulda . . .

RonW
02-05-2015, 03:42 PM
Very often not other people's. Thomas Jefferson owned six of his own children. None of them were vaccinated. Only four lived to adulthood.


Damn that Obama, eh? Somebody's gotta pay.


Yeah, if we only had enforced the miscegenation laws like we shoulda . . .

I find it fascinating how the liberal mind comes to certain conclusions...from vaccines to racism...yep you tied that up into a neat knot..all the way back to Thomas Jefferson..

TomF
02-05-2015, 03:47 PM
I find it fascinating how the liberal mind comes to certain conclusions...from vaccines to racism...yep you tied that up into a neat knot..all the way back to Thomas Jefferson..I find it fascinating how the conservative mind* can't seem to recognize when a serious topic has a playful shift into free-association, intentional absurdity and joking.






*with some very notable exceptions.

RonW
02-05-2015, 03:59 PM
I find it fascinating how the conservative mind* can't seem to recognize when a serious topic has a playful shift into free-association, intentional absurdity and joking.

*with some very notable exceptions.


Oh I knew you guys were just joking around, kinda like when you said you didn't know about this 6 day deal ....you was just joking, wasn't you ..

htom
02-05-2015, 05:06 PM
There are many areas of life where, for the common good, the government passes laws.

Some are big on individual choice. To them I ask: Should we make stopping at a red light optional?

....

It's required? I thought I was the only one who thought that!

Keith Wilson
02-05-2015, 05:07 PM
. . . you didn't know about this 6 day deal ...Eh? What in the world are you talking about?

And Ron, you don't understand jack sh*t about any 'liberal mind', much less Tom's or mine.

RodB
02-05-2015, 08:27 PM
Highlighted/bolded suggests you protesteth too much! The liberals may be aghast at some of the wacked out ideas you (and yours) espouse here - but I'd challenge you to find any statements remotely approaching your characterization of those who disagree with you. Honestly, you sound rabid. You can say differently; but that's how you come across.


If you have followed any of the posts from John Smith... you would know he consistently illustrates massive efforts to come up with thread titles to attack the right... day in... day out...and most are nonsense. If there is any way he can tie some negative connotation to the Republicans or conservatives...he is right in there... the truth be damned.

I stand by my post and certainly could care less what you may think about anything. At least half of the country think the progressive minds are are mentally challenged.

R

John Smith
02-05-2015, 08:31 PM
If you have followed any of the posts from John Smith... you would know he consistently illustrates massive efforts to come up with thread titles to attack the right... day in... day out...and most are nonsense. If there is any way he can tie some negative connotation to the Republicans or conservatives...he is right in there... the truth be damned.

I stand by my post and certainly could care less what you may think about anything.

R

What ARE you talking about. Republicans wrap themselves in ideological knots. They're extremely concerned with fetuses, but not children. They are the ones who think vaccines should be optional, that think Evolution is a hoax, etc.

I just post what they say.

RodB
02-05-2015, 08:37 PM
What ARE you talking about. Republicans wrap themselves in ideological knots. They're extremely concerned with fetuses, but not children. They are the ones who think vaccines should be optional, that think Evolution is a hoax, etc.

I just post what they say.

I'm wondering how big a group "they" entails?

R

John Smith
02-05-2015, 08:41 PM
I'm wondering how big a group "they" entails?

R

For one, it included ALL the Republican candidates in last election's primaries. Every single one went on record as denying Evolution. IMHO, that disqualified them for office.

I'm only the messenger here. They're the ones who raised their hands.

It follows, logically, that all those who voted for them deny Evolution.

Boater14
02-05-2015, 08:48 PM
47,500 children paralyzed. Would you be a fool, a liar or an idiot to believe that? I watch the news every night and read the nyt every morning.mmust just be nut media reporting the story.

Cuyahoga Chuck
02-05-2015, 08:55 PM
I'm wondering how big a group "they" entails?

R

" They" know who they are but "they" may not be able to count. If it matters try google.

Cuyahoga Chuck
02-05-2015, 08:58 PM
If you have followed any of the posts from John Smith... you would know he consistently illustrates massive efforts to come up with thread titles to attack the right... day in... day out...and most are nonsense. If there is any way he can tie some negative connotation to the Republicans or conservatives...he is right in there... the truth be damned.

I stand by my post and certainly could care less what you may think about anything. At least half of the country think the progressive minds are are mentally challenged.

R
Johnny does a good job, doesn't he? He's no C&P artist. He pumps out a lot of quality text to define his positions. Often he beats the opposition to flinders.

Cuyahoga Chuck
02-05-2015, 09:27 PM
A writer living in Nigeria turned the tables on American’s overreaction and fear that travelers from African nations might bring Ebola into the United States, expressing his concern for “the measles-ravaged country America” on Twitter.
Elnathan John, a writer and lawyer living in Abuja, Nigeria, wrote (https://twitter.com/elnathan/status/561822765402324994): “Our thoughts are also with the measles-ravaged country America. I hope we are screening them before they come to Africa.”
Concerns about citizens of African nations bringing Ebola to America reached epidemic proportions of its own last year, with members of the public signing aWhitehouse.gov petition (http://www.fox8live.com/story/26701666/white-house-petition-urges-faa-ban-from-ebola-stricken-countries) stating, “The Ebola virus has reached unprecedented epidemic proportions in West Africa. The citizens of the U.S. are scared. We do not want any more Ebola-infected individuals bringing the epidemic to our shores.”


John’s comment on Twitter was retweeted over 7,000 times, with a majority of commenters joining in on the mocking.
One writer (https://twitter.com/opinionatrix/status/561860446219952129) added, “OMG maybe we should build a big fence to make sure they don’t bring it to Canada!!” while another wrote (https://twitter.com/scttfrnks/status/561940459124424705), “Pray for us. All we can do is sit here and wait for the Nigerian aid to arrive.”
Another mocked American’s short attention span for over-hyped crises, writing (https://twitter.com/seyitaylor/status/561943050008920064), “every 30 mins, a child in America catches… Oh look, ‘Dancing with the Stars’ is on!”



Ebola was an unknown quantity and nobody in the international community had a handle on it until Western medicos intervened. Rubella (measals) is a known quantity and Western medicine has a grip on it at the moment IF enough citizens get vaccinated. So your Nigerian friend can cast all the aspersions he likes but he and everybody in his country live much longer and more disease free because Western medicine has conquered most of the big plagues that regularly ravaged Nigerians and others in Africa in the past. In short, he seems not to know who his benefactors are. In the future when new plagues appear it will be Western medicine that will come to the rescue of those who don't have the skill to investige the diseases. Elnathon John could do more good by mocking president Goodluck Jonathan who has allowed rebels to set up a rival state in his territory where they regularly kill hundreds of NIgerians and steal all the children.

RonW
02-05-2015, 09:37 PM
Johnny does a good job, doesn't he? He's no C&P artist. He pumps out a lot of quality text to define his positions. Often he beats the opposition to flinders.

That's funny chuck, just a riot....Here's one of his finest quality texts .........and I will leave it at that...You might want to rethink this .......

http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?185234-Weird-dream-but-interesting-discussion-Remember-Dr-Elders&highlight=

RonW
02-05-2015, 10:58 PM
February 04, 2015 - Anderson Cooper speaks with former U.S. Congressman Dan Burton, who chaired several hearings on vaccines and autism. -

http://xrepublic.tv/node/12162

Glen Longino
02-05-2015, 11:19 PM
Eh? What in the world are you talking about?

And Ron, you don't understand jack sh*t about any 'liberal mind', much less Tom's or mine.

Brilliant and True!:)

John Smith
02-06-2015, 10:11 AM
More attacking messengers. Vaccines work well. They have a track history.

Would anyone here, including Ron and Rob, want to risk their kids contraction Polio. How would you explain to your child who gets Polito, Measles, or some other nasty that you declined to vaccinate him?

John Smith
02-06-2015, 10:19 AM
I don't know if I have a liberal mind. I'm told I do, but I'm not so sure.

I believe if congress passes bills that require money, or we go into war which costs money, we should raise taxes to pay for these commitments. I believe when we fund a war, that funding should include more than adequate money to care for the wounded when they come home.

I believe if we have a government provided infrastructure, we should take in sufficient revenue to keep it properly maintained.

I believe we need to educate our youth, and the K - 12 system is dramatically outdated and inadequate. Free, taxpyer paid, education NEEDS to be expanded.

I this is realistic thinking.

We have a $17 trillion debt. I've often pointed out this has its roots in Reagan. We have a $3.5 trillion annual budget. It is impossible to cut enough from that budget to pay down the debt. That's not liberal thinking; that's math.

We are under taxed. I think that's a fact and I accept it.

I would have no problem with a slight tax increase, if it was progressive as it went up income levels. I could stand, say $100 a year increase in my income taxes. If we figure out what percentage that is, and raise all income taxes the same percentage, excluding no forms of income, we'd probably be able to balance our budget and make some payment on our debt.

Again, it's just math.

RonW
02-06-2015, 10:30 AM
John Smith -
We have a $17 trillion debt. I've often pointed out this has its roots in Reagan. We have a $3.5 trillion annual budget. It is impossible to cut enough from that budget to pay down the debt. That's not liberal thinking; that's math.

So why don't you get realistic instead of spewing garbage.............

We have a $18.5 trillion dollar national debt, the great leader aka (Obama) has incurred $8 trillion of that over the last 6 years and no doubt will add another $2 trillion over his last 2 years.....He also proposed a $4 trillion budget for this year, which is going no where..In 2000 the budget was $1.9 trillion......absurd....
Reagan added $1.8 trillion to the debt, but let's try and remember that he also rebuilt the military which was vastly depleted after viet nam and ignored by the pacifist president jimmy carter.


I would have no problem with a slight tax increase, if it was progressive as it went up income levels. I could stand, say $100 a year increase in my income taxes. If we figure out what percentage that is, and raise all income taxes the same percentage, excluding no forms of income, we'd probably be able to balance our budget and make some payment on our debt.

That would be the equivalent of you pissing in lake michigan..........

Cuyahoga Chuck
02-06-2015, 11:11 AM
John Smith -

So why don't you get realistic instead of spewing garbage.............

We have a $18.5 trillion dollar national debt, the great leader aka (Obama) has incurred $8 trillion of that over the last 6 years and no doubt will add another $2 trillion over his last 2 years.....He also proposed a $4 trillion budget for this year, which is going no where..In 2000 the budget was $1.9 trillion......absurd....
Reagan added $1.8 trillion to the debt, but let's try and remember that he also rebuilt the military which was vastly depleted after viet nam and ignored by the pacifist president jimmy carter.



That would be the equivalent of you pissing in lake michigan..........

Get real ,booger! Nobody you mentioned except Obama inherited a presidency where the the economy was going down the toilet and there were TWO wars that had to be managed WITHOUT the necessary taxation to pay for them. Obama was involved in getting a handle on this mess even before he took the oath of office. And over the next six years Obama was opposed by a congress that refused at one point to pay for anything. They turned off the money tap. Wasn't that a cute trick? And when they turned it on it was nowhere near what was required. In spite of all the rightwing stupidity the country has bounced back. But the downside was money had to be borrowed to get the result we got. We borrowed a lot. Would you really prefer to chance living in a second Great Depression just so the federal treasury had a positive balance?

George Jung
02-06-2015, 11:20 AM
I suspect 'it depends' - would that involve drawing/quartering Obama?

Booger, that!

RonW
02-06-2015, 11:52 AM
I suspect 'it depends' - would that involve drawing/quartering Obama?

Booger, that!

booger this.......

http://xrepublic.tv/node/12162

John Smith
02-06-2015, 12:50 PM
John Smith -

So why don't you get realistic instead of spewing garbage.............

We have a $18.5 trillion dollar national debt, the great leader aka (Obama) has incurred $8 trillion of that over the last 6 years and no doubt will add another $2 trillion over his last 2 years.....He also proposed a $4 trillion budget for this year, which is going no where..In 2000 the budget was $1.9 trillion......absurd....
Reagan added $1.8 trillion to the debt, but let's try and remember that he also rebuilt the military which was vastly depleted after viet nam and ignored by the pacifist president jimmy carter.



That would be the equivalent of you pissing in lake michigan..........

Pure bigoted nonsense. I've asked before, and you've ignored: How much of today's debt is the result of policies/wars Obama initiated? The answer is very little. The tax cuts, wars, and Medicare drug program continued to add to our debt after Bush left office.

That's simple fact. Look it up. I don't believe you can honestly attribute a single trillion dollars of our present debt to anything Obama initiated. All the rest of the debt is the cumulative responsibility of previous administrations.

This is where the facts, themselves, have that apparent liberal bias. No matter how much you protest, or how much BS you post, the facts are what they are.

RonW
02-06-2015, 01:03 PM
Pure bigoted nonsense. I've asked before, and you've ignored: How much of today's debt is the result of policies/wars Obama initiated? The answer is very little. The tax cuts, wars, and Medicare drug program continued to add to our debt after Bush left office.

That's simple fact. Look it up. I don't believe you can honestly attribute a single trillion dollars of our present debt to anything Obama initiated. All the rest of the debt is the cumulative responsibility of previous administrations.

This is where the facts, themselves, have that apparent liberal bias. No matter how much you protest, or how much BS you post, the facts are what they are.

That is a shameful and disgusting statement, I'm not sure if you are really that ill informed or truly that partisan. Just unbelievable...No he can not walk on water.

hokiefan
02-06-2015, 01:08 PM
Pure bigoted nonsense. I've asked before, and you've ignored: How much of today's debt is the result of policies/wars Obama initiated? The answer is very little. The tax cuts, wars, and Medicare drug program continued to add to our debt after Bush left office.

That's simple fact. Look it up. I don't believe you can honestly attribute a single trillion dollars of our present debt to anything Obama initiated. All the rest of the debt is the cumulative responsibility of previous administrations.

This is where the facts, themselves, have that apparent liberal bias. No matter how much you protest, or how much BS you post, the facts are what they are.


That is a shameful and disgusting statement, I'm not sure if you are really that ill informed or truly that partisan. Just unbelievable...No he can not walk on water.

John is exactly right. Point out an error in his facts. You can't do it because there are none. YOU are the one that is hopelessly ill informed and partisan.

RonW
02-06-2015, 01:14 PM
John is exactly right. Point out an error in his facts. You can't do it because there are none. YOU are the one that is hopelessly ill informed and partisan.

That's easy enough......Berry aka ( OBama ) has been president for over 6 years, at some point he and the left has to admit to the fact that he is responsible for his actions and/or lack of actions.......6 years later and it is still bush's and everyone else's fault. What a joke and denial of basic responsibility.

On 2nd though maybe we should have just kept bush for 16 years, after all according to the left he is responsible for everything..

hokiefan
02-06-2015, 01:17 PM
That's easy enough......Berry aka ( OBama ) has been president for over 6 years, at some point he and the left has to admit to the fact that he is responsible for his actions and/or lack of actions.......6 years later and it is still bush's and everyone else's fault. What a joke and denial of basic responsibility.

On 2nd though maybe we should have just kept bush for 16 years, after all according to the left he is responsible for everything..

Fail.

John of Phoenix
02-06-2015, 01:22 PM
Post 89:

I stand by my post and certainly could care less what you may think about anything. At least half of the country think the progressive minds are are mentally challenged.

R

Post 91:

I'm wondering how big a group "they" entails?

RYou said it was "at least half the country". Are you suddenly (and I do mean SUDDENLY) unsure?

John of Phoenix
02-06-2015, 01:26 PM
http://xrepublic.tv/node/12162
Danny Lee "Dan" Burton is the former U.S. Representative for Indiana's 5th congressional district, and previously the 6th district, serving from 1983 until 2013. He is a member of the Republican Party and the Tea Party Caucus.Of course he thinks vaccines cause autism, he's a red.

bob winter
02-06-2015, 02:12 PM
I notice there outbreaks of measles and mumps lately, thanks to the moron parents who would not have their kids vaccinated. I wonder how long it will take before polio makes a comeback. My mom had scarlet fever when she was quite young, lost most of the sight in one eye.

I won't take the flu shot because it is hit and miss. This year it missed. I asked the doctor about the shingles vaccination but passed on it when he told me that it was likely only 40% effective at my age. Seemed like a waste of $ 200.

John Smith
02-06-2015, 03:14 PM
That is a shameful and disgusting statement, I'm not sure if you are really that ill informed or truly that partisan. Just unbelievable...No he can not walk on water.

I am humbled by the attention you feel it necessary to give me. I'm also excited that, again, you cannot post any facts to support your case.

I have for many months asked simple questions. Show me anything, ANYTHING, since '92 the Republicans have gotten right. NO ONE has answered that, other than a single statement Ron Paul made, made, and I'm not sure he counts.

These are FACTS

Reagan never balanced the budget, never submitted a balanced budget, and tripled the debt creating an illusion of prosperity. EVERY Republican voted against the '93 budget and predicted it would destroy the economy. Even while they were impeaching Clinton, they caved in and did it his way on the budget. They also all said they would NOT impeach him if Starr's report only included Monica; they lied.

They told us we'd be greeted with flowers in Iraq, the entire thing would last weeks, and the oil would pay for it. They told us Saddam was involved in 9/11. They told us they had solid evidence of his WMD's and we knew their location.

They told us Romney was winning the election.

I try hard not to insult people, but I have got to say only a stupid person would continue to listen to people who've been so consistently wrong.

Now, it seems, you blame me because the people you listen to are either wrong or lying.

You give me far more credit than I deserve. It's not my fault you listen to these people.

Keith Wilson
02-06-2015, 03:44 PM
He also proposed a $4 trillion budget for this year, which is going no where..In 2000 the budget was $1.9 trillion......absurd....Federal spending in 2014 was about 20% of GDP, the average for the past 40 YEARS. The deficit was 2.8% of GDP, smaller than the average since 1980. (numbers from the WSJ; look here (http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2014/10/08/the-federal-deficit-is-now-smaller-than-the-average-since-the-1980s/)) I think 'absurd' would be better applied to your post. However, this thead is about vaccines; if you want to be silly about economics, you should probably open another.

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/BN-EX456_narrro_G_20141008143250.jpg

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
02-06-2015, 05:06 PM
Returning to our muttons... - Here's the Brit take on the subject - set to music

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0512ln6 > Mitch Benn from 8:58 onwards

The rest is topical Brit satire and quite beyond Rod.

George Jung
02-06-2015, 07:57 PM
I notice there outbreaks of measles and mumps lately, thanks to the moron parents who would not have their kids vaccinated. I wonder how long it will take before polio makes a comeback. My mom had scarlet fever when she was quite young, lost most of the sight in one eye.

I won't take the flu shot because it is hit and miss. This year it missed. I asked the doctor about the shingles vaccination but passed on it when he told me that it was likely only 40% effective at my age. Seemed like a waste of $ 200.

How damned old are you, Bob? :P Stats are, at age 75, your statistical risk is 1 in 2 chance of Shingles. The vax, on average, reduces that risk by 55% - but it reduces the chance of developing post herpetic neuralgia by 75%. I can pretty much guarantee you - if you get PHN, you'll think $200 is nothing. (You might look that one up)

Peter Malcolm Jardine
02-06-2015, 08:11 PM
Of course he thinks vaccines cause autism, he's a red.


Nothing to do with being a red..... a whole lot to do with not being terribly bright.

George Jung
02-06-2015, 08:38 PM
My dad had them - and developed PHN, which lasted about 6 months - when he was about 70. Said it was worse than recovering from a CABG. He was a cranky, WWII naval vet - for him to even comment was something.

RodB
02-06-2015, 09:27 PM
More attacking messengers. Vaccines work well. They have a track history.

Would anyone here, including Ron and Rob, want to risk their kids contraction Polio. How would you explain to your child who gets Polito, Measles, or some other nasty that you declined to vaccinate him?

Your contrived obtuseness is getting old. I don't recollect anyone disagreeing with the value of vaccinations...only your move to put another false narrative on Republicans.

R

RodB
02-06-2015, 11:37 PM
That's easy enough......Berry aka ( OBama ) has been president for over 6 years, at some point he and the left has to admit to the fact that he is responsible for his actions and/or lack of actions.......6 years later and it is still bush's and everyone else's fault. What a joke and denial of basic responsibility.

On 2nd though maybe we should have just kept bush for 16 years, after all according to the left he is responsible for everything..


The last election showed the american voters thought this administration was responsible for their actions... ie., Obama's actions.

RodB

S.V. Airlie
02-06-2015, 11:39 PM
No, Dems rarely vote in midterm elections, only fat, old reps do. THAT was a big mistake by the dem's

slug
02-07-2015, 04:53 AM
No, Dems rarely vote in midterm elections, only fat, old reps do. THAT was a big mistake by the dem's

its not their fault. The liberals genuinely consider issues by forming liberal round table discussion groups. Once they decide which way to vote , they stub out their joints, grab some munchies, then go home and crash out.

Unfortunately when they wake up in the morning they have completly forgotten everything they considered the day before and must once again form a round table, discuss the issue, stub out joints, get some munchies..........

its just the way it is.


http://s17.postimg.org/kxyzarb4v/image.jpg (http://postimage.org/)
image upload no limit (http://postimage.org/)

bob winter
02-07-2015, 08:25 AM
How damned old are you, Bob? :P Stats are, at age 75, your statistical risk is 1 in 2 chance of Shingles. The vax, on average, reduces that risk by 55% - but it reduces the chance of developing post herpetic neuralgia by 75%. I can pretty much guarantee you - if you get PHN, you'll think $200 is nothing. (You might look that one up)

I'm 71. Maybe I will spring for the injection. I had no idea the chances were that high.

John Smith
02-07-2015, 10:47 AM
The last election showed the american voters thought this administration was responsible for their actions... ie., Obama's actions.

RodB

Last time Obama ran, he won, in spite of what Fox told you.

John Smith
02-07-2015, 10:50 AM
its not their fault. The liberals genuinely consider issues by forming liberal round table discussion groups. Once they decide which way to vote , they stub out their joints, grab some munchies, then go home and crash out.

Unfortunately when they wake up in the morning they have completly forgotten everything they considered the day before and must once again form a round table, discuss the issue, stub out joints, get some munchies..........

its just the way it is.


http://s17.postimg.org/kxyzarb4v/image.jpg (http://postimage.org/)
image upload no limit (http://postimage.org/)

I think the Dems simply fall for the Republican line. Gore did that and, IMO, it cost him his election. So much money had been spent labeling Obama "failed" that the Dems did a Gore. That only strengthened the belief people had that Obama has failed.

TRUTH, IMO, is he's done remarkably well considering ZERO help from the GOP. They'd have let GM and Chrysler go under. We've recovered extremely well COMPARED TO OTHER COUNTRIES. Compared to where we'd like to be, our recovery is not so good. Imagine how much better it might be is the GOP had helped.

John Smith
02-07-2015, 10:51 AM
I'm 71. Maybe I will spring for the injection. I had no idea the chances were that high.

I asked my Dr. a couple of years ago, and she wasn't very supportive of that vaccine. Next time I'm in her office I'll ask again. I'm assuming she's got more data now.

Keith Wilson
02-07-2015, 11:00 AM
The liberals genuinely consider issues by forming liberal round table discussion groups. Once they decide which way to vote , they stub out their joints, grab some munchies, then go home and crash out.

Unfortunately when they wake up in the morning they have completly forgotten everything they considered the day before and must once again form a round table, discuss the issue, stub out joints, get some munchies.......... its just the way it is. :d The way it IS? How old is that picture? I looked a little like that about 45 years ago, except my clothes weren't so silly. Might you actually be a modern Rip van Winkle, having slept through everything since? Nixon's the one! Peace with honor! :D

RonW
02-07-2015, 12:09 PM
Well here is something to read for those who are actually interested in this debate.....................

Evidence Emerges that Measles Outbreaks Are Deliberately Encouraged by Big Pharma to Ignite Vaccine Hysteria..

While the mainstream media is busy making a mockery of itself with runaway hysteria “witch hunt” hate speech against parents who choose not to poison their children with toxic vaccines, the real story on the measles outbreak remains entirely unreported in any mainstream media outlet.

What story is that? The true story about how Big Pharma’s own vaccine scientists blew the whistle on MMR vaccine research fraud taking place over a decade ago, warning that the vaccine’s approval by the FDA was based on “falsified results” and that the fraudulent MMR vaccine was the “primary cause” of a measles outbreak in 2006, as they state in their own words (see below).

The senior management of the world’s top vaccine producer was actively engaged in the fraud, according to the whistleblowers, even going so far as to test the vaccine against contrived “laboratory” strains of infectious viruses rather than testing them against strains circulating in the real world. This created an MMR vaccine with results that could be faked to appear effective while actually conferring almost no real-world protection at all, thereby ensuring an eventual outbreak that the media would seize upon to call for more vaccines.

When these pro-vaccine scientists attempted to sound the alarm on the MMR vaccine research fraud they not only witnessed but actually took part in carrying out, they were threatened with being arrested and sent to prison, according to their own testimony.

Words from the False Claims Act

We now have new transcriptions from this document filed with the United States government, which reveals shocking details about the vaccine fraud witnessed firsthand by Big Pharma’s own scientists. The document is entitled United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Civil action No. 10-4374. “Complaint for Violations of the Federal False Claims Act.”

“Merck’s senior management” helped orchestrate the vaccine fraud.

“Wide-scale falsification of [vaccine] test data”..

http://naturalnews.com/images/Infographic-Vaccine-Circular-Logic-600.jpg

http://www.globalresearch.ca/evidence-emerges-that-measles-outbreaks-are-deliberately-encouraged-by-big-pharma-to-ignite-vaccine-hysteria/5429853

Keith Wilson
02-07-2015, 12:19 PM
Evidence Emerges that Measles Outbreaks Are Deliberately Encouraged by Big Pharma to Ignite Vaccine Hysteria..http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/files/2009/04/tinfoil-hat.jpg

RonW
02-07-2015, 12:26 PM
http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/files/2009/04/tinfoil-hat.jpg

It appears that Keith read the article and looked at the sources.............not........

S.V. Airlie
02-07-2015, 12:29 PM
My mother/brother who had polio and knows/knew what it did to them would have appreciated the polio vaccine but, it hadn't been developed when they had the disease.

George Jung
02-07-2015, 01:10 PM
Oh, man.... you want to be careful who you associate with, RW - folks will suspect you're a nutcase.


In a 2006 Western Standard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Standard) article by Terry O'Neill (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Terry_O%27Neill_(journalist)&action=edit&redlink=1), Chossudovsky was included among "Canada's nuttiest professors", "whose absurdity stands head and shoulders above their colleagues" and who were "peddling half-baked or discredited theories or plain old bigotry".[21] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Chossudovsky#cite_note-WS_chussodovsky-21) Chussodovsky was said to hold that the U.S. had fore-knowledge of the September 11 attacks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks) and the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Indian_Ocean_earthquake_and_tsunami); that Washington had weapons that could influence climate change (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change); and that the large banking institutions are the cause of the collapse of smaller economies, characterised by O'Neill as " more like wild-eyed conspiracy theories than serious political discourse".[21 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Chossudovsky#cite_note-WS_chussodovsky-21)

RonW
02-07-2015, 02:15 PM
Oh, man.... you want to be careful who you associate with, RW - folks will suspect you're a nutcase.

Your lack of comprehension is amazing, but par for the course with your liberal friends..

The vaccine controversy not only concerns what is or isn't the facts, but what people do or do not believe, or why they have reason to doubt........

And until you understand the controversy, and why there is controversy, adding labels to one side or the other is about as childish and immature as it gets, and accomplishes nothing.

--You also left out a link to your so called story, and wikipedia ain't it......

S.V. Airlie
02-07-2015, 02:17 PM
My mother spent 8 months in an iron lung ward. I think she probably would have a lot to say about vaccines and vaccinations. First line, are you nuts not vaccinating your children?

Norman Bernstein
02-07-2015, 02:24 PM
It appears that Keith read the article and looked at the sources.............not........

I read the article. There were no sources. No links or references that could even remotely verify or defend the nutcase assertions.

George Jung
02-07-2015, 02:28 PM
It's a conspiracy theorists website; it goes downhill, from there.

S.V. Airlie
02-07-2015, 02:29 PM
Funny thing about that Norman. Not even the author's name. Someone DID find that though.

hokiefan
02-07-2015, 02:33 PM
I read the article. There were no sources. No links or references that could even remotely verify or defend the nutcase assertions.

It comes from Natural News, about which has been said by science bloggers,


One such blogger, David Gorski of ScienceBlogs, called NaturalNews "one of the most wretched hives of scum and quackery on the Internet," and the most "blatant purveyor of the worst kind of quackery and paranoid anti-physician and anti-medicine conspiracy theories anywhere on the Internet",[33] and a one-stop-shop for "virtually every quackery known to humankind, all slathered with a heaping, helping of unrelenting hostility to science-based medicine and science in general."[10] Peter Bowditch of the website Ratbags,[34] and Jeff McMahon writing for Forbes commented about the site.[35] Steven Novella of NeuroLogica Blog called NaturalNews "a crank alt med site that promotes every sort of medical nonsense imaginable." Novella continued: "If it is unscientific, antiscientific, conspiracy-mongering, or downright silly, Mike Adams appears to be all for it – whatever sells the "natural" products he hawks on his site."[4]

George Jung
02-07-2015, 02:46 PM
Ah, RW - nice company you associate with! Of course, this latest discovery really doesn't say anything new about you. We all know.

S.V. Airlie
02-07-2015, 02:58 PM
www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/vaccine-schedules-and-infant...

S.V. Airlie
02-07-2015, 03:05 PM
Wouldn't open

The anti-vaccine movement is a frequent topic on the Science-Based Medicine blog. There are a number of reasons for this, not the least of which being that the anti-vaccine movement is one of the most dangerous forms of pseudoscience, a form of quackery that, unlike most forms of quackery, endangers those who do not partake of it by breaking down herd immunity and paving the way for the resurgence of previously vanquished diseases. However, anti-vaccine beliefs share many other aspects with other forms of quackery, including the reliance on testimonials rather than data. Even so, although the intelligentsia (and I do use the term loosely) of the anti-vaccine movement realizes and exploits the power of anecdotes and testimonials and how human beings tend to value such stories over dry scientific data, leaders of the anti-vaccine movement realize that science is overwhelmingly against them and that testimonials alone are not adequate to counter that science in the realm of public policy and relations.
That’s why, over the years, various anti-vaccine “scientists” (and I use that term very loosely as well) have produced poor quality, sometimes even fraudulent studies, which are then touted as evidence that vaccines cause autism or at least as evidence that there is actually still a scientific controversy when in fact from a scientific standpoint the vaccine-autism hypothesis is pining for the fjords (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pining+for+the+fjords). Examples abound, including the work of Mark and David Geier, whose studies led the to use chemical castration to treat autistic children; Andrew Wakefield, whose small case series almost certainly included fraudulent data; a truly incompetent “phone survey” (http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2007/06/generation-rescue-survey-results/) commissioned by Generation Rescue designed to compare “vaxed versus unvaxed” children; and an even more incompetent “study” in which Generation Rescue used a cherry picked group of nations (http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=445)to try to argue that nations that require more vaccines have higher rates of infant mortality. These efforts continue. For example, last year Generation Rescue requested $809,721 from the Airborne settlement to set up a “vaxed versus unvaxed” study (http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2010/06/generation-rescues-vaccinatedunvaccinated-study/), despite the known difficulties with such a study (http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=939) and the low likelihood of finding anything (http://photoninthedarkness.com/?p=154) without huge numbers of children.
Last week, they were at it again.

The return of the revenge of the claim that more vaccines equal more infant mortalityOver the last week or so, anti-vaccine activists have been busy touting two “studies” or “reports,” one I can write about now, one that will have to wait. I’ll start with the one that has to wait first (http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/05/investigators-and-families-of-vaccine-injured-children-to-unveil-report-detailing-clear-vaccine-auti.html):

Investigators and Families of Vaccine-Injured Children to Unveil Report Detailing Clear Vaccine-Autism Link Based on Government’s Own Data
Report Demands Immediate Congressional Action
Directors of the Elizabeth Birt Center for Autism Law and Advocacy (EBCALA), parents and vaccine-injured children will hold a press conference on the steps of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (717 Madison Place, NW in Washington, DC) on Tuesday, May 10 at 12:00 PM to unveil an investigation linking vaccine injury to autism. For over 20 years, the federal government has publicly denied a vaccine-autism link, while at the same time its Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) has been awarding damages for vaccine injury to children with brain damage, seizures and autism. This investigation, based on public, verifiable government data, breaks new ground in the controversial vaccine-autism debate.
The investigation found that a substantial number of children compensated for vaccine injury also have autism. The government has asserted that it “does not track” autism among the vaccine-injured. Based on this preliminary investigation, the evidence suggests that autism is at least three times more prevalent among vaccine-injured children than among children in the general population.
Stay tuned. This appears to be the same “study” that anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. was originally going to announce in front of the White House back in April, but his press conference was ultimately canceled (http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2011/04/robert-f-kennedy-jr-not-holding-a-press-conference-on-monday/). Apparently, this publication was to appear in the Pace University Law School journal, which, of course, the sort of venue that is always preferable to the peer-reviewed scientific literature, at least to cranks.
Whatever the announcement turns out to be, the second example is indeed a study that somehow made it into the peer-reviewed literature. I found out about it from two sources, first, you our readers, several of whom have sent me links to the study, and, second, the ever-popular all-purpose quackery website, NaturalNews.com, which announced triumphantly last week that nations requiring the most vaccines tend to have the worst infant mortality rates (http://www.naturalnews.com/032306_vaccines_infant_mortality.html):

A new study, published in Human and Experimental Toxicology (http://het.sagepub.com/content/earl… (http://het.sagepub.com/content/early/2011/05/04/0960327111407644)), a peer-reviewed journal indexed by the National Library of Medicine, found that nations with higher (worse) infant mortality rates tend to give their infants more vaccine doses. For example, the United States requires infants to receive 26 vaccines — the most in the world — yet more than six U.S. infants die per every 1000 live births. In contrast, Sweden and Japan administer 12 vaccines to infants, the least amount, and report less than three deaths per 1000 live births.

S.V. Airlie
02-07-2015, 03:07 PM
Before we get to the study itself—which, as you might imagine, has…flaws—let’s take a look at the authors. The first author, Neil Z. Miller, is described as an “independent researcher, and the second author, Gary S. Goldman, is described as an “independent computer scientist.” This is not a promising start, as neither of them appear to have any qualifications that would lead a reader to think that they have any special expertise in epidemiology, vaccines, or science. Still, I suppose one could look at the fact that these two somehow managed to get a paper published in a peer-reviewed journal as being pretty strong evidence for the democratic nature of science, where you don’t necessarily have to be affiliated with a university or a biotech or pharmaceutical company in order to publish in the scientific literature. On the other hand, even though it is stated that this was not funded by any grants or companies, I still see a conflict of interest. Specifically, the NaturalNews.com article points out that the “National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) (http://www.nvic.org/) donated $2500 and Michael Belkin donated $500 (in memory of his daughter, Lyla) for open access to the journal article (making it freely available to all researchers).” The NVIC, as you recall, was founded by Barbara Loe Fisher (http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=7893) and is one of the oldest and most influential anti-vaccine groups (http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=1723) in the U.S., having recently teamed up with Joe Mercola (http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=7669) to promote anti-vaccine views.
No, most definitely not a promising start.
It’s also not surprising. I did a bit of Googling, as is my wont whenever I encounter someone whose name I don’t recognized, and I found abundant evidence in his Wikipedia entry that Miller has a long history of anti-vaccine activism, having written books with titles like Vaccine Roulette: Gambling With Your Child’s Life, Immunization Theory vs Reality: Expose on Vaccinations, and Vaccines: Are They Really Safe and Effective?, among others. But that’s not all; he’s also the director of the ThinkTwice Global Vaccine Institute (http://www.thinktwice.com/) and in fact is hosting a copy of this study (http://www.thinktwice.com/HET_study.pdf) on his website. Gary S. Goldman (http://www.drgoldmanonline.com/) is even more interesting. It turns out that he is the President and Founder (http://www.whale.to/vaccines/goldman_h.html) of Medical Veritas, a rabidly anti-vaccine “journal” that is into HIV/AIDS denialism, having published dubious “reanalyses” of autopsy results (http://www.medicalveritas.com/images/00121.pdf) of victims of AIDS, such as Eliza Jane Scovill (http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=328). He also notes at his website that he’s written books entitled The Chickenpox Vaccine: A New Epidemic of Disease and Corruption (http://www.drgoldmanonline.com/SummaryofChickenpoxVaccine.pdf).
Even less promising.
Still, one might wonder why I pointed this out. Isn’t that an ad hominem attack? Not at all. I’m not arguing that this latest paper is wrong because its authors are clearly members of the anti-vaccine fringe. Who knows? They might be on to something. I’m merely pointing out that what’s good for the goose is good for the gander when it comes to pointing out conflicts of interest (COIs) and, as Harriet has recently discussed COIs do not necessarily have to be financial. As I’ve pointed out time and time again, COIs do not necessarily mean that a study is in error, poorly done, or out-and-out wrong. They merely demand a bit more skepticism, particularly when they are not disclosed, which they are not in the actual paper, which fails to list the connection to NVIC (http://www.nvic.org/), Medical Veritas (http://www.medicalveritas.com/), and ThinkTwice (http://www.thinktwice.com/). Why didn’t Miller list himself as editor or founder of ThinkTwice (http://www.thinktwice.com/) or Goldman as founder and editor of Medical Veritas (http://www.medicalveritas.com/)? One wonders, one does. Knowing that these two hold those positions is every bit as relevant as knowing when a pharmaceutical company publishes a study about its latest blockbuster drug.
But who knows? Maybe I’m wrong. Well, actually, I don’t think I am, but it will take delving into the actual paper to show why.
Infant mortality as a function of number of vaccinesThe first thing you need to know is that this is a really, really simple paper. In fact, I’d go so far as to say it is simple-minded more than just simple. Basically, Miller and Goldman went to The World Factbook (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html) maintained by, of all organizations, the Central Intelligence Agency. Noting that in 2009 the U.S. ranked 34th in infant mortality, they looked up the infant mortality rates from the U.S. and all the nations that have lower infant mortality rates than the U.S. and then compared them to the number of vaccine doses each nation require. They then graphed the infant mortality rate as a function of vaccine dose, and this resulted in Figure 1:

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/figure1.jpg
That’s it. That really is the “meat” of the paper, such as it is.

S.V. Airlie
02-07-2015, 03:09 PM
Whenever I see a paper like this, I ask myself: What would I say about it if it had been sent to me as a peer reviewer. This graph leads to a number of questions. First, why did the authors use 2009 data? The cited reference notes that the data were accessed back in April 2010. That’s over a year ago. Did it really take over a year between submission and publication. Be that as it may, whenever I see investigators trying to correlate two variables like infant mortality and the number of vaccines I ask: What is the rationale? It’s the “storks deliver babies (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-9639.00013/abstract)” fallacy all over again. In fact, it’s amazingly simple to find spurious “correlations,” as has been demonstrated time and time again as bloggers find correlations between unrelated things, such as vaccines and automobile deaths (http://www.vaccinetimes.com/vaccines-and-auto-deaths-a-k-a-i-can-play-with-excel-too/) and the rise in global temperatures and the number of pirates (http://www.venganza.org/about/open-letter/).
I also note that the authors here seem to have pulled the same trick that J.B. Handley and crew like to pull when trying to convince people that U.S. infants are “overvaccinated” by artificially pumping up the apparent number of vaccine doses by counting multivalent vaccines as more than one. For instance, the MMR and DTaP are counted as three each because each vaccine is trivalent; i.e., containing vaccines against three different diseases. In fact, the authors of this gem do this very thing in spades, as Catherina explains (http://justthevax.blogspot.com/2011/05/oh-goodness-here-i-wanted-to-go-to-bed.html):

There are a number of things wrong with this procedure – first of all, the way Miller and Goldman are counting vaccines is completely arbitrary and riddled with mistakes.
Arbitrary: they count number of vaccines in US bins (DTaP is one, hib is separate) and non-specific designations (some “polio” is still given as OPV in Singapore), rather than antigens. If they did that, Japan, still giving the live bacterial vaccine BCG, would immediately go to the top of the list. That wouldn’t fit the agenda, of course. But if you go by “shot” rather than by antigen, why are DTaP, IPV, hepB and hib counted as 4 shots for example in Austria, when they are given as Infanrix hexa, in one syringe?
Mistakes: The German childhood vaccination schedule recommends DTaP, hib, IPV AND hepB, as well as PCV at 2, 3 and 4 months, putting them squarely into the 21 – 23 bin. The fourth round of shots is recommended at 11 to 14 months, and MenC, MMR and Varicella are recommended with a lower age limit of 11 months, too, which means that a number of German kids will fall into the highest bin, at least as long as you count the Miller/Goldman way.
Having used dubious and error-ridden methods for counting the required vaccines and correlated those numbers to infant mortality rates, the authors then move on. After pointing out that the U.S. has a poor infant mortality rate (IMR) relative to its wealth and what it spends on health care, the authors state:

There are many factors that affect the IMR of any given country. For example, premature births in the United States have increased by more than 20% between 1990 and 2006. Preterm babies have a higher risk of complications that could lead to death within the first year of life.6 However, this does not fully explain why the United States has seen little improvement in its IMR since 2000.7
Nations differ in their immunization requirements for infants aged less than 1 year. In 2009, five of the 34 nations with the best IMRs required 12 vaccine doses, the least amount, while the United States required 26 vaccine doses, the most of any nation. To explore the correlation between vaccine doses that nations routinely give to their infants and their infant mortality rates, a linear regression analysis was performed.
This is known as starting with a reasonable observation and then switching to a hypothesis with little or no scientific justification, in essence pulling it out of thin air. The second question I would have is: Why a linear relationship? No justification is given for performing a linear regression analysis. My third question would be: Why this data set?
Actually, this third question is probably the most interesting of all. Miller and Goldman only looked at one year’s data. There are many years worth of data available; if such a relationship between IMR and vaccine doses is real, it will be robust, showing up in multiple analyses from multiple years’ data. Moreover, the authors took great pains to look at only the United States and the 33 nations with better infant mortality rates than the U.S. There is no statistical rationale for doing this, nor is there a scientific rationale. Again, if this is a true correlation, it will be robust enough to show up in comparisons of more nations than just the U.S. and nations with more favorable infant mortality rates. Basically, the choice of data analyzed leaves a strong suspicion of cherry picking. Were I reviewing this paper, I would insist on the use of one or two other data sets. For example, I would ask for different years and/or perhaps the use of the rankings by the United Nations Population Division, which can be found in the Wikipedia entry containing the list of countries by infant mortality rate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate). And I would insist on doing the analysis so that it includes several nations with worse IMRs than the U.S. Indeed, since the focal point of the analysis seems to be the U.S., which, according to Miller and Goldman, requires more vaccine doses than any other nation, then it would make sense to look at the 33 nations with worse IMRs than the U.S.
Be that as it may, I looked at the data myself and played around with it One thing I noticed immediately is that the authors removed four nations, Andorra, Liechenstein, Monaco, and San Marino, the justification being that because they are all so small, each nation only recorded less than five infant deaths. Coincidentally, or not, when all the data are used, the r2=.426, whereas when those four nations are excluded, r2 increases to 0.494, meaning that the goodness of fit improved. Even so, it’s not that fantastic, certainly not enough to be particularly convincing as a linear relationship. More dubiously, for some reason the authors, not content with an weak and not particularly convincing linear relationship in the raw data, decided to do a little creative data manipulation and divide the nations into five groups based on number of vaccine doses, take the means of each of these groups, and then regraph the data. Not surprisingly, the data look a lot cleaner, which was no doubt why this was done, as it was a completely extraneous analysis. As a rule of thumb, this sort of analysis will almost always produce a much nicer-looking linear graph, as opposed to the “star chart” in Figure 1. Usually, this sort of data massaging is done when a raw scatterplot doesn’t produce the desired relationship.
Finally, it’s important to remember that IMRs are very difficult to compare across nations. In fact, the source I most like to cite to illustrate this is, believe it or not, an article by Bernadine Healy (http://health.usnews.com/usnews/health/articles/060924/2healy.htm), the former director of the NIH who has over the last three or four years flirted with the anti-vaccine movement:

S.V. Airlie
02-07-2015, 03:11 PM
Never mind that the authors present no real data to justify such a speculation. They do speculate, however. Oh, how they speculate! The spend two whole pages trying to link vaccines to sudden infant death syndrome and argue that SIDS deaths, hinting at some sort of conspiracy to cover up the number of SIDS deaths by reclassifying them and then cite old studies that suggested a correlation between vaccination and SIDS while neglecting the more recent data that show that the risk of SIDS is not increased after immunization (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16945457) and that, if anything, vaccination is probably protective against SIDS (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17400342). Indeed, one of the studies the authors discuss is an abstract presented in 1982, not even a paper published in a peer-reviewed journal.
Finally, there is the issue of ecological fallacy. The ecological fallacy can occur when an epidemiological analysis is carried out on group level data rather than individual-level data. In other words, the group is the unit of analysis. Clearly, comparing vaccination schedules to nation-level infant mortality rates is the very definition of an ecological analysis. Such analyses have a tendency to magnify any differences observed, as Epiwonk once described while analyzing–surprise, surprise!–a paper by Mark and David Geier (http://epiwonk.com/?p=59):

To make this jump from group-level to individual-level data is The Ecological Fallacy, which can be defined simply as thinking that relationships observed for groups necessarily hold for individuals.
The ecological fallacy was first described by the psychologist Edward Thorndike in 1938 in a paper entitled, “On the fallacy of imputing the correlations found for groups to the individuals or smaller groups composing them.” (Kind of says it all, doesn’t it.) The concept was introduced into sociology in 1950 by W.S. Robinson in 1950 in a paper entitled, “Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals,” and the term Ecological Fallacy was coined by the sociologist H.C. Selvin in 1958. The concept of the ecological fallacy was formally introduced into epidemiology by Mervyn Susser in his 1973 text, Causal Thinking in the Health Sciences, although group-level analyses had been published in public health and epidemiology for decades.
To show you one example of the ecological fallacy, let’s take a brief look at H.C. Selvin’s 1958 paper. Selvin re-analyzed the 1897 study of Emile Durkheim (the “father of sociology”), Suicide, which investigated the association between religion and suicide. Although it’s difficult to find Selvin’s 1958 paper, the analyses are duplicated in a review by Professor Hal Morgenstern of the University of Michigan. Durkheim had data on four groups of Prussian provinces between 1883 and 1890. When the suicide rate is regressed on the percent of each group that was Protestant, an ecologic regression reveals a relative risk of 7.57, “i.e. it appears that Protestants were 7Ĺ times as likely to commit suicide as were other residents (most of whom were Catholic)….ln fact, Durkheim actually compared suicide rates for Protestants and Catholics living in Prussia. From his data, we find that the rate was about twice as great among Protestants as among other religious groups, suggesting a substantial difference between the results obtained at the ecologic level (RR = 7.57) and those obtained at the individual level (RR = 2).” Thus, in Durkheim’s data, the effect estimate (the relative risk) is magnified by 4 by ecologic bias. In a recent methodological investigation of bias magnification in ecologic studies, Dr. Tom Webster of Boston University shows that effect measures can be biased upwards by as much as 25 times or more in ecologic analyses in which confounding is not controlled.
The bottom line is that Miller and Goldman’s ecological analysis virtually guaranteed overestimating any relationship found, the way some studies of radiation hormesis have done (http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=11636). Given that the difference between the highest and lowest IMR is only around two-fold, in essence, given this data set it is highly unlikely that there is any relationship there. This is particularly true given that the authors cannot possibly have controlled for the major confounders. Add to that the fact that they only used one data set and didn’t even include nations with higher IMRs than that of the U.S., and I declare this paper to be utterly worthless. It’s an embarrassment to Human and Experimental Toxicology that its peer reviewers didn’t catch all these problems and that an editor let this paper see print. The Editor-in-Chief Kai Savolainen and the Editor for the Americas A. Wallace Hayes ought to be ashamed of themselves.
ConclusionThe current study joins a long list of poorly planned, poorly executed, poorly analyzed studies that purport to show that vaccines cause autism, neurological diease, or even death. It is not the first, nor will it be the last. The question is: How do we respond to such studies? First off, we as skeptics have to be very careful not to become so jaded that knee-jerk hostility predominates. As unlikely as it is, there is always the possibility that there might be something worth taking seriously there. Next off, we have to be prepared to analyze these studies and explain to parents, when appropriate (which is the vast majority of the time) exactly why it is that they are bad science or why their conclusions are not supported by the data presented. Finally, we have to be prepared to provide these analyses fast. The Internet is speed. Already, if you Google the terms “infant mortality” and “vaccine,” anti-vaccine blogs gloating over Miller and Goldman’s study and the study itself appear on the very first page of search results.
Such is the power of a bad study coupled with the reach of the Internet and the naivete of peer reviewers and journal editors who don’t realize when they’re being played.

Lew Barrett
02-07-2015, 04:28 PM
Well here is something to read for those who are actually interested in this debate.....................

Evidence Emerges that Measles Outbreaks Are Deliberately Encouraged by Big Pharma to Ignite Vaccine Hysteria........

http://www.globalresearch.ca/evidence-emerges-that-measles-outbreaks-are-deliberately-encouraged-by-big-pharma-to-ignite-vaccine-hysteria/5429853

I read it and also followed the link to the suit, which I also read. They present no evidence that Merck intentionally caused any outbreaks, in fact the suit doesn't deal with that at all. It alleges that Merck's research and reporting are knowingly fraudulent in respect to the efficacy of their mumps vaccine. That may be true. I'm in no position to know nor do I have the knowledge to either confirm or refute the suit's claim but if it's all true, it's damning. But it has nothing to do with Disneyland. Whereas, the website is pretty much all Disneyland.

So....did you actually read it? I get the feeling you didn't.

Yet again you link to a politically biased source to support allegations within the realm of science. And, let me add....it's sure right wing/ Republican/Tea Party looking to me. There's nothing politically neutral on that site.

John Smith
02-07-2015, 04:56 PM
Your lack of comprehension is amazing, but par for the course with your liberal friends..

The vaccine controversy not only concerns what is or isn't the facts, but what people do or do not believe, or why they have reason to doubt........

And until you understand the controversy, and why there is controversy, adding labels to one side or the other is about as childish and immature as it gets, and accomplishes nothing.

--You also left out a link to your so called story, and wikipedia ain't it......

Why do you continue to insult people? Among what we all KNOW is that Measles is a disease that the vaccine pretty well got rid of. It is not a coincidence that we have outbreaks in areas where many have declined the vaccine.

It's all pretty clear.

John Smith
02-08-2015, 08:55 AM
Agree with Keith Wilson.

To not immunize is child abuse ... by stupid parents.

ONLY an IDIOT thinks there is a link to autism. IDIOT, I said. A FOOL, at best.

______________

It will NOT be long before the parents of UN-immunized kids get SUED!!!

And rightfully so!

I tend to agree. Even now, I think all the kids that get sick that were not vaccinated should sue their parents.

What really puzzles me is how much science everyone enjoys each day. We flip a switch and a light goes on. We fly long distances. We use computers and watch television. The list is virtually endless.

I cannot imagine all of this without government insuring such things as the electricity in our home meet their 'code' so as to insure a reasonable degree of safety. Same with cars and driving. We have laws pertaining to how cars are equipped, and how they are driven. We have lemon laws to protect buyers.

The only areas I can recall where the science was questioned in recent times was lead in paint. "Scientists" hired by the paint folks testified the science was not settled that lead is not good for people. "Scientists" hired by the tobacco industry testified the science was not settled that smoking can cause cancer. "Scientists" hired by the fossil fuel industry kept Los Angeles from getting a free monorail system. "Scientists" hired by the fossil fuel industry testify the science is not settled on Global Warming.

Even non scientists like Jenny McCarthy manage to find an audience to accept their "expertise". Betsy McCaughley got sufficient audience and support that the language she deemed "death panels" was taken out of the ACA. Jon Stewart read that language. It actually insured LIFE SUSTAINING requests were honored.

The vaccine thing falls in line with this stuff. Parents looking for a reason to not vaccinate find one. Doesn't matter if the source is reliable.

George Jung
02-08-2015, 11:06 AM
Hehehe.... another tip of the hat to our societal knowledge base - when Jon Stewart is our most honest source!

You'll Never Go Broke Underestimating the Stupidity of the American Public (http://momako.blogspot.com/2007/09/youll-never-go-broke-underestimating.html)

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
02-08-2015, 11:19 AM
Overestimating?????

Keith Wilson
02-08-2015, 05:19 PM
Originally posted by RonW:

And until you understand the controversy, and why there is controversy . . .I do understand 'the controversy'. There is science on one side, and bullsh!t on the other. These two things are often in conflict.

George Jung
02-08-2015, 06:45 PM
Glad to see Kinder/Gentler Wilson has his limits! Sometimes, coddling just encourages 'em!

Lew Barrett
02-08-2015, 09:05 PM
Overestimating?????

That'll cost ya.

Lew Barrett
02-08-2015, 09:10 PM
Agree with Keith Wilson.

To not immunize is child abuse ... by stupid parents.

ONLY an IDIOT thinks there is a link to autism. IDIOT, I said. A FOOL, at best.

______________

It will NOT be long before the parents of UN-immunized kids get SUED!!!

And rightfully so!

Never one to mince words, Brad:) You can add my +1 to your comment.

Keith Wilson
02-09-2015, 08:34 AM
Glad to see Kinder/Gentler Wilson has his limits! As I said, I have no tolerance for stupidity that kills children.

John Smith
02-09-2015, 09:15 AM
As I said, I have no tolerance for stupidity that kills children.

I agree. I fear a lot among us really don't much care about children. Apparently even if they are our own.

Look at what we're passing on to them.

RonW
02-09-2015, 09:43 AM
I agree. I fear a lot among us really don't much care about children. Apparently even if they are our own.

Look at what we're passing on to them.

I agree with John and other liberals, these wacked out righties just can't care about children, that is obvious because they question vaccines that have Thimerosal
which is being used as a preservative and is 49% Mercury ..We all know that big pharma and FDA are looking out for our best interests and no one should question either.

These righties don't care about our environment either, that is evidence with the way they drive those big SUV's and use oil.

These righties don't care about women health either, you can see that by the way they object to abortions.

These righties don't care about life itself, or they would all give up their guns for the safety of us all......

These righties don't even care if people are happy, if they really cared then they wouldn't object to gay marriage.......

Yep these wacked out righties just don't care, even when it comes to their own children.........who are they to question.........

Norman Bernstein
02-09-2015, 09:55 AM
I agree with John and other liberals, these wacked out righties just can't care about children, that is obvious because they question vaccines that have Thimerosal
which is being used as a preservative and is 49% Mercury ..

1) Thimerosal has been discontinued from most vaccines for years now.

2) There are a number of different forms of mercury... only some are toxic, others are not. Many people have had fillings in their teeth, made of an amalgam of mercury and silver, for decades ('m one of them) and haven't been poisoned.

RonW
02-09-2015, 10:16 AM
Norman -
1) Thimerosal has been discontinued from most vaccines for years now.

And there in lies the problem, there has been too many documented problems related to vaccines. And that shouldn't be, there should be no problems and vaccines should be a good thing to rid society of these diseases. But problems create questions and then to make stupid statements that these people that question just don't care for children, even their own, is absurd, obviously they care and that is why they are questioning.

--Oh P.S. I think formaldehyde has also been listed on some of the vaccines..and even some metal oxides.


---Got a lot of snow there norm, just saw aerial america last night on mass. Didn't know your state is that pretty...The closest I have been is new jersey and conn.....

Osborne Russell
02-09-2015, 02:30 PM
In whose interest would it have been to poison the public with mercury, and why would they have chosen inoculation as the method?

Paul Pless
02-09-2015, 02:31 PM
In whose interest would it have been to poison the public with mercury, and why would they have chosen inoculation as the method?cheaper and easier to just do it through burning coal

Osborne Russell
02-09-2015, 06:31 PM
cheaper and easier to just do it through burning coal

Yeah, if you want to poison everyone. But did They want to poison themselves?

Hm, the vaccines would get everyone except the ones who didn't get vaccinated. Omigod! The vaccine deniers have been behind it all along !

Lew Barrett
02-09-2015, 06:44 PM
I really don't get the opposition. Seems like they oppose it simply because Obama is for it.




Statement is bold again illustrates your illogical leftwing sickness and hatred for the right...even when what you infer is totally false. ...ie., Jenny McCarthy for one is a liberal FYI...
RodB

Do you need more than the comments on this thread, identified by the usual positions of the forum members involved to see how wrong you are, Rod? This has become an issue brought to the fore by conservative rabble rousing. "You can't trust anybody."

Fear, and a celebration of stupid.

George Jung
02-09-2015, 06:52 PM
1) Thimerosal has been discontinued from most vaccines for years now.

2) There are a number of different forms of mercury... only some are toxic, others are not. Many people have had fillings in their teeth, made of an amalgam of mercury and silver, for decades ('m one of them) and haven't been poisoned.


At first glance, I'd applaud your effort - trying to 'educate' the uneducable. But that's thankless - folks like RW aren't interested in truth. They're not interested in fact. Same for Science. They've got their 'belief system', and arguing with them is akin to an assault - and they'll defend at all costs.

Info on the make up of vaccines has been discussed many times on this forum - and ol' RW has seen the 'facts' each time, and rejected them. Save your breath. Put him on ignore - it'd be a kindness!

George Jung
02-09-2015, 06:55 PM
Stunningly simplistic, and thereby misleading sentence. You ignore that the mercury is an organomercury and not free mercury. You ignore the difference between methylmercury and ethylmercury. You ignore the biological half-life. You ignore the dose of mercury, and imply that 49% Mercury is alarming. You play on societal fears of mercury, which arose from real and tragic poisonings. You ignore that there is no evidence linking vaccine doses of thiomersal with any disorder.

Not to mention - the mercury salts previously used in vaccines was excreted by the recipient several days ppost injection. Or that the incidence of Autism has actually risen since it was removed from pediatric vaccines. (proof that correlation is not causation - but who are we fooling? I suspect RW and RB don't even know what that means. Gotta go - time to go argue with the cat; it's more productive)

John Smith
02-09-2015, 07:04 PM
I wonder why people who don't believe in vaccines go to the doctor for any reason. Maybe they don't. Maybe that's why they don't think anyone needs health insurance.

George Jung
02-09-2015, 07:11 PM
Some find themselves 'trapped' - by a company policy that requires an annual visit, or screening labs. By job requirements, such as DOT. By sneaky methods, such as insurance offering to 'pay' you if you get an annual. Can't skip free money!

John Smith
02-09-2015, 07:36 PM
http://www.nationalmemo.com/film-review-vaccine/

S.V. Airlie
02-09-2015, 08:26 PM
Three more states have measles outbreaks.

Phil Y
02-09-2015, 11:16 PM
Someone should put the brakes on these anti vaccination idiots.

George Jung
02-10-2015, 05:39 PM
unfortunately, no law against being stupid. (If there was, we'd need a new model for lifetime incarceration)

John Smith
02-12-2015, 12:28 PM
If we look at this from the standpoint that outbreaks only spread among the unvaccinated, does it change our view?

It dawns on me I've not heard anyone reporting on the outbreaks point out that only those not vaccinated are at risk.

Keith Wilson
02-12-2015, 12:52 PM
If we look at this from the standpoint that outbreaks only spread among the unvaccinated, does it change our view?Babies under a year old are too young to be vaccinated, but can still get measles. And it seems a bit harsh to punish any child for having misguided parents

John Smith
02-12-2015, 01:02 PM
Babies under a year old are too young to be vaccinated, but can still get measles. And it seems a bit harsh to punish any child for having misguided parents

I agree to a point. It might be a good idea NOT to take babies to certain public places simply because they've not been vaccinated. It is probably harsh to punish the child for misguided parents, but doesn't that happen all the time in many areas of life?

Anyone with the biological parts can be a parent.

I lean on the side of this is an area where the government should dictate. It's not too far removed from the Sex Ed thread. Parents DON'T teach kids about sex, so why not the school?

Keith Wilson
02-12-2015, 01:04 PM
It is probably harsh to punish the child for misguided parents, but doesn't that happen all the time in many areas of life?Many things happen that we should try to prevent.

I've already made my opinion clear. Refusing to vaccinate your child is deliberate endangerment, and should be treated as such.

John Smith
02-12-2015, 01:09 PM
Many things happen that we should try to prevent.

I've already made my opinion clear. Refusing to vaccinate your child is deliberate endangerment, and should be treated as such.

I actually agree, and don't want to make you think I don't.

Who is at fault? The parent who declines to vaccinate, or the talking head or politician that convinces her vaccinations are bad? Or the media who presents one on one debates creating the impression there are equal numbers believing the two sides of the issue?

Fitz
02-12-2015, 01:23 PM
I caught this NOVA program last night. It puts many of the questions in this thread to the test. It is available on line.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/body/vaccines-calling-shots.html

Sky Blue
02-12-2015, 08:15 PM
Don't forget the reds' anti-science platform.

Yeah, liberals always make sure they get their children vaccinated. Especially the well-educated, extremely-wealthy liberals living in the most liberal region in the country. I mean, only dumb, rural anti-science "Reds" would fail to vaccinate, right?

I'm sure the parents in this population (http://www.wired.com/2015/02/tech-companies-and-vaccines/) will be surprised that they too are bible-thumping, anti-science, "Reds.":rolleyes:

They will also be surprised to learn that not only are they "Reds," they are libertarians too! And that they will be voting for Rand Paul!

Woo-Hoo! Release the hounds! Get your prosecution team ready, Keith! Great thread! lol

Keith Wilson
02-12-2015, 08:23 PM
This is one issue that doesn't fall out along liberal-conservative lines. There are plenty of folks on the left that feed their kids nothing but organic food, drink fair trade coffee, use cloth diapers, drive Priuses, yet are convinced that vaccines are awful. It wouldn't surprise me at all if a majority of the anti-vaccine people were left of center.

Sky Blue, we have laws requiring kids to ride in car seats on the highways, to wear helmets while riding bicycles, flammability standards for kids' pajamas, choking hazard standards for baby toys . . . How is vaccination any different? Why should we allow exemptions?

Sky Blue
02-12-2015, 08:26 PM
I actually agree entirely with your view, Keith, and expressed as much to my wife, whose sister is among the conspiratorial, anti-vaccination bunch. I think they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, and I think CPS should be notified by schools, day cares, etc., for all un-vaccinated children that they see.

Obviously I chafe at the notion that this tendency we are seeing is a "right wing" phenomenon, when clearly it is not, as evidenced by my link.

Fitz
02-12-2015, 09:14 PM
I only offered the link because I thought it was a good summary. I live in a house that was a Pest House during one or more 18th century small pox epidemics. There are stories associated with the house that suggest inoculation was a new idea. I was surprised to learn from the show that small pox vaccination has been around for almost 1,000 years. The risk/benefit analyses presented are also worthwhile.