While, thanks to the recent CDC report documenting the resurgence of measles in the U.S., thanks to worrisome pockets of decreasing vaccine uptake that could portend a much wider resurgence if the antivaccine brigade, now led by Jenny McCarthy, has its way, I'm back on the topic of vaccines after having amazingly managed to stay away for an uncharacteristically long time, I thought that one last post for a while (I hope) is in order.
Yes, in September, there is reason for some optimism in the P.R. war, which the antivaccination forces have clearly winning in recent months. That's because a new book by the man whom antivaccine activists consider the Dark Lord of Vaccination himself, Dr. Paul Offit, will be hitting the bookstores. It's called: Autism's False Prophets: Bad Science, Risky Medicine, and the Search for a Cure:
I'm in the middle of reading a review copy of the book. Besides being a good, concise read on the history of the whole myth that vaccines cause autism, I'm thus far shocked at just how really nasty antivaccine activists have gotten with respect to Dr. Offit. It goes far beyond verbal abuse and insults, including the usual "pharma shill" gambit. There's a really, really visceral hatred of Dr. Offit among the Jenny McCarthy clan, to the point of death threats and times when the University of Pennsylvania had to provide armed guards to protect him. Even if all the bad things the antivaccine movement say about Dr. Offit were true (they're not), this goes far beyond the pale.
Personally, I fear for his safety this fall after his book comes out, especially if he does extensive publicity tours. I also fear a single book will be no match for the celebrity and pro wrestling-funded propaganda machine that, thanks to Jenny McCarthy, the antivaccinationists have built up. Still, it's a hopeful sign, and I hope more books like this will be forthcoming. It's time to get serious about countering the dangerous idiocy of the Jenny McCarthy brigade. This is far more important than even the evolution-creationism manufactroversy. Public health is at stake.
I would like to slap him myself.
I really hope we get this anti-vax ignorance under control before a major outbreak gives us a few thousand dead and brain damaged children to remind them why vaccines exist.
Interesting. The VP of my 3bil Big Pharma division just retired to teach part-time at UPenn's medical school. We often complained to him about patient perceptions and the significance of public sentiment, and he always told us, "publish more! just publish in as many scientific journals as possible, that will fix the PR issues!" We always said, "Yeah, OK, but that's kinda not enough. What else can be done?" Our feeling was that he just didn't grok the magnitude of the problem. So maybe this will open his eyes a bit, when he sees the Coo Coo for Cocoa Puffs folks banging down his colleague's door. Sad as that is...
"I really hope we get this anti-vax ignorance under control before a major outbreak gives us a few thousand dead and brain damaged children to remind them why vaccines exist".
Actually there are hundreds of thousands of brain damaged kids which should remind you of how dangerous vaccines can be. If you opened your eyes you would see them. Let's not ignore them.
Here is another article showing where the break outs are and where they come from. Finally, it also mentions how serious measles is to immune compromised children and infants.
http://bmartinmd.com/2008/08/cdc-updates-biggest-us-measles.html
Annie
The difference between a vaccine-autism link and a measles-brain damage link: one has been shown to occur, while the other has not. (Hint: Latter, former.)
Let's hear it for the Infectious Disease Promotion Society! w00t!
Infectious Disease Idealization Obfuscating Truth Society
Unpleasant as the idea is, if some from the anti-vaccine brigade try to carry out the worst of their threats, it might be good for our side: victimizing your opponents is bad framing.
Do you mean autistic children? Can you describe this brain damage?
if some from the anti-vaccine brigade try to carry out the worst of their threats, it might be good for our side: victimizing your opponents is bad framing.
I agree with you about the framing thing, but on the other hand, I think there's a larger, more powerful frame in place that pretty much cancels the other one out. Any time some (in particular) white, male, North-American-born agendist with a gun and a hair across his ass does something like that, this larger narrative kicks into play: the "isolated incident."
Very few stories in the media connect domestic terrorism -- when conducted by white, North American men -- with larger narrative and rhetorical trends in the subcultures that create them. So the newspaper might mention that the guy who walked into the UU church in Knoxville and started shooting had a shelf full of Michael Savage and Ann Coulter books, but do Savage and Coulter get any of the rap in the media for publishing reams of what essentially amounts to "kill the liberals"? When Eric Rudolph blew up a bunch of stuff and shot some abortion providers, did anyone actually take a close look at the anti-abortion movement and/or the communities where people were actively sheltering him and refusing to turn him in? When Chad Castagena, fan of Michelle Malkin and extreme right-wing site Free Republic, started mailing anthrax copycat letters to people he didn't like, did anyone in the mainstream media hang any of it on Malkin's foul mouth or Free Republic? Shit no.
That kind of thing is always just caused by a bad apple working alone, creating an "isolated incident," and never the logical end result of the interaction between subcultures that create existential threats from nothing and a murderous personality.
Some silly anon said "Actually there are hundreds of thousands of brain damaged kids which should remind you of how dangerous vaccines can be. If you opened your eyes you would see them. Let's not ignore them."
Sure, just tell us what real evidence you have that the MMR vaccine causes more harm than measles (1 in 500 deaths, 1 in 5000 severe neurological damage, bits of blindness, deafness and paralysis here and there), mumps (male sterility, once a very common cause of deafness, occasional death), and rubella (early 1960s epidemic filled institutions of CRS victims). Also give us the real science showing that the DTaP is worse than diphtheria (caused thousands of deaths when the former USSR broke up), tetanus (no such thing as herd immunity, about a 10% mortality rate), and pertussis (which still kills over a dozen American babies each year).
Just show us the real science you have that autism is caused by vaccines.
Dear Sir:
I think public communication is important in public health. Any side effects of a vaccine were reported by mass media, the vaccination rate of that specific vaccine decreased that leads to more outbreak cases in Taiwan. Therefore, measles problem in US is a good indicator for international health concern.
C C King, Professor
College of Public Health
National Taiwan University
Dear Sir:
I think public communication is important in public health. Any side effects of a vaccine were reported by mass media, the vaccination rate of that specific vaccine decreased leading to the occurrence of more outbreak cases in Taiwan in the past. Therefore, measles problem in US is a good indicator for international health concern.
C C King, Professor
College of Public Health
National Taiwan University
Thank you for the heads-up about the book, Orac. I've had good experiences with book recommendations from Sciencebloggers, so this one will be on my reading list.
However, as to its likely effect- if we lived in a society where reading for pleasure or from curiosity about the world were the norm, it might well have a significant beneficial effect. The trouble is that we don't live in such a society, but in fact one where such reading habits are going extinct.
To Elizabeth, the first commenter:
Whom would you like to slap, and why? I feel like I'm missing a part of a conversation. Could you help?
As I've mentioned on my blog, and possibly this blog, people like They are already there... and McCarthy are the stalking and trojan horses or useful idiots of Big Pharma.
Think about it. As someone who has had a relative suffer from polio, I can vouch that Big Pharma made a ton of money providing treatment, assistance, and pain killers to my relative over the decades she suffered from the disease. To be quite frank, it was a never ending gravy train of cash for them until her death a few years ago.
On the other hand, I will never get polio. Big Pharma made a few dollars off my vaccine, but that is nothing compared to the amount of money big pharma banked from my relative.
Yet, McCarthy and her kind want us to believe that Big Pharma is part of a plot to force dangerous, even deadly, vaccines upon us. This is sheer lunacy and no corporate board or group of shareholders would tolerate such a plan because of the money they would lose.
Just got the Sept '08 issue of Redbook magazine. I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess that Orac hasn't read it yet ;) They're doing a 4-part series on "Living with Autism" - following a family whose 3-yr-old son was diagnosed w/autism. They're working with a Dr. Radoff. The article is impressive because in the space of a few pages, they manage to attribute his autism to aluminum, casein, glutein, construction dust, genetic tendencies, the vaccine schedule, exposure to cleansers and chemicals, and digestive infections. Consequently, the kid has a treatment plan including behavioral therapy, anti-yeast meds, antibiotics, a special diet, and eventually chelation.
The article finishes with a piece of pseudo-journalism featuring (who else) Jenny and some lovely pandering by saying the debate over the cause(s) of autism isn't over.
So Offit's book is a good start - but how many people are actually going to read it, as opposed to the people who'll see articles like this one and come away with misleading or just plain wrong information? We need more info and stories to go through other sources, like magazines and TV shows.
I think that *shudder* 'framing' for vaccination could be a lot better. The 'causes' part is the tricky one.
Vaccines are dangerous, duh. (Some more than others of course.) It is often said (sometimes even truthfully) that vaccine X causes Y in Z fraction of the time.
However, the counter argument is more complex. Not vaccinating a single person in among a population who has been vaccinated is sometimes much less risky in the XYZ 'causes' sense. Instead, we have to add another number, the fraction of the population not being vaccinated. With that we could say:
"If 10% of people didn't get vaccinated, not getting X vaccine causes Y Z percent of the time."
Yeah, that is a bit of a fuzzy form of 'causes', but isn't dishonest. It allows an much more natural apples to apples comparison.
SICK MONKEYS: RESEARCH LINKS VACCINE LOAD, AUTISM SIGNS by Dan Olmsted
The first research project to examine effects of the total vaccine load received by children in the 1990s has found autism-like signs and symptoms in infant monkeys vaccinated the same way. The study's principal investigator, Laura Hewitson from the University of Pittsburgh, reports developmental delays, behavior problems and brain changes in macaque monkeys that mimic "certain neurological abnormalities of autism."
Although couched in scientific language, Hewitson's findings are explosive. They suggest, for the first time, that our closest animal cousins develop characteristics of autism when subjected to the same immunizations - such as the MMR shot -- and vaccine formulations - such as the mercury preservative thimerosal -- that American children received when autism diagnoses exploded in the 1990s.
The first publicly reported results of this research project come at the International Meeting For Autism Research in London. Poster presentations must go through a form of peer review before they are presented at the conference; the papers have not yet appeared in a scientific journal.
In addition to Hewitson's oral presentation today, on Saturday in one of two related poster presentations, the researchers also are reporting in their abstract that "vaccinated animals exhibited progressively severe chronic active inflammation [in gastrointestinal tissue] whereas unexposed animals did not. We have found many significant differences in the GI tissue gene expression profiles between vaccinated and unvaccinated animals." Numerous scientific studies, as well as many parents, report severe GI ailments in children with regressive autism.
The results are sure to be controversial, in part because they lend credence to studies first published in 1998 by British pediatric gastroenterologist Andrew Wakefield, one of Hewitson's co-authors on these findings. He described an unusual inflammatory bowel condition in children who had regressed into autism after they received the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccination. Wakefield is currently fighting charges of medical misconduct in Britain over allegations of conflict-of-interest and improper procedures related to that paper. He denies the charges.
@Dan Olmsted, you must be aware that Orac has given his opinion on the Hewitson conference abstract: Some monkey business in autism research. You may learn a lot about cDNA microarrays. It is also clear that there just isn't enough detail (absent publication) to rely upon these findings.
Hewitson's findings may lend credence to the subset of people who still rely upon Wakefield's work but after the testimony of both Chadwick and Bustin at last year's Autism Omnibus hearings (again, Orac covered that but I can't include the links for fear of angering the filter), that really should not be anyone with any understanding of either the science or standards of scientific evidence.
However it does seem hopeful that you wrote "that American children received when autism diagnoses exploded in the 1990s" as it seems that you accept that there is a degree of diagnostic substitution taking place rather than any increase in numbers. I realise that this doesn't gel with your usual stance, nor indeed your remark about the vaccines, but I'm ready to give the benefit of the doubt.
I believe it was either Sweden or Norway, who stopped vaccinations for 5 yrs because of the suspicion of vaccines causing Autism. There was no difference in the percentages of instances of autism for that entire 5 yrs. So, they started vaccinating again, and funnily enough, the rates of autism stayed the same.
Had the Chicken Little "Vaccines cause autism!" been correct, the instances of autism would have changed, and it didn't. That alone shows that the vaccines are not the culprit.
What I think is that there isn't more cases of Autism. Only it's being diagnosed correctly more often. And testing for autism tends to come during the vaccination schedule. One has nothing to do with the other.
Sandra, are you talking about the seriously flawed Denmark study which never even studied regressive Autism. Again, there were numerous flaws with that if it is the one you are referring to.
Sandra said "I believe it was either Sweden or Norway, who stopped vaccinations for 5 yrs because of the suspicion of vaccines causing Autism."
Actually it was Japan that stopped MMR (their version, it had a troublesome mumps component), and autism still increased. Also there has been a resurgence of measles that has required the closing of college campuses. See first study in this list:
http://www.immunize.org/catg.d/p4026.pdf
In the 1970s they delayed the pertussis vaccine until age two because of fears it caused SIDS. The number of SIDS did not decrease, but the deaths of infants to pertussis increased. It was realized that SIDS could not be blamed on the pertussis vaccine, see:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15889991 ..."An antivaccine movement developed in Japan as a consequence of increasing numbers of adverse reactions to whole-cell pertussis vaccines in the mid-1970s. After two infants died within 24 h of the vaccination from 1974 to 1975, the Japanese government temporarily suspended vaccinations. Subsequently, the public and the government witnessed the re-emergence of whooping cough, with 41 deaths in 1979. This series of unfortunate events revealed to the public that the vaccine had, in fact, been beneficial."
Dan, were those Amish monkeys?
Just read the package inserts. EVERY SINGLE ONE states no carcinogen effects, MUTAGENESIS, or FERTILITY studies have ever been tested. Can someone answer WHY NOT? Big Pharma does not give a crap about the health of our children. childhood cancers are on the rise from 20 years ago, autism on the rise, food allergies on the rise, ADHD is on the rise. Childhood diabetes is on the rise yet mention how childhood immunizations are on the rise in the last 20 years and yet nobody sees the link. It's not rocket science. It is not natural to inject a 2 month old baby with 10 viruses at one time. They need to do LONG TERM STUDIES. Sure protect your child from minor illness but develop cancer, diabetes, ADHD later on so we can earn even more money for meds. It's the big pharma circle of money.
I just read the post, and listened to the youtube video. I was so pleased and relieved that someone, finally, someone has so well expressed the interests of the majority of parents. Autism is not caused by vaccination.
Thanks Dr. Offit. I look forward to reading your book. And be assured that you are indeed correct. That tiny minority of wacko parents are out there, but they are definitely in the minority. I know they are going to play the "I am a parent of a child with autism, you must feel sorry for me and grant me unlimited freedom to express complete stupidity" card.
I for one, am not putting up with this anymore. I'm a parent of a child with autism too, and I'm not stupid, and I believe in the scientific method.
Autism is not caused by vaccines. Get over it.
Broken Link: How do you know that Autism is not caused by vaccines if no studies have been done on the population who became sick and regressed into Autism after their shots? No studies have been done. Nilch. Nada. Zero. Just ask Julie Gerberding and Bernadine Healy.
childhood cancers are on the rise from 20 years ago
Actually, they're not. Check out the SEER database. Childhood cancer rates are pretty stable for the most common childhood cancers (leukemias and lymphomas.) I'm not certain about brain tumors, having not studied that, but I can't find any evidence of a rise in brain tumors--in fact, there is a small drop overall since the 1990s.
Mr. Olmsted,
I'm not sure why you posted that study in response to this thread, rather than answering my calling you and your crew out for contributing to the resurgence of the measles here:
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2008/08/thanks_again_jenny_mccarthy_a…
In case you don't bother to come back to Respectful Insolence respond, I just thought I'd e-mail my response to you in addition to posting it in this thread and point out that the "study" you describe is pretty darned crappy. In fact, I even wrote extensively about it when it came out for two different blogs. Heres one version:
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2008/05/some_monkey_business_in_autis…
Read it, and learn. Bottom line: If its abstract describes it accurately, Hewitson's study was too poorly designed and incompetently executed to be evidence of much of anything.
Of course, given how much you and your fellows at AoA hate Paul Offit for his disclosed conflicts of interest, I'm sure you'll be very interested in Dr. Hewitson's undisclosed conflicts of interest:
http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/?p=824
I'm sure I can look forward to your posting an article that is equally outraged about the numerous undisclosed conflicts of interest in the autism biomed movement. Heck, I even listed a few of them for you here:
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2008/07/more_execrable_journalism_abo…
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2008/08/sharyl_attkisson_of_cbs_and_g…
No, no. No need to thank me. I'd have done the same thing for David Kirby, J.B. Handley, or anyone else at AoA.
Orac
P.S. Lest you think that I only view the ethical misadventures of your biomed heroes dimly, please, feel free to peruse this post:
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2008/08/when_clinical_trials_are_desi…
No, but I bet they were taken care of by Dr. Eisenstein at HomeFirst in Chicago. :-)
Dianne stated: "I'm not certain about brain tumors, having not studied that, but I can't find any evidence of a rise in brain tumors--in fact, there is a small drop overall since the 1990s".
Yeah, right Dianne. My husband worked for a small company and 4 of his co-workers were just diagnosed with brain tumors last year. There has been an huge serge in this area also.
I also found it very alarming that many physicians blamed their patients' A.L.L. Leukemia on their vaccines (VAERS reports filed by their physicians).
Okay, Dawn, in your last post you were talking about *childhood* cancers being on the rise. And now, as evidence, you are listing four adults being diagnosed with brain tumors? Totally apart from the fairly obvious conclusions (such as, if they all worked at the same company, their immediate working conditions seem to be a more likely culprit), and totally apart from the fact that coincidences do happen, and totally apart from your utter lack of evidence, these are adults you're talking about, and thus not evidence of a spike in childhood cancers.
VAERS is pretty unreliable as evidence of anything. It's too easy to manipulate. It can warn that something should be investigated, but that's the extent of it. Since the vaccine-autism link *has* been studied, we don't have to just rely on VAERS. We can look at the actual studies. And apart from some small, poorly designed studies run by people with a significant profit incentive, the studies have been pretty conclusive. There is no correlation between vaccination rates and autism. There is therefore no reason to conclude that the one causes the other. If it did, there would be a correlation, and there is not.
Have vaccinated children developed autism? Sure. Most autists were vaccinated, just like most people of every demographic. Most homosexuals have been vaccinated, and the rate of homosexuality (well, admitted homosexuality) has been rising, yet I don't see anyone claiming a link there -- probably because most admitted homosexuals are normal functioning adults and thus enjoy an independence which autistic children do not. They are thus less vulnerable to the sort of exploitation which has driven the anti-vax movement.
Here is a little more information about measles mortality before and after the introduction of measles vaccine in 1963. Measles mortality had already declined 97.7% even before measles vaccine was introduced in 1963 because of improved living standards.
http://www.healthsentinel.com/graphs.php?id=20&event=graphs_print_list_…
The above links to a graph showing the decline in deaths from measles from 1900 to 1987. What is striking is the decline in mortality rate from a high of 14.3 per 100,000 to .2 per 100,000 in 1963.
Measles Vaccination Information
Pre-Vaccinations
In 1900 there were 13.3 measles deaths per 100,000 population. By 1955, the death rate was 0.03 deaths per 100,000, a decline of 97.7%, eight years before the first measles shot.(5)
The death rate from measles in the mid-1970's (post-vaccine) remained exactly the same as in the early 1960's (pre-vaccine).(6)
In the United States and England, between 1915 and 1958, there was a 95% decline in the measles death rate.(7)
Before the vaccine was introduced, it was extremely rare for an infant to contract measles. However, by 1993 more than 25% of all measles cases were occurring in babies under one year old. CDC (Centre for Disease Control) officials attribute it to the growing number of mothers who were vaccinated during the 1960's, '70's, and '80's. (When natural immunity is denied, measles protection cannot be passed onto their babies.) (8)
With Vaccinations
In the U.S.A. the measles vaccine has been available since 1957 and the triple vaccine against measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) has been available since 1975. In spite of all this, from 1983 to 1990 there has been a 423% increase in the number of measles cases.(9)
In 1985 the American government reported that 80% of notified cases of measles had been vaccinated. 10 In 1986 there was a measles epidemic at Corpus Christi, Texas, in which 99% of the children affected had been vaccinated against measles, and over 95% were supposedly immune. 11
According to Dr. Atkinson of the CDC, "measles transmissions has been clearly documented among vaccinated persons. In some large outbreaks...over 95% of cases have a history of vaccination..." (12)
According to a study by the World Health Organisation (W.H.O.), those vaccinated against measles are 14 times more likely to contract the disease than those left unvaccinated. (13)
Effects of Vaccinations
Serious nervous system and other reactions to measles vaccine have been repeatedly reported in medical literature. The measles vaccine may cause ataxia (inability to co-ordinate muscle movements), learning disability, retardation, encephalitis, retinopathy, blindness, aseptic meningitis, seizure disorders, paralysis and death. Other researchers have investigated it as a possible cause of or co-factor for multiple sclerosis, Reye's Syndrome, Guillain-Barre syndrome, blood clotting disorders, and juvenile-onset diabetes. (14)
During measles, the body literally 'burns' up the cells containing the invading virus. This incineration takes place at the site of the spots or rash, which measles is known for. If this is stopped, as by a vaccination, then the virus survives and lives on in the body, only to cause havoc later on. A high proportion of individuals who had the vaccination were found in adult life to have developed cervical cancer, skin cancers and multiple sclerosis.(15)
References
1Neil Z Miller, "Vaccines: Are They Really Safe And Effective?", (New Atlantean Press, 1994), pp. 25-29. ISBN 1-881217-10-8
2Randeall Neustaedter, "The Immunization Decision", (North
Atlantic Books, 1990), pp. 53-58. ISBN 1-55643-071-X
3Leon Chaitow, "Vaccination And Immunisation: Dangers, Delusion and Alternatives", (The C.W. Daniel Co. Ltd. 1994), pp. 107-110. ISBN 0-85297-191-4
4Trevor Gunn, "Mass Immunisation, A Point in Question", (Cutting Edge Publications, 1992), pp. 17-18. ISBN 0-9517657-1-X
5Robert Mendelsohn MD, "How To Raise a Healthy Child ... In Spite of Your Doctor", (Chicago: Contemporary Books, 1984), p.216.
6 J. Cherry, "The New Epidemiology of Measles and Rubella," (Hospital Practice, 1980), p. 49.
7 Michael Anderson, "International Mortality Statistics" (Washington, DC: Facts on File, 1981) pp 182-183.
8 Daniel Q Haney, "Wave of Infant Measles Stems From '60s Vaccinations," Albuquerque Journal, (November 23, 1992), p. B3.
9 What Doctors Don't Tell You, "The WDDTY Vaccination Handbook", The Wallace Press 1991.
10 Centre for Disease Control Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 6th June 1986, U.S.A.
11 New England Journal of Medicine, 26th March 1987, U.S.A.
12 FDA Workshop to Review Warnings, Use Instructions, and Precautionary Information [on Vaccines], (Rockland, Maryland, Sept. 18, 1992), p.27.
13 National Health Federation Bulletin, (Nov. '69). Also see Note 5.
14 See Note 5, p. 215.
15Rønne T. "Measles Virus Infection Without Rash in Childhood is Related to Disease in Adult Life", The Lancet, 5 Jan. 1985, pp. 1-5.
http://www.healthsentinel.com/graphs.php?id=20&event=graphs_print_list_…
The above links to a graph showing the decline in deaths from measles from 1900 to 1987. What is striking is the decline in mortality rate from a high of 14.3 per 100,000 to .2 per 100,000 in 1963, even before the first vaccination.
The death rate from measles in the mid-1970's (post-vaccine) remained exactly the same as in the early 1960's (pre-vaccine).
Calli stated: "There is no correlation between vaccination rates and autism. There is therefore no reason to conclude that the one causes the other. If it did, there would be a correlation, and there is not".
What studies have been done on the population who received their shots after developing normally and then regressed into Autism directly after their vaccines? There are none that I am aware of. If you know something that Bernadine Healy and Julie Gerberding do not, I would suggest that you get in touch with them. This could be ground breaking news.
Calli also stated: "Most homosexuals have been vaccinated, and the rate of homosexuality (well, admitted homosexuality) has been rising, yet I don't see anyone claiming a link there -- probably because most admitted homosexuals are normal functioning adults and thus enjoy an independence which autistic children do not".
As far as homosexuality is I do believe the main cause is chemicals in this case....don't you find it all too convenient that hormone altering chemicals have found their way into the majority of our health & beauty products (especially baby products)? Prescription drugs found in our tap water which also can alter your hormones? Haven't you heard of the problems with fish these days and their sex "changing" in our polluted environment? We are destroying this planet and everything in it. So sad.
Hewitson is a litigant in the autism omnibus hearings and Olmsted and his AoA crew think Offit has a conflict of interest?!
Did Hewitson ever report the conflict of interest?
Olmsted is trying to resuscitate a career with the worst science he can find. It's foolish and supported only by the ego stroking he gets from his small following of fanatical parents.
I hope Dr. Offit's book gets him invited on Oprah, GMA and the View. I am a parent of an autistic child and I am sick to death of paranoid and delusional weirdos like Dawn dragging the topic of autism into the recesses of stupidity and human degradation (see Dan Olmsted's writing for more of that).
Isn't it just interesting how Dan Olmsted, the paid puppet blogger of JB Handley can come to Orac's blog and post at will but Dan and his merry band of idiots on the Age of Autism blog don't let critical or contrary comments through their fascist moderation system.
I don't know if Offit's book mentions Olmsted or Handley's crew of miscreants, but maybe that's why Dan showed up here to defend his "position"?
What is striking is the decline in mortality rate from a high of 14.3 per 100,000 to .2 per 100,000 in 1963, even before the first vaccination.
What is more striking is that this is per 100,000 of the population, not of people infected.
So, with roughly 300,000,000 people in the U.S. today, a rate of 0.2 per 100,000 would give 600 people dead from measles today, if the same rate were in play. You seem to be implying this with your statement about the rate continuing into the 1970's.
Notice how the number of cases, in this example from Spain, dropped as the vaccination rate climbed from 60% to 80%
http://www.eurosurveillance.org/images/dynamic/em/v09n04/euro09tmb.gif
Or, in the US
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7a/Rubella-us-1966-93-c…
Vaccines work. Medicine also works and saves lives. Medicine can't do it all, though. People still die from measles in countries with good medical care.
I am a delusional weirdo because I can read between the lines and see the real truth?? Offit Fan, if you are the parent of an Autistic child, why aren't you PISSED off about the CDC LYING to the public about the number of Autistic children there really are now? 1 in 67 elementary school children! 1 in 150 was in 1994!! I would be angry if I were you. Weird that you aren't though. Maybe you are just another parent that was brainwashed into believing that your child was a "good sacrifice" - it was for the "good of mankind". I am really beginning to see that people truly believe it too.
You do the math. 1 in 67. Sick. I guess the real question is why are we being lied to about the real numbers?
https://www.ideadata.org/PartBChildCount.asp
https://www.ideadata.org/arc_toc8.asp#partbCC
https://www.ideadata.org/arc_toc8.asp#partbCC
https://www.ideadata.org/tables29th/ar_1-2.htm
https://www.ideadata.org/tables29th/ar_1-3.htm
http://www.ideadata.org/tables28th/ar_1-2.htm
http://www.ideadata.org/tables28th/ar_1-3.htm
http://www.ideadata.org/tables27th/ar_aa2.htm
http://www.ideadata.org/tables27th/ar_aa3.htm
http://www.ideadata.org/tables26th/ar_aa2.htm
http://www.ideadata.org/tables26th/ar_aa3.htm
http://www.ideadata.org/tables25th/ar_aa2.htm
http://www.ideadata.org/tables25th/ar_aa3.htm
http://www.ideadata.org/tables24th/ar_aa2.htm
http://www.ideadata.org/tables24th/ar_aa3.htm
http://www.ideadata.org/tables/ar_aa2.htm
Dan Olmsted, do you have a brain of your own or do you just borrow JB's from time to time? Did you really just come here and randomly regurgitate a piece of one of your old columns because Orac brought attention to the guy who's going to blow up your sugar daddy's self-aggrandizing little empire?
"Poster presentations must go through a form of peer review before they are presented at the conference; the papers have not yet appeared in a scientific journal."
I remember that one. "A form of peer review". Hilarious! Somebody buy Dan a drink for having the nerve to show up without a clue. He's got spirit.
Offit fan stated: "I am a parent of an autistic child and I am sick to death of paranoid and delusional weirdos like Dawn dragging the topic of autism into the recesses of stupidity and human degradation (see Dan Olmsted's writing for more of that)".
It figures, my previous post with plenty of links was held up by the moderator.
What I don't understand is why parents of Autistic children are o.k. with the fact that the CDC is spreading their usual lies - Autism currently affects 1 in 67 elementary school children. If my link is approved, you will be able to do the math. If it were me, I would be very upset that the CDC is spouting off the 1 in 150 - which was actually from 1994. So, why aren't you upset about it? Talk about a great deal of injustice on behalf of the CDC with regard to the Autistic community.
What I truly don't understand is that from the sounds of it - many posters on this forum are far more comfortable with losing their child to Autism than to death from one of these diseases - and many posters do have vaccine-damaged children (though they are in total denial about it). They are totally at peace with the damage done to their child (not just Autism) because in their own mind, it was for the "sake of the program" or it was "a service to their fellow man".
Kind of reminds me of the warped mentality of China. If you don't have a boy, heck, we "recommend" that you "throw out" your baby girl with that day's trash. The citizens actually accepted the fact when they were told only 1 child allowed per household! "It's for the good of mankind though" officials led them to believe because their population was quickly growing. Whether or not this is still being practiced, I'm not sure, but it was occurring in the 1990's.
Well, if our "officials" state that these diseases are something to fear - than it must be so. In fact, they have even been so gracious as to "supply" us with this evidence too. LOL
Of course, given how much you and your fellows at AoA hate Paul Offit for his disclosed conflicts of interest, I'm sure you'll be very interested in Dr. Hewitson's undisclosed conflicts of interest:
A very real question is why didn't Mr. Olmsted report those conflicts when he ran his blog piece on the abstracts.
It seems unlikely to this reader (given the connections of Dr. Hewitson back to AoA) that Mr Olmsted wouldn't have known.
What I truly don't understand is that from the sounds of it - many posters on this forum are far more comfortable with losing their child to Autism than to death from one of these diseases
My child is not "lost", thank you very much. No, really, I can see him sleeping right over there.
The whole false logic of there being a choice doesn't fly.
If there were a choice between infectious disease and autism, we could have that debate. That isn't the discussion. The discussion was (at one time) do vaccines cause autism. Had that one panned out, we could have the discussion you want ("chose between disease and autism").
Instead, we are stuck with endless rounds of "why is this discussion still going on"
"...I am a delusional weirdo because I can read between the lines and see the real truth??"
"...You do the math. 1 in 67. Sick. I guess the real question is why are we being lied to about the real numbers?"
Okay Dawn, here's the math - from the data you provided, specific to autism.
From Table 1-4 (2006)
Autism: Child count 125,944 in the elementary school age group 6-11 (out of about 25 million U.S. children in that age group). That equals about .5 percent (1 in 200).
From Table 1-16 (2006)
Autism: .43% as a percentage of the resident population in the 6-17 age group. (1 in 230)
Channeling from Portland? stated: "If there were a choice between infectious disease and autism, we could have that debate. That isn't the discussion. The discussion was (at one time) do vaccines cause autism. Had that one panned out, we could have the discussion you want ("chose between disease and autism").
Actually, maybe you weren't aware of the fact that no studies have been done yet according to Julie Gerberding and Bernadine Healy on the "regressive Autistic". So, yes that is why we are still debating the issue. It is still a possibility that vaccines cause Autism in some individuals.
Do'c, I provided the links. Don't distort the information supplied.
Dawn dear, you've been drinking again, haven't you? And not taking those pills that the nice doctor prescribed especially for you? It's not wise, dear. You're going to have to stop hanging out in biker bars with Kelli Ann. She's having a bad effect on you. :)
Dan Olmsted showing how well he does research said "In the U.S.A. the measles vaccine has been available since 1957 and the triple vaccine against measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) has been available since 1975."
BZZZT... WRONG! WRONG, WRONGETY WRONG!
Where did you get those "facts"? From JB Handley or one of your other handlers? Good grief, man, those are easily available bits of information available free to the public, and you get it completely wrong.
Oh, and if you think I'm going to help you by telling you the correct information, forget that. You are just going to have to use your "investigative reporter" skills for that. The same ones that took you to Lancaster, PA where you completely overlooked a clinic catering to and studying the Amish.
Are anti-vaxers loud, shrill, evidence-resistant people with bad rhetorical skills or is it just my imagination?
With the short period of time that autism has been recognized as a disorder, the changing definition with time, and the cause unknown, is it any surprise there's confusion? Add to the mix litigators and convenient scapegoats (CDC, FDA, Big Pharma) and the emotional impact of afflicted children, and you've got wonderful growth medium for woo, denialism, and general batshit shrieking.
What if the cause is genetic and there's nothing an autistic child's parents could have done differently aside from not mate? There's a strong sense of something being unfair and a natural search for a cause. And when that cause is not readily forthcoming, there's plenty of societal pressure to find a scapegoat, even without the influence of the ambulance-chasing class.
So while the hard, thankless work of researchers goes on to find an actual cause and cure, we get a lot of sound and fury, mostly misguided but some mendacious. Between studies and natural experiments, there's no evidence that vaccines (with or without thimerosol) cause autism - none. You can squeeze that turnip all you want but you'll get no blood and what's worse is that repeatedly researching this hypothesis diverts effort from finding the actual cause and cure.
People prefer stories to statistics, the logical impossibility of proving a negative escapes most, and the human capacity for self-deception is almost unlimited, so maybe it's reasonable to expect some people to buy into the fable of a vaccine/autism connection. But really, it's gone on too long - once the nude models and comedians get in on the action, can the clown car and dancing bear be far behind? More with the science and less with the circus please.
Hey Dan boy,
How much does JB pay you to regurgitate antivax trash? Or is it your good friend Blaxill who is bankrolling you? How much are you paid to report whatever JB tells you to? That's not a conflict of interest? If you question this tripe you're out of a job, right? And while you're at it, tell us how much Kirby is paid to be a PR man for the wingnuts he obviously has no respect for?
"Do'c, I provided the links. Don't distort the information supplied."
Dawn, it's never too late to back to school, and there's never anything wrong with saying that you don't understand something or that you need some help - even if just to refresh your memory on children's math. Just something for you to consider.
I used the data you provided and did some fourth grade math (well it was fourth grade when I was a kid, it could be second grade now) - basic percentages and proportions.
Perhaps you'd like to share your Biblical math, DAN math, or heck, maybe Dan Olmsted could just jump in and explain this one in plain english to you.
"maybe Dan Olmsted could just jump in and explain this one in plain english to you."
He's right Dawn. Unless there is maybe an oddball state or two, there is no representative "1 in 67" with autism in the IDEA data in the age group you mention. In fact the IDEA data show long-term stability, and likely diagnostic substitution, so you may want to steer away from that in your current (yet outdated) repertoire.
Maybe you were confused about something you heard, or maybe you just didn't quite understand something you read. It could even be that you were given some misleading information, and weren't able to see why it was probably misleading.
Don't give up though. It's parents like you who will make a difference. Science does not have all the answers, and science doesn't care like you obviously do.
Let them call you "math challenged" or even "clueless". In your heart of hearts, you know the truth regardless of what the science, or any "data" says. That's what matters. Even if the CDC isn't really lying when they cite the 1 in 150, you go ahead continue to claim they are. Without your added voice (intelligent or not), their side gains the upper hand. Never give up that good fight, even if you are completely wrong.
- Love and compassion,
Dan Olmstead Stand-In
Dan, what was the deal with Lancaster County, anyway? Did the CSC kids have the "wrong kind of autism?"
So I was hanging out with some friends the other day and, somehow, the topic of vaccines came up. One girl said "it's so scary to get your kids vaccinated these days." When asked why, she said that she had seen one of those "specials" they have on news programmes about a possible link between vaccines and autism.
I tried to explain to her that there isn't a link, it's just something a lobbying group has made up. She said "yeah, but it was on the news." So I tried to explain to her that studies have been done and they don't show a link, but she just kept saying that it was on the news.
So I tried a different strategy. I asked her if she knew how terrible a lot of the vaccine-preventable diseases were. Finally, she agreed that she would vaccinate her kids because it would be far worse to end up with something like polio, but that it's just scary to think that you could be hurting them as well.
This is in Canada. It's spreading!
My husband worked for a small company and 4 of his co-workers were just diagnosed with brain tumors last year.
I'm sorry about your husband's coworkers and it sounds like a cluster that should be investigated, but that doesn't change the fact that that the overall rate of brain cancer in the US is falling currently. No one knows what causes brain cancers, but it's not vaccines and not cell phones. (Incidentally, do you mind telling me what type of work your husband does? The reason for the high rate of brain cancers at his company could be anything from bad luck to a major radium deposit under the building, but if it would be interesting to investigate further in case their is a correlation with his job.)
I think parents who vaccinate are nothing but little puppets with the government pulling their strings. How could a loving parent who clains to care about the health and safety of their child vaccinate? This is to EVERY parent who vaccinates...shame on you for blindly trusting your doctor without knowing the ingredients that are being injected into your child. I bet you read food labels in the grocery store to check if it is healthy enogh for your child to consume. Do you also buy 100 % juice for your toddler? It does not a bit of good if you are injecting monkey kidney, bovine serum and formeldayde into your child. I think parents who vaccinate without questioning the ingredients inside are shameful. Next time you bring your child in for an injection ask to see the package insert and read the whole thing. You would probably end up changing your mind like I did .
Squeaky_wheel, maybe you should look a little harder at that graph. In 1964, the mortality was well above the "0.0" line. It was about .2 per 100,000, as you said. By 1968, the mortality had dropped to the "0.0" line where it has stayed ever since. Presumably there is still the occasional death from measles, but it's well below the rate in the early 1960s. .2 per 100,000 translates to 600 per year in the general population, as Sullivan pointed out above. We aren't losing 600 per year to measles.
But you should poke around on that site a bit more. You should look at this chart which shows both the measles mortality from the first chart and the measles disease rates. Note that mortality was dropping steadily but disease rates were not. This implies that the lower mortality rate was due to better and better medical care that saved patients who would otherwise have died. But the disease rate plummets after the introduction of the vaccine. This implies that fewer people became patients who had to be saved by medical efforts.
I'd rather not get the disease at all than to get it and pull through after a harrowing stay in the ICU. But that's just me.
My, my, my... the antivax trash like Handley's boy Olmstead and AntivaxDawn certainly crawl out from their rocks as fast as they can whenever a popular blogger throws a little science their way. It's like a moth and a light - science and reality are gonna kill their scare tactic funding source but they're drawn to it anyway.
Mr. Olmsted, I do hope you'll answer that question about your employers instead of simply cutting and pasting your old articles. We all know that you used to work for UPI, then left to become editor of Age of Autism. Who pays you?
Dianne stated: "I'm sorry about your husband's coworkers and it sounds like a cluster that should be investigated, but that doesn't change the fact that that the overall rate of brain cancer in the US is falling currently. No one knows what causes brain cancers, but it's not vaccines and not cell phones. (Incidentally, do you mind telling me what type of work your husband does? The reason for the high rate of brain cancers at his company could be anything from bad luck to a major radium deposit under the building, but if it would be interesting to investigate further in case their is a correlation with his job.")
Actually Dianne, his company has already been investigated by a group out of Washington, D.C. Amazingly enough, they couldn't find anything. He worked in an office.
Brain cancer rates falling? Yeah right. Just like people today are living longer than ever before. Another, yeah right. Well, if our government officials say so then it must be.
Devin Said:
Great example. Do you think 100% juice is 100% pure fruit juice and free from any of the scary chemical compounds that you claim are in vaccines? Until you get a better handle on the concept of concentration and chemistry, maybe you should keep your irrational fears bottled up.
kimberlyn said:
Maybe because all of the individual components have been tested? Maybe because there is no plausible biologic reason? Maybe because there has been no upsurge in infertility and cancer and 3-armed babies?
Real evaluation of any vaccine can only be done after the vaccine has been in routine use for a substantially long period of time. All the WWII servicemen and women were demonstrably fertile after they came home and started making babies. Some of them are still alive, and reasonably healthy for their age. The first children to get the polio vaccine are still alive (and walking without braces and crutches!). My generation was fertile and didn't produce 2-headed babies at any higher rate than my grandmother's generation.
notmercury said:
Great example. Do you think 100% juice is 100% pure fruit juice and free from any of the scary chemical compounds that you claim are in vaccines? Until you get a better handle on the concept of concentration and chemistry, maybe you should keep your irrational fears bottled up.
'CLAIM" are in vaccines. You afraid to actually read the ingredients inside. I bet you don't even have kids.I have NO fears because I do not vaccinate. My fears used to be what if my children get injured from the vaccines. My children follow a 100 % healthy organic diet without processed sugar or flour and "high fructose corn syrup". My 9 yr old had the flu once and 3 colds in his life....that is it. He has his own natural immune system not some genetically engineered immune system that was created in a lab like the majority of the people here. How does it feel for your kids to have a forever altered immune system? Wonder how you sleep at night knowing your kids are injected with animal fragments and viruses. Yet no manufacturer tests if these ingredients cause cancer or mutates and cause a whole slew of health problems later on. Oh it also states that fertility was not studied either so all of you who vaccinate your daughters and she wonders why she can't conceive naturally 25 yrs from now....hmmmmm maybe you can wonder if it was the 36 vaccines by age 6 you injected in her. I don't "claim" honey it is stated on EVERY vaccine. I would think a parent would want to know if those problems are likely to occur. That is why you vaccinating parents are ignorant
Well, if our government officials say so then it must be.
Do you have any idea what the SEER database is? It is run by the NCI, i.e. the national government. True. But it is a conglomerate of 17 locally run cancer registries, each of which have their own internal controls for consistency and quality of data. Furthermore, the raw data is available to essentially anyone who wishes to see it. You could probably get it yourself simply by asking for it. So for the conspiracy you're positing to work, there would have to be collusion between a particularly data driven section of the national government (Bush has constantly had trouble keeping the NIH in line), multiple state and local agencies, and researchers around the world, many of whom work in countries which not only have no reason to protect the US government but may have grounds for wanting to prove the US data wrong. A conspiracy on that level with that many participants just isn't possible. Someone would have spilled it by now.
If it makes you feel any better, the SEER database only goes back to 1973, well after the measles vaccine came into usage. So, theoretically, a large increase in brain cancer could have occurred in the late 1950s when the first vaccines were used and there'd be no way to know with this particular database.
Brain cancer is a weird one, with few known etiologies. I'm not sure it's even related to smoking. Brain radiation is a risk, but I'm not sure what else. Best wishes to your husband's colleagues.
"Poster presentations must go through a form of peer review before they are presented at the conference"
Does anybody really know anybody who has had a poster turned down?
Oh dear lord.
"Even if you're wrong, keep screaming, so you can drown out the voices who are right, because all that matters is our cause."
Good job Dan. You finally admit, with your advice that being correct/incorrect or right/wrong doesn't matter to you. The only thing that matters is that you get your share of media attention, and that your "cause" wins.
Way to go.
My kid just had to get 5 shots, mostly due to bad record keeping by his previous doc in MO. (No, i'm not suing. Stop it.) In one day. Thus far, no ebul autism. He's not suddenly feverish, and retreating into his own world. (Well, other than the video game-induced one.) In fact, he's the same smart, talkative, slightly goofy kid with the eating habits of a swarm of locusts that he's always been.
Therefore, based on the same knowledge in "My heart of hearts", (why does that make me think of Dennis Leary), and using the same science as all the other dodos, vaccines do NOT cause autism.
There, that's settled.
Also, I'm glad to see the antivax side, like "Dawn" is also echoing the John Best "HOMOS ARE TEH EVUL" line. Funny how often homophobia comes up in antivax discussions. But then, that means they're igoring reams of data on the fact that homosexuality among higher mammals is rather common, even outside the bonobono chimps.
But then, ignoring evidence and talking shit is what AntiVaxers do best.
Dan and Dawn,
Please explain these graphs:
http://www.iayork.com/MysteryRays/2008/08/22/measles-and-vaccination/
Devin Said:
Define 100% healthy and organic.
Well I would hope it's his own immune system. How does one replace an entire immune system with one created in a lab? Just curious.
I swear to Odin, I'm changing my name. Dawn-the-other-poster is embarrassing the hell out of me with her paranoia.
Devin...if, 25 years after all her immunizations completed by age 6, my child has trouble conceiving, it just MIGHT be because fertility DROPS after age 25, and is demonstrably lower in the 30's than the 20's.
On the other hand - my children are (and were) very healthy. A few colds, never the flu. Ear infections as infants thanks to genetics and very short eustachian tubes, which they outgrew. LOTS of sports injuries since they loved to participate in sports. And yes, they have had ALL their immunizations. Even the "evil" Guardisil, which they elected to get (I was neutral as to whether they got it or not).
I didn't feed them organic, I didn't make their own baby food. I breastfed and bottle fed. But they are happy, healthy young adults. My anecdotes are just as good as yours.
Funny ozzy, your measles death chart is completely different than mine. I wonder which one is correct? Hmmm..
Dawn ...
Using the same IDEA database that you did, I can show a shocking, thousand-fold increase in traumatic brain injury! IDEA proves that hundreds and hundreds of parents are bashing their toddlers over the head and not being prosecuted for it!
The real reason ... just like with autism, the IDEA data collection method finally provided a checkbox that gave the schools a place to mark the real name of the child's disability. Instead of "retarded", they could mark "traumatic brain injury". Instead of "retarded", they could mark "autism" or "autistic spectrum".
Ah, but Tsu Dho Nimh, might I remind you that traumatic brain injury may also occur in cases of heavy exposure to toxic chemicals? You forgot that one.
Oh, by the way Tsu Dho Nimh, I do thank you for actually being the only person on this board to do the math. You are exactly right - a thousand-fold increase in traumatic brain injury. Thank you for taking the time to look into my links and assess correctly.
Not That Dawn stated: "Devin...if, 25 years after all her immunizations completed by age 6, my child has trouble conceiving, it just MIGHT be because fertility DROPS after age 25, and is demonstrably lower in the 30's than the 20's".
Yeah, Dawn just like it is completely "normal" to suffer from memory loss in your 50's. Well, our government agencies say it must be so, than it is.
Just one question for you. Your children are very healthy? I guess we have different versions of that term. How many medications are they on at the moment? I am betting more than one.
I'll chime in here also. My child is very healthy and is on no medication. She has received all of her vaccinations at the specified time. I'm not bragging or anything but she is only 2 and can already count to 10. It must be because of the vaccines!
Ah, but Tsu Dho Nimh, might I remind you that traumatic brain injury may also occur in cases of heavy exposure to toxic chemicals? You forgot that one.
From the DOE definition itself:
http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/finrule/1999-1/031299a.pdf
Sorry Dawn, it looks like in addition to basic math, reading comprehension might make for a good refresher education opportunity for you.
Dawn - You lose. You want to know how many medications my kids are on currently? One. They are both taking oral contraceptives, since neither one wants to have children at the moment, and yes, they are/were sexually active. No other medications. No vitamins, nothing. They do have ibuprofen, etc, in their medicine chests for use as needed. They take nothing else regularly except the BCP.
Of course, anybody who actually knows anything about autism is going to say, "Hey, wait a minute" when they hear this, because the primary symptoms of autism relate to human communication and social interactions. This is why there is no accepted animal model of autism--because nobody is confident that they could recognize animal autism if such a thing actually exists.
A "form" of peer review? Olmstead's careful use of weasel wording reveals that he is being intentionally deceptive here, rather than merely clueless. Poster presenters submit short abstracts that do not contain enough information for the kind of careful peer review applied to journal submissions. Basically, somebody skims over it, and says, "Yes, this abstract falls within the subject matter of this meeting." A scientist would not call this peer review--but hey, if the guy who looks at it is a scientist--that makes him a peer, right?--and he makes some kind of a judgement, no matter how superficial--that's still a review right? So it's a "sort of" peer review.
A lot of poster presentations never end up as publications, precisely because the work cannot pass peer review--the real kind employed by scientific journals
Dawn, you don't get to re-define words to bolster your case when it falls apart.
Medically, "trauma" refers to a serious or critical bodily injury, wound, or shock. It means "physically damaged" as in by gunshot wounds, drowning, blunt instruments, falls, auto accidents where the kid doesn't stop when the car does ... that kind of traumatic injury.
Brain damage from exposure to toxic chemicals is not called "traumatic". It's called "__name of toxin here__ damage". It's called lead poisoning, it's called "fetal alcohol syndrome", it's called "Mescal bean poisoning". It's not called trauma, no matter how much you want to redefine it.
And don't forget the reason for the vaccines: it's called "measles encephalitis", it's called "paralytic polio", it's called "death due to chickenpox encephalitis", it's called "death from post-diptherial cardiomyopathy",
In my great-great-grandmother's bible it was written as "died of the houping cough, age 3 months".
Ack. Grammer sucks.
The last sentance should read:
"They take nothing else regularly. They only take the BCP daily."
Also, just in case you want to know, they have no chronic illnesses (asthma, diabetes, etc), both children are in honors courses in college.
@Ozzy...yeah, my oldest was reading at 2, and counting, too. Guess the vaccines made her IQ genius level (goodness knows, it couldn't be genetic!!! LOL)
Ack. Grammer sucks.
The last sentence should read:
"They take nothing else regularly. They only take the BCP daily."
Also, just in case you want to know, they have no chronic illnesses (asthma, diabetes, etc).
Both children are in honors courses in college.
@Ozzy...yeah, my oldest was reading at 2, and counting, too. Guess the vaccines made her IQ genius level (goodness knows, it couldn't be genetic!!! LOL)
Sorry for the double post. I tried to stop the first submission to make some corrections (thought I had hit preview, not post. As I said, I'm not a genius).
That's just great, another dose of vitriol from Do'C and his ilk.
Dear Dawn,
First he suggests you don't understand children's math, and now he wants us to believe that you don't understand what you read, or perhaps didn't even read it in the first place. It's like they're trying to imply that you're simply making this stuff up as you go, rather than repeating (parrot-like) from sources you trust.
Trust me Dawn, sources do matter. Keep the faith, and no matter how many times you are shown to be completely incorrect with your own data or claims, ignore that, and always remember that your child will not judge you. Your child does not need to know whether you are right or wrong. Your child does not care whether you have good reading comprehension, or whether or not you are a 4th grade math whiz (unless maybe they need help with their homework). Your child simply needs you to love them, and fight for what you know to be right (even if it's wrong). Just fight.
Love and compassion,
Dan Olmsted Stand-In
Not That Dawn stated: "Dawn - You lose. You want to know how many medications my kids are on currently? One. They are both taking oral contraceptives, since neither one wants to have children at the moment, and yes, they are/were sexually active. No other medications. No vitamins, nothing. They do have ibuprofen, etc, in their medicine chests for use as needed. They take nothing else regularly except the BCP".
Be sure to look at the lengthy list of side effects for the pill. I'm sure in a few decades you will be kicking yourself for your daughter's thyroid problems or whatever else ails her due to one "medication" that she is on.
Tsu Dho Nimh stated: "In my great-great-grandmother's bible it was written as "died of the houping cough, age 3 months".
Is this the same Bible that states "Do not look upon man for salvation, but upon Me, the Creator of all things?"
Tsu Dho Nimh also stated: "And don't forget the reason for the vaccines: it's called "measles encephalitis", it's called "paralytic polio", it's called "death due to chickenpox encephalitis", it's called "death from post-diptherial cardiomyopathy",
Let us not forget that encephalitis is also an adverse reaction to many vaccines. Just how "rare" that is among many other reactions is exactly what we are debating here.
"We all know that you used to work for UPI, then left to become editor of Age of Autism."
A Deafening Silence,
I'm afraid you do not seem to have all your facts straight.
Firstly, by postulating that I used to work for UPI, you're implying that I was participating in some sort of master plan from an imagined evil leadership of UPI. It's simple really, I followed the story wherever it led.
Secondly, your assumption that I left to become editor of Age of Autism, is inaccurate.
A basic google search to one year ago, will show you that I contributed independently to Age of Autism (then called rescuepost.com).
"Dan Olmsted wrote The Age of Autism column for United Press International and is now an independent journalist based in Washington, focusing on autism and related issues. He can be reached at Olmsted.dan@gmail.com."
Best,
Dan Olmsted Stand-In
The rarity of encephalitis cases as a direct result of vaccination is not what's being debated here. It's known to be on the order of less than 1 or 2 in 1,000,000 for most vaccines. There's little evidence to support that even in those 1 in a million cases, the vaccine is the definite cause of the encephalitis.
So now Dawn, bring on some of that home-cooked math, and show us the incidence of encephalitis brought on by infection with the diseases the vaccinations are designed to inhibit the spread of. It should be easy for you, because there is a much higher incidence to work with.
After that, please consider apologizing to the parents of children whose very health (and in some cases, lives) depend on the success of vaccination. You should apologize for selfishly, and cluelessly trying to facilitate the spread of infectious disease, because whether you realize it or not, that's what you're doing.
"There's a really, really visceral hatred of Dr. Offit among the Jenny McCarthy clan, to the point of death threats and times when the University of Pennsylvania had to provide armed guards to protect him. Even if all the bad things the antivaccine movement say about Dr. Offit were true (they're not), this goes far beyond the pale."
Hey Dawn (yes that Dawn), did you overlook the whole topic? You spew your religious view point on a science blog (which, does not belong, scientifically speaking), your obvious homophobic views (see also religion), and your stead fast belief in being anti-vaccination. Never once, did you as a obviously proud godly woman, ever apologize, or do anything to distance yourself from individuals who are willing to take there beliefs to the extreme of death threats? I thought the bible said (if your gonna try and insert it's credibility here) "thou shall not kill"? Hmmm, belief system aside, is that supposed to be considered "acceptable" behavior (and a cause that you would want to align yourself with)? Do you see any pro-vaccine people behaving that way (Im sure you got data stashed some where to prove me wrong)? I think you missed the content in this particular posting (and I will be nice, and not say that it could be related to your comprehension abilities, rather you allowing your beliefs to cloud all reasonable judgment).
"Firstly, by postulating that I used to work for UPI, you're implying that I was participating in some sort of master plan from an imagined evil leadership of UPI."
"Dan Olmsted wrote The Age of Autism column for United Press International"
?????
(click image upon arrival)
Dawn - who is this Huge Serge? How much does he charge?
who is this Huge Serge?
Maybe it's really a huge Sarg (coffin auf Deutsch). Probably needed to bury the victims of the anti-vax movement. Including the autistic people who, after years of hearing how they are "lost" and worse off than kids who die of preventable diseases, commit suicide.
Dawn, this does not make much sense. "Regressive autism" is just autism. It is a common pattern for children to exhibit apparent "regression" around the time when they would have gotten their vaccine shots (whether they actually get them or not), although it is now known that less obvious symptoms are evident well before this.
You can't have it both ways. You can't simultaneously argue that vaccinations are a major cause of autism and that vaccine-induced autism is so rare that it is undetectable unless you study some particular subpopulation of autistic kids.
Let me break it down for you: If there are many kids with autism due to vaccinations, then not giving the vaccination should have a big impact on the overall autism statistics. The fact that it does not means that vaccine-induced autism (if it exists at all, which is unlikely) must be be so rare that it doesn't even make a blip in the overall autism statistics.
"How much does JB pay you to regurgitate antivax trash? Or is it your good friend Blaxill who is bankrolling you? How much are you paid to report whatever JB tells you to? That's not a conflict of interest? If you question this tripe you're out of a job, right? And while you're at it, tell us how much Kirby is paid to be a PR man for the wingnuts he obviously has no respect for"?
This is the most ironic and hilarious thing that I have read in a long time. Some clown complaining about Dan's "conflict of interest" on a post about Paul (for profit) Offit of all people... LOL! Good one.
Ah, but what you fail to understand is that those "blunt force trauma" cases are misdiagnosed. The broken bones, black eyes, burns, etc. are all caused by vaccines. You can do a search on "Yurko" for details.
"Dan Olmsted wrote The Age of Autism column for United Press International"
Okay Kev. I'll concede the point. I used to work for UPI.
But try not to lose sight of the bigger picture. Whether or not I worked for UPI, or regardless of whether or not Dawn presents evidence that undermines her own claims, those posters underwent a form of peer review.
Dawn - re: health problems related to taking birth control pills.
Well, tell you what. If my mother (who took them when they first came out, at the very high doses used initally), or I (who still takes BCPs) or my children ever develop problems from taking the drug, I'll worry about it. Yes, medications have risks. Yes, I have read the package inserts. I know the risks and side effects, so do my children. None of us are blindly taking medication. We currently feel the benefits outweigh the risks.
Most likely, my children will give their children, if they have any, vaccines. If they don't, it won't be because of a false fear of vaccines causing autism, exposure to vaccine ingredients of any kind or any other irrational fear. Vaccines would be withheld for sensible, rational reasons - i.e. immunodepression or reaction to a specific vaccine.
We have a family history of what would probably be now diagnosed as autism and/or PDD. Goes back several generations (at least 5...according to family letters which document behaviors that now would be considered autistic, instead of "naughty" or schizophrenic or retarded). Obviously, vaccines have not been the cause nor have they had an impact on the genetics.
Life is full of risks. I ride motorcycles. Yeah, it's a high risk I could be injured. My children go to college hundreds of miles away from home. Yeah, they could be hurt, attacked, be in a hurricane or tornado. Life is risky. We live it anyway. But at least we don't live it in fear due to false information.
Dawn stated:
Funny thing - people are living longer than ever before. If you don't believe the data, then how are we to convince you of the truth?
I'm reminded of an apocryphal story I heard years ago:
The moral of this short story is that there is no way to reason people out of a belief that they didn't reason themselves into.
This latest was the best - or worst - yet. Since decreasing brain cancer rates and increasing lifespan don't fit into her delusional frame, Dawn dismisses them as disinformation spread by a massive governmental conspiracy to cover up "the truth".
If you can't argue with the data, counter it with paranoid delusions. They didn't cover that strategy in my high school debate class.
The only point in countering these increasingly irrational arguments is to keep people who don't know better from thinking they might be correct. Just like the time and effort wasted countering the delusions of Dawn, Dan and the rest, the research resources that are being spent (and will be spent in the future) "researching" implausible hypotheses (like "vaccines cause autism") are probably necessary to keep the "average citizen" from thinking that there is any truth to them, but they are an absolute waste as far as actually finding any useful information about autism.
Prometheus
[You afraid to actually read the ingredients inside. I bet you don't even have kids.I have NO fears because I do not vaccinate. My fears used to be what if my children get injured from the vaccines. My children follow a 100 % healthy organic diet without processed sugar or flour and "high fructose corn syrup". My 9 yr old had the flu once and 3 colds in his life....that is it. He has his own natural immune system not some genetically engineered immune system that was created in a lab like the majority of the people here.]
Let's count the fallacies, shall we?
[You afraid to actually read the ingredients inside.]
Doggerel #43: "You're Just Afraid of the Truth!"
[I bet you don't even have kids.]
Doggerel #93: "You're Not a Scientist!"
[My 9 yr old had the flu once and 3 colds in his life....that is it.]
This smacks of John Best's "I breezed through the measles as a kid, therefore it's not fatal and the millions of kids who've died of measles every year don't exist!"
As for the rest, are you actually implying that white sugar and bleached flour somehow affect the immune system?!
THAT DOES NOT COMPUTE
THAT DOES NOT COMPUTE
THAT DOES NOT COMPUTE
Do'C: After that, please consider apologizing to the parents of children whose very health (and in some cases, lives) depend on the success of vaccination. You should apologize for selfishly, and cluelessly trying to facilitate the spread of infectious disease, because whether you realize it or not, that's what you're doing.
I couldn't agree more. See, I teach in a (gasp!) public school and am thus privy to all of the germs contained by 1600 bodies daily. And some of them aren't vaccinated, because their parents have apparently drunk the same kool-aid as Dawn and her ilk. (Vaccination is mandatory in our state, although there are medical exceptions and any parent can request a religious exemption no matter what their religious beliefs may be.) And these kids came down with whooping cough a few years back after a church trip to a foreign country. Hmmm. Since they weren't vaccinated, they brought the disease back with them to school. One teacher had to take unpaid leave of absence for two weeks, because her husband was undergoing cancer treatment and the chance of her bringing the bacteria home and killing him was just too great. As if it wasn't enough that her husband & the father of her four kids was dying, she had to lose 2 weeks' worth of income at a time when they could least afford it. So it's not just other kids who are at risk... it's adults, too. Selfishness, pure and simple. Amanda Peet's description of these parents as "parasites" is right on.
Oh, get serious. Abstinence is soooo much healthier. Get frisky with the sweetie a few times, bear a few kids, do without until menopause, hope you remember how -- isn't that a much better idea than remembering to take those pills and dealing with the risks?
If not, well, babies are nice to have around and after the first dozen or so you can pretty much leave care of the younger ones to the older ones.
What is this "stand-in" BS? I posed the question to Mr. Olmsted, not to his stunt double, Kim Stagliano, J. Bully Handley, or anyone else.
Mr. Olmsted, who underwrites your paychecks these days, now that UPI doesn't?
"So it's not just other kids who are at risk... it's adults, too".
Well, ALL adults should be up to date on all vaccinations. Adults should be forced to get Hep A, Hep B, MMR, DTaP, rotavirus, Prevnar and flu shots every 2 years... just in case. I would much rather you FORCE the vaccines on adults with properly functioning immune systems as opposed to forcing them on babies with developing immune systems. So, get to work... you guys have a lot of ground to cover.
Get in line people. If you don't... You have no right to complain about others who don't vaccinate.
Adults should be up to date - Did you not read the part about cancer treatment? Are you aware that people undergoing cancer treatments or who've had organ transplants have compromised immune systems, and therefore can't be vaccinated? They depend on herd immunity every bit as much as kids. Perhaps you'd like them and all of their household contacts to be permanently quarantined? And let's not forget the newborns who are too young to be vaccinated... they, too, depend on herd immunity. Selfishness based on pseudoscience is downright dangerous to a significant part of the population.
Does anybody really know anybody who has had a poster turned down?
Ozzy,
depends on the conference. Some conferences cull 30% (for example) of all abstracts before assigning to posters or oral sessions.
From my read of the instructions for IMFAR, they don't appear to do review. They seemed to accept abstracts up to the point that the conference was basically full, then stop. Of course, there is some clip-level. If someone submitted their abstract on, say, aerodynamics of wing shapes, I'm sure that IMFAR would reject it. This is different from a conference that might actually do some peer review where all abstracts are collected and a program committee reviews the abstracts and rejects a certain number.
My guess is that IMFAR will be instituting some form of review for the Chicago conference. If nothing else, they've grown as large as they can handle.
But, it seems a stretch for Mr. Olmsted to be pushing the idea that the abstracts were "peer reviewed". Quite technically, the fact that someone read the abstract and made sure it wasn't a joke or on a totally non-autism subject might be construed as "some form of peer review". It might hold up in court as technically correct, but as far as conveying accurate information about the process, it is incorrect.
Regardless of whatever scientific study shows this/this scientific study shows that....can we all agree that vaccines CAN cause death? Whether it be one in a million, one in a trillion.....you have NO RIGHT to ask ANYONE to sacrifice themself or child for the sake of the "herd". Again, there is no such a thing in my book. However, if there is, what do you think the herd consists of? Do you honestly believe that our "elite officials" vaccinate themselves or children? Are you really that sure of yourself? After reading the vaccine literature, it is the VACCINATED whose pose the greatest risk of all! At least with the unvaccinated you will be able to see symptoms!! Are we in America or did aliens come down and take over the minds of many (LOL)?
Dawn, it's time to close the bottle and put the pipe away.
Move to China D.C. Sessions where you will be able to live under a dictatorship. Just get the heck out of the U.S. because "my kind" are not budging on the subject. Vaccines can injure and kill - that is something that you are obviously o.k. with. I'm not.
you have NO RIGHT to ask ANYONE to sacrifice themself or child for the sake of the "herd"
No one asks you, or anyone to sacrifice his or herself or his/her child for the "herd." For every recommended vaccine, if the risk of the vaccine is X then the risk of contracting the disease is NxX. If N is less than one (i.e. more people are injured by the vaccine than the disease) then the recommendation changes and the vaccine is no longer given to the general population but only to high risk groups and eventually not at all. See small pox as an example: the small pox vaccine was phased out in the US before it was officially eradicated worldwide because more people had adverse reactions from the vaccine than were injured by the disease after a certain point.
The bottom line is that the primary beneficiary of vaccination is the person who is vaccinated. Herd immunity is a nice side benefit, but it's not the main point of vaccination. Individual protection is.
I think aliens have, indeed, taken over the mind of Dawn's "elite officials" - love the ironic air quotes there - since I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say she thinks GWB is the greatest president evah. After all, nobody, but nobody, can deny science and evidence like G-Dub.
(Oh! Wait! He has a Biblical mandate! It's probably in Revelations, just like Big Pharma is!)
Wow -- the "love it or leave it" gag. I haven't had that thrown at me since before Dawn was born.
E stated: " think aliens have, indeed, taken over the mind of Dawn's "elite officials" - love the ironic air quotes there - since I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say she thinks GWB is the greatest president evah. After all, nobody, but nobody, can deny science and evidence like G-Dub.
(Oh! Wait! He has a Biblical mandate! It's probably in Revelations, just like Big Pharma is!)"
I actually think he is cooko for cocoa puffs. Nice try though. He is by far the WORST president yet.
Dianne stated: "No one asks you, or anyone to sacrifice his or herself or his/her child for the "herd." For every recommended vaccine, if the risk of the vaccine is X then the risk of contracting the disease is NxX. If N is less than one (i.e. more people are injured by the vaccine than the disease) then the recommendation changes and the vaccine is no longer given to the general population but only to high risk groups and eventually not at all. See small pox as an example: the small pox vaccine was phased out in the US before it was officially eradicated worldwide because more people had adverse reactions from the vaccine than were injured by the disease after a certain point.
The bottom line is that the primary beneficiary of vaccination is the person who is vaccinated. Herd immunity is a nice side benefit, but it's not the main point of vaccination. Individual protection is".
Oh really? That is not what I am reading in the papers lately or on community forums either. In fact there is so much hatred being thrown towards the anti-vax community that it is quite sad. Many on this forum are responsible for that too. So, yes, many are trying to "force others" to vaccinate. Nice try though. Sorry, but your "kind" is not "entitled" to the life of my children or myself.
Wait a second, Dawn. You're calling the people on this forum responsible for hatred? When you yourself have been ranting, yelling, name-calling, etc. on multiple comment threads? When the main post is about the batshit crazy hatred and death threats being thrown at people like Offit? When you sarcastically use air quotes, implying in the last case that Dianne isn't even a human?
("Kind" can be taken to mean species, fyi.)
Hello, Dawn. I hear the pot calling - he'd like to tell you that you're the kettle.
When you sarcastically use air quotes, implying in the last case that Dianne isn't even a human?
Well, how do you know I am, after all? Maybe I just pass the Turing test...Sorry, couldn't resist. I'm not sure what Dawn means by my "kind" either. Supporters of evidence based medicine? People who vaccinate because the data looks good and they don't believe that there is a vast conspiracy to make up the evidence? Elite officials in on the conspiracy? (I'm kind of complemented at the idea that that could be the answer: I've never been called an elite official before.) Aspies? Eh, I'm not sure she knows either.
If you think that's prime, head back over to the "Thanks again, Jenny McCarthy and Andrew Wakefield! Thanks again for the measles!" comments and you can watch her responding to an immunosuppressed woman by calling her, "Spawn of Satan!"
ps: It's "scare" quotes, not "air" quotes.
Well, ALL adults should be up to date on all vaccinations
Adults should be forced to get Hep A, Hep B, MMR, DTaP, rotavirus, Prevnar and flu shots every 2 years... just in case.
You are just spraying silly around, commenter Adults should be up to date.
Hep A can be acquired by a traveler to an area where it is endemic, and thus spread when the traveler returns home. Hep B is not so infectious, due to transmission methods, but is still a risk. Given that I've traveled to risk areas (as have my adult children) we are all immunized. We also elected to be immunized against Hep B, although our lifestyles put us at low risk.
MMR is of course, measles, mumps, rubella. I have not been revaccinated since I was born before 1957. I would consider a booster shot if there was a significant outbreak in my area, as I work with children.
DTaP: actually, TDap is recommended for adults. My last inoculation was (IIRC) in 2003, after an injury with lacerations in the stable yard. I believe my adult children have also been re-vaccinated, as we are all active outdoor people. You don't want tetanus, no you don't; and I would not like to be the asymptomatic person giving pertussis to the infant siblings of the children I work with.
Rotavirus: is not recommended for adults. Why? Even though adults can be infected with one of the seven antigentic groups, the infection is annoying but not potentially life-threatening. The virus is ubiquitous; almost all kids have an infection by the age of 36 months. Infants < 5 months tend to be protected by maternal antibodies, so the big risk is after 5 months. That is why the oral vaccine is recommended to be administered at two, four and six months.
Prevnar: this is an infant vaccine which protects against infections with Streptococcus pneumoniae. While S. pneumoniae is a normal inhabitant of the human upper respiratory tract (citation), it does cause serious illness world-wide. Pneumococcal infection accounts for more deaths than any other vaccine-preventable bacterial disease. Those most commonly at risk for pneumococcal infection are children between 6 months and 4 years of age and adults over 60 years of age. Virtually every child will experience pneumococcal otitis media before the age of 5 years. It is estimated that 25% of all community-acquired pneumonia is due to pneumococcus (1,000 per 100,000 inhabitants). (citation). Adults over 65 are recommended to get another vaccine, the 23-valent:
Product: Pneumovax® 23 (PS)
Manufacturer: Merck
Year licensed: 1977
Product: Pnu-Imune® 23 (PS)
Manufacturer: Wyeth
Year licensed: 1979
Flu shots. Sheesh, when there are flu shot clinics in every grocery store, why not?
Regardless of whatever scientific study shows this/this scientific study shows that....can we all agree that vaccines CAN cause death? Whether it be one in a million, one in a trillion.....you have NO RIGHT to ask ANYONE to sacrifice themself or child for the sake of the "herd".
Fuck, my irony meter just imploded in record time.
Dawn, you do realise that that same argument can also apply to such actions as shopping, school field trips, school lab experiments, travelling by bike, car etc etc. Nothing is 100% "safe", even living in a bubble wont guarantee 100% safety?
Though, I don't expect a rational response, cue logical fallacies from Dawn in 5, 4 3...
DC Sessions - sorry, my bad. In my part of the country we make fun of people who do that with their fingers - just brought the term across. :)
Dawn said:
Google says: No results found for "Do not look upon man for salvation, but upon Me, the Creator of all things?". What book are you quoting?
If you are talking about the Bible with "Luke, the physician"? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luke_the_Evangelist ... that verse refers to spiritual salvation, not physical healing.
But I'm Buddhist, so technically I'm a heathen unbeliever ... a well-vaccinated heathen.
And, you selfish witch, you have no right to endanger the children of others because of your fears. If you want to remain unvaccinated, and keep your children unvaccinated, stay the hell out of the herd! Stay out of the movies, the schools, the restaurants, the airports, the doctors offices and the rest of the places that the herd has a reasonable expectation will be free of diseases.
I have listened as a baby died because of the stupid parents who didn't vaccinate their toddlers for pertussis. Every time we called lab results to her nurse, we could hear her couging her lungs out, and the pressure of the coughs was rupturing the blood vessels in her eyes and brain from, rupturing the air sacs in her lungs, and the minutes-long sessions of coughing out with no breathing in was killing her brain cells from the lack of oxygen. She took weeks to die.
She was about 3 months old, and her unvaccinated toddler brother caught pertussis from an unvaccinated playmate and infected his baby sister with it. If either ofthose children had been vaccinated, that baby would probably be alive today.
Actually, I like the term. Close enough to "scare quotes" and quite illustrative when done manually.
Dawn, I suggest you stop eating, since otherwise you risk choking to death. You should also stop driving, since that carries a risk of death, too. Of course, being a pedestrian is also dangerous, so better stay inside. You'll also need to find someplace that's never hit by tornados, thunderstorms, or earthquakes.
Do you see how ridiculous that is? Ignoring the magnitude of risk is just silly. Yeah, a vaccine could kill, but tripping and breaking your neck, death from an auto crash, or death from an infectious, vaccine-preventable disease are all more likely.
Nothing is risk-free.
Is "Dawn" the same Dawn who (I'm embarassed to say) was the Libertarian party candidate for governor of Colorado a couple of years back?
Is "Dawn" the same Dawn who (I'm embarassed to say) was the Libertarian party candidate for governor of Colorado a couple of years back?
No, that was (I believe) Dawn Richardson, of Parents Requesting Open Vaccine Education (PROVE). But it might have been yet another Dawn.
That was Dawn Winkler:
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2006/09/more_on_dawn_winkler.php
She is also mentioned in the book "Vaccine" by Arthur Allen.
Dawn, let me speak to you as one mother to another.
I hope "Dawn Crim" is a pseudonym you use on the web. If it is not, consider how much information you are putting out about your sons.
If I remember correctly, Austin is now approaching 19 months old.
Cody is now...14 or 15?
From what you have written elsewhere, I think he is the child of a previous marriage, and may not share the Crim surname.
Maybe you want to rethink how public you are about your kids' information. I know I did.
Dawn, those are just anecdotes and the plural of anecdotes is not data.
Also, considering how you cannot remember the spelling of a very famous man, and your very serious issues with reading comprehension or logic: I suspect how you remember things may not be quite accurate.
Honestly Liz Ditz, why do you even care about how much info I divulge? I really do not want to see another family go through this type of pain. Again, why do you of all people even care?
I actually thought about your question further Liz Ditz and what do I have to hide? I am having my story aired on Medical Veritas. I am not ashamed, rather angry about what has happened. Again, I do not want to see another family endure this same situation. People may call me selfish for no longer vaccinating, but I feel that I am no longer brainwashed. My story is either very unique or I am just a mother who smartened up after her ordeal.
I think I have Dawn figured out. All modern medicine is Bad, and anyone who says differently -- and especially any research that exists to show that medicine is beneficial -- is part of an elaborate conspiracy by the government, who want to wipe us all out a la Hitler. Got it. Also she's fond of post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacies: any illness that manifests subsequent to the receipt of a vaccine was caused by the vaccine, and cannot possibly under any circumstances be traced to anything else.
I guess in her world, we'd all still be dying of polio, smallpox, and bubonic plague. I'm glad I live in the real world.
Dawn - You've had a very unlucky family history. But why blame vaccines for this? Do you actually have any evidence that this was all vaccine-caused and not coincidence? And even if it was all vaccine-caused, isn't it a bit easier to assume that something in your particular family is reacting poorly rather than an issue with the actual vaccines? After all:
Grimalkin: Vaccinated. No problem.
Grimalkin's two sisters: Vaccinated. No problem.
Grimalkin's many many cousins: Vaccinated. No problem.
Grimalkin's husband: Vaccinated. No problem.
Grimalkin's brother and sister n law: Vaccinated. No problem.
All pets Grimalkin has ever had: Vaccinated. No problem.
As a matter of fact, I've never met anyone who has ever had any issues whatsoever beyond a little redness/soreness around the injection site from vaccines. And even that goes away fairly quickly.
Devin - Why do you assume that the luck your children are having is directly related to the lack of vaccination? I was vaccinated as an infant. I've had the measles (not part of the vaccination schedule in the country where I grew up). I had mild diarrhoea once when I was four. Then I had the flu once when I was eight and once again when I was eleven. Other than that, I have never been sick. I am known as the one who can drink milk that's gone so bad it's lumpy and not get sick at all.
Using your logic, I should credit all my good luck and good genes on vaccinations. You, with the exact same history, are crediting it on the LACK of vaccines. Only one of us can be right - so which one of us is it?
It's not merely to save other people's children (the ones you call the heard) from encephalitis, paralysis, and death that your kids are put at risk. Your kids are put at risk so that other people's kids can go to the movies. That's right! People are actually permitted to drive their kids to the movies! And it's not some tiny risk that even the statisticians can barely detect--we are talking about tens of thousands of deaths and millions of injuries a year from automobile accidents.
Of course, I'm sure that you with your great concern for absolute safety, would never use something as dangerous as an automobile for anything other than an absolutely essential purpose, and that you would never allow your own children to ride in one under any conditions. But even then, your kids are not safe. Children are killed on the sidewalks, riding their bikes (but your kids don't ride bikes, I'm sure--4.4 million children inured on bicycles every year)--all because other people want to drive themselves and their kids to the movies or to softball games (don't even ask about the risk of sports to children) or other frivolous activities.
"The injured and dead do not count when it comes to vaccines. Why? I guess that is the real question. I compare the vaccine program to the devastation of Hilter. Eliminate the "weak and unwanted"."
Oh dear. And Godwin's Law comes into play.
What makes you think the injured and dead do not count? Your deep-seated desire to be a victim, perhaps? You are well aware that adverse events are reported and recorded; you have cited VAERS before. For all its weaknesses, it alone is proof that the dead and disabled are not ignored -- unless they *want* to be ignored, that is.
I'm sorry you were injured by the MMR shot, assuming you really were (correlation does not equal causation, and you have shown a remarkable propensity for drawing conclusions on little to no evidence, so I'm afraid I cannot trust your anecdotes to be accureate). Truthfully, pregnant women are not given the MMR for their own benefit. It was not given to protect you. It was given to protect your *child*. But as you do not believe the medical profession has your children's best interests at heart, you probably do not believe that. After all, you believe a vaccine gave your son conjunctivitis, which is pretty far-fetched. And you seem fully prepared to label your children autistic despite the absence of a clinical diagnosis. I hate to say it, but it kind of sounds to me like you are setting your children up for failure by assuming that they will be mentally disabled and then seeking the evidence to prove that supposition, rather than letting your children show you what they are really capable of.
As far as your other relatives, you are describing things which sound like they are not vaccine related at all, and then saying that because the evidence doesn't support your preferred conclusion, doctors must be lying. You are changing the evidence to fit your theory. Given that this means deciding that your children are "damaged" even if the evidence does not suggest that they are, I really hope you'll take a moment to seriously think about your kids, and what it will do to them if you raise them to believe they are mentally disabled, especially if you are wrong about them being disabled.
Regardless of your children's mental condition, can I give you one piece of free advice? This is good no matter what you think about vaccines.
Never define your children by what they cannot do. It is deeply discouraging to them, and makes them think they cannot succeed. This is the central lesson of "Finding Nemo", and it's one which every disabled child's family needs to hear. It's not about what they can't do. It's about what they can. Might your children have autism? Maybe. But let the facts show that to you. And even if they do have autism or other things such as ADHD, don't hold them back because of their disability. They are probably more capable than you think. I grew up with a number of people with learning disorders and other handicaps, and they all said that there was nothing they resented like people not thinking they were capable of anything.
Believe me, I know. I have ADD myself. (It runs in my family.) It's not so bad, really. It just means you have to learn different ways to reach them, and that you'll have to teach them different strategies for getting through life. It's not the end of the world.
Oh, and I had spinal meningitis as a child. They took two spinal taps and still were unable to determine the cause. My mom put her foot down and would not allow them to take a third tap, so I was simply treated as if I had HiB (which is highly contagious) -- isolation ward until I was on the mend. I don't think it's typical for it to take multiple taps, but it's also not unheard of. It's certainly not a reason to assume a vast conspiracy.
Yes trrll, it is called LIVING a normal life. However, I am one mom that "smartened up" after witnessing the horror associated with vaccines - which for whatever reason the medical profession is brainwashed into thinking "doesn't happen - ever" even though the side effects experienced are the ones listed directly on the vaccine literature, but for whatever reason they "don't count". Amazing. I am no longer a fool. I once was, but no longer.
Well, I guess there's nothing we can do for Dawn. I found an old thread she was in, and it seems like she's always been like this. This quote from her pretty much sums it up: "Again, in my case...I am 100% convinced because my infant is all the proof I need."
http://www.schwablearning.org/message_boards/view_discussion.aspx?threa…
I would just like to add to my last post that I have continued to have vaccinations throughout my life because my family travels a lot. I've been to very "exotic" places, so my immune system has really been put to the test.
Devin - have your children ever left the comfort of herd immunity?
Calli, do you really think that little of me? I am praising my children for their gifts - not condemning them for their shortcomings!! I do know that vaccines cause damage, I am a witness to that along with proof of medical records, baby book records, and pictures.
Despite the fact that my children were injured, they will always hold their own special talent, which I will treasure.
Not that I even have to explain this to you, but what else could they have been able to do if it were not for vaccines impeding upon their other possible talents? It makes me wonder and very angry at the same time.
Dawn,
Around the age of two months Deanna ran out of a factor provided by her mother. Being unable to make the factor herself her condition deteriorated and she subsequently died.
You had a run of bad luck, damn bad luck. You then looked for someone or something to blame, and decided people had to be lying to you. Since then you have found people who feed your paranoid ideations and reinforce your need to blame. Your [airquote]friends[/airquote] are using you and have as much concern for you as they do autistic children.
You needed support when you had your run of calamities, but our belief that one can and must stand on his own in times of crisis served you ill. You needed help, and we told you to deal, ignoring the fact that no one is entirely self-sufficient.
Maybe one day our society will be mature enough to help those who need help, and wise enough to know when that help is needed. For the sake of those who come after us I hope that day is soon.
People may call me selfish for no longer vaccinating, but I feel that I am no longer brainwashed.
Exactly right Dawn. It does not matter what anyone else thinks. It doesn't even matter that you don't understand some of the simplest of the data you attempt to present, or that you can't keep it straight. Don't listen to them.
All that matters is that you don't feel brainwashed. You have clearly demonstrated to these blind followers of the religion called "science", that your mommy instincts are superior to any level of intellect or education that you could attain. They are so damn lost that I take pity on them.
It doesn't matter that more children may quite likely become ill (some even very seriously so) as a result of your actions. The world doesn't belong to it's inhabitants as a group, it belongs only to us warrior moms. Everyone else, get out of our way (especially children with weakened immune systems).
You in-di-GO girl!
Jenny McCartney Stand-In
Dawn - Even IF your children's problems were caused by vaccines, what if you could rewind time and not vaccinate them. What if, a couple months or years after you decided not to vaccinate, one of them brought home a vaccine-preventable disease and spread it to the other. What if they both died? What if one died and the other was left with a brain injury far worse than whatever ails him now?
Would it all have been worth it?
Wow, thanks Clay for finding that old thread. I am not being sarcastic, I really mean it.
Grimalkin stated: "Even IF your children's problems were caused by vaccines, what if you could rewind time and not vaccinate them"
YES, YES, YES, a thousand times over - YES -I NEVER would have vaccinated them if informed consent was practiced in the first place!! Period!
Well, if we've got some pretty corrupt people gathering the data - I can only ASSUME that things would have been better. Am I wrong?
Dawn - You would honestly rather put your children in all that risk just because there's a CHANCE that they've received their autism from vaccines? A chance that is incredibly small? Not to mention the much higher chance that they would have had autism anyway AND been put at risk for catching diseases that would have easily been preventable...
Tell me, if you hadn't vaccinated your children and they ended up displaying signs of autism anyway - would you have then assumed you'd made a mistake and taken them to be vaccinated?
Why do you assume that we have corrupt people gathering the data? Does peer review mean nothing to you? And what do you have for evidence that suggests that vaccines actually caused any of your nasty family history? At best, you have "I feel it in my heart of hearts!" Why should I believe you? Why should anyone believe you? Why should I allow you to put MY child at risk based on something as flimsy as that?
Honestly Liz Ditz, why do you even care about how much info I divulge? I am having my story aired on Medical Veritas.
Dawn, it isn't your story alone. If you were only writing about the pre-eclampsia, the c-section, and the alleged post-natal rubella vaccine and how those affected you, I wouldn't comment. But you aren't. You are writing about your older son's issues, and your younger son's issues, using their real names (as far as I can tell).
I am praising my children for their gifts - not condemning them for their shortcomings!
Dawn, over the past 7 months, you and I have frequented some of the same parents' discussion boards. I have never once read a post from you relaying your joy in either of your sons' achievements.
I am particularly mindful of the late, lamented SchwabLearning community, where it was common for parents to celebrate a delayed milestone reached.
If I'm wrong about your public celebration of your sons' abilities--and I am certainly not immune to error--please let me know.
Actually Grimalkin, you really have no grounds to believe what I have just shared. After all, there is no science to back up my claims. You must know that there is no science for a reason.
I won't go into all of my "who/what/why", but just rest assured there are a lot of families who are angry about the injustice with "the system". It is bogus and doesn't exist for all of the injuries and deaths that do occur due to "vaccines". Please, by all means, sign up for the "Vaccine Dangers Group" on Yahoo to learn more by former RN Sheri Nakken.
My children do not have Autism, though ADHD is now going to be considered on the spectrum - if that is the case it will be far more than the U.S. Dept of Education's reported 1 in 67 now. Holy crap...what will the numbers really be?
I have a lot of medical records, pictures, and baby books for my "scientific evidence". Like I said earlier, screw Pubmed. It may serve justice for some things, but sure as hell not vaccines.
I don't know anybody in the medical profession who thinks that adverse reactions to drugs--or to any medical treatment "doesn't happen - ever." The very existence of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is evidence of recognition that the risk of vaccination is genuine, albeit much, much less than the risk of the diseases that vaccines protect against.
But have you actually "smartened up?" Do you allow your children to engage in activities that are far more risky than any vaccine--riding in cars, riding bicycles, playing sports. Yes, of course, these risks are part of living a normal life, just as vaccinations are part of a normal, healthy life. What is abnormal and unhealthy is becoming obsessed with tiny risks, to the point of putting not merely your own children, but those of your neighbors at much greater risk of painful, disabling diseases or death.
Good gravy - I've rarely seen someone so lost tearing up maps and throwing away the compass and sextant so gleefully.
Dawn, whilst we're flapping about in the shallow end, how about them Jews and their so-called 'holocaust'?
Dawn, if you're not outright lying, you may just be exhibiting one of the most obtuse, single-minded forms of confirmation bias I've ever heard of. Let's see -- preeclampsia? That's a life-threatening situation in and of itself. I doubt a rubella vaccine could make it any worse than it already is. I can't say much about your kids, but I'm sure an actual doctor could. As for your brother, I highly doubt the doctors were lying to you -- there's all kinds of exotica out there just waiting to bust out into the human population. Your niece -- how do you know it wasn't genetic? Do you honestly believe that every child with a genetic disorder is born as obviously damaged goods?
Your paranoia does a disservice, not only to families of those affected by autism spectrum disorders and the millions of people alive today because of almost three hundred years of vaccinations, but to the suffers of learning disabilities as well. I have ADHD and severe, chronic depression, and apart from a rather achy day after a tetanus shot in my mid-teens, I've never had any lingering after-effects from any vaccine. (In fact I've volunteered to go with my mother to get a flu shot with her if she'd go. She won't, but that's neither here nor there.) The kindest thing I can say about you is that you need serious and immediate mental health care for some kind of delusional disorder. My less-civilized inclination is to assume you aren't lying and say "You deserve it. Unfortunately, they don't."
trrll stated: "I don't know anybody in the medical profession who thinks that adverse reactions to drugs--or to any medical treatment "doesn't happen - ever." The very existence of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is evidence of recognition that the risk of vaccination is genuine, albeit much, much less than the risk of the diseases that vaccines protect against".
Really? Who? Which Doctors? Which nurses? Yes, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is A JOKE if your doctor doesn't properly document your history - which is all too often I might add for everyone - despite the adverse reactions listed on EVERY vaccine. Why? They don't read it themselves and don't know what to watch for either....just a sore area and maybe a "slight fever" the patient is told. That is EXACTLY why more than 50% of cases are "dismissed" each year. The doctor did not report anything in the medical records properly. Again, my frantic phone calls after hours with my infant are proof of that. Vaccines do no harm - the medical profession seriously believes this too.
"U.S. Dept of Education's reported 1 in 67"
Dawn, you've already been shown, with the data you provided, that this is incorrect.
Please take one minute and explain, in your own words, how the IDEA data shows 1 in 67 elementary school aged children with autism spectrum disorder labels.
As a parent, even if you don't have autistic children, you should be concerned that the 1 in 200 that the IDEA data does show, means that there are many children who may not be receiving appropriate education/services. Regardless of etiology of any disorders, you do care about children, don't you Dawn?
Orac,
I see you emailed something to Olmsted. I don't recommend emailing anything to the AoA crowd because they will take what you say and post it on their site in an attempt to attack you. Olmsted's ethics are pretty obvious to anyone who has read the stuff he allows on his site: the attacks on you, on Offit, on Grinker, etc. Absolute sleaze in my opinion and an abandonment of professionalism.
It would indeed be interesting to ask science journalists around the country (who have heard of Olmsted) their opinion of him.
Between this thread and the other thread Dawn posted in, I am convinced that either:
a.) Dawn is delusional and convinced of a widespread conspiracy involving the pharmaceutical industry, the medical profession and the govrenment to deny the existence of so-called vaccine injury.
b.) Dawn is not in the least bit delusional, and is simply parroting anti-vaccine canards either for her own benefit or for the benefit of her little anti-vax friends who want to defraud the government/defraud parents with b.s. autism treatments.
c.) Dawn has some bizarre form of Munchausen's Syndrome By Proxy.
I kinda agree with Brian X and go with option a.
Too bad Dawn wasn't actually THE Dawn Winkler, although I'd guess that this Dawn and that Dawn have the same basic core beliefs.
You are a liar and you know it Do'C-my bad I almost called you coc. Anyways, the data shows it - you just haven't taken the time to look at it. Another one of your fellow bloggers did and reconfirmed the evidence. Sorry, you are wrong in this matter.
"That is EXACTLY why more than 50% of cases are "dismissed" each year."
Dawn, in the past 10 years, about 65% of the cases have been dismissed (100% of over 300 autism cases have been dismissed in the same time period - remember the subject of Offit's book?). Dismissal reasons include many other factors asisde from lack of documentation.
Honestly Liz Ditz, why do you even care about how much info I divulge? I am having my story aired on Medical Veritas.
Dawn, it isn't your story alone. If you were only writing about the pre-eclampsia, the c-section, and the alleged post-natal rubella vaccine and how those affected you, I wouldn't comment. But you aren't. You are writing about your older son's issues, and your younger son's issues, using their real names (as far as I can tell).
I am praising my children for their gifts - not condemning them for their shortcomings!
Dawn, over the past 7 months, you and I have frequented some of the same parents' discussion boards. I have never once read a post from you relaying your joy in either of your sons' achievements.
I am particularly mindful of the late, lamented SchwabLearning community, where it was common for parents to celebrate a delayed milestone reached.
If I'm wrong about your public celebration of your sons' abilities--and I am certainly not immune to error--please let me know.
Dawn - why do you keep bringing up that doctors don't document vaccines properly? I don't understand. Maybe it's an American thing, but we keep our own records. When we get our first vaccines, we're given a little booklet that the doctor fills out and gives to us. We (responsible parents) then check to make sure it's correct. We then keep that booklet and bring it with us every time we get a vaccine. Both my husband and I (I grew up in Switzerland and he in Russia, just to show how widespread this system is) have our original vaccination booklets in our "important documents" file, right next to our passports.
Do you Americans have a different system? Like, some sort of mass network that doctors fill in that you can't look at? Because honestly, that's the only way I can imagine that you, as a parent, would just not bother to keep and check a record of your children's vaccinations...
Actually Grimalkin, here in the U.S. if you don't ask to see the "list of side effects" they will not show you them (most parents do not know that there is one). In fact, these crazy doctor/nurses just give you a simple sheet that states your child might have a swollen area of injection or a slight fever - nothing more. So, the reporting system of reactions to vaccines is a joke. The parents do not know what to watch for because they are not told. That is exactly why nothing is ever reported in this country. So, when a child dies within minutes of a vaccine, they are told by their doctor that it was anything except the vaccine - they stupidly believe it. Some don't and become very angry. That is why there are many groups in the U.S. fighting this nonsense. I am actually ashamed now to be an American after learning about all of the foreign countries that we are hurting by way of vaccines. It makes me sick.
"You are a liar and you know it Do'C"
Anyways, the data shows it - you just haven't taken the time to look at it."
Dawn, I'm not a liar, but I suppose I could be wrong (happens to all of us you know), so let's take the time, and double check together shall we? Even if this doesn't benefit you, there may be some young student out there would appreciate clarity of writing it down.
Your original claim was:
The data you provided that references this age group, can be found here (your link).
Table 1-4. Students ages 6 through 11 served under IDEA, Part B, by disability category and state: Fall 2006
I gave you the benefit of the doubt, and went ahead and used the largest autism child count (which includes Peurto Rico).
125,944
The population data you provided that references this age group, can be found here (your link).
Table C-10. Estimated resident population ages 3 through 21, by age group and state: 2006
Ages 6-11
24,055,415
Warning! Elementary School Math Follows
Now let's do the math, one step at-a-time.
125,944 in 24,055,415 represents a ratio. In this ratio, the number of 6-11 year old children with autism spectrum disorders is 125,944 for every 24,055,415 6-11 year olds.
To understand how this would represent "1 in N" we need to ask, "What is the proportion (with the ratio of the number of chidren with autism spectrum disorders) expressed as "1" that solves this (providing ratios on both sides that are equal)?
In other words, how can we solve for N in the following: 125,944/24,055,415 = 1/N
By multiplying the cross products, we can solve for N. Yay!
125,944 x N = 24,055,415 x 1
125,944N = 24,055,415
Now all we have to do is divide both sides by 125,944, and we will have solved for N!
125,944N/125,944 = 24,055,415/125,944
N = 191
And now we know the accurate representation of "1 in N".
1 in 191
Hey look Dawn, I was wrong! Aren't you glad we got to the bottom of that? You see my original estimate of 25 million kids in that age group was a little on the high side. I accept full responsibility for that. I'm glad we used the actual numbers, aren't you?
Now where on earth would you come up with 1 in 67?
"Broken Link: How do you know that Autism is not caused by vaccines if no studies have been done on the population who became sick and regressed into Autism after their shots? No studies have been done."
Dawn,
You remind me of Jerome Corsi. You know whom I'm talking about right? He spews arguments like yours all the time.
When facts don't match the agenda, make stuff up. "No studies have been done" You mean, studies you refuse to read maybe?
Furthermore, if you had paid attention in school, you would know that correlation is NOT causation. "who became sick and regressed into Autism after their shots"
Regressed into Autism?? How the hell do you know they didn't have autism in the first place? Just because autism usually* can be diagnosed around the age children get vaccinated MUST MEAN that vaccine cause autism??
You and your kind have provoked a lot of suffering in families that out of fear, refused to vaccinate their kids, only to have them get sick and sometimes die. Ever seen a case of pertussis in a little infant? I have! And let me tell you something: It is heartbreaking, you get sick with frustration and sadness to be impotent in saving a life that won't have any chance to make it. How does it feel to realize that? Alas, I harbor no hope that you'll ever understand until you see it for yourself.
Finally DON'T you DARE lecturing me about the suffering of autistic families, because I am the father of an autistic son. I know what it means. Reinventing every aspect of your life as a family, the constant battles with school districts and teachers that just won't be bothered in merely LISTEN to me and accept that, maybe, my wife and I knows a thing or two about our own son. The weird and accusatory look of strangers toward parents that for God's sake, can't even control the freaking brat! I know what it means to have autism in a family. I live it every day.
How about you?
* I use the term "usually" because only very recently has it become feasible to diagnose earlier than 2-3 years old. Which bring a fascinating question: What will happen to the Vaccine-Autism link if all children can be screened for possible autism at 1 year of age?
"Broken Link: How do you know that Autism is not caused by vaccines if no studies have been done on the population who became sick and regressed into Autism after their shots? No studies have been done."
Dawn,
You remind me of Jerome Corsi. You know whom I'm talking about right? He spews arguments like yours all the time.
When facts don't match the agenda, make stuff up. "No studies have been done" You mean, studies you refuse to read maybe?
Furthermore, if you had paid attention in school, you would know that correlation is NOT causation. "who became sick and regressed into Autism after their shots"
Regressed into Autism?? How the hell do you know they didn't have autism in the first place? Just because autism usually* can be diagnosed around the age children get vaccinated MUST MEAN that vaccine cause autism??
You and your kind have provoked a lot of suffering in families that out of fear, refused to vaccinate their kids, only to have them get sick and sometimes die. Ever seen a case of pertussis in a little infant? I have! And let me tell you something: It is heartbreaking, you get sick with frustration and sadness to be impotent in saving a life that won't have any chance to make it. How does it feel to realize that? Alas, I harbor no hope that you'll ever understand until you see it for yourself.
Finally DON'T you DARE lecturing me about the suffering of autistic families, because I am the father of an autistic son. I know what it means. Reinventing every aspect of your life as a family, the constant battles with school districts and teachers that just won't be bothered in merely LISTEN to me and accept that, maybe, my wife and I knows a thing or two about our own son. The weird and accusatory look of strangers toward parents that for God's sake, can't even control the freaking brat! And don't get me started about medications AND psychotherapy. The multiple attempts to help my Daniel have been plagued by sleepless nights, episodes of horrible bulimia, acute anxiety, tantrums that only I could control before a wall could get smashed or someone hurt. I know what it means to have autism in a family. I live it every day.
How about you?
* I use the term "usually" because only very recently has it become feasible to diagnose earlier than 2-3 years old. Which bring a fascinating question: What will happen to the Vaccine-Autism link if all children can be screened for possible autism at 1 year of age?
Dawn you posted a request on a couple of groups including Jenny McCarthy's rally group, for your so-called "friends" to come to your aid here on Orac's blog because you were doing battle here with, as you wrote, "evil people" because the "evil people" were saying bad things about the "anti-vaccine community" of which you feel that you and the rest of the JennyDCRally group belong. You realize that Dr. Jay is in that group and that he made a point of saying that he's not anti-vaccine, not at all, he's taking millions of doses of tetanus vaccine to inject African babies. I assume that they all contain thiomersal. So which is it? Are your friends on the JennyDCRally group anti-vaccine or are they part of the worldwide plot to destroy everyone with vaccines? And what's that about God planning on killing off the bottom 1/3 of humanity, the ones with immunosuppression, with plagues. Really? I don't think so. I think you are making that up just like you make up everything else or repeat what other insane people confabulate.
It looks like not many or none of your friends from the "anti-vaccine community" showed up to take your part, but instead left you twisting in the wind.
Dawn said,
"...Actually Grimalkin, here in the U.S. if you don't ask to see the "list of side effects" they will not show you them (most parents do not know that there is one). In fact, these crazy doctor/nurses just give you a simple sheet that states your child might have a swollen area of injection or a slight fever - nothing more..."
-------------------
That sounded like a pile of crap because I keep filed every piece of paperwork that our pediatrician gives us, and among those are Vaccine Information Statements, which present rationale for the vaccine, effects of disease contraction, contraindications for the particular immunization, a hierarchy of potential side effects, what to do in the event of side effects, and information on the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. In our physician's practice, we have received those prior to administration of the vaccine.
Fact Sheet for Vaccine Information Statements
"...By Federal law, all vaccine providers must give patients, or their parents or legal representatives, the appropriate Vaccine Information Statement (VIS) whenever a vaccination is given.
The Internet. All current VISs are available on the internet at two websites -- the CDC's Vaccines & Immunizations site (www.cdc.gov/vaccines) and the Immunization Action Coalition (www.immunize.org/vis/)(exit). VISs from these sites can be downloaded as pdf files and printed.
You can also order single hard copies of the VISs using NIP's Online Order Form (at www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs).
State Health Department. CDC sends each state health department's immunization program camera-ready copies when a new VIS is published. The immunization program in turn provides copies to providers within the state..."
Current Vaccine Information Statements
If you take a look at those, you will note that although they are compact documents, there is considerably more information than Dawn states to be the case.
Grimalkin,
As far as recordkeeping, in our family we have both a small booklet, that was provided to our family by the department of public health that is filled in and initialled at the time of vaccination, AND computerized records of every vaccination given that is available upon our request, both for our personal family records and for verification for school or other enrollment.
I know that, actually, which is why I simply e-mailed him a direct link to my comment with a brief sentence saying it was my response to him. :-)
Indeed, the logical fallacy Dawn is preaching is known as the fallacy of the perfect solution or the "Nirvana" fallacy, that states that if a solution is not 100% perfect it is worthless. I've written about this fallacy before with regard to antivaccinationists and the "Green Our Vaccines" movement before and with regard to the aforementioned Dawn Winkler.
See above -- then it would be because we were vaccinated, and the evil juju transferred invisibly from us to her and her children. You see, by vaccinating we all get the diseases INVISIBLY -- no symptoms, just as sick.
Dawn, you never know when one of us is around. We might be the clerk at the grocery, or the driver of the bus. We could be walking behind you on the sidewalk, shedding viruses all over the street. We could be behind you in the theatre, and that sneeze you heard could be the spray of evil particles that will do the same thing to you and your children that you've worked so hard to avoid.
You can't escape, Dawn. We're everywhere. We're going to get you, and you'll never know when it happens.
Dawn - you didn't answer my question. You said that doctors don't properly document your history and, if I remember (for some reason, I can't find the post now), you said that one of your children had to be vaccinated twice because of this lack of documentation. That's what I was referring to - why didn't you keep a record of the vaccines?
Regan - That's because that's what caring parents do. A necessary component of ensuring their children's welfare is to keep an accurate record of all vaccinations - not only so they can know what they still need and what they've already had, but also so that they don't have to miss any time off from school due to confusion over whether or not they are up-to-date. It's great that you keep the other list as well :)
Grimalkin ... except for the US military, medical records in the USA are totally disorganized.
My vaccination history is scattered across three states, with no tidy "shots record".
Let's see...L. Ron Hubbard was a third rate sci-fi writer who needed to make a buck and founded the "Church of Scientology".
Dan Olmsted is an under employed third rate "science writer" who needs to increase his income..
Perhaps he should be the founder of the "Church of NO-Scienceology".
Actually Grimalkin, here is what goes on in the U.S.
If the healthcare provider fails to give a parent a Vaccine Information Statement (such as in my case), they are not held accountable for their actions by the state nursing or state medical board.
If the healthcare provider fails to follow the vaccine manufacturer's guidelines (such as in my case), they are not held accountable by either organization.
If the medical teaching hospital is fully accredited and fails to record thousands of patients' vaccine information, they are not held accountable by the Joint Commission, the CDC, Health & Human Services, or Congress (such as in my case and every other patient that was in that hospital in February of 2007). I actually had a nurse manager of the maternity ward make the mistake of telling me that no other patients' vaccines were recorded (along with mine) due to "system changes". However, I thankfully had a detailed billing summary sent to me to prove that the vaccine was administered before the hospital was made aware of their mistake.
If the healthcare provider fails to properly document the patient's adverse reactions or alert the child's physician (such as in my case), they are not held accountable for their actions by the nursing board or medical board.
If the child suffers from permanent damage from the vaccine(s) and the problems are not recognized by the physician (in the areas of regression)or properly documented (such as in my case), the child then goes to school where the problems are evident - by then it is too late for the parent to seek compensation through the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.
If a vaccine has demonstrated numerous reports of serious adverse reactions (such as Gardasil) and it is reported to VAERS, it will not be used as evidence to pull the vaccine from the market because more often than not, no "causal relationship" has been established.
My child was never re-vaccinated accidentally. It was a series of mistakes and sheer ignorance on behalf of the healthcare workers that caused him to receive more vaccines after already suffering from unrecognized reactions. Apparently, the nurses and doctors are not required to read the vaccine literature and truly believe that only 1 in a million people "may have a reaction, though usually not severe". What a joke.
Actually, Tsu Dho Nimh, if an experimental vaccine is given to our troops, it is not recorded either.
Dawn,
That would be fascinating information if any of it was the least bit true.
Dawn from Sedna stated so much garbage that it is impossible for anyone to keep up with it. She is truly the "Energizer Bunny" of anti-vaccination bull.
Dawn doesn't seem to know the rules here. In her circles, the rules are, if someone says something with enough conviction, then you believe it. This usually results in disaster, often involving Ponzi schemes.
Here, you make a claim, you back it up with evidence. Your personal experiences alone don't count, human observation can be flawed. Tangible evidence is required.
Tsu Dho Nimh - So you never keep any records of your own? I mean, obviously we wouldn't trust the bureaucratic medical system to keep thousands and millions of patient records without any errors at all. That's why the individual is responsible for keeping a record of all things like vaccines or allergic reactions. In Switzerland, the medical records were very disorganized too (as they are in probably all non-dictatorship countries). That's why we all kept our own records so that if the doctor said "you need a measles vaccine," we could say "no, I had one just two years ago. Here's the booklet with the doctor's signature that proves it."
The one thing Dawn and I agree on is that we can't just sit back and trust everything doctors say or every decision they make - especially if you don't have a family doctor and only go once a year or so. All it takes is a typo on your record or a miscommunication between offices and things can be pretty bad. That's why, as individuals, we need to make sure that we keep duplicates of all our information and medical histories. That's also why we need to look at what we are being proscribed (just as an example, when I was very little and I injured my back horse-riding, I was proscribed a pain killer in an adult dose. My mom thought it looked wrong and got a second opinion before giving me any - that's responsible parenting).
But for something as safe as vaccines, something that just hasn't been shown to cause the mass carnage Dawn describes, it's just silly. Keep track of what your children have already had. Keep a close eye on them and make sure that they aren't showing any allergic reactions, etc. But stopping treatment altogether for no reason other than that you "know in [your] heart of hearts" that it's causing something that simply isn't shown to be caused by vaccines is silly.
And Dawn, if you have truly had such bad experiences with your doctor, if your doctor has truly refused to treat your child and your child was actually very much sick (whether she treated it as a reaction to a vaccine or as an isolated problem), switch doctors! Doctors, like all people, come in the good and the bad varieties, careful and careless, caring and just waiting for their shift to be over so that they can hit the golfing green. Find one of the former category - there's plenty of them around. But don't deny your child something that could potentially save his life just because you don't like doctors...
Grimalkin stated: "But don't deny your child something that could potentially save his life just because you don't like doctors"...
Actually, with a vaccine system that is as flawed as the U.S., I will not be placing anymore faith in the medical establishment.
I will never know if it was the Pertussis, peanut oil, formaldehyde, aluminum, eggs, lactose, or phenoxyethanol that my son reacted to. Who knows what caused his severe reactions? After all, he was given 3 different vaccines at one time for 5 different diseases all for the sake of medical convenience, not safety. At least I was intelligent enough to know the difference between what is normal and what is not for reactions - and stopped vaccinating him. I am also intelligent enough to know that vaccines have never been studied long-term or studied in the subsequent vaccinated generations either. It is just one big...who knows what will happen?? I refuse to allow my family to be human guinea pigs though.
Just so you know, if parents no longer wish to vaccinate in the U.S., they will have a difficult time finding a doctor who will see their family. Heck, and if they sign the Vaccine Refusal form, their insurance will no longer cover them too. Thanks AAP and CDC - you corrupt organizations!
Some do, some don't. Since there is no national health record system, those who don't -- don't. Individual MDs keep files on their patients, but when people change providers the records don't necessarily follow them.
I personally keep records of all of my recent vaccinations, but by and large at my age the question is rather moot.
Influenza every year -- Well, next year it doesn't matter.
DT booster -- both the MD and I have records of that one.
HepB -- currently no boosters required, but the original was a bit over ten years ago so I'm keeping track.
Polio -- had a booster five years ago for a trip to India. Yawn.
Pneumonia -- one last year, another in ten or fifteen. Keep track.
That's it. Next time around the DT becomesDTaP, otherwise nothing exciting.
Actually there are plenty of doctors who will see unvaccinated patients. They don't, however, have to see patients who are verbally abusive to the doctor or the staff. They don't have to keep patients who repeatedly voice their distrust and outright hatred of all medical staff and medical systems. They don't have to keep patients who repeatedly refuse to comply with treatments. If you're having trouble finding one, Dawn, it's most likely due to THOSE things, not the failure to vaccinate.
Not true E. I think you need to do your homework. Families across the country are up in arms because the majority of doctors are doing one of two things.
1. They are refusing to treat patients if they will not follow the vaccine schedule set forth by the AAP and CDC. All Star Pediatrics is just one of many practices that enforces this insane policy. So, regardless of the patients' demeanor - it is either "their way" or the highway.
http://www.allstarpediatrics.com/AllStarImmunization.html
2. If the patient does not wish to vaccinate, they are asked to sign a Refusal to Vaccinate form supplied by the AAP, which is incriminating for the parent. It basically states that the "benefits outweigh the risks" and that you are not only endangering your child, but others by refusing to vaccinate.
Many parents who have signed this bogus form are now having their insurance companies alerted. Their insurance providers are now refusing to pay for any healthcare if the child is not up to date on their vaccines. And, in some situations, Child Protective Services is called in by the doctor and the child is removed due to the parent signing this form, on the basis of negligence. Though the children are eventually returned to the parents, it does not occur until the child is brought up-to-date on their vaccines - against the parents' wishes.
This is happening all over this country. I'm sorry that you were not aware of it.
Dawn, that is a really excellent website from All Star Pediatrics. Did you look at it? It contains the recommended vacination schedule, as well as some scientifically accurate resources. It even includes the vaccine information sheets! You know, the ones with all of the information, including side effects? That you said doctors don't give out? Appears they do, at least in the one you happened to cite...
More notably, I don't see anything about refusing to treat patients. What a great way to completely undermine your own position... citing a resource that does nothing for your assertion. Not that I am surprised. Honestly, why do you continue to post on this board? No one is taking you seriously, on any of the threads you're trying to dominate. See, here we rely on scientific evidence. This is happening all over this country... I'm sorry you are unaware of it.
OK, I was able to find their policy upon a longer look at the site. They're not outright refusing to treat you. They're asking you to discuss your concerns with them. After all other efforts, they do reserve the right to dismiss you. And why wouldn't they? If you're consistently refusing treatments they recommend, why should they waste their time with you? Why should they have your unvaccinated kids in the waiting room, potentially infecting other kids? Good on them, I say.
And your solution to this is ... what?
Force them to take patients?
Your solution to insurance company policies is ... what?
Force them to cover you regardless?
These are the facts, based upon the best current medical and scientific knowledge, and a doctor is legally and ethically obligated to inform you of this. Can you really blame a doctor for wanting documentary proof that he has lived up to his legal obligations in the not-unlikely event that your child dies or is terribly disabled by a disease that a vaccine would have protected him from?
Insurance premiums are calculated based upon the expected medical costs incurred by responsible parents who protect their families and reduce the risk of catastrophic illness by getting the necessary vaccinations. It would hardly be surprising if the terms of your insurance specifically excluded vaccine-preventable illnesses, unless you can establish that you took all reasonable protective measures by getting the recommended vaccinations. It would be unfair to other customers to raise insurance rates for everybody to pay for the excessive costs incurred by a minority of parents who refuse to vaccinate.
You might ask yourself, "Why are insurance companies pushing people to get vaccinated?" After all, if vaccination increases health risks and health expenses, then it is the insurance companies that are going to end up paying for it. Insurance companies are very skilled and experienced at assessing benefit/risk ratios, and are not likely to simply take some doctor's word for it when it is their money that is involved.
It seems to me that knowingly exposing a child to the risk of infection by diseases such as polio, whooping cough, and measles is a form of child abuse. I see no reason why a doctor should react differently than if a child were to be brought in with suspicious broken bones, bruises, or signs of sexual trauma. Child Protective Services is the appropriate agency to decide whether behaviors that place children at risk constitute child abuse.
I don't think I'd place a neglect issue with no immediate threat to life or limb on the same level as immediately life-threatening abuse, but your point about insurance companies and the bottom line is telling. Since you bring up the subject of long-term liabilities, I'm taking the opportunity to repost a related point:
Bearing in mind that I am not a lawyer and nobody is safe while the legislature is in session, here's a pleasant parting thought for Dawn and the other antivaccionationists:
The statute of limitations for pediatric victims is tolled until their majority.
Courts are starting to recognize "assault with a deadly virus." In other words, deliberately or negligently risking someone else's health by exposing them to communicable disease may land you in court.
So if you take your unvaccinated darlings on holiday to Switzerland, and on return pass something to a newborn who ends up spending three weeks in ICU and becomes permanently disabled as a result, you could find yourself paying for that infant's medical expenses and lifetime care. What's more, you won't know for up to twenty years later. With interest.
Have a nice day.
Grimalkin: /?We don't have any official, signed and dated sort of booklet for docs to use. It would be nice.
Dawn said:
And if someone refuses a transfusion, it is standard procedure to have them sign the refusal and have it witnessed and even notarized. It's so the relatives can't come back later with a lawsuit because a transfusion was not given.
I note that Allstar Pediatrics doesn't say they will refuse to treat ... but they do ask that the parent find another clinic. A doctor is NOT a hired servant, they are a consultant who has medical knowledge you want to use. There is no profession where a consultant has to continue to do what they can despite a client's refusal to follow recommendations that are "industry standard".
I stopped reading the comments when I hit DO's comment to Dawn:
Teh truthiness will make ye free!
I have an experiment, Mr. Olmstead: Find some poor deluded bugger who's convinced he can fly. Encourage him the way you've encouraged poor old Dawn. After all, science could be wrong on that one, if he shuts his eyes really tightly, prays hard enough, and sprinkles himself with some magic fairy dust.
Saying science doesn't care is like saying your refrigerator doesn't care. That's not what it's damn well for.
It's all very well, downright fashionable, in fact, to care. Just don't expect it to change the facts.
Fact: no vaccine-autism link has been proven. Period.
Fact: It is dishonest and hurtful to encourage people to believe things that are false-to-fact for your own benefit.
You, Mr. Olmstead are behaving in a dishonest and hurtful way when you encourage Dawn and her fellow conspiracy theorists to continue believing truthiness instead of actual truth.
You're either a self-aggrandizing charlatan, or a useful idiot. And by encouraging people to accept woo in place of science, you have personally contributed to deaths in the United States and about the globe.
Sleep well.
Do keep in mind that people don't really, like Macbeth, say "Evil be thou my good!" At worst you have the sociopaths who really just don't give a damn and only see that the idiot marks are forking out for fakes. Very few of them put the kind of passion into their scams that we see in antivaccination land, and very few of the ones who do settle for chump change. They branch out and usually get overconfident.
More particularly, the antivaccinationists are (at least most of them) good people. At least, that's how they see themselves.
That's a roundabout way of saying that you're never going to see the antivacc brigade face reality. If they ever got to the point where they simply couldn't avoid the fact that they've been killing and crippling the children of people who trusted them, their whole world would come apart.
It is, literally, unthinkable.
Which is why they will find any way to avoid going there. That's a large part of why they go from one discredited excuse (SIDS) to another (mercury) to yet another (formaldehyde) to still another (aluminum) without ever changing the bottom line. All along the way they will deny that vaccines ever do any good at all; we even have John Scudamore insisting that smallpox is still as common as ever but that the Grand Conspiracy is covering it up.
You. Are. Not. Ever. Going. To. Get. Them. To. Face. Reality.
"Are you aware that people undergoing cancer treatments or who've had organ transplants have compromised immune systems, and therefore can't be vaccinated"?
Hey, cool. So ALL adults (unless they have cancer) need to have their vaccinations up to date. As soon as that happens, then we can talk... Until then, STFU.
Yes, adults should be up to date on their vaccines. It's only smart. Fighting vaccines because of paranoid conspiracy theories or advice from dumdums like Dr. Jay Gordon is insane and will lead to the deaths of innocent people.
Dawn, while your efforts are appreciated by some, the simple fact of the matter is like D.C. Sessions said so plainly:
"You. Are. Not. Ever. Going. To. Get. Them. To. Face. Reality"
They will never listen to you.
Under the influence of Dawn's reverse psychology, because surely that is what it must be, I made it my business this AM to schedule appointments to meet with the doctor to bring the kids' vaccinations up to date, and my own and my husband's as well. My husband is travelling overseas and we agreed that it would not be good neighbors to bring something back from the trip.
We'll be sure to read our VIS and bring the little vaccination record book.
Thanks Dawn!
Craig,
Actually, I'm rather surprised you'd be defending Dawn, given that, regardless of our differences, I always thought you were at least somewhat reasonable. Really, go back and read her comments. They are the product of a conspiracy theorist posting a tsunami of misinformation that is child's play to demonstrate to be misinformation. She's been corrected again and again on very basic facts that are not even disputable. She won't listen. My readers have done prodigious work in trying to educate her on basic facts, even using basic mathematics. No go.
Really, whatever your opinion, if you back Dawn, you're backing someone who will only make you look bad in the end. Just some friendly advice.
Orac, I am being reasonable, actually. I'm trying to convey to Dawn that it is pointless to argue with you guys. You have your beliefs and we have ours. There was no disrespect intended. I'm just trying to let her know that there is nothing she can do or say that will change anyone's mind here.
You make it sound as though there is no conceivable set of events which could change your mind. Am I wrong?
To be truthful (as an aside), watching you guys mutilate her is a little painful to see.
Additionally, I wonder if she might be a female version of John Best.
Just a thought.
D.C. Sessions, respectfully, I can't see of anything that could change my mind. You asked an honest question, and I feel I should answer you respectfully and honestly. I can't get over the fact that my son had an adverse reaction to a vaccine that caused an encepalopathy. I can't unsee it. I can't undo it. I wish I could.
I try not to get into the debates when you guys talk about vaccines. I like to think that Orac and I, and several of the people on here, have come to the agreement that we'll agree to disagree.
Again, if you took offense from my earlier statement, none was intended.
On the contrary -- you gave me an honest answer that takes the entire disagreement into territory where I won't follow. That's why I asked.
Why do you say that?
My mind can be changed (as can the minds of the science-based people here), although you are correct that the paranoid ravings of someone like Dawn won't be able to do it. No, I require science, not "gut feelings," anecdotes, or personal experience. Humans are very prone to being very deceived by all of those, and correlation does not equal causation. That being said, unlike antivaccine activists, I follow the evidence wherever it goes. If there is presented compelling scientific evidence from well-designed, well-controlled, and well-performed experiments, clinical trials, or epidemiological studies I will take them seriously and possibly change my mind, depending upon my evaluation of the new evidence in the context of existing evidence. That's how a scientist works, and I am a scientist as well as a physician.
Orac, actually, I should have specified. Yes, you are correct in that there is nothing that SHE specifically could do or say to change any of your minds. Thanks for the correction :)
And, D.C. Sessions, fair enough.
Peace out, everyone.
That's rather a fundamental difference, and epistemology at that level isn't really debatable. We're down to axiomatic differences and there's not really much point in arguing them.
You and I can have a roaring good argument, and in the end one of us might (or might not) change his mind. You're not going to get very far, though, having a mullah and a Jesuit argue theology. At best they'll recognize that they aren't even asking the same questions.
Which is exactly what's going on with CW: he and I don't have a common question set, so further discussion is pointless.
Like I said earlier, screw Pubmed. It may serve justice for some things, but sure as hell not vaccines.
Translation: My mind's made up, don't confuse me with the facts. Seriously, Dawn, do you have any evidence that the large number of different authors who publish in the many publications listed in Medline are somehow all part of a vast conspiracy that makes Medline unreliable for vaccination related data and vaccination related data only?
What makes you think that it's just vaccination that the conspiracy cares about?
To answer your question: there's no other possible explanation for them containing nothing but lies. They must be lies, because they contradict the plain truth and even a stopped clock is sometimes right.
Tsu Dho Nimh stated: And if someone refuses a transfusion, it is standard procedure to have them sign the refusal and have it witnessed and even notarized. It's so the relatives can't come back later with a lawsuit because a transfusion was not given.
I note that Allstar Pediatrics doesn't say they will refuse to treat ... but they do ask that the parent find another clinic. A doctor is NOT a hired servant, they are a consultant who has medical knowledge you want to use. There is no profession where a consultant has to continue to do what they can despite a client's refusal to follow recommendations that are "industry standard".
Actually, what really doesn't make any sense is that everyone is o.k. with the fact that the vaccine manufacturers are shielded from lawsuits.
The only reason why doctors are asking parents to sign the Refusal to Vaccinate Form is to cover their own butts. Apparently, a parent who refuses any vaccines and the child later contracts the disease - can rightfully go back and sue the doctor for lost wages and mental anguish? That is rididulous and the doctors SHOULD not have to face those circumstances. You can't sue the doctor if your died is injured or died from the vaccine, you can't sue the manufacturer, but you can sue the doctor for failing in his duty to get you to take the vaccine? What the heck kind of nonsense is that?
Welcome back, Dawn. Have you decided whether to answer the previous questions? Let me remind you:
Should I reword the questions to make them easier to understand?
No, my solution is not to force them to take patients. However, I do see that profit trumps care these days. Like many people today, doctors too have no morals anymore and forgot why they took up medicine in the first place. There is actually a great movement in California in the medical industry (northern CA). Allopathic doctors are teaming up with homeopathic/alternative treatment centers to give their patients a variety of treatment options. How cool is that? Living on the east coast - we will probably see that great idea implemented here in about 10 years.
Well, hmmm...as far as insurance companies go. If your child develops diabetes as a result of the Mumps Vaccine (which studies have proven that it "can" trigger diabetes in certain predisposed individuals), you expect others to contribute to the cost of your $1 million dollar treatment because you decided to vaccinate? That is a little nutty.
I just wanted to clarify something with you D.C. Sessions too. You seem to have the misconception that it is the Oprah watching, couch potato, lifelong welfare dependent (this is not a put-down for anyone who has had to receive temporary assistance either- just the ones who bleed the system forever), uneducated moms who are no longer vaccinating. I encourage you to go to the AAP's website for clarification on the subject. Apparently, it is the middle-upper class college educated moms who are behind the anti-vaccine movement.
Good night!
Given that accepted medical opinion, backed by overwhelming epidemiological evidence, indicates that vaccines protect against fatal and disabling diseases, a doctor would be in violation of his ethical and legal obligations to his patients if he failed to advise them of that fact. This would most certainly make him liable in any court of law, unless he gets his patients to sign a statement attesting that they were properly informed that evading vaccination imperils not only their children but their neighbors' children as well.
Paranoid fantasies of antivaccinationists aside, there simply isn't enough money in vaccines to make vaccine production economically viable, if the companies are subject to liability if the vaccine fails to work or causes side effects in even a small number of cases. Because vaccination provides an enormous public health benefit, the federal government has chosen to assume the cost of compensating those who are injured by vaccines. This is very much to the benefit of those who believe themselves to have suffered a vaccine related injury. Because those who get vaccinated are themselves contributing to a public good, the Vaccine Court is set up to give the plaintiffs very much the benefit of the doubt. Even weak cases that would never have a prayer in civil court frequently are awarded compensation. The government even foots the bill for plaintiff's lawyers, whether they win or lose, which is not the case in civil court.
You can be assured that if the Mumps vaccine actually cost insurance companies more money than it saved them, then health insurance would specifically exclude complications of mumps virus. But an insurance company cannot base its judgments upon whether a medical treatment can cause harm; that would be stupid, because every effective medical treatment can occasionally cause harm. They have to consider whether it prevents more harm than it causes. If the insurance companies support vaccinations, you can be sure that it is because hard economic analyses have convinced them that the health costs of not vaccinating far exceed those of vaccinating
I thought I could sleep. Oh, well.
trrll stated: "Because vaccination provides an enormous public health benefit, the federal government has chosen to assume the cost of compensating those who are injured by vaccines. This is very much to the benefit of those who believe themselves to have suffered a vaccine related injury. Because those who get vaccinated are themselves contributing to a public good, the Vaccine Court is set up to give the plaintiffs very much the benefit of the doubt. Even weak cases that would never have a prayer in civil court frequently are awarded compensation. The government even foots the bill for plaintiff's lawyers, whether they win or lose, which is not the case in civil court".
That is not true trrll. My infant and I just went through the dance. The Court is a joke and it is VERY difficult to prove one's case if the doctor did not document anything properly. Well, if doctors/nurses don't recognize adverse reactions, or even know what they are because they don't read the vaccine literature, it is a program purposedly designed to fail - for the patient, not the doctor, not the court, not the vaccine manufacturer - just the patient is the one who loses.
Vaccines provide an enormous health benefit? Says who? The doctors who make a killing selling vaccines (which result in lifelong prescription drugs for ailments which are more often than not, caused by vaccines) (cha-ching)?
Or the medical teaching facilities who receive funding from the drug companies in the form of grants for research? Or the makers of the vaccine products? Maybe it is our political officials who receive campaign funds from the drug companies. Or, maybe it is all of the above.
Yes, and I still believe in Santa Clause too. Just follow the money trail.
trrll stated: "You can be assured that if the Mumps vaccine actually cost insurance companies more money than it saved them, then health insurance would specifically exclude complications of mumps virus. But an insurance company cannot base its judgments upon whether a medical treatment can cause harm; that would be stupid, because every effective medical treatment can occasionally cause harm. They have to consider whether it prevents more harm than it causes. If the insurance companies support vaccinations, you can be sure that it is because hard economic analyses have convinced them that the health costs of not vaccinating far exceed those of vaccinating".
Well, with my brother's $1 million dollar vaccine-induced hospital stay for his deadly vaccine-induced stealth virus, I guess I will have to start educating my insurance company's board of directors. Thank you for reminding me trrll!
Dawn said "Vaccines provide an enormous health benefit? Says who? The doctors who make a killing selling vaccines (which result in lifelong prescription drugs for ailments which are more often than not, caused by vaccines) (cha-ching)?"
Sure, just provide us some real evidence. Show us some real definitive science that the MMR causes more problems than measles, mumps and rubella. Show what life long ailments are caused by the MMR, with real evidence at a greater rate than those caused by the MMR (1 in 1000 chance of encephalitis, with a chance of death and permanent disability), mumps (with a chance of permanent male sterility and deafness, oh and death), and rubella (with a real chance if a pregnant woman gets of stillbirth or giving birth to a child with disabilities).
Then do the same with the DTaP, show where it is worse than pertussis (which kills over a dozen American babies each year), diphtheria (survivors can end up with permanent cardiac and/or nerve injuries, about 1 in 20 die) and tetanus (which kills 1 out of 10). Show us that the DTaP vaccine is worse than the effects of the toxins produced by diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus. The toxin from tetanus, tetanospasmin, is on the basis of weight is one of the most potent toxins known.
Come on, you are making the claims... now back them up with something more substantial than your personal sob story anecdotes, insisting we buy a silly book or a random website. Give us some real statistics, real science and real evidence. Like this:
http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/159/12/1136 ..."Routine childhood immunization with the 7 vaccines was cost saving from the direct cost and societal perspectives, with net savings of $9.9 billion and $43.3 billion, respectively. Without routine vaccination, direct and societal costs of diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, H influenzae type b, poliomyelitis, measles, mumps, rubella, congenital rubella syndrome, hepatitis B, and varicella would be $12.3 billion and $46.6 billion, respectively. Direct and societal costs for the vaccination program were an estimated $2.3 billion and $2.8 billion, respectively. Direct and societal benefit-cost ratios for routine childhood vaccination were 5.3 and 16.5, respectively."
... and...
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedi… .... "The average hospital admission cost was $8,201, and the average length of hospital stay was 4.6 days. Hospital costs amounted to $18 million, two thirds of which was paid for by Medi-Cal. Measles is a serious disease that can result in severe complications requiring lengthy and costly hospital stays."
Put up or shut up.
It may surprise you to learn that your insurance company has other customers other than yourself. So they will happily be willing to pay out $1 million dollars for your brother's hospital stay if by doing so, they save the hundreds of millions of dollars for disability and hospitalization that a major infectious disease epidemic could cost them. Pure economic self interest forces the insurance companies into a utilitarian strategy of playing the odds--the greatest good for the greatest number translates into the greatest profits for the insurance company.
The doctors who make a killing selling vaccines
Um, I don't think that giving a vaccine is even a billable procedure. In other words, doctors get paid absolutely nothing for giving vaccines.
(which result in lifelong prescription drugs for ailments which are more often than not, caused by vaccines) (cha-ching)?
Sigh. Can you give an example? Or even better several, given that you're talking about ailments (plural)?
It's probably billable in a strict sense, but you are right that doctors make little money on vaccines. They are completely covered by every insurance plan I've ever heard of, because they are so much less expensive than the diseases they prevent. And any vaccine that is required for school attendance is provided by the government to those who don't have insurance and can't afford to pay for it out of pocket.
Gee, what a surprise. The court system won't declare you the winner on the basis of your say-so. Even with the lower standards of the vaccine court, you actually do need a little bit of evidence! What is this country coming to!
Recently paparazzi caught Jenny in the act of inviting local Malibu children to a measles party at her house....
http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/2770/jennyinviteslocalmalibufd5.jpg
:-) Attendance is said to have been disappointing.
If I might interrupt Dawn? The doctors are simply in the middle of the vaccine machine. Government entities are the biggest purveyors of vaccines. The water gets a little cloudy when you have the government guaranteeing vaccine purchase, and then they turn around and mandate their use. Or, when you have a person that sits on an advisory panel which recommends vaccines for universal use, while simultaneously owning stock or some similar conflict of interest, within the vaccine maker.
So, the distinction here, is that the vaccine market - is a guaranteed market. The bottom line is that publicly traded pharmaceutical companies, and vaccine mandates don't mix.
AA
AA said "Government entities are the biggest purveyors of vaccines. The water gets a little cloudy when you have the government guaranteeing vaccine purchase, and then they turn around and mandate their use. "
Which government? There have been studies from Japan, Canada, Finland, the UK and elsewhere that show there is absolutely no relationship between vaccines and autism. Also, in many of those government the medical system and the production of the vaccines are socialized... actually done by the government (that is what it is in Denmark).
I have shown that vaccines save money. Prevention through vaccination is lots cheaper than paying for hospitalization, using ventilaters and later dealing with the expenses of permenent disability or death (funeral homes are expensive!). So why do you still bring up the "Big Pharma Money Making Through Vaccines" fallacy?
Since all we are now hearing form Dawn Crim is a whole bunch of nothing... why don't you answer our questions. In case you don't want to scroll up I'll cut and paste them for you:
My questions:
Sure, just provide us some real evidence. Show us some real definitive science that the MMR causes more problems than measles, mumps and rubella. Show what life long ailments are caused by the MMR, with real evidence at a greater rate than those caused by the MMR (1 in 1000 chance of encephalitis, with a chance of death and permanent disability), mumps (with a chance of permanent male sterility and deafness, oh and death), and rubella (with a real chance if a pregnant woman gets of stillbirth or giving birth to a child with disabilities).
Then do the same with the DTaP, show where it is worse than pertussis (which kills over a dozen American babies each year), diphtheria (survivors can end up with permanent cardiac and/or nerve injuries, about 1 in 20 die) and tetanus (which kills 1 out of 10). Show us that the DTaP vaccine is worse than the effects of the toxins produced by diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus. The toxin from tetanus, tetanospasmin, is on the basis of weight is one of the most potent toxins known.
Diane's question (she first quotes Dawn):
(which result in lifelong prescription drugs for ailments which are more often than not, caused by vaccines) (cha-ching)?
Sigh. Can you give an example? Or even better several, given that you're talking about ailments (plural)?
"So, the distinction here, is that the vaccine market - is a guaranteed market."
As long as the infectious diseases they are designed to inhibit the spread of, exist, the anti-vaccinationists are supplementing the vaccine industry by working to prolong the need for them.
On the theme that the vaccine market is guaranteed... So how many companies are manufacturing a smallpox vaccine? Or a typhoid vaccine? Or a typhus vaccine?
Have you heard of those vaccines? Well, if you read AoA you would have read that as a military brat JB Handley had very few vaccines. Um, yeah, right... I believe there are gaps in his shot record. I know there are in mine, but I do have it. Here is my shot record:
Smallpox:
23 Jan 58 (no take)
20 Mar 58
13 Aug 59
30 Mar 68
6 Apr 68
7 Sep 71
20 Jun 74
Typhoid:
18 Jul 59
26 Aug 59
31 Aug 59
6 Apr 68
14 Jun 74
Diphtheria/Pertussis/Tetanus:
23 Jan 58
20 Feb 58
20 Mar 58
21 Jun 59
3 Aug 62
Diphtheria/Tetanus:
30 Mar 68
14 Mar 74
?? Mar 85 (I stapled myself at work, so I went to the plant clinic)
?? Apr 95 (cut myself, so I went to a drop-in med clinic)
2 Feb 05 (because it was time, and I am a gardener)
Typhus:
13 Apr 68
18 May 68
Polio:
29 Jun 59
12 Oct 59
16 Aug 61
3 Aug 62
17 Jun 68
Yellow Fever (Panama and Venezuela):
26 Aug 59
3 May 68
..... Where is the big market for typhus, typhoid, smallpox and yellow fever vaccines in the USA and UK?
Someone truly paranoid about vaccine companies valuing profits above everything else would suspect the antivaccinationists to be plants, ensuring that vaccine uptake is not 100% and that diseases the vaccines protect against are never wiped out...
I know that there are some parents on this board who secretly don't vaccinate and are afraid of voicing their concerns due to the possibly of being verbally bashed here...I am warmly inviting you to join the Yahoo Group "Vaccine Dangers" by Sheri Nakken, former R.N. You will surely learn a lot. I do hope to see some of you!
Oh, and some incredible books on the subject that I wanted to add too.
The Virus and the Vaccine by Debbie Chin and Jim Schumacher
Vaccine Safety Manual by Neil Z. Miller
The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America by Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt
What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Your Children's Vaccinations by Dr. Stephanie Cave
... where the bashing is reserved for people who do vaccinate, but you won't hear from them because Nakken bans anyone who doesn't toe the party line.
... Although none of it is actually true, but see the editorial policy.
... and here, have some Kool-Aid.
Ouch, D.C. Sessions, that hurt. So much so, that I am wearing my "Anti-Vaccine" t-shirt to my dentist appt this morning.
Oh no, not the dentist! They're going to brainwash you with flouride and mercury fillings! Run, Dawn, run!
HCN,
I'm not talking about autism HCN, aplogies if I was unclear. I'm talking about a publicly traded corporation that is responsible for biological products mandated for use by the US government in the US. That very same government is the biggest purchasers of those vaccines. No conspiracy, just fact.
I read your comments, and had been following the thread. I'm not prepared to offer evidence of anything - I'm not making claims, except the above.
My issues surrounding vaccinations deal with this issue on a rather level. This approach to preventative care has been implemented for a very short time [think evolution], and is still in its infancy. I feel there are ecological and evolutionary consequences to this action, and that if we are truly skeptical in terms of longevity for the human species. This viewpoint should not be a stretch, whether it is agreed upon or not.
Some of my issues surrounding vaccines also have to do with age, and I feel that children under two are going through critical stages of nervous system development and that pathogens/viruses should not pass go and not collect $200 on purpose.
I think that if people feel protected by vaccinating, then good for them - it's not place to judge their decisions. BUT, I don't like the selective stance on the "selfishness" of the unvaccinated. Either they are taking advantage of herd immunity, or they are spreading disease in the herd - can't have it both ways.
AA
My apologies to all that read the preceding post. I've not had near enough coffee this morning, and have left out a couple of words. I hope you are able to understand the point I was making, I'll proof better next time.
AA
Actually, we can. Unvaccinated people who don't get sick are taking advantage of herd immunity - that's why they don't get sick. However, when immunity levels drop low enough to no longer have the herd immunity effect, unvaccinated people are at greater risk of getting sick and spreading that disease to others. And those unvaccinated people who travel to places where these diseases are still endemic are putting others (including people who can't be vaccinated) at risk when they return to the US.
Natalie said: Actually, we can. Unvaccinated people who don't get sick are taking advantage of herd immunity - that's why they don't get sick."
You can't prove that. This is the very same temporal association you apply to vaccine injury. Why are you assuming that every unvaccinated person that encounters disease will get sick?
Natalie said: when immunity levels drop low enough to no longer have the herd immunity effect, unvaccinated people are at greater risk of getting sick and spreading that disease to others."
You can't prove that either. You are assuming that every human organism will respond the same way to disease, this is simply untrue. Why are we assuming that every person that encounters a pathogen will get sick, I don't understand this kind of fear? Are we really this frail of a species?
Respectfully, it seems whichever scenario fits is the one that's used.
AA
I profoundly hope that there are evolutionary and ecological consequences. For instance, extinction. variola is pretty much extinct and can stay that way with my blessings; there are quite a few others that can join it and I won't shed a tear.
Otherwise your argument seems rather strongly reminiscent of the one that the antivax crowd was pushing a few years ago about how measles and the like are necessary to proper child development.
Disease is a guaranteed market. The profits generated by an epidemic of a vaccine-preventable disease far exceed the profits made from vaccine sales. Which is why you don't see companies lining up to produce vaccines. Anybody with broad investments in the pharmaceutical industry would make money, not lose it, if there is a decline in vaccination. Waving the "conflict of interest" flag seems little more than a crude attempt to distract from the fact that near-unanimous medical and public health opinion supports universal vaccination for the major infectious diseases, quite independently of what financial holdings a person may have. And I can't help noticing that the people who make these vague implications of pecuniary motives regarding medical and public health authorities never seem to raise the same concerns regarding antivaccination spokesmen, many of whom are making money from books, speaking engagements, or investments in firms that produce nostrums marketed to those who believe that herbs and supplements are an adequate substitute for vaccination.
I find that the use kind of tactic is a hallmark of dishonest debate--misinterpret an opponent's generalization as being absolute and without exception, and demand that they prove that there are no exceptions.
Nobody said every unvaccinated person who encounters disease will get sick. That is obviously stupid. This is a discussion of risk. There are doubtless some people who will luck out and escape infection through good fortune or genetic resistance, although there are some diseases--measles for example--that are so extraordinarily virulent that almost every exposed unvaccinated person will get sick. And herd immunity reduces the risk of infection to everybody, vaccinated and unvaccinated, with unvaccinated people benefiting the most because they have less resistance to infection.
Your counter is not logically equivalent to the prior statement. I can, unequivocally, state that your not having had smallpox is due to herd immunity: you were never exposed. That is the one 100% guaranteed condition for getting the disease, the rest are less reliable. It's like saying that the guardrail saved you from injury when you didn't go over a cliff: you might have emerged uninjured even if you had gone over, but the guardrail kept the question from coming up.
Of course, especially with highly infective diseases like measles the odds of a escaping uninfected from exposure are very close to zero for the nonimmune.
Again, you're misrepresenting her statement. She's talking about risk, not individual certainty. It's certainly possible to beat the odds. If you're so confident that you're willing to bet your life on it, I suggest a dry run with your life savings in Las Vegas.
A third straw man. We're not assuming anything, we're stating the factual observation that diseases are successful survivors in their ecological niche, which happens to be us. Emotional terms like "frail" are beside the point; if polio were not able to overcome human defenses enough of the time, it would not exist. "Enough of the time" is a statistical value, and that value in fact defines herd immunity.
Without vaccines, polio has been around for at least thousands of years. It's now well on its way to extinction. The difference is that it's fallen below "enough of the time."
AA, I strongly recommend that you read Mark Crislip's post regarding the historical effects of diseases commonly vaccinated against: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=186
I don't doubt that some people have a natural immunity to measles. However, the risk is simply not worth it. We are afriad of these diseases, because they kill.
D.C. Sessions wrote:
That's the Anthroposophists' schtick. Rudolf Steiner supposedly ascertained (by means of his secret hotline to the Akashic records) that the soul takes seven years to incarnate into the body, that periodic bouts of inflammation are essential to the development of the soul, that different diseases cultivate different soul qualities, and that the "materialistic" act of vaccination inhibits and distorts that process.
Check out Arthur Allen's article, Bucking the Herd. And here's a little Steiner himself, quoted in Report on Vaccination, by that most dogmatic of anthroposophical antivaccinationists, Dr. Philip Incao.
(Rudolf Steiner, "The Crumbling of the Earth and the Souls and Bodies of Man" given in Dornach October 7, 1917. Reprinted from Anthroposophical Quarterly, Vol.. 19, No. 1, 1974, and Mercury Press.)
And just for good measure, here's a description of a lecture by Dr. Incao, called Vaccines, Viruses, and Aids.
Dawn said "p "Vaccine Dangers" by Sheri Nakken, former R.N. You will surely learn a lot. I do hope to see some of you!
...
Oh, and some incredible books on the subject that I wanted to add too...."
I asked you for real science, not a list of books. Truly, those books are best to avoid.
While Ms. Nakken was a nurse at one time, that was a long time ago and she seems to have forgotten much, including simple math:
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.kids.health/msg/926522ef91b8ab8c?hl… ... Sheri asked "> So what does 0.2% calculate to in numbers "
She is also a homeopath. If you go on her Yahoo group ask how good she is at curing syphilis.
Now, please tell us where the science shows that the MMR is more dangerous than measles, mumps and rubella and where the DTaP is more toxic than tetanolysin, tetanospasmin, pertussis toxin and diphtheria toxin.
AA said "I'm not talking about autism HCN, aplogies if I was unclear. I'm talking about a publicly traded corporation that is responsible for biological products mandated for use by the US government in the US. That very same government is the biggest purchasers of those vaccines. No conspiracy, just fact.
I read your comments, and had been following the thread. I'm not prepared to offer evidence of anything - I'm not making claims, except the above."
Well, at least you can admit to having no evidence, right after you claim a something is a "fact".
What evidence to you have to that "fact"? How does that "fact" affect the vaccine policies and research in the Canada, Japan, UK and elsewhere? Why is it that those countries also seem to have vaccine policies that point to prevention? What happened in Switzerland, UK and Japan when people decided to skip getting measles vaccines (Japan made it voluntary)?
And do tell, what is the relative costs of providing vaccines versus hospitalizations and lifelong care of those disabled by disease, or their funerals?
How about some evidence for your "facts"?
Back from the dentist, town hall, and grocery shopping. Boy, does my anti-vaccine spark some conversation too!! I love wearing it. I'll be sure to purchase different colors for every day of the week because I sure am making some waves by wearing it. Oh, and my little guy frequently wears his too - "Vaccines hurt. Educate yourself." Of course, his sparks a lot of conversation too.
D.C. Sessions stated: "... and here, have some Kool-Aid."
Actually, D.C. Sessions, us "anti-vaccine people" have enough common sense not to drink Kool-Aid because it contains a lot of harmful ingredients like preservatives, dyes, and artifical colors.
Natalie stated: "Oh no, not the dentist! They're going to brainwash you with flouride and mercury fillings! Run, Dawn, run!"
You must have one of those uneducated, ignorant dentists Natalie. Mine actually has never used mercury for anything - not crowns, not fillings, not anything and their office proudly states that fact. Yes, flouride is very harmful too which is why my family doesn't drink tap water or receive flouride treatments.
Boy, I need to slow down and proof read before I submit my comments...sorry...Let me repeat...
Back from the dentist, town hall, and grocery shopping. Boy, does my anti-vaccine "t-shirt" spark some conversation too!! I love wearing it. I'll be sure to purchase different colors for every day of the week because I sure am making some waves by wearing it. Oh, and my little guy frequently wears his too - "Vaccines hurt. Educate yourself." Of course, his sparks a lot of conversation too.
D.C. Sessions stated: "... and here, have some Kool-Aid."
Actually, D.C. Sessions, us "anti-vaccine people" have enough common sense not to drink Kool-Aid because it contains a lot of harmful ingredients like preservatives, dyes, and artifical "flavors".
Natalie stated: "Oh no, not the dentist! They're going to brainwash you with flouride and mercury fillings! Run, Dawn, run!"
You must have one of those uneducated, ignorant dentists Natalie. Mine actually has never used mercury for anything - not crowns, not fillings, not anything and their office proudly states that fact. Yes, flouride is very harmful too which is why my family doesn't drink tap water or receive flouride treatments.
AA said:
And, how do you propose to prevent this fragile collection of neurons be protected from pathogens during this critical stage of development? You gonna put the kid in a bubble for the first 2 years?
Tsu Dho Nimh, unfortunately, vaccines are solely responsible for shifting the vulnerable age groups - to the elderly and young infants. What would your solution be then? Vaccinate every 5-10 years despite the numerous injuries and deaths associated with vaccinating?
I think that we all must come up with a reasonable solution to the problem. I compare this crises with that of technology. Yes, we have achieved many great things in this new age, but we are destroying this planet in the meantime. How do we fix it? Ignore it and hope that it goes away? Or do we let it keep boiling until the lid blows off?
HCN,
No need to be hostile. Are you suggesting that I provide you evidence of government purchase of vaccine? Are you suggesting I provide you evidence of certain pharmaceutical companies being publicly traded, for-profit corporations?
HCN said: Why is it that those countries also seem to have vaccine policies that point to prevention? What happened in Switzerland, UK and Japan when people decided to skip getting measles vaccines (Japan made it voluntary)? "
Sorry, but I'm not sure it matters. As long as publicly traded companies are responsible for the production of vaccines mandated for use, you will have mistrust of the establishment. As long as you have ghostwriting problems, you are going to have a mistrust of the literature found within peer reviewed journals. What difference does any of it make?
The current preventative philosophy totally disregards hundreds of thousands of years of history, in that, as soon as we began domesticating (this includes agriculture do a degree) we became susceptible to disease that hadn't previously afflicted our race in such magnitude. Sure, disease was fairly common during this time - but the mentality that we were helpless human beings being ravaged by disease completely ignores all which led to those tragic events.
The for-profit health care industry grew to take care of these susceptible generations of people (and their heritage), and have instituted vaccine policies to prevent the recurrence of the patterns of disease that affected THOSE people. This mindset assumes we've made absolutely no progress in antiseptic medical care, infrastructure etc. etc...
It's quite easy for you to find evidence which supports the cost of caring for those that become sick, and compare it to the overall cost of instituting universal vaccine policies when the system is set up to feed itself.
@Tso Dho Nimh "And, how do you propose to prevent this fragile collection of neurons be protected from pathogens during this critical stage of development? You gonna put the kid in a bubble for the first 2 years?"
Nope, but I'm certainly not going to allow direct access to susceptible nervous tissue. I'm more inclined to take the advice of primitive cultures, and breastfeed the child to that age. They also carried their young, because the nomadic lifestyle required it. This kind of relationship between mother and offspring is crucial for human milk, and its development.
Unfortunately, man has shifted disease burden within the last 5 or so generations and if we think there is no consequence to this, we are totally fooling ourselves.
AA
I didn't realize so many people had comments for me, and it's doubtful I'll be able to address all of them.
Kathleen Siedel,
I'm not sure I even know what you and DC Sessions are talking about. Soul? Childhood disease necessary? I've never made any such allegation.
DC, surely you see the irony in you calling my use of the word frail as being emotional - when the majority of vaccine enthusiasts that frequent this board often use maim, kill etc... And while you may feel triumphant in that small pox scar I have on my arm, you are mistaken if you don't think that void hasn't been filled with something else.
We are altering ourselves faster than any civilization prior to this one [many of which failed], and evidently no other HUMAN BEING has a say in it.
Sharpie,
I've seen Crislip's account of the past. I don't have a comment, because I don't have irrational fear of disease and am able to keep the past in context.
To everyong else, I'll be getting back to lurkdom - I simply do not agree...
AA
Of course the county health department buys vaccines, but since when is that the US government? And why is it a nefarious practice for public health departments to provide vaccines?
Why not be hostile? You refuse to answer direct questions without slipping and sliding all over the place.
You continued: "Nope, but I'm certainly not going to allow direct access to susceptible nervous tissue. I'm more inclined to take the advice of primitive cultures, and breastfeed the child to that age. They also carried their young, because the nomadic lifestyle required it. This kind of relationship between mother and offspring is crucial for human milk, and its development."
Right, and the child mortality rate of this fictional nirvana was what? Breastfeeding does not protect babies from everything, especially pertussis.
They delayed vaccines until age two in Japan, and the outcome was they could no longer blame the DTP for SIDS:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15889991? ... "An antivaccine movement developed in Japan as a consequence of increasing numbers of adverse reactions to whole-cell pertussis vaccines in the mid-1970s. After two infants died within 24 h of the vaccination from 1974 to 1975, the Japanese government temporarily suspended vaccinations. Subsequently, the public and the government witnessed the re-emergence of whooping cough, with 41 deaths in 1979. This series of unfortunate events revealed to the public that the vaccine had, in fact, been beneficial."
Also, should you care, pertussis is increasing and it does kill babies:
Year____Cases____Deaths
2004____25827______ 27
2005____25616______ 39
2006____15632______ 16
The death figures for 2004 through 2006 are from this slide set:
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/Slides/Pertussis10… ... Slide 9. Of the 82 deaths from pertussis during 2004 through 2006, 69 were of infants under the age of three months, while the remaining 13 were older than three months.
So what is your plan to prevent deaths to babies under age two from pertussis and Haemophilus influenzae type b?
HCN said: Why not be hostile? You refuse to answer direct questions without slipping and sliding all over the place."
Whatever. I made one statement to DAWN about the misconception of doctors making big bucks on vaccines. You then proceeded to unload your vitriol and demanded that I prove YOU wrong. I have no opinion of your cost/benefit analyses, except that I will not dignify the position of a for profit health care system. Perhaps someone else will.
I was then fairly vigorously attacked for my perception of what vaccine enthusiasts consider to be selfish among those that don't share their opinions. (strawman, dishonest debator, bla bla bla) If you consider that slipping and sliding, you are free to do so. The tone here makes it impossible to have civilized discussion without being attacked, and why this is my final post.
HCN said: Right, and the child mortality rate of this fictional nirvana was what? Breastfeeding does not protect babies from everything, especially pertussis"
Mortality rates from other cultures that do not have modern conveniences in which to abuse beyond belief wouldn't be very relevant, and it's not my point - and it's no surprise that is where you would focus your attention. A cursory search in the literature does demonstrate the capability of nursing mothers to protect their young from respiratory infection. You are free to understate the protection of breastfeeding all you like.
I'm familiar with the pinkbook, unfortunately it is rather difficult to assess risk [of harm] because of a passive reporting system for vaccine injury. To truly assess risk [not COST], shouldn't we be comparing how many children died as a result of pertussis (DTaP) vaccination and implement a monitoring system that allows this to happen? Never mind, kids don't die or get injured from vaccines...
Your insinuation that I don't care about the tragic death of a child is unwarranted, and your attempts to paint my character unfavorably because I disagree with your position is totally unnecessary. If you feel it furthers your position, so be it.
HCN said: So what is your plan to prevent deaths to babies under age two from pertussis and Haemophilus influenzae type b?"
My plan? Sorry, did I claim to have one? Someone asked me what I would do, I responded. I would breastfeed the child, carry him/her everywhere and minimize exposure to anything I could. I would eat appropriately [foods that humans have evolved to eat] and avoid unnecessary exposure to whatever I could.
I'm perfectly within my rights to disagree with the full-on attack against every microbe on the planet, some humans evidently feel they have the superiority to choose which life forms live...and which ones die. I'm not one of those humans. Especially life forms that already live harmoniously inside the human body, best to make peace with them. The rest of you are free to support the attack, and you obviously do. We can't all be gatekeepers.
AA
But how do you know, Dawn? How do you know that Big Dental isn't secretly pumping you full of mercury and flouride to keep you weak and stupid?. Could you possibly be saying that you - gasp! - are trusting a member of the medical establishment??? I'm shocked at appalled.
"YOU wrong. I have no opinion of your cost/benefit analyses, except that I will not dignify the position of a for profit health care system. Perhaps someone else will."
Hey HCN:
I'll dignify it with a response -- See "Vaccine decline must be halted, says opinion leader" (16 May 2005) at www.in-pharmatechnologist.com/Industry-Drivers/Vaccine-decline-must-be-… But, I'm sure that won't satisfy those who choose not to believe that Big Pharma is only in it because it makes so much money, since the "opinion leader" the reporter was referring to is our own Dark Lord, Darth Offit. ("the number of firms producing vaccines has dropped from 28 in 1967 to just five in 2004".). It's simple conspiracy economics 101 that whenever there's a highly profitable market, that firms get out of it line of work and new firms don't enter it. That's Through The Looking Glass Proof Positive.
Best regards, and thanks for the links. My collection of downloaded articles grows daily.
AA, in regards to your plan to protect any future children:
You are very naive.
Someone truly paranoid about vaccine companies valuing profits above everything else would suspect the antivaccinationists to be plants, ensuring that vaccine uptake is not 100% and that diseases the vaccines protect against are never wiped out...
Hi Sharpie. I agree.
I have no idea whether or not you thought my comment suggested anything of the sort, or you were simply making a random observation that while true, does not apply here.
The statement below,
"So, the distinction here, is that the vaccine market - is a guaranteed market."
As long as the infectious diseases they are designed to inhibit the spread of, exist, the anti-vaccinationists are supplementing the vaccine industry by working to prolong the need for them.
Was made entirely without regard for motives of vaccine manufacturers or any speculation that antivaccinationists would be "plants".
It is merely the noting of what is most likely an unintended consequence of the actions of the antivaccinationists.
See Hanlon's Razor
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity."
Do'C: I was about to express astonishment that you could think I was serious about antivaxers being Big Pharma plants... until I remembered that the stupid spewed so far in this thread burns so hot, I'm typing from behind a huge mirrored shield like in Sunshine (great film, by the way).
AA: As you've not challenged any of Dr Crislip's figures, I can only assume that you accept that the diseases he discusses have killed and permanently injured countless people in the past.
However, you say that you are able to "keep the past in context". I can only assume (because of the delicious vagaries of your post) you mean that something else has changed between then and now. Maybe the diseases have been neutered somehow. Maybe our immune systems have suddenly become bulletproof. Could you provide some evidence, please? Or a plausible mechanism?
Simply saying "we can discount the past, people don't die of measles anymore" is idiotic. I mean, when's the last time someone was eaten by a tiger in the US? Clearly we should let them all out of zoos and have tiger parties where all the neighbourhood kids come round and stick their heads in the tiger's mouth.
AA sez:
My plan? Sorry, did I claim to have one? Someone asked me what I would do, I responded. I would breastfeed the child, carry him/her everywhere and minimize exposure to anything I could. I would eat appropriately [foods that humans have evolved to eat] and avoid unnecessary exposure to whatever I could.
Did you know that there are industrialized cultures which *do* breastfeed their children to age two? Breastfeeding to age two is actually recommended in the Koran, so it is very widely practiced in Muslim countries. It is very good for children, not least because it has such an ideal balance of nutrients and is much harder to overfeed, but it does not keep their infant death rates down.
In ancient times, when mothers carried their infants around with them all the time and breastfed to age two and only ate "foods we evolved to eat" (whatever that means), common practice was to avoid naming the child until the first birthday. This was to avoid getting too attached to the kid, as the kid would probably die by then.
In Medieval Europe (where people ate organic produce and breastfed and carried their kids with them because unless they were rich, they had no other alternative), the practice of infant baptism was begun. Children would be baptized as early as possible. The reason was not to introduce the child to the community, as we tend to think today. The reason was to ensure that the child would be able to enter Heaven if, as was quite likely, they died before maturing enough to understand the Gospels and take Communion and everything. Indeed, it was not uncommon for priests to go out to homes to baptize sickly newborns and then immediately perform last rites.
Breastfeeding is awesome. Don't get me wrong. I'm a big advocate for it. I breastfed both of mine until they didn't want it anymore. (Neither went to age 2, but really, you can't force a kid to suckle. The first went to about 18 months, the second, who is more independent-spirited, stopped at about 14 months.) But there is only so much that it can do. It doesn't confer as much immune benefit as was once thought, at least not after the colostrum is gone, and once the child is taking solids, they're really not getting that much breastmilk anyway.