Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Measles and "Herd Immunity"

Yep, saw that and printed it along with the article for later reference.

I'm not going to bother doing your research for you. I've cited debunk after debunk on these pages, and yet you people keep popping up with the same questions despite the ready availability of answers. If you want to find real answers, they're abundant and easily available.

But you can start by reading HER OWN summary of the LeBaron (2007) study, which glosses over the fact that MOST of the previously immunized kids with serologically-proven measles infection had such mild forms of the disease that they were excluded from the study!

What does this mean?

First, it means that while single-vax programs and even double-vax programs may not completely prevent the disease, they substantially reduce the likelihood of severe infection with attendant increased risk of morbidity and mortality.

Second, it means the blog's author is not interested in presenting the truth... she is only interested in advancing her own agenda. Her agenda is NOT supported by the vast majority of immulogists, epidemiologists, pediatricians, or public health experts. These people are NOT ".gov". They are the scientific community.



Again, do your research. Vaccines are cheap and provide little or no profit for the organizations that produce and distribute them. In fact, if it wasn't for public health dollars spent by governments worldwide, vaccines and vaccination programs would cease to exist.

This is the paradox that makes the anti-vax movement so ridiculous: they simultaneously claim that vaccines are a government conspiracy and a huge cash-cow for Big Pharma. Come on! It's either one, or the other, it can't be both. But the nutjobs continue to insist on both.

Finally, this blogger (like many anti-vax bloggers) is actually using this article to sell something herself. In my view this is the height of hypocrisy... saying that Big Pharma is making money off vaccines, then turning around and making money herself off the controversy she is creating.



Others have already spoken to this. Decreased levels of vaccination in certain populations has allowed pertussis in particular a major resurgence in America. This has been seen in Russia and other 3rd world countries as well. When enough anti-vax parents produce enough unvaccinated children, disease outbreaks are inevitable.

Also, we know that the pertussis vaccine is imperfect. Always has been. It can prevent serious infection, but minor infection is common in immunized people. It's the nature of the pathogen, it's just a tougher nut to crack... but since minor pertussis infection has no really serious consequences, it's considered an acceptable level of control even though imperfect.

FINALLY... let's look at the REAL meaning of herd immunity.

Herd immunity is a form of immunity that occurs when the vaccination of a significant portion of a population (or herd) provides a measure of protection for individuals who have not developed immunity (i.e., have not been vaccinated).

A lot of anti-vax parents actually cite herd immunity as a reason for not vaccinating their kids... i.e., that they're willing to let other parents/kids take the potential hit from a vaccine side-effect, but rely on herd immunity to keep their own kid from getting sick. This is selfish cowardice at the very least.

Obochenkosomethink PhD cites the correct definition, but then goes on to claim that this doesn't happen while citing examples that show it does, while cherry-picking findings from these studies to support her contentions.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/parents/downloads/parent-ver-sch-0-6yrs.pdf

So at birth, a child of completely-monogamous parents who are not Hep B carriers is immunized against such as a matter of routine. Brilliant.

At two months, a ten pound baby gets as many as five additional injections.

Five more injections at four months

Seven more at six months

Nine more between 12 and 18 months

My first two boys got all of this, on schedule for the most part. I'll apologize to them when they're old enough to understand.

For the third kid, I've taken this extremely aggressive vaccination schedule and spread it WAY out, so that she'll finish it up just in time for public school. I lined out the schedule as follows: no more than 2 shots at any given visit, no vax visits within 3 months of each other, deleting one round of each vax that's prescribed 4 or more times, and vaxes start at age 2 so she has some bodyweight to bring to bear against the injections.

I think that a lot of anti-vax hysteria would immediately go away if a couple dozen MDs, all of whom swear by and advocate the schedule linked above, subject themselves to the 2-month, 4-month and 7-month injections, but with doses increased in proportion of their weight vs the weight of an average 2-month, 4-month and 6-month baby. Monitor them for side effects and broadcast the great news that these injections in these doses at this timing is completely harmless. Any takers?

If imperfect means that my Kid#1, who had the whole CDC routine on time, came down with a 4-week cough during which he routinely vomited while coughing heavily in spite of otc and prescribed cough medication, and since gets a very bad cough with each cold with attendent puking at times, then I'd hate to see the real thing...

There is a notion afoot among the great unwashed (non-MDs) that our kids are going to get pertussis anyhow; the docs will simply look at our immunization record and call it something else. Granted, I also read and recognize what you wrote concerning decreased severity of disease with immunization.

Doc, thanks for the information, however please refrain from connecting me to the "anti-vax" crowd. I've never made such a claim contrary to popular albeit ignorant opinion here on the campfire.

Sometimes people die with seat belts on.

Not really. The Non-immunized populations of greatest concern to public health authorities (up until last summer when Obama let millions of non-immunized kids in, that is) include native American/Canadian populations (treaty and non-treaty Indians and Metis) and inner-city populations living below poverty level (highly concordant with IV drug abuse).

Canada's non-immunized native populations are a serious problem for public health authorities there.

...and the American medical system causes over 200k iatrogenic deaths every year.

So whats your point?

The fact that millions of children receive those vaccinations every year with very few issues is evidence enough for anyone able to understand basic math... The worldwide measles death rate among non-vaccinated people is almost 1 out of 100 while the rate of severe vaccine reactions is 1 in a million... I know which odds I'll take.

The article I was thinking of referred to a non first nations high school with high vac rate and still had major measles outbreak.( not questioning you, just trying to clarify)

Vaccinations are not and never will be 100% effective. Yes, they work most of the time, and our human populations and livestock industries are great testaments.

Sadly, some folks do have adverse reactions to a vaccine or some component, but typically the greater good far outnumbers the rare adverse instances. Most of us have no issues with bee stings, but a few folks do tip over. Sad, but sh-t happens, and we have no plans to wipe out bees.

I've not studied the literature on humans, but all sorts of things can render vaccinations ineffective among livestock. Stress and even mild nutritional deficiencies adversely affect their immune responses. A copper deficiency can render shots ineffective among otherwise healthy looking stock. Likewise, administering a vaccine and immediately loading stock onto a truck for transport can stress them such that one was simply wasting $$ and time with the treatment.

Here's a single source to start with.

Personally, adequate rest seems to affect my health as much as anything. If some rare event pops up and I have to do 48 hrs straight without sleep, I nearly always come down with something. It's really a mild form of stress, but obviously there is an effect.

While the term "eradication" has been frequently kicked around by the press, it's a bit misleading, as we've been experiencing low levels of measles/polio/etc cases all along.

Do you MD types monitor those millions of babies telepathically? Glad to know that all of the other millions-minus-two (my older kids) were somehow tested for CNS damage afterward.

I'll go out on a limb and say that long-term effects of such aggressive immunizion scheduling at such early age are simply not known, and they won't be knowable without some sort of long term testing that presently is not done. But, we engineers don't know or understand basic math.

That "statistic"... isn't. It's a facile misrepresentation of facts.

Example: An old man falls down and breaks his hip. He's transported to hospital, has surgery to fix his hip. He develops a blood clot in his leg due to immobility, a piece of the clot breaks off and is pumped into his lung (pulmonary embolism) and he dies 10 days after his surgery. His death is classified as iatrogenic because it's a known complication of his surgery.

What the example doesn't take into account is that if he didn't have the surgery and stayed home, his risk of death due to DVT/PE would be many times higher than if he'd had the surgery.

So: his death is correctly classified as iatrogenic under our current system and is included in the 200K deaths you cite. But the classification/statistical model doesn't compare it to the number of deaths that would occur without surgery, which is proven to be much, much, MUCH higher.

The reality is that while many people die following their treatment by our medical system due to complications from treatment etc, the medical system of treatment isn't the root cause of these deaths. If we didn't treat them, the death rate in America would be much, much higher.

VEK, I might be an "MD type", but my ex-wife and I followed a spaced-out vaccine schedule for our own kids similar to yours. I didn't have any solid reasons from the literature to do this, just a general understanding of immunologic development in kids.

Your lack of a basic understanding of physiology is what makes you continue to believe that vaccines will induce some sort of CNS lesion as opposed to actual measles which does in fact cause brain damage in some cases. A vaccine is all about giving a reduced dose of a killed or modified pathogen to develop immunity so when confronted with the real thing your body can fight it off before it causes brain damage (in the case of measles.) The blood:brain barrier prevents the vaccine itself from causing damage, and the vaccine helps mitigate a febrile response which could also cause brain damage if the fever is high enough.

SBTCO, sorry, my bad. I am officially disincluding you from the anti-vax crowd.

The initial BS report was that Drs caused 100,000 deaths per year and that was proven a lie, but feel free to forgo BP meds, Diabetic meds, or antibiotics if you get MRSA.

unfortunately a side effect of the vaccines is we now have several generations that havent gotten to see these diseases up close and personal and alot of people have the false assumption in their head that "they really werent that bad".....there is a reason it got near total acceptance at the beginning, parents had seen the diseases up close and did not want to risk their kids getting it cause they do kill and maim.....any clue how many great and great-great uncles and aunts i had that DIDNT make it to their teens cause of chit like measles in pertusis? my family lost 25% to childhood illnesses like these.....

Seems that a lot of vax reaction symptoms reported to and echoed by the anti-vaxers are pretty consistent with encephalitis and/or meningitis. My hopeless ignorance of the subject notwithstanding, I'm curious as to how those millions of babies are monitored for brain/spinalcord/membrane swelling and possible damage.

You are an MD; tell us whether these are reactions to the bugs or the carriers, fillers and preservatives.

Again, a lot of this angst which is apparently not founded in ANY medical learning or text could be put to rest by injecting 0.5mL x 6 x (200/10) = 60mL ~ 2 fl. oz ~ 1/4 cup (over 1/8 pound) of unaltered infant vaccines into yourself three times spaced two months apart and reporting to us how goes it. No big deal, right?

I prefer to get my medical advice from the internet, or my neighbor (he's old and owns a bookstore), or my children's peers, rather than from my physician. True, I could go to an additional physician for a second opinion, if my doctor's advice isn't what I want to hear, but then, that would just be spending more money to probably hear the same thing from one more person who has spent years studying evidence based medicine, and whose life is dedicated to serving mankind, and where would that get me?