Marked: Berkeley Expert Calls Worsening Measles Outbreak “A Very Large Red Flag”

By Glen Martin

As a UC Berkeley School of Public Health emeritus professor specializing in infectious diseases, John Swartzberg knows viruses as well as other people know their lapdogs. So when he gets concerned about a bug, so should you. And right now he’s pretty concerned about measles. Anyone who has perused a news site or suffered through a CNN broadcast over the past week can guess why: An outbreak of measles that erupted in Disneyland now has spread to at least seven states and resulted in almost 100 cases, with no sign of abating.

Sure, measles isn’t Ebola or Lassa fever, or even a nasty strain of influenza. But it isn’t the viral equivalent of a hangnail, either. Swartzberg cites some supporting evidence:

  • Measles is among the most contagious of viral diseases, with the average infected person capable of infecting 12 to 18 unvaccinated people.
  • Measles can cause real misery. In the decade before measles vaccination began in the United States, 3 to 4 million citizens were infected annually. Of that number, around 48,000 were hospitalized, about 1,000 developed chronic disability from measles encephalitis, and 400 to 500 died.
  • Measles is easily transmitted—and potentially devastating—to children who are too young to receive vaccinations, and to people for whom vaccination is a legitimate risk, such as patients with severe immune deficiencies.
  • Measles epidemics are expensive. A 2004 Iowa outbreak involved only three confirmed cases, but their treatment and the investigation required to confirm their contacts cost local and state health departments more than $140,000. The costs involved in addressing a handful of confirmed cases during a 2008 outbreak at two Arizona hospitals hit $800,000.

“The current outbreak can’t be considered momentous in terms of mortality, but it’s still a very large red flag for the U.S. public health system,” says Swartzberg. “It says there are far too many people in our nation who aren’t protected from disease by immunization. We don’t have that herd immunity that widespread vaccination once provided.”

Indeed, until the recent rash of outbreaks, measles was eliminated from the United States. That’s not the same thing as eradicated, Swartzberg observes. Eradication means zero cases, period. In the medical context, elimination is the absence of “autochthonous” cases: Infections that were not imported, but arose from native sources. The Happy Kingdom’s outbreak, it’s believed, originated from foreign tourists.

Still, the chances of an outbreak would have been almost nil if everyone at Disneyland had been up-to-snuff on their inoculations. That’s because the measles vaccine is 95 percent effective in preventing infection. Swartzberg provides one qualifier: For people who’ve gone decades following their initial vaccination, an extra jab doesn’t hurt (in the public health sense, at least).

“A second injection takes immunity from 95 percent to 97 to 99 percent,” he says. “For most infectious diseases, 95 percent is fine. Even for measles, the target for herd immunity is 95 percent. But given that measles is one of the most contagious diseases around, that extra few percent can make a huge difference when there’s an outbreak.”

And of course, we’re not at the 95 percent vaccination rate—for measles or any other infectious disease. According to the state Department of Public Health, about 90.4 percent of California’s kids were up-to-date on their vaccinations in 2014. That’s well under the figure needed for herd immunity.

Which brings up the 800-pound public health gorilla in the room: The anti-vaccination movement. Swartzberg has had it up to here with anti-vaxxers, and he’s taking off the (surgical) gloves.

“A small but very vocal minority is perpetuating this myth (the danger from vaccines), and we have to stop accommodating them,” Swartzberg says. “As with climate change, there is no legitimate debate. Both climate change and the efficacy and safety of vaccinations are as real as the sun rising.”

Swartzberg acknowledges he is particularly exasperated with media coverage of vaccination issues.

“Phys­i­cians need to do a bet­ter job de­bunk­ing this dis­in­form­a­tion, and politi­cians also must be held to ac­count. Though anti-vac­cin­a­tion act­iv­ists are few in num­ber, they are ex­tremely vo­cal.”

“On a recent story broadcast on KQED, the director of public health for Marin County and a chiropractor who opposed vaccination were given equal time, as though their credentials were equivalent,” he says.  “I was astounded.”

But it’s not just newshounds seeking “balance” who are to blame, Swartzberg emphasizes.

“Physicians need to do a better job debunking this disinformation, and politicians also must be held to account. Though anti-vaccination activists are few in number they are extremely vocal, and they carry disproportionate weight with politicians.”

Swartzberg observes he was disappointed with Gov. Jerry Brown’s response to AB 2109, a 2012 bill that required anyone seeking a “philosophical exemption” from school vaccination mandates to obtain a signed attestation from a physician that vaccination counseling had been provided. Brown signed the bill, but added the addendum:

“…Additionally, I will direct the department to allow for a separate religious exemption on the form. In this way, people whose religious beliefs preclude vaccinations will not be required to seek a health care practitioner’s signature…”

And that, of course, nullified any significant impact the law may have had.

Vaccination proponents do appear to be making incremental headway. That 90.4 percent vaccination rate cited by the California Department of Public Health represents a 0.2 percent increase from the previous year.

“If there’s a silver lining on the current measles outbreak, it’s that there should be an uptick in vaccinations,” Swartzberg says. “Unfortunately, it may only be transient. The irony in this entire process is that success is determined by things not happening. If a surgeon performs a successful procedure, the patient is very aware of it. But no one has ever thanked me for not getting pneumococcal pneumonia because I gave them an anti-pneumonia vaccine. The benefits of vaccinations are profound, but they often are not apparent to the public.”

Share this article:
Google+ Reddit

Comments

I do not have children, but I am a numbers person. I have heard a lot of opinions and analysis over the last few weeks regarding the recent measles outbreak in Disneyland. What I find confusing, and you mention in your article, is that prior to the measles vaccine being administered roughly 3 to 4 million people annually would be infected. At that time the US population was roughly 200 million. Using the average of 3.5 million people getting infected yearly that equates out to be 1.75% of the population. If the measles vaccine is only 95% successful what difference does it make? Would it not have to be greater than 98.25 % to make statistical sense? Of the 3 to 4 million people getting infected only about 1500 have permanent damage or die. That equates out to 0.0428% of the infected population. A greater percentage of people have permanent damage or die from pneumonia every year. The argument on health care costs to detect measles is valid.
I was one of the many kids who contracted measles in 1962. A miserable disease, to be sure, but just as I should have gotten over it I developed pneumonia. So, two diseases for the price of one. You can bet my children received their MMR vaccinations, why risk your children’s health as well as others?
Well, no, not quite. A 95% success rate in itself is very good. However, a 95% success rate isn’t the same thing as 95% of the population being immunized. Think about it like this: if a virus is trying to spread to a vaccinated person, it only has a 5% chance of actually infecting the person - so, 1/20 people has a chance of being infected. Now, seeing as measles can spread to 12-18 people from a single case, if all of them are immunized, taking the best case scenario - the desease wouldn’t be able to spread. The big problem is that there are people who cannot be immunized - those with immunodeficiency, people undergoing chemo, and those who are too young to receive the vaccine. These people have to rely on the rest of the population to not get infected and spread the disease to them. Anti-vaxxers pose a great risk to these people, especially taking into consideration that a lot of them have anti-vaxx friends who have anti-vaxx cousins and so on, providing an easy way for a virus to spread to the vulnerable population. That’s why we need herd immunity. 95% has obviously been good enough to work up to this point, and holds up statistically.
John the “smarty pants” fool- you might be a “numbers guy” but obviously you do NOT know how to read coherently. The article clearly states the recommended dose is TWO injections- which brings it to closer to 99% effective. That is why the vaccination schedule recommends two shots for everyone. Also, I use to work as a healthcare practitioner for 9+ years, so I believe my credentials speak for themselves as I’m not the one pretending to be an online (numbers) expert.
Just because 5% of the population isn’t covered doesn’t mean they will all get Measles. The 1.75% figure that you derived is the percentage of the unvaccinated public that would be infected. So 1.75% of 5%. Which is why infection rates fell from hundreds of thousands to just hundreds after vaccination efforts.
Just because 5% of the population isn’t covered doesn’t mean they will all get Measles. The 1.75% figure that you derived is the percentage of the unvaccinated public that would be infected. So 1.75% of 5%. Which is why infection rates fell from hundreds of thousands to just hundreds after vaccination efforts.
I got measles before there was a vaccine, as did two of my sisters. Now, we are in our 70s, but new grandparents and are around infants. I also had whooping cough as a child, but my doctor insisted that I get a whooping cough booster before being around a newborn. I have a general question and a specific one. General question: Everyone I knew as a child, sooner or later, got measles. Could this pool of “measles survivors” contributed to “herd immunity” and as we die off, could this lessen “herd immunity” even with 95% vaccination rates or better? What would Dr. Schwatzberg recommend for older people who never had the vaccine, but did have measles as a child and now may be around infants who have not yet been vaccinated, because of their young age?
Think of it in terms of probability of transmission: if 95% of the people an infected person is exposed to are vaccinated, then the probability of transmission is relatively low. This is the essence of herd immunity. By reducing the percentage of immunized people, the anti-vaxxers are creating an significantly increased risk to the general population, especially those who cannot be vaccinated due to age or medical condition. Since they are doing this in response to superstition and fraud (the original report was fraudulent), it is appropriate for society to be upset with them.
hey troll, your ignorance is showing
If you had those diseases you have lifetime immunity. The dr should not have given you the whooping cough vaccine, that vaccine stays active with bacteria in your throat and may spread to people and infants. I believe those who lived through the disease in the first place are the only ones truly immune. Vaccines are a limited immune band aid that are becoming ineffective as diseases mutate.
The logic you are employing is flawed in that you are assuming all 200 million people were exposed. The actual exposure numbers are not here so by that condition your theorey falls flat.
You are correct if you are only considering the benefits over the course of a single year, but we’re talking 3-4 million people annually. So take the average of 3.5 million and run the numbers over the 45 year period since we started administering the measles vaccine in the U.S. That comes to 157.5 million people infected or 79% of the population. Even if you ran the numbers over just 10 years, it’s still 17.5% of the population.
The key point in the numbers that appears overlooked in your analysis is the term “annually.” Looking over the course of ten years - at 3 to 4 million each year - we’re talking 30-40 million people. That’s 15%-20% of the population at that point who have contracted the disease within a ten year span. Meaning that in this scenario, my child has a roughly 18% chance of contracting the disease by age 10. I’m also curious as to your source for the pneumonia statistic you cited at the end of your post. If it is in fact a higher rate of infection however, I don’t see why that means DON’T vaccinate for measles. We CAN detect and vaccinate for measles. Why wouldn’t we?
The people who survive the infection have immunity so there are far fewer than 200 million at risk. The trick is to survive it. Also the modern low mortality comes at high medical cost. Read measles history of decimation in naive populations on the web, it pretty ugly. It is very irresponsible not to vaccinate.
The people who survive the infection have immunity so there are far fewer than 200 million at risk. The trick is to survive it. Also the modern low mortality comes at high medical cost. Read measles history of decimation in naive populations on the web, it pretty ugly. It is very irresponsible not to vaccinate.
I’m going to try to explain this. In short, you are not thinking of the numbers correctly. Yes, “only” 1.75% of the population was infected (this is just an estimation—I’m sure many cases went unreported). However, not 100% of the population was at risk. You have to remove anyone from the equation who 1) was not exposed to the measles that year (yes it was common, but it wasn’t EVERYWHERE, ALL THE TIME) or 2) had already had measles earlier in life and were already immune (from what I’ve heard, probably just about everyone over the age of 10 or so had already had it). I think I have heard it said that about 90% of people who are not vaccinated and have never had measles, will contract the disease if exposed. With vaccination, 95% of those exposed will NOT get it (so that 1.75% would have instead been less than 0.1%, had they been vaccinated). The other factor to consider is “herd immunity”—if one person is infected, but all those around him/her are vaccinated, there is a VERY low risk that it will be able to spread and you will just have 1 isolated case. However, as less and less people are vaccinated, it provides the opportunity for the virus to spread from one person to another, to another, etc. and soon you have an outbreak (especially with a disease like measles that is SO contagious). I do agree that not many people are permanently damaged by measles, but when there is such an effective and safe way to prevent it entirely, why would you not want to do that? The risk-benefit analysis is SO far on the side of vaccination that it shouldn’t even be a question.
“If you had those diseases you have lifetime immunity. The dr should not have given you the whooping cough vaccine, that vaccine stays active with bacteria in your throat and may spread to people and infants.” False on both accounts. For SOME diseases (Measles is likely one), yes you probably have lifelong immunity. For others (like Pertussis), immunity wanes after a few years and needs to be boostered. There is no risk of shedding pertussis after getting a vaccine. The vaccine does not even include whole cells of the pertussis bacteria (only small particles; even with the previous whole-cell pertussis vaccine, the bacteria was completely killed and not capable of causing infection), so there is no physical way for you to become “infected” with the vaccine. The only POSSIBLE truth to your statement is that it is possible to become infected with pertussis after vaccination, but not show any symptoms (it protects against DISEASE, but not necessarily INFECTION).
Check with your physician. They can check your titer level (how much resistance your body has to measles) or give you a booster. Pregnant women who had measles have the level checked because it is so important to check newborns.
This is a good question, similar to one that I had. I did some research on this because last year I was dating an antivac person and tried, with no success, to convince her of the irrationality of her position. What was explained to me was the following: basically, the 95% effectiveness rate does not mean that the remaining 5 percent will GET measles, only that they will be theoretically vulnerable to exposure. Herd immunity threshholds for measles is estimated at between 80 and 95 percent. Even with the imperfection of the vaccine, and less than 100 percent compliance (such as before antivac insanity took hold), the effectiveness level of the vaccine is more than enough to create a “firewall” against contagion. This isn’t just theoretical, it was effectively proven for many years before vaccination rates started declining.
This is a good question with a complicated answer. Having had the measles, your body made antibodies to fight it off, and create “immunity” to the disease. Everyone is different, and antibody response varies. Everyone who had whatever strain it is (there are many strains of measles) could, in theory, be immune and contribute to herd immunity. The longer it has been, however, the greater the chance that you have less immunity, thus the push for antibody testing, and booster shots, to insure a higher level of immunity. Hope that helps!
This is an illustration that explains how herd immunity works. http://www.niaid.nih.gov/SiteCollectionImages/topics/communityImmunityGe... Yes, if that 1.75% were concentrated in a small area of the population then you would be correct. But that 1.75% is spread throughout a 200 million population. The odds that an infected person will come upon large numbers of unvaccinated is very slim and even if an infected person does come in contact with an uninfected person, the outbreak is contained to relatively small, manageable pockets.
Because at 95%, so many people are protected that disease does not spread and outbreaks don’t happen. You are combining data that makes no sense.
The media is using this story to scare people in to voting in laws that force vaccines. I have vaccinated all my children. However, I understand the fear with the growing number of autism cases, parents are scared to vaccinate with the MMR vaccine which is 3-in-1 vaccine (Measles, Mumps, Rubella). Instead they would like the option to have a doctor administer the vaccines one at a time to minimize the possible side effects but you can no longer get the single vaccines in the United States. The parents who are not vaccinating their children are not anti-vaccine they are anti the 3-in-1 vaccine and want another option.
I’m very uncomfortable with the term “herd immunity.” Makes you all sound like a bunch of sheep, following the masses. Baaaaaa
Or cows, rather than sheep. I know some of you will take any opportunity to slander me: “sheep are in flocks and cows are in herds.” Whatever, you’re still a a bunch of mindless animals who do whatever the government tells you to, using fear tactics.
Jon, I’m not checking your math or population figures, just clarifying how the percentages of infection and vaccine efficacy should relate. Based on your numbers, if 1.75% of the population would be infected without the vaccine, then with the vaccine 95% of those (the 1.75%) cases would have been prevented. In other words the percent of population infected would be reduced from 1.75% to 0.0875% with a vaccine that has 95% efficacy.
What I’d really like to know is, of all the people who have contracted measles in the recent outbreak, how many of them WERE vaccinated? That’s probably not popular to ask, but since we all seem to love numbers so much, I thought it worth asking.
To the other Emily, I have heard in the news that 6 were vaccinated, and we’re at 72 cases? The CA reported vaccination rate is roughly 90%(I realize all the cases are not Californians, but we have that percentage). So; the 6 vaccinated people who were infected represent 90% of the population, and the 66 unvaccinated and infected represent the remaining 10%. This is proportionate and actually supports the 1% failure rate among those who receive 2 doses of the vaccine. (Given 90% of the unvaccinated exposed to the measles contract the virus, http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/transmission.html)
If the measles outbreak is a red flag, maybe the following is the checkered flag: I wonder if we’ve overlooked some valuable work done in the past on this problem. There are soooo many research articles and publications these days, it is hard to keep up with all the current information, let alone look back a number of years and even decades to past research and treatments. …..This post is a little outside the box (OK, maybe way outside the box, but hear me out). What if vaccinations weren’t necessary at all because the level of immune function were raised in 100% of the population to the point where no one came down with the measles? What if vaccinations were eradicated or reduced just as old technology was replaced by newer approaches in the past, just as satellites reduced the need for so many telephone wires, and airplanes reduced the need for buses and the horses that came before that? And what if one agent were capable of doing just that and at the same time giving protection from not only measles, but other viral infections like polio, viral hepatitis, mumps, viral encephalitis, chickenpox, shingles, viral pneumonia, influenza, etc. And what if this same agent gave protection from bacterial diseases like diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, tuberculosis, typhoid fever, etc. And what if this agent could be used to easily treat acute cases of the above diseases should someone happen to develop them? And while we’re dreaming let’s make this agent non-toxic, readily available, and inexpensive. First of all it would be Big Pharma’s worst nightmare, and medical treatments would also take a big financial hit if such an agent existed. Like lowering gas prices, the general public wins, but there are big businesses that get hurt. Since the touchstone in our world today for determining the worth of any action seems to be, “How will it affect the economy?”, this natural healing agent would, of course, be outlawed, even condemned, and information about its existence and efficacy suppressed. Proponents would be labeled “quacks” or “snake oil salesmen.” ……Let’s go back in time for a moment, say 25 million years ago (give or take one or two dozen million). Most of the vertebrate animals living at that time were capable of making their own ascorbic acid. We know today that some animals (humans, ages, fruit bats, some fish, guinea pigs) have lost the ability to make this substance. Most animals make about 10 grams of vitamin C a day per 150 pound body weight equivalence. A goat makes about 13 grams. When a goat is stressed with wounds from a dog attack or infection with a virus or bacterium, it increases its daily production to about 100 grams per day. Today humans make zero (0) ascorbic acid per day (…as far as we know; There may be some ascorbate producers out there still carrying the functional gene the rest of us lack.). We’re told to consume our 70 milligrams (0.070 grams) or so a day of ascorbate, the RDA so that we don’t get scurvy. This is where the problem lies because for most animals ascorbate is NOT A VITAMIN. It is not a substance needed in small quantities to avert a deficiency disease. So why do they make so much of it?? IT HAS OTHER FUNCTIONS. It has other functions that come into play at higher dosages. It is the most powerful natural anti-biotic, anti-viral, anti-fungal, universal toxin/poison agent known to man when available or given in the right dosage and timing (just like any pharmaceutical)…… Let’s come forward now to the late 1940’s to North Carolina and visit Frederick R. Klenner M.D.’s office. At the height of the polio epidemic in the U.S. 60 patients came to see Dr. Klenner with symptoms and prior diagnoses of polio. All 60 were treated successfully using massive doses of 6 to 20 grams of vitamin C per day given intravenously over a 3 day period. This is roughly the same protocol he used to successfully treat other viral and bacterial diseases. A fascinating account of the many successes of this treatment protocol by this doctor are given in Dr. Thomas Levy’s book, “Curing the Incurable.” This book has over 1,200 scientific references. It describes the successful treatment (and in many cases prevention) of the diseases listed above as well uses of vitamin C to treat toxins, poisons, and venoms…….By the way when Dr. Klenner’s daughters contracted the measles, he knew the higher dosages given intravenously would cure the disease. He decided to try out lower doses orally to gauge their effectiveness (Hey it was the 1940s - I guess it was OK to perform scientific experiments on your kids back then). When they were given 1,000 mg (1 gm) every 4 hours orally, their symptoms were improved. Lower doses allowed the disease to progress. When he increased the dosage to 1,000 mg by mouth every 2 hours, all evidence of the infection cleared within 48 hours. If the oral vitamin C regimen was abandoned at this point, the disease returned. Vitamin C was able to manage the symptoms, but full eradication did not occur until he continued the 1 gram every two hours around the clock (=12 grams per day) for four days which did permanently eradicate the disease. Why bother with a vaccine when the treatment is as easy as this? Human beings are immunological weaklings compared to the C makers. We’ve been limping along scrounging what little vitamin C we could forage from our environment for millions of years, and that is how we’ve survived the death sentence of scurvy that has haunted us all these years (well, except for those of us who were at sea for long periods of time in big ships without limes or lemons). So we’ve been able to keep our C level high enough to avoid scurvy, but not high enough to avoid all these infectious diseases that have plagued us throughout history. We’ve gotten a little respite with the development of antibiotics this last century, but there are signs that this technology is losing its potency. What we need now is to recognize the OTHER abilities and uses of ascorbic acid in our body. As much as Type 1 diabetic needs insulin, we all need ascorbic acid, in small quantities to avoid (and treat) scurvy and IN LARGER QUANTITIES to avoid (and treat) infectious diseases and toxins/poisons. (Vitamin C’s usefulness in higher doses in preventing/treating cardiovascular disease and cancer is also a nice side effect, as it has been shown to be effective against chronic diseases as well – but that is a story for another post…) …. There is so much potential for improving our health and reducing the suffering and death from infectious diseases. In one fell swoop we can go beyond vaccinations and antibiotics to the next level, but it is for now still outside the box of the status quo. And it is disheartening to know that there are powerful economic forces that are threatened by this approach who are actively trying to suppress this other side of vitamin C today. Please don’t take my word for any of this. READ. EDUCATE YOURSELF.
Disney Land is relatively close to the border…………just sayn……
Dwight Morgan, I will definitely not take your word for it because what you just said was nonsense.
actually, getting the whooping cough vaccine before being around infants is dead on correct. It’s older children and adults who give it to infants. And since whooping cough is bacterial, like pneumonia, you can get it again and again and again, if not immunized.
There are two effects to consider, but I speak just as another numbers man (with the last statistics course 20 years ago and absolutely zero formal education in epidemiology, so I hope people with either of these can comment too) Firstly, if the measles vaccine is 95% effective, it means only 5% of 3.5 Million people get infected (The others in the 200 mio. population aren’t getting it anyway). We are down to 175000 case or 0.0875% of the US population. I think this already makes a big difference. Secondly, infection is not a random event hitting people from the sky. It is through infection. The article states that a vaccinated person can infect up to 18 unvaccinated people. These 18 people go on to infect another 18 (that’s already 324 people) and so on until the epidemic has exhausted that season’s host pool. If these 18 were vaccinated, the most likely event is that a single person gets infected from those 18 (95% protection infect 0.9 % on average, though I’ll grant you that this is a slight simplification but at 95% we are close enough for the argument to remain valid), who will himself go on to infect 1 person in the most likely event. That’s 324 time less than without vaccination and this multiplier effect is much more significant then the individual protection. That’s what I understand as herd-immunity. But again, I am just a numbers man (thought the wiki articles about these subjects tend to go into the same direction)
It is nonsense to you because of the paradigm you are referencing from (“the box”). People used to think the earth was flat and that the celestial bodies revolved around the earth…. Scientists are open-minded and investigate new possibilities. Those with vested interests in maintaining the status quo vehemently deny and are not open to inquiry.
What he refers to by herd immunity is the fact that if the percentage of a given population which is immune to a disease is high enough, it is impossible for an infectious pathogen to establish a firm hold. It is not the case that having 95% of the population vaccinated means 5% of the people get measles. It means that so many people are immune to measles that it is impossible for the disease to establish a chain of transmission. Therefore, while me may see one or two cases, we tend not to see very large outbreaks. This is why we see such small numbers of cases per year over the past decade until this outbreak.
THANK You!
John is not a ‘numbers guy’ at all. He uses the numbers he wants to use to make his point. There is so little logic to his point, no extrapolation to existing populations numbers with apples to apples comparisons of time-specific knowledge, and no science to back his pseudo-points, he is a typical conspiracy theory moron. May he continue to not have children so he doesn’t pass on the stupid gene.
I had the measles just before the vaccine came out. I spent $9000 on my last set of hearing aids, my fifth pair in the last fifteen years, chasing technological updates because I’d do anything to be closer to normal hearing. No insurance doesn’t cover them.
Bernadette, No… Infection does not confer “Lifetime immunity”. Ever hear of someone getting chicken pox twice? That’s because antibody titers can wane over time, leaving the person vulnerable to infection again. Also, (and more importantly), the whooping cough vaccine (“Tdap” for adults) is NOT a live virus vaccine. The vaccine does not pose a risk to others around you. ANYONE who is going to be near a neonate should be sure they are current on their Tdap - to protect the infant. - Just my 2 cents as an MD and a woman whose husband’s little brother died from whooping cough at just 8 months old.
Jesus H Christ! Are you that hard up for alternative medicine that you would let children die for it? Massive doses of vitamins and minerals are pissed out, via the excretory system. They don’t cure bacterial or viral diseases. Jeezus!
Having whooping cough doesn’t provide lifetime immunity. I sadly can’t have the vaccine due to an allergic reaction. I’ve had it twice, immunity wanes as soon as 7 years. Check your facts on pertussis. Immunization has a similar immunity decline and those who can should get boosters as thier immunity wanes.
The Tin-foil hat wearing parents could have lawsuits brought against them. Maybe it could also be considered abusive to have withheld the vaccinations from their own children. When a 6month old baby in Oakland contracts this and it could have health consequences for that child’s entire life should we not hold those responsible for its spread accountable. The anti-vaccination movement needs to end. Its criminal of these parents and the behavior should be treated as such.
Numbers guy eh? I have a degree in biomedical mathematics and I would argue that you’re understanding of numbers and statistics is precisely the reason that real mathematicians exist. The assumption that you are making and subsequently conflating with the percentage of effectiveness is predicated on the entire 200 million Americans being exposed to the virus. Obviously, this is not the case. Measles is highly contagious, but also highly diagnosable. Once someone has contracted it they go to the hospitable, get quarantined and then treated. If you want to examine numbers you should look to the WHO website and examine how, after the vaccine, diagnosis of the virus could go from 3-4(3.5, good job with that) million people, to being declared eradicated in the US(between 37-200 cases in 2000). If you calculate what 37/3,500,000, you might get a better picture for how a measles vaccine that is 95% effective might be more powerful than the conclusion that you came to. Nothing bothers me more than people who think that because they can perform basic arithmetic, think that they can use numbers pulled completely out of context, throw them in an equation, and reach ridiculous albeit “mathematically sound” conclusions.
Riiiight. ME, please name some of these people or show some bills before legislature, or even some websites full of groups of people organizing for such a law. At the most, what has been considered is something to reduce the spread of diseases by not allwoing children without up to date immunizations to register for public school. This is NOT the same as “forcing” vaccinations on people. Also, why are you bringing up autism in particular here? Because of one (1) single “researcher” in the UK who falsified his data and wrote a paper that was later pulled by the publisher? Why don’t you go ahead and link vaccinations with Type II diabetes, obesity, asthma, heart disease, cancer, arthritus or some other disease? It makes JUST as much sense as what you did here. I have never heard of this anti 3-in-1 group. Does this group include all parents who don’t want to allow their children to be vaccinated? What about the ones doing it for religious grounds? I don’t think they would care whether they get one at a time or three at once would they? And the ones that do it because they think eating healthy food is enough probably don’t care either, no?
Unfortunately, we have a generation of new mommies and daddies who have not had a good enough education to read and decipher studies. Likewise, we have many article writers that do not understand science. Pile this on the fact that there are thousands of alternative websites and blogs making false health claims. The scientists and pediatricians are outnumbered! I am part of a few large mom groups, and you would be appalled by the amount of moms who claim that essential oils and elderberry syrup are the cure-alls for all serious illness. I had strep throat, and a local mommy actually came by with essential oil, told me to drink it, and it would cure me in a day or two. Ugh. I live in California in a pretty well-off neighborhood, where people have insurance and access to good medical care. Despite this, they choose to not vaccinate and withhold pediatric appointments so that they can try their “oils”. How can we fix this? Number one, we need to make sure that individuals who write medical pieces for well-respected news outlets actually UNDERSTAND medicine. Number Two, we need to make false health claims punishable. But, most importantly, we need to teach high-schoolers about statistics, the scientific process, and respect for experts.
I am 61 and had my titters ran 4 years ago and I still have immunity for measles, mumps, and chicken pox and of course I had all diseases. It isn’t fun having any of them and I feel sorry for parents who think their children are better off getting the disease then the vaccine. Shame on you millions of children get the vaccine with no problem and the % that have any reaction is few since most of the vaccines have gotten better with research. I just hope those who have not vaccinated their children don’t lose them to the disease.
You’re also forgetting that most in the adult population had already had the disease and were immune on that basis.
The pertussis vaccine is acellular. There are no bacteria present in it, therefore there is no way to spread pertussis by getting the vaccine.
Except those who do not immunize tend to live in clusters so if one person contracts Pertussis, measles etc. it is likely to spread in that area among those who are not vaccinated.
Your information is not accurate. Pertussis is inactive not a live vaccine.
It makes a difference to the 3.5 million that contracted it, and most certainly to the 400-500 that died from it.
Hi, I came across this article on Facebook and it interested me. Two years ago my 4.5 year old girl started with few red spots on her face within hour theuy had spread all over her body. Even her genitals. She shortly after spiked a fever, I took her to genesys hospital in grand blanc no as to this is where we reside . They admitted her because of the fever and we stayed there for 5 days. Rash was worsening day by day. Had to pull her from pre k that year it was during spring break, d she wasn’t allowed back even though all the docters said she wasn’t contagious. Some of her rash like on her back and opened up. It was very itchy, so she was on round the click benadryl, getting blood work every day few times a day, she was in so much pain and discomfort I felt helpless. Docters were of NO help, had allergist come in, dermatology, you name it. To this day they don’t know what it was and where it came from. and I was reading this article and looking at the picture I pull up pictures of my little girl during that time and I’m not no doctor but they look pretty darn similar as well as the shared fever 4 consecutive days in the way it started from start to finish it took almost 3 months for my little girl to get rid of that rash completely she was vaccinated and they say I meant are as well shortly after she gotten rid of that rash she ended up getting hand foot and mouth disease and then another rash that started at her feet just like the one she was in the hospital for but it started in the different location and then went awayI really should have called her and taking her to a hospital like Hurley that specialized in children
What you’re missing is that that 3.5 million comes out of the pool of (mostly young) people who can be infected. If you’ve already had it, then you’re not in that pool. So over a long time, the entire population has had the measles. According to the CDC, in the USA “in the decade before 1963 when a vaccine became available, nearly all children got measles by the time they were 15 years of age.” So a 95% vaccine rate takes a near 100% probability to 0%.
YES!!! This!!
Amen, Angie…I agree 100%
If you had measles, you ARE immune now, 100%. It’s as though you were vaccinated only better in terms of you ever contracting the disease again. You won’t. Nor will you carry it. You will produce antibodies to fight any virus that contacts you. Losing your generation of 100% immunity will affect herd immunity some.
That is not how math works. If you can prevent 1.5% of the 1.75% then the disease will “kill itself off”. Which vaccination can do.
What I see in this issue is a failure of doctors and epidemiologists to present adequate and convincing facts to the public, thereby allowing pseudo-scientists, technophobes and the misinformed to proliferate their misinformation. Because I, along with most of my generation survived past measles outbreaks with few consequences that doesn’t mean that measles is a benign illness with only uncomfortable symptoms. What are the real risks of a measles infection, vs the real risk of a reaction to an MMR vaccination and why isn’t this simple comparison being posted everywhere I look?
Ask your health care provider to do a measles titer. From that you can discuss and determine if a booster vaccination is appropriate.
Thank you for that information. I had the vaccine 2years ago. Is that still a problem? I know that one has to be careful around children who have gotten the chicken pox vaccine. I am not exactly sure what you are saying. Are you saying that vaccines, themselves, can cause the disease they are designed to prevent?
In most cases if you had the disease you are immune, but there are a few cases such as my mom’s where she had to get the MMR vaccine and booster even though she had measles as a child. Your doctor’s office can run a simple titer test to see if you are immune or not.
A remarkable study reveals that a vaccinated individual not only can become infected with measles, but can spread it to others who are also vaccinated against it - doubly disproving two doses of MMR vaccine is “99% effective,” as widely claimed. One of the fundamental errors in thinking about measles vaccine effectiveness is that receipt of measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine equates to bona fide immunity against these pathogens. Indeed, it is commonly claimed that receiving two doses of the MMR vaccine is “99 percent effective in preventing measles,”1 despite a voluminous body of contradictory evidence from epidemiology and clinical experience. This erroneous thinking has led the public, media and government alike to attribute the origin of measles outbreaks, such as the one recently reported at Disney, to the non-vaccinated, even though 18% of the measles cases occurred in those who had been vaccinated against it — hardly the vaccine’s claimed “99% effective.” The vaccine’s obvious fallibility is also indicated by the fact that that the CDC now requires two doses. But the problems surrounding the failing MMR vaccine go much deeper. First, they carry profound health risks (over 25 of which we have indexed here: MMR vaccine dangers), including increased autism risk, which a senior CDC scientist confessed his agency covered up. Second, not only does the MMR vaccine fail to consistently confer immunity, but those who have been “immunized” with two doses of MMR vaccine can still transmit the infection to others — a phenomena no one is reporting on in the rush to blame the non- or minimally-vaccinated for the outbreak. MMR Vaccinated Can Still Spread Measles Last year, a groundbreaking study published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases, whose authorship includes scientists working for the Bureau of Immunization, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, and the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA, looked at evidence from the 2011 New York measles outbreak that individuals with prior evidence of measles vaccination and vaccine immunity were both capable of being infected with measles and infecting others with it (secondary transmission). This finding even aroused the attention of mainstream news reporting, such as this Sciencemag.org article from April 2014 titled “Measles Outbreak Traced to Fully Vaccinated Patient for First Time.” Titled, “Outbreak of Measles Among Persons With Prior Evidence of Immunity, New York City, 2011,” the groundbreaking study acknowledged that, “Measles may occur in vaccinated individuals, but secondary transmission from such individuals has not been documented.” In order to find out if measles vaccine compliant individuals are capable of being infected and transmitting the infection to others, they evaluated suspected cases and contacts exposed during a 2011 measles outbreak in NYC. They focused on one patient who had received two doses of measles-containing vaccine and found that, Did you follow that? A twice-vaccinated individual, from a NYC measles outbreak, was found to have transmitted measles to four of her contacts, two of which themselves had received two doses of MMR vaccine and had prior presumably protective measles IgG antibody results. This phenomenon — the MMR vaccine compliant infecting other MMR vaccine compliant cases – has been ignored by health agencies and the media. This data corroborates the possibility that, during the Disney measles outbreak the previously vaccinated (any of the 18% known to have become infected) may have become infected or already were shedding measles from a vaccine and transmitted measles to both the vaccinated and the non-vaccinated. Stop Blaming A Failing Vaccine on Failure to Vaccinate The moral of the story is that you can’t blame non-vaccinating parents for the morbidity and mortality of infectious diseases when vaccination does not result in immunity and does not keep those who are vaccinated from infecting others. In fact, outbreaks secondary to measles vaccine failure and shedding in up to 99% immunization compliant populations have happened for decades, which you can learn in greater depth by reading our recent review article on the topic: “The Disney Measles Outbreak: A Mousetrap of Ignorance.” Moreover, these CDC and NYC Bureau of Immunization scientists identified a ‘need’ for there to be “thorough epidemiologic and laboratory investigation of suspected measles cases regardless of vaccination status,” i.e. investigators must rule out vaccine failure and infection by fully infected individuals as contributing to measles outbreaks. Instead, what’s happening now is that the moment a measles outbreak occurs, a reflexive ‘blame the victim’ attitude is assumed, and the media and/or health agencies report on the outbreak as if it has been proven the afflicted are under or non-vaccinated – often without sufficient evidence to support these claims. Clearly stakeholders in the vaccine/non-vaccine debate need to look at the situation through the lens of the evidence itself and not science by proclamation or pleas to authority.
A vaccine does NOT “eliminate your risk of a disease”, it merely primes your immune system’s B cells to carry antibody recognition factors for a specific disease organism. If that organism or a closely related one attacks you (as they do every second of the day, every day of your life) your immune system mobilizes antibody producing cells against that particular attacker. Therefore, if a disease that you have been vaccinated against is present then your immune system recognizes it and begins the process of making antibodies against that disease. You should then, even if only briefly become sick with the attacking organism while your body develops a supply of plasma cells and T cells against the offending organism. This new attack would also have the benefit of refreshing or reinforcing your immune system against that or any very similar organisms (note that I include viruses among “organisms”. As a teacher I frequently experienced brief periods of symptoms such as sore throats, coughs and sneezing that only lasted one or two days but I seldom experienced illnesses that lasted for the full week to ten days typical of most viruses. I ascribed this to my constant barrage of bacteria and viruses I experienced in my daily contact with students obviously carrying a wide variety of diseases. Note that I have not received any immunizations since childhood. I still feel that the general risks of vaccines are far lower than the risks of complications from a full fledged attack by a serious disease (which measles is).
You can get titers done to measure how much immunity you have. I got the MMR as a kid but got a booster in my 30s because my protection levels were borderline and I work in healthcare. Your doctor can then advise you if you should get a booster.
TDaP, the whooping cough vaccine does not have any live virus in it and thus cannot “stay active with bacteria in your throat ” It cannot possibly spread to others. Anyone who comes in contact with newborns must make sure that they are up to date with this vaccine
I’m sorry, but agree or disagree, is there any reason to talk to people like this? Do you talk to people in this manner face to face? I don’t understand all of the bullying going on online these days. Any response one may have becomes null and void as far as I’m concerned, when people speak with such disrespect to others, no matter how the other person is speaking. Spreading love, understanding and encouragement will take you so much further. When have you ever been persuaded to see something someone else’s way after being put down or disrespected? I don’t know about you, but it’s never worked for me.
This was in regards to comments above…I thought I was responding to one in particular, but I guess not.
If the 1.75% is of the total population, you can’t know the total number of people exposed which is what would tell you the effectiveness, I think. If everyone were exposed, and the effectiveness was 95% that would be 10 million(then) 15 million now, correct?
Immunity to pertussis “whooping cough” (both after infection or vaccination) wanes over time. The doctor was absolutely correct in giving her a booster. A pertussis booster is recommended for all adults, and particularly if they are going to be around a newborn.
There is no stupid question. Making a fool out of someone for asking only increases the chance they won’t ask the next time meaning they will continue to discuss/spread misinformation.
People are being pretty harsh toward Jon, who made reasonable mistake. And all of the complicated explanations of the numbers have not actually addressed the error in simple terms: The claim that a vaccine is “95% effective” does not refer to the population. In other words, it does not mean that the vaccine will protect 95% of the population from disease. It means that the vaccine will be 95% effective in preventing measles in ONE vaccinated individual if that individual is exposed. It is a completely separate and irrelevant statistic from both the size of the population, and the number of measles cases in that population.
1.75% a YEAR got messels. Year after year a new 1.75% were getting the messels. After ten years, somewhere around 17.5% of the population would have had messels in just the last ten years (death rates and birth rates complicated the actual percentage but it is still in the ballpark). Remember, this 17.5% of the population doesn’t include the number of people who had it 11 or more years before. If 15 - 20% of people get messels in ten years, how many would get it in 50 years? The vaccine gives you basically a LIFETIME immunity to messels if it takes which is 95% for the single and 99% with the booster. The flaw you made was comparing ANNUAL percentage to LIFETIME percentage. A simpler example is the percentage of people who get married in a year verse the percentage of people married. For the percentages to match, every married person would have to get divorced and then married each year.
Reading through these comments makes you realize that you can’t argue with idiots and ignorance. The fact that autism and the “safety” of MMR are even being questioned and that parents want an “alternative” is DUMB. Will anyone accept that there is NO evidence to support a link to autism and that this vaccination has extremely rare side effects? I guess no point in even saying this since science and facts are no longer important. As to the “numbers guy” SNORT, read more carefully and look at the word annually, plus you need to be exposed, stop your nonsense.
Sara - your statement is false. There is even an article on the FDA website. The DtaP vaccine does shed from the respiratory system for up to 6 weeks after getting the vaccine, so you CAN give someone pertussis after getting the vaccine. Also in the pertussis outbreaks of late, the people who have contracted the disease have been those PREVIOUSLY vaccinated….NOT the unvaccinated
I must add to your comment because you failed to mention after mentioning autism, vaccines DO NOT cause autism! That study was not only discredited, he admitted it was fraudulent and has lost his medical license. You may have not intended to indicate a correlation in your comment but it did read as if you were. If you were intending to make that correlation, you should do some research and stop helping to spread misinformation which essentially has led to this outbreak. My kids are not old enough for the second vaccine so are only at the 95%, if they get the measles it will be because of misinformation about the cause of autism. http://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/good-investigative-reporting-may-fina...
Harry, stopped reading your post when made a link between autism and the vaccine. That is when I knew you have no idea what you are talking about and are part if the problem. Vaccines do not cause autism. The original study making that link has not only been discredited by countless other studies, scientists and medical professionals, doctor Wakefield (who published the study) has admitted it was fraudulent and has lost his medical license. Stop spreading inaccurate information!
Thank you for bringing this up. My family has been following the vitamin c protocol from Dr. Linus Pauling for a couple years now… I have an autoimmune condition… and we are the healthiest family I know. My condition is under control, my husbands high blood pressure and elevated triglycerides are no more, and my son is incredibly healthy. We stopped vaccinations when we realized we got incredibly sick with every vaccine administered. No, this is not about numbers or stats, it’s about real evidence for us.
The individual vaccines are available and are used for those doing a delayed vaccination schedule…
I’m not mindless and don’t buy everything our govt tells us to do. But I do believe that the number of studies done on the safety of vaccines warrants a very close review. Look at the consequences for nonbelieving in vaccines. Use your thinking skills on this one.
1) The science is overwhelmingly clear that vaccines, even multiple vaccines like the MMR do NOT cause autism. 2) As the mother of an autistic son, I find the “better to risk DEATH (more than 145,000 people worldwide die of measles in 2013, according to WHO) than risk autism” attitude of ant-vaxxers to be offensive.
The 95% figure doesn’t mean that it is protective for 95 out of 100 people. It means that for a single vaccinated person, they will be protected from 95 out of 100 exposures. That’s why a booster shot can raise that number for any individual. A second dose raises your immunity to 97% or so by strengthening your immune response further.
John, the 95% figure doesn’t mean that it is protective for 95 out of 100 people. It means that for a single vaccinated person, they will be protected from 95 out of 100 exposures. That’s why a booster shot can raise that number for any individual. A second dose raises your immunity to 97% or so by strengthening your immune response further.
Respectfully, your post contains some dangerous misinformation. The dtap vaccine which protects from diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis is administered via intramuscular injection. There are no bacteria in your throat as a consequence of getting an injection in your deltoid (your shoulder muscle). Also, your mention of diseases mutating indicates a common lack of understanding of what “mutation” means. Diseases do not have DNA therefore cannot mutate. A mutation is a heritable change in the DNA of an organism, or in the case of measles, a virus. This means the DNA undergoes a change in sequence and passes that on to the next generation. If, as an unselfish society, we were all vaccinated then a mutation would not be possible because there would be no place for the virus to replicate and it would disappear. I have seen no evidence that the measles vaccine is less efficient nor any reference documenting a mutated measles strain that limits the MMR vaccine’s efficacy. Please look into small pox eradication when you want to read something about what vaccines do. Go ask any immunologist or doctor about how close the world is to eradicating polio and how we got here. VACCINES. Ask any virologist “what is the greatest hope for eradicating HIV?” VACCINES. They work.
This was meant address Bernadette’s post: Respectfully, your post contains some dangerous misinformation. The dtap vaccine which protects from diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis is administered via intramuscular injection. There are no bacteria in your throat as a consequence of getting an injection in your deltoid (your shoulder muscle). Also, your mention of diseases mutating indicates a common lack of understanding of what “mutation” means. Diseases do not have DNA therefore cannot mutate. A mutation is a heritable change in the DNA of an organism, or in the case of measles, a virus. This means the DNA undergoes a change in sequence and passes that on to the next generation. If, as an unselfish society, we were all vaccinated then a mutation would not be possible because there would be no place for the virus to replicate and it would disappear. I have seen no evidence that the measles vaccine is less efficient nor any reference documenting a mutated measles strain that limits the MMR vaccine’s efficacy. Please look into small pox eradication when you want to read something about what vaccines do. Go ask any immunologist or doctor about how close the world is to eradicating polio and how we got here. VACCINES. Ask any virologist “what is the greatest hope for eradicating HIV?” VACCINES. They work.
This was meant address Bernadette’s post: Respectfully, your post contains some dangerous misinformation. The dtap vaccine which protects from diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis is administered via intramuscular injection. There are no bacteria in your throat as a consequence of getting an injection in your deltoid (your shoulder muscle). Also, your mention of diseases mutating indicates a common lack of understanding of what “mutation” means. Diseases do not have DNA therefore cannot mutate. A mutation is a heritable change in the DNA of an organism, or in the case of measles, a virus. This means the DNA undergoes a change in sequence and passes that on to the next generation. If, as an unselfish society, we were all vaccinated then a mutation would not be possible because there would be no place for the virus to replicate and it would disappear. I have seen no evidence that the measles vaccine is less efficient nor any reference documenting a mutated measles strain that limits the MMR vaccine’s efficacy. Please look into small pox eradication when you want to read something about what vaccines do. Go ask any immunologist or doctor about how close the world is to eradicating polio and how we got here. VACCINES. Ask any virologist “what is the greatest hope for eradicating HIV?” VACCINES. They work.
You forgot immunity in your calculations. Pre-vaccine, that would have been 3 to 4 million annually out of those who had not previously been infected. So arbitrarily let’s take a two generational period of 40 years. Over that period 3.5 x 40 = 140 million people would been infected. Of those who survived, they would be immune in our pre-vaccination year and not a part of your calculations. Of course some of those would have died of other causes over the 40 year period. But another thing to factor in, we have a much longer life span than 40 years, so my estimate of 140 million is a gross underestimate of those immune. But even so, let’s go with this very conservative number, that leaves only 60 million who are susceptible meaning that 3.5 million cases a year means that 5.8% of the susceptible population is infected each year. And most of those are the very young.
Perhaps during that education, our children would learn that putting quotation marks around a word implies that the word does not actually mean what it appears to mean, and if the word does mean what it means in the context of a sentence, the quotation marks signify a lack of understanding of grammatical context on the part of the writer. Log, eye, you get it. Anyhoo… Have you ever tried using Elderberry to prevent illness? Have you used Lemon Oil to sooth a sore throat, ACV to thin phlegm, Pi Min to uninflame sinuses, or even just a good old fever to kill virus? Your disdain for these things indicates that you have not, and the absence of experience with “alternative” (see, that’s the correct way to do that) medicine invalidates any claim you have concerning it’s effectiveness. So maybe while the rest of us hippies are avoiding paying for private jets for the big pharma set, you can research the scientific method you seem so keen on promoting and use it to replace your completely non-scientific approach to denigrating the natural methods of healing you obviously know nothing about. Oh, and I agree we should respect the experts- but lets remember that the experts for, oh, say, the past couple million years used herbal remedies for everything. And you’ll excuse me, along the lines of reasoning displayed above, for failing to respect you.
sorry, this was supposed to be addressed to CALIMAMMA: Perhaps during that education, our children would learn that putting quotation marks around a word implies that the word does not actually mean what it appears to mean, and if the word does mean what it means in the context of a sentence, the quotation marks signify a lack of understanding of grammatical context on the part of the writer. Log, eye, you get it. Anyhoo… Have you ever tried using Elderberry to prevent illness? Have you used Lemon Oil to sooth a sore throat, ACV to thin phlegm, Pi Min to uninflame sinuses, or even just a good old fever to kill virus? Your disdain for these things indicates that you have not, and the absence of experience with “alternative” (see, that’s the correct way to do that) medicine invalidates any claim you have concerning it’s effectiveness. So maybe while the rest of us hippies are avoiding paying for private jets for the big pharma set, you can research the scientific method you seem so keen on promoting and use it to replace your completely non-scientific approach to denigrating the natural methods of healing you obviously know nothing about. Oh, and I agree we should respect the experts- but lets remember that the experts for, oh, say, the past couple million years used herbal remedies for everything. And you’ll excuse me, along the lines of reasoning displayed above, for failing to respect you.
WOW. This has by far been the best article and follow-up comments that I have read so far on vaccination. It is hard to seek the truth when it is wrapped up with people’s bias opinion, and with the exception of a handful of comments whose opinions I completely invalidate because of their name calling and pompous attitude, I have been thoroughly impressed by everyone’s addition to this issue. I’m still not convinced that I should vaccinate my kids. There has hardly been mention to the side effects of the MMR vaccine and the number of related deaths, or how many of these infectious diseases were waning BEFORE vaccinations came along. For those refuting the issue of autism based on ONE MAN’s study that was debunked as fraudulent, that is a pretty poor example in my opinion. Although autism has not played a factor at all in my decision to not vaccinate (or selectively vaccinate) my children, it is still a factor worth considering in the scheme of things. No, I don’t think vaccines cause autism….but could they greatly contribute to someone who has a vulnerability towards it? BH, I agree that more medical doctors/immunologists etc. should be putting out more irrefutable information instead of essentially saying “we know better than you, and you should just do what we say.” Dwight Morgan, I really appreciated your comments….
There is a huge difference between the evidence regarding vaccinations and climate change. Don’t ruin your point about how much vaccination is safe and necessary by dragging climate change into it. Sure, the climate is changing, but to what degree man is affecting it or can do anything about it, is hugely debated among scientist and is heavily driven by politics. Really stupid and mismatched comparison there.
Lost in this discussion is the undisputed fact that vaccines never have nor ever will provide immunity. Read the inserts on the vaccine and check out the ingredients before inflicting yourself or a loved one with these farsical poisons
All I have to say (to big pharma and the government) is give us vaccines without all the other harmful ingredients and you will see vaccine rates increase.
Hello? You have been protected by others who vaccinate. But that protection ironically is being diminished by other people like you. When your kids are exposed, they will get it and no amount of vitamin c is going to help. And if they have long term health problems as a result, you will have only yourself to blame. I hope that doesn’t happen but it’s going to start happening to a lot of families that thought they were invincible. The bigger problem for me is not how your choice will affect your family but how that choice puts others at risk, like people who would get vaccinated but can’t or the very young. How nice of you to make a decision that could potentially cause damage to another. There are many words for this but narcissism is one that comes to mind. Have a nice day.
So many reasons to vaccinate, but the main reason is to protect those little ones under 12 months that CAN NOT get vaccinated. Why put infants in danger? Older children and adults can fight the illness off much better, but in the case of an infant it could result in death. We need to stop accommodating stupidity that could destroy my child’s life!
AMEN! Maybe you need to repeat that just to make sure everyone understands!!!
Because of the 1.75% of the population that would be exposed, 95% would have immunity. Of 3.5 million people that would have been infected previously, full-vaccination would result in only 175k infections.
And where is there any info linking this vaccination procedure to autism.
Jon, 1.75% of the population were immunized each year, by surviving measles. Surviving the disease has the same effect as vaccination, thus, at any time before vaccinations became available, the decided majority of the population would already have been effectively immunized.I’m not so much a math person, but supposing 3million infections per, over 60 years, we’ve got about 180 million effectively immunized. As well, the nation was a much less mobile nation then, which would reduce the mobility of epidemics.
From what I have read, 20% of the cases were people who had been vaccinated twice with the MR vaccine. There is also a recent case (Last year) of someone being fully vaccinated, catching measles then passing it on to 4 people who were also vaccinated.
The difference it makes, Jon, is this: back in the 1940s & 1950s when the 3-4 million people per year were getting infected…the world, in terms of travel, was a much different place. Most people stuck pretty close to home, so if they came down with say, measles, the spread of it would be far more contained than in today’s world where millions of people are in contact with one another on a GLOBAL scale every single day. Maybe if you looked at the numbers in terms of travel and the “spreadability” factor from pre 1963 (around the beginning of the measles vaccine), you would see that unvaccinated people are far more dangerous to the general population, because the likelihood of it spreading in today’s highly mobile society, is much higher.
You had me on bord until you compartmentalized; as you say, “anti vaxxers,” with climate change believers. So, those darn “anti vaxxers” are as correct as climate change, is… right in your face. Thanks for clarifing.
Okay okay.. Why do you have to be rude about it?
Why did you attack him personally and not simply refute his points, when all he did was raise a valid question based on his reading of the article’s numbers? What the hell is wrong with you? And what medical credential makes you a more competent numbers guy? Working as a home health aide doesn’t magically turn you into a statistician, and I suspect it was your nasty, gratuitously aggressive personality that kept your career in healthcare short.
I have children they are all vaccinated with all the recommended items birth through now, even the tentanus shot, middle/junior high shot, hep b series. *they are ALL healthy -ages range 16 1/2 - 7. I am healthy, my sisters and cousins and their children - all vaccinated! All do yearly well check ups as you are supposed to through adulthood…. I myself had the hep b series because I worked in medical field. I myself took all vaccines as a child, however when I was pregnant with my 1st I found out I was NOT immune to the Measles. I had to take a titer after my child was born. Again next pregnancy found out the titer didnt work - I am still not immune…. Again…. So I was told not to come into contact if possible someone that had measles, worked with someone or their family had measles outbreak. I think all of our choices affect others to a point… however ingridents in all things and environment causes harm to us all. I know parents that DID NOT have their 2 children vaccinated with ANY THING and her 2 children have autism. Another mom did not 1 of 3 of her kids have autism and others has skin issues.
What they are not telling is that people who have received the CDC recommended doses of vaccine are still catching and passing on measles to others. —-The MMR vaccine insert itself lists the following side effects: MEASLES , measles like rash, diabetes, encephalitis, Guillain–Barré syndrome, pneumonia and even death. —-Last year was no different the Hooping Cough outbreak was yet again traced back to the very same vaccine used to prevent it and the Enterovirus D-V 68 that put all of the children in the hospital all across the US was also traced back to a vaccine. —-People need to do the research for themselves and quit believing sites and news agencies like this one who are controlled and paid of to tell lies to your faces.
Tune in to the Jenny McCarthy show…..apparently, she’s an MD now!
I had measles when I was a kid and I survived, sharing the living room couch with my brother in a dark room wearing sunglasses. But my friend a few house down wasn’t so fortunate. She developed encephalitis and died. And the history of measles is dire. When populations such as native Hawaiians were exposed, the virus was extremely deadly. And the virus does not show signs of mutation like the flu virus. It is virulent and dangerous for people who are in danger because of their chemotherapy or their autoimmune diseases. Vaccinate!
Janell Marie I’m of two minds about this. Vaccinations do save millions of people from death, while being entirely harmful to a few. What we do not know—and will not know unless someone does a long term comparative study—is what this hodgepodge of vaccines does to the human body. Short term gain, yes; but what of the long term? All my kids (grown now) are vaccinated, but I still wonder. We have epidemic number of kids with asthma, autism and other serious problems. Do we know if compromising the body with vaccines, antibiotics (most are given to animals we eat so we get them one way or another), even non-prescription drugs do some great genetic or immune system harm we don’t know about? No, we don’t know for sure. But those of us who recognize how easily a flu or whooping cough epidemic could kill en mass are more than willing to vaccinate. I am 73 and appreciate the comments which recognize that the older generation got the measles and the antibodies along with it. I also had mumps, chicken pox. January 23 at 5:21pm
You have natural immunity, which is FAR better than vaccine immunity. The science to date says YOU are not risking your grandchildrens’ health. It’s everyone who HAD measles vaccines as youths and never acquired real natural immunity by going through the disease who are the “brittle” links in the chain. Their vaccinated immunity isn’t robust or long-lasting.
I had measles, mumps, and chicken pox as a kid. No German measles. I had a negative titer and a Rubella vaccination 35 years ago. Recent titer was again negative, but there is no longer a single vaccine. Should I have the MMR. Are there any risks at age 75? My grandchildren are 6 and 6 months, and d.i.l. will probably get pregnant again.
Please … visit a hospital to see first hand what measles does to the human body.
I have not had the time to properly research this. But I can’t help but wonder ( and I doubt that I’m the only one ), if this has anything to do with the influx of illegal aliens that our thoughtful pResident has so casually allowed into our country? Thoughts?
I think you have to take into account that the transmission of the disease drops drastically with 95% herd immunity. You can’t just multiply percentages in a linear fashion and say, “Hey this doesn’t make sense”.
@ Sheeple — You Sir, are an idiot.
FYI, Dr. Schwartzberg will appear on KALX Berkeley’s “Soap Box Derby” call-in talk show this Thursday, May 21, 2015 9pm-9:30pm. It’s broadcast around the Bay Area at 90.7 FM as well as streamed live at http://kalx.berkeley.edu
One would think if measles is so dangerous they would have monovalents for this disease. So odd they got rid of monovalents
Assuming the vaccinated do not spread the disease is a BIG assumption. The vaccinated are asymptomatic , does not mean they are not carriers.
You are testing negative for Rubella I think , since you have contracted Measles already as a child. I would not worry about Rubella . Please also know Rubella sheds through the nasal cavity for upto couple months I think (please verify the duration) . You mentioned you had grandkids so I will try to play safe and avoid any vaccination at that age esp if you are immune to the biggies
on the contrary if you are going near a neo nate you better not be recently vaccinated. There are specific signs at hospitals that say that. Recently vaccinated are shedding and are a risk to anyone that is not vaccinated
Oh no …. those little ones are supposed to be protected by their mothers milk. Breast feed moms .. do not depend on your neighbor to jab himself .
That is an excellent question Joannne, I have wondered that often , as time goes by “immune via contracting the disease” is reducing . So now we are really finding out how effective the vaccine is. Initial study of herd immunity was done with these people who got the disease and a figure of around 70% was considered effective. Medicos within the last couple decades have (without backing it up) raised it to 90 then 95 ? Fact is no one knows if herd immunity even works for vaccinated populace. We will know in the next 3-5 decades I guess.
agreed!! 30,000 a year die of the flu. The elderly and weaker immune systems that would die of almost any illness will also die of the Measles. Last time I looked at the Measles stats, they were down 95% by the time vaccinations came into existence! and where does he get those numbers from? I’ve never been able to find them?
agreed!! 30,000 a year die of the flu. The elderly and weaker immune systems that would die of almost any illness will also die of the Measles. Last time I looked at the Measles stats, they were down 95% by the time vaccinations came into existence! and where does he get those numbers from? I’ve never been able to find them?