The other day, I noted a contrast between certain parts of the developed world (namely, Europe) where, thanks to fears of the MMR vaccine stoked by Andrew Wakefield and the credulous and sensationalistic British press, MMR uptake rates have fallen and, predictably, measles incidence has skyrocketed, and the rest of the world, where polio is now on the verge of being eradicated, thanks to vaccination campaigns. It's evidence that the antivaccine movement, inspired by Andrew Wakefield and promoted by antivaccine groups like Generation Rescue, the National Vaccine Information Center, the Australian Vaccination Network, and Safeminds, has harmful consequences to public health. Of course, it's entirely predictable that, where vaccination rates fall, vaccine-preventable diseases will tend to make a comeback. Indeed, it was antivaccine fear mongering based on religion and suspicion of Westerners that delayed progress in the eradication of polio, progress that is only now getting back on track.
Other vaccine-preventable diseases are also making a comeback, unfortunately, as I found out when I read Trine Tsouderos' excellent article in the Sunday paper entitled Whooping cough returns as vaccine use drops, changes. The situation is a little more complex than that for the resurgence of measles due to catastrophic declines in MMR uptake in the U.K. and parts of continental Europe, but once again it's a situation where less vaccination equals more disease. First, here's the description of the success:
Hundreds of thousands of people in the U.S. -- mostly babies and toddlers -- were coming down with whooping cough each year when vaccines against "this menace," as one newspaper called it, were introduced in the 1930s and 1940s.A childhood scourge for centuries, this sometimes fatal disease seemed destined to become little more than a memory in the U.S. -- with only about 1,000 cases nationwide over the next 40 years.
Now here's the current situation:
In Michigan, 315 cases were reported in 2008, according to the state Department of Community Health. A year later, the incidence of whooping cough had nearly tripled to 902 reported cases. And by 2010, the number of reported cases in Michigan had risen to 1,564.
Similar outbreaks have been seen in other states as well. In California, nearly 10,000 cases of whooping cough were reported in 2010 -- the most since the 1940s, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Ten babies died.
Here's where the complicating factor comes in. Although, as Tsouderos points out, pertussis vaccination rates remain high, there are pockets of low vaccine uptake in many states. Moreover, there is evidence that pockets of unvaccinated children can easily form the nidus for outbreaks of pertussis, measles, and other vaccine-preventable diseases, it's about more than just that. For instance, states with lax policies with regard to religious and philosphical exemptions to vaccination tend to have elevated pertussis incidence, and the risk of developing vaccine-preventable diseases is markedly elevated in those claiming exemptions. For instance, those exempted from vaccination have been 35 times more likely to have had the measles than vaccinated children. A recent study reported that unvaccinated children are 23 times more likely to get pertussis than vaccinated children.
So what's the other part of the equation besides pockets of unvaccinated children that allow local outbreaks to occur? Trine Tsouderos explains:
The vaccine children receive today is different from the ones introduced 70 years ago. Some of the original immunizations were "whole-cell" vaccines, made from killed whole cells of the bacterium that causes whooping cough. Eventually, those old whole-cell vaccines led to the development of the diptheria-tetanus-pertussis shot, or DTP, which became a mainstay in the school immunization routine.
"That whole-cell vaccine works well at the beginning and it lasts and lasts and lasts," said Dr. Roger Baxter, codirector of the Kaiser Permanente Vaccine Study Center.
But, he added: "That fantastic immune response is accompanied by a, well, fantastic immune response."
In other words, the body's reaction to the vaccine sometimes included pain and fevers that could be, in extremely rare cases, high enough to lead to seizures, he said. "This was terrifying to parents," Baxter said.
Of course, the fact that pertussis immunity can wane with time is touted by antivaccine activists as "evidence" that "natural" immunity is better than vaccine-induced immunity. Unfortunately, the price of "natural" immunity is a child's actually getting the disease. That price in the pre-vaccine era was morbidity and, yes, mortality. There were 36,000 deaths from pertussis and pertussis-related complications between 1926 and 1930, and in 1934 there were 260,000 reported cases of pertussis. By 1976, thanks to the vaccine, there were around 1,000 cases. So, yes, "natural immunity" might be longer-lasting and more persistent, but the price of that "natural immunity" is death and suffering.
As is the case with so many vaccines, as the incidence, morbidity, and mortality from pertussis plunged, fewer and fewer parents had ever seen a case. Consistent with human nature, where a risk we can see is almost always more compelling than a risk we can't, because parents didn't know or know of parents whose children suffered--or even died--from pertussis anymore and didn't see their children as being at risk for the disease, they became more suspicious of the vaccine and less tolerant of any possible side effects. When reports of seizures and encephalopathy from the whole-cell pertussis component of the DTP (diptheria-tetanus-pertussis) surfaced in the late 1970s and early 1980s, they led to a documentary written and produced by Lea Thompson entitled DPT: Vaccine Roulette, which first aired on a local NBC affiliate in Washington DC on April 19, 1982, and then ultimately was aired nationally on The Today Show, and then later to a book by Barbara Loe Fisher and Harris Coulter, DPT: A Shot in the Dark. Both used anecdotes over epidemiology and were very compelling at causing fear. As Steve Novella pointed out, later evidence did not support an association between the whole cell pertussis component of the DTP and encephalopathy, but the damage had been done.
Fortunately, scientists developed an acellular pertussis vaccine. These vaccines didn't have the same side effects of fever, febrile seizures, and the like, but recent evidence suggests that they are probably not as good at producing long-lasting immunity as the old whole cell pertussis vaccine was. It's a trade-off, as is all vaccine development. The very aspect of the whole cell pertussis vaccine that allowed it to produce longer-lasting immunity was the very aspect of it that also resulted in more side effects:
Developing vaccines can be a balancing act, trying to trigger as good an immune response as possible in as many people as possible for as long as possible without also triggering unacceptable side effects.
"You can make a safer vaccine and people have better trust in it," said pediatrician Dr. Kathryn Edwards, director of the Vanderbilt University Vaccine Research Program, but the unwanted side effects -- like fevers and pain -- can be associated with better, longer-lasting protection.
Antivaccine activists use this observation as an excuse to claim that the pertussis vaccine "doesn't work" and that "natural immunity" is much better. However, even immunity from a pertussis infection wanes over time, and, more importantly, as I pointed out earlier, the price of this "natural immunity" is the disease, with all its attendant risks, up to and including death. Faced with that tradeoff, I'd say that vaccination makes far more sense than taking the risk of disease. One has only to look back nearly 80 years, when a quarter of a million people per year were developing pertussis and thousands of them died. While it's true that medicine has advanced a lot since then and the mortality rate from pertussis would likely not be nearly as high, the suffering from the disease is still incalculable, as anyone who's seen a baby with pertussis coughing and struggling for breath would attest.
When it comes down to it, arguments from antivaccine activists that the pertussis vaccine "doesn't work" and the argument that, if the vaccine is so effective, then why is pertussis making a comeback are a smokescreen. Vaccination resulted in a massive decline in incidence of pertussis. When reports 30 years ago suggested that the vaccine wasn't safe enough, a safer vaccine was developed. The tradeoff was that its immunity is probably not as long lasting. However, given how safe the vaccine is, that characteristic of the vaccine only suggests that booster shots at an older age are a good idea, not that we should abandon the vaccine. Yet that is the argument that antivaccine activists are making, with their characteristic binary thinking: That if the vaccine isn't perfect and doesn't provide immunity as long-lasting as the disease, then we should abandon the vaccine and promote "natural" immunity. Just never mind the cost.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/13/antidepressant-use-linked…
I know an natal anti-depressant which may lead to positive outcomes in neonates (Dr Dreher)
Jen in TX, for everyone's sake please move to California or someplace sane and get that child some of the forbidden medicine!
Ignore the flower bashers.
I do not know why nirad and crhis is picking on kesbump, but I fear that escalation will continue to the point where farting will abruptly commence. The attack will most definitely be silent and ozzing. The wets ones are the best kind. I once farted on purpose in class to interrupt a stupid professor from teaching the moronic mud to man theory of evolution. I blamed on an accieent, but I later confessed it was on purpose - after I was not in his class anymore. It wasn't a permanent stoppage of this false doctrine, but it temporarily chnaged the subject in the classrooom. I urge all evolution deniers to fart at least once in the classroom and disrupt this negative ideology of evolution. It is better to use the wet silent deadly ones to clear other hippy liberals from the general area. Constant farting in class seems to put one's self in corner wth alot of room away from the hippies who forget to take a bath.
Great post, Orac. And very timely. With pertussis incidence on the rise, it's a good time to remind adults to get their booster shots. Pertussis vaccine isn't just for kids; adults can often have pertussis in a milder form, presenting an increased risk of spreading the disease.
If people think that their decision to vaccinate or not has no consequences, the may want to read about a parent's frightening encounter with pertussis, all stemming from the late '70s scare you mention.
Also glad that you mentioned that natural infection doesn't provide lifelong immunity, either. Numbers I have come across suggest natural immunity lasts from 3-20 years, with vaccine-induced immunity being 3-12 years.
I'm very glad I got my Tdap vaccine this summer.
But not to worry! Jean has the cure: "Whooping Cough is easily fixed by one administration of a homeopathic remedy which works within 2 minutes"
"The very aspect of the whole cell pertussis vaccine that allowed it to produce longer-lasting immunity was the very aspect of it that also resulted in more side effects"
The Dutch National Institute for Public Health and Environment (RIVM) paid for a lot of work on the toxic and antigenic effects of the whole cell pertussis vaccine. These are due to lipopolysaccharide (LPS) from the bacterial outer membrane.
See http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/dissertations/2007-0619-201035/inde… for information on LPS-engineering to decrease toxicity and improve vaccine efficacy.
You wouldn't stop lying, would you Orac?
h_ttp://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9814&page=3
What else do you have in mind germ denier?
I've had pertussis as an adult. I've had asthma since I was two or three, so respiratory tract infections are really common occurrences for me in winter. In winter 2010, what started off feeling like bronchitis soon got to the point where the blood vessels, in my eyes and across my cheeks, were bursting with the force of the coughing. Nothing relieved it, I was purple from lack of oxygen, coughing and retching with such force that I was incontinent.
I have never felt so wretched in my life, even after neurosurgery, or when in hospital after a trapped kidney stone caused sepsis. My doctor had to watch videos on youtube to compare the 'whooping', even after a positive swab, because he couldn't believe what he was seeing.
I cannot imagine being a tiny baby, or a pre-verbal child, and not being able to either articulate how terrible you feel, or to understand what the hell is happening to you.
I had mumps in 2006, not as bad as pertussis, but if you have to take several oral medications every day and can't even swallow your own saliva, then life gets messy. One of my ovaries swelled up so badly that it twisted on it's stalk, and almost required surgery to remove it.
As an immune-compromised adult, it's a terrifying thought that it may not be cancer that kills me off in my 40s (typical in my family), but measles, or flu in my 30s. I can't have any vaccine cultured in a certain medium that I'm allergic to, or any vaccine that raises ICP. It saddens me that some people are so cavalier about vaccines, that they don't believe in a social contract, that they actually think babies, or people too ill to be vaccinated should just die off, because the alternative is to "contaminate" their precious bodily fluids.
Completely overlooked (once again) is the recent evidence that shows a diminished immune response with prophylactic acetaminophen use. One wonders to what degree this is playing a role in the resurgence of pertussis?
http://www.medpagetoday.com/PrimaryCare/Vaccines/16458
BTW, for those who have been following my rants about acetaminophen overuse and its possible link to autism, this may be of interest and will surely ruffle a few feathers!
It seems anti-vaxxers are always touting data that proclaims that "more educated parents"** are less likely to vaccinate( AoA; Mike Adams) so we might expect that those pockets of lower vaccination rates will permeate and encircle large cities, settling in affluent hipster havens and well-heeled suburbs... perhaps declaring yourself against vaccines won't stay as fashionable as it is now.
I can't fathom how buying into alt med, natural-is-better memes ever were considered hip, cool, *fashionable* in the *first* place? Isn't the essence of hip being able to out-think the average person, be in the fore-front of the new, *not* being a follower?
Smart, quick, no-nonsense, reality-seeking, complex- never go out of style.
** people define "educated" differently, purely by amount. We could also look at age-related data ( Thomson-Reuters, Sept 2011)
One notes that the review Thingy cites is from 1994. One also notes that Thingy also completely ignored the other studies cited by Dr. Novella, most of which are more recent. One also notes that febrile seizures in general (which were more common with the whole cell pertussis vaccine) do not increase the risk of permanent neurological damage.
Those tempted to be swayed by Thingy @4 will note that Thingy calls Orac a liar for not commenting on a report from 1991, though Orac points readers to Steve Novella's post referencing "later evidence", which in this case means studies from 1993, 1994, 2008, and 2010, all of which, the alert reader will note, are later than 1991.
Steve Novella finishes up with a comment quite applicable to the Thingy: "What we also see in this story is that anti-vaccine activists, like Fisher, froze their opinions about DTwP back in the early stages of anecdotal reports."
R U blind Orac? IOM, 1991. Now show me a study that refutes the already established causation between DPT and acute encephalopathy? Well? Show me your germ theory denialism skill.
If anything, the essense of hipness is seeming to be those things. Appearance and reality frequently differ.
Having fun moving the goalpost? We're talking about acute enceohalopathy, aren't we?
@ Jen in TX:
You'll note that there is not the faintest shred of a hint of a connection with autism there. Unless you want to claim that getting a fever protects against autism, the article you cite simply stands as an example of SBM developing better knowledge and practices.
Even as early as 1979, there were data to suggest that the reports of horrible consequences following DTP were very likely not causally connected to the vaccine.
Here's the link again to Steven Novella's post:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/a-shot-in-the-dark-revisi…
He states (with evidence, mind you), "So while there were more minor reactions to DTwP, there was no increase in seizures or encephalopathy compared to DTaP, which supports the conclusion that DTwP does not increase the risk of these neurological events." Emphasis added for Thingy's benefit.
Hello! Yooohooo! IOM, are you there?
That does not in any way refute nor challenge the already established link between DPT and acute encephalopathy (IOM, 1991). Next.
1991 - 1979 = 12. Todd W cites evidence predating Thingy's citation by twelve years, and Thingy thinks its citation trumps his evidence.
2008 - 1991 = 17. Steven Novella cites evidence postdating Thingy's citation by seventeen years, and Thingy thinks its citation trumps his evidence.
Those unacquainted with Thingy can see just one reason why it is pointless to try to carry on a discussion with Thingy. Its constant insults and deliberately offensive language are other reasons.
IOM in 1994 (from "DPT Vaccine and Chronic Nervous System Dysfunction:
A New Analysis"):
BTW, for those who have been following my rants about acetaminophen overuse and its possible link to autism, this may be of interest and will surely ruffle a few feathers!
You mean in the sense of its being content-free and thus requiring people to look around for which version of this dopey notion Shaw is peddling?
Wow.
Look at what I quoted @14. Look at what Thingy pretended to quote @16. Thingy "thinks" (for lack of a better term) it wins by simply removing the relevant words and pretending they were never there -- even though anyone can look back two comments earlier and see them quite plainly, and then click over to Steven Novella's post and observe that I quoted him correctly. Thingy doesn't seem to grasp that this is the Internet, and you can't just pretend that someone said one thing when they actually said another.
Again, for those who are unfamiliar with Thingy, this is why it is pointless to try to carry on a discussion with Thingy.
LW,
Don't be so dramatic. Actually, I was trying to bold that "relevant word" to correspond to my comment. I have no idea that it didn't show up until you told me. So here it is again.
Enough of your excuses and show me the evidence.
First you need to show us a study that has established causation between DPT and acute encephalopathy. "Consistent with" is not the same as "established." Note that the 1991 IOM report is also consistent with there being no causation between DPT and acute encephalopathy. A 1993 IOM report (of which all of the authors were also authors of the 1991 report) makes this quite clear:
Cowan, et al. "Acute encephalopathy and chronic neurological damage after pertussis vaccine." Vaccine. 1993 Nov;11(14):1371-9. PMID: 7906066
@ LW
You have to understand Thingy's basic premise though. According to it, had those children not received the DPT, then they would never have gotten the disorder. The premise being that vaccination is, if not the only, certainly the major cause of infection today.
Much like Emily in the previous thread, avoiding disease is simply a matter of will power. Or washing your hands, or something. Whatever it is, it's much easier, safer and more reliable than vaccines.
Todd W.,
Again the IOM report in 1994 does not in any way refute, challenge, or overturn the previous finding in 1991 which had already established causality between DPT and acute encephalopathy.
You'll never find that from the original and official report. Next.
How has this been overlooked? Diminished =/= none or not protective. I think it's a bad policy to administer acetaminophen as a pre-prophylaxis or even to reduce an uncomplicated fever surrounding vaccines but there are many more obvious targets than Tylenol.
Why? The director of a notorious quack laboratory, Great Plains dribbles some unsubstantiated drek about yet another autism causation because of what he believes is the autism epidemiology in Cuba is going to ruffle whose feathers Jen? I see you are easily impressed and snookered.
^What elburto@ 5 said, +1^
Had pertussis as an adult, caught from an unvaccinated patient on oxygen, brought into the ER at the same time as my spouse. I had had the childhood series, but not an adult booster, because at the time folks still thought the childhood immunizations lasted forever.
Months upon months of coughing until I vomited. Coughing until I was incontinent. Intermittent fevers that left me delirious for days on end. Charley horse cramps all through my ribs and belly, resulting in vomiting all over again. Dehydration and all the misery that goes with it, when you can't keep anything down. And zero sleep of course, forget about a solid eight hours of getting your head down--I was lucky to get a few hours per night, at most. At a job where I had no sick days and no health insurance. (Aside: A hearty Fuck You to states where insurers can refuse coverage for pre-existing conditions.)
People would deliberately inflict that on a child? I wouldn't inflict it on my worst enemies. As soon as the TDaP became available to me, you better believe I got it. At least as an adult, you know what is going on and to just keep sipping half-strength Gatorade and chicken broth for the dehydration, even though you feel like hammered shit and it doesn't really stay down. You know that the reason your spouse is cranky when fetching you another glass of water is because he didn't get any sleep either. Kids can't rationalize that stuff, they just feel even more miserable.
-This message brought to you by a fully vaccinated Big Pharma employee.
You'll never find that from the original and official report. Next.
Hm. I'm curious: Orac, you mention the antivaccine people are saying that natural immunity is better than vaccine-induced immunity. If vaccine-induced immunity fails and someone gets the disease, wouldn't they just then get natural immunity? Unless I'm wrong about that, it doesn't even seem like a reason not to get vaccinated.
Granted, they have a bunch of other excuses that they give to avoid vaccination, this one just seems particularly flawed.
Give it up, guys. We've been outfoxed.
The first study that Thingy likes, no matter how old, no matter how small, no matter how inconclusive, is the final word and no subsequent study, no matter how recent, no matter how large, no matter how conclusive, even if performed by the very same people as performed the first study, can ever dispute a single word of Thingy's favorite study.
Once it's in Thingy's Bible, It Is Written.
Serve up #4. What do you have germ denialist?
Actually, the way I see it, Science Mom, Dr. Shaw is kind of putting his neck on the line here. Some in the "biomed" community are not at all happy about this and that's all I'm going to say about it!
Kings of Ferrets, that, and also, if natural immunity is good, why are live virus vaccines bad?
Presumably this:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8182813
"The committee found that the evidence favored the rejection of a causal relation between diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and encephalopathy, infantile spasms, and sudden infant death syndrome."
Please do not feed delusional, etc, etc, SFB Troll.
@ Jen in TX: Doctors and nurses have known for years that fever is an important part of the immune response...so there may be an association with decreased immune response with the use of an antipyretic such as Tylenol/acetaminophen. The other link you provided is to a crank website.
It has always been a trade-off about the use of Tylenol pre or post immunization, for parents whose children have a diagnosed severe seizure disorder...where grand mal seizures or status epilecticus may be triggered by high sustained fevers.
Both of my children (born in 1970 and 1976), received whole cell pertussis vaccines. My older child spiked a moderate fever and cried inconsolably for 4 hours, following the first shot and to a lesser extent the second shot of the three shot series. My son, who was severely neurologically impaired, had none of those effects.
This is how the anti-vax cranks and their websites work. They headline any reports, that "hint" of a serious adverse event post immunization...then "dead" silence when, following thorough investigation, no link was found. Hence, we still have the notorious anti-vax websites still "headlining" "Another (or 4 more) deaths from HPV Vaccine"...long after the VAERS investigations showed no link between HPV vaccine administration and deaths from suicide or a motor vehicle accident weeks, or months, after the HPV vaccine was administered.
The notorious anti-vax websites and some lesser ones, continue to spread the false information...they are deliberately non self-correcting. That is the difference between reputable internet source and real journalists and the crank web sites and their yellow "journalists".
Ray P, Hayward J, et al. Encephalopathy after whole-cell pertussis or measles vaccination: lack of evidence for a causal association in a retrospective case-control study. Pediatr Inf Dis J. 2006 Sept;25(9):768-73.
Took about 5 seconds in PubMed. I would call you a lazy sloth but it would be disrespectful to my gentle tree dwelling mammalian friends. Then again, my Little Grasshopper, perhaps you are merely unschooled in PubMed-fu, the more esoteric and scientific cousin of Google-fu.
Yep, you've got a crank problem. This behavior is classic, and it's clear, he's a crank that can't be turned.
@ Jen in TX
Oh goody. Another Brave Maverick Doctor⢠in the making. I can't wait to hear about his martyrdom at the hands of "the biomed community" or "Big Pharma." Maybe he and AJW and Burzynski can exchange notes.
Does he have any evidence for this supposed correlation?
If you have something to say, then say it. Does this sort of breadcrumbing make you feel special? Dr. Shaw is a quack with no MD and touts ridiculous hypotheses as fact. He doesn't have a bit of sway with the scientific and medical communities so I don't see what he has got that "puts his neck out".
I can prove that the 1991 IOM paper does not establish causality (from p. 118):
An excess risk of 0.0 per million doses means that there is zero excess risk. In other words, no causality.
James Gavin,
*Yawn*. Next.
Just to be absolutely clear: nowhere in the 1991 IOM report or the original NCES study does it claim to have established a causal relation between DTP and acute encephalopathy.
Cynical Pediatrician,
Did you even bother reading the conclusion?
Being "not associated with an increased risk" does not mean absence of causality. Next.
10.5 is better.
"Being "not associated with an increased risk" does not mean absence of causality. Next."
...so says the delusional SFB Troll...who has its own "special way" of interpreting the English language, its own "cherry-picking-the-data-technique" and a "unique" facility of pathologically lying. It needs "terminal disinfection".
-Next.
Takeaway point for folks following at home: never, ever take one of Thingy's citations as supporting its positions without first reading them to see the context... because 99 times out of 100 the citation actually supports current medical practices despite what Thingy thinks (or claims) it says.
Also watch for ideosyncratic redefinitions of common terms... notably "infection", which is one of its bugaboos. Sometimes communication with Thingy really goes at cross-purposes because English ain't Thinglish.
In summary Th1Th2 is indeed a classic crank with severe perceptual filters augmenting a huge propensity for confirmation bias... its value here is mainly one of entertainment.
(I hereby propose a Crank of the Year award, sculpted from Cubic Plutonium* or its cheapest and most environment-friendly synthetic substitute. Thingy should be among the 2011 nominees.)
-- Steve
* Yes, I spent some time on Usenet back in the day... the cranks there were of a much more entertaining and less potentially-dangerous variety than Th1Th2, let me tell you.
Thingy is evidently operating off its own (undisclosed) definition of causality. This goes with its own definition of infection. There is no point trying to carry on a discussion with someone who does not speak the same language we do.
I hereby propose a Crank of the Year award, sculpted from Cubic Plutonium
Belated thought; maybe a Klein bottle sculpture? Something that appears solid on first glance but doesn't hold water is probably the best geometric representation of crankery I can think of.
-- Steve
@ Anton P. Nym: Great post. I figured out how to find out where SFB Troll cherry-picked its data. I simply "copy" Thingy's latest "cherry-picked" sentences...then "paste" it on the Google search field.
And, you wonder why I find that the Th1Th2bot makes more sense than Thingy....
"Some in the "biomed" community are not at all happy about this and that's all I'm going to say about it!"
It's definitely not a good idea to provide details. You rile up the "biomed" community goons, and first thing you know they're stalking you on their Segways and putting adjuvants in your mailbox.
Last year (I think), the county in Iowa where my parents live, population of about 21K, I think, had 13 cases of whooping cough. Scaled to the population of Michigan, that would constitute about 7000 cases and it would scale to 23000 cases in California, more than twice as many as in the recent outbreak.
I do not know about the vaccination status of the county
Orac @8
I'm not interested in responded to a delusional troll, but you might be interested to note that studies by two separate research group have shown that children who seemed to develop acute encephalopathy following vaccination with DTP in fact had pre-existing mutations that cause that symptom, unrelated to vaccination.
The reported reactions are due to channelopathies, most commonly (ca. 70%) due to mutations in SCN1A. SCN1A is minimally expressed at birth but then reaches maximal expression at around the time when seizure disorders begin to manifest; this happens both in humans and in (unvaccinated!) rats, and has nothing to do with vaccination. I believe that about 700 different SCN1A mutations have been identified; some cause only febrile seizures, some cause more serious seizure disorders such as generalized epilepsy with febrile seizures plus, severe myoclonic epilsepsy borderland, and severe myoclonic epilepsy of infancy (Dravet syndrome). Since many of the mutations are temperature-sensitive, increased body temperature (whether due to a warm bath or to fever associated with natural infection or vaccination) reveals the underlying problem as with increasing age of the child the defective protein increasingly replaces the normal protein product (of a related gene).
In short, children who, in the anti-vax meme, appeared to be 'developing normally as babies and toddlers ... making eye contact, even potty trained, but then suddenly lost all those skills' have been explained in studies of allegedly vaccine-injured children to have had pre-existing mutations that produced those symptoms, including developmental regression. None of this was known at the time of the previous Institute of Medicine reports.
--Reyes IS, Hsieh DT, Laux LC, Wilfong AA. Alleged Cases of Vaccine Encephalopathy Rediagnosed Years Later as Dravet Syndrome. Pediatrics. 2011 Aug 15.
--Berkovic SF et al. De-novo mutations of the sodium channel gene SCN1A in alleged vaccine encephalopathy: a retrospective study. Lancet Neurol. 2006 Jun;5(6):488-92.
--Li BM et al. Autism in Dravet syndrome: prevalence, features, and relationship to the clinical characteristics of epilepsy and mental retardation. Epilepsy Behav. 2011 Jul;21(3):291-5
--Catarino CB et al. Dravet syndrome as epileptic encephalopathy: evidence from long-term course and neuropathology. Brain. 2011 Oct;134(Pt 10):2982-3010.
--Wiznitzer M. Dravet syndrome and vaccination: when science prevails over speculation. Lancet Neurol. 2010 Jun;9(6):559-61.
--Neville B. Dravet syndrome and 'immunization encephalopathy'. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2010 Jun;52(6):590-1
--Okumura A, Uematsu M, Imataka G, Tanaka M, Okanishi T, Kubota T, Sudo A, Tohyama J, Tsuji M, Ohmori I, Naiki M, Hiraiwa-Sofue A, Sato H, Saitoh S, Shimizu T. Acute encephalopathy in children with Dravet syndrome. Epilepsia. 2011 Nov 16.
--Wolff M, Cassé-Perrot C, Dravet C. Severe myoclonic epilepsy of infants (Dravet syndrome): natural history and neuropsychological findings. Epilepsia. 2006;47 Suppl 2:45-8.
In regard to Thingy's comments
To quote Inigo Montoya
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Thingy is taking "correlation does not mean causation" to also mean that "lack of correlation does not mean no causation." Of course, a lack of correlation is strong evidence against causation, whereas correlation is only weak evidence for correlation.
Ack! Preview is your friend! The last sentence above should read:
Of course, a lack of correlation is strong evidence against causation, whereas correlation is only weak evidence for causation.
@ Jen in TX: Doctors and nurses have known for years that fever is an important part of the immune response..."
OMG, don't make me laugh, lilady. If fever is sooo important, then why have (some, not all) "doctors and nurses" been spending so much time telling parents to shove Tylenol into the mouths of babes at any sign of a slight temp increase all these years as well as before and after vaccinations, complete with "helpful" freebie samples and coupons from J&J sales reps? Where on earth is that evidence that you all are always hollering about?
There's no evidence to suggest that fever is harmful. Dehydration is harmful (and even more so with antipyretic use) and heatstroke (not from fever) is harmful. The underlying reason for the fever (infection) may (or may not) be harmful. Fever phobia and the widespread use of fever suppressing drugs is bullshit medicine that has killed and injured babies. Maybe that's the reason for the hostility towards this idea? The idea that the "evidence based medicine" that you all champion might have gotten it all wrong?
Consider the 1991 IOM report cited by W. Kevin Vicklund @39. Â
Let's suppose the true risk is the absolute top end of the range: 10.5 cases of encephalitis per million (even though that's not what later research showed). Â The rate of death from pertussis in California in 2010 was 1/1000 (ten deaths in 10,000 cases). That is a death rate of 1,000/1,000,000, or nearly a hundred times the absolute maximum rate of encephalitis, not death, from the whole-cell vaccine, that isn't used anymore anyway. Â
Oops: reading fail there
Baah, do I feel sheepish.
http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2011/Adverse-Effects-of-Vaccines-Evidence-an…
Great post.
So, to support the proposition that EBM has "gotten it all wrong," you present... EBM? Much hilarity doth ensue.
Orac, you really must provide some evidence to support your assertion that a paper that is almost fifteen years old is the cause of a current European measles outbreak. Either that or stop making the claim. And provide us some data regarding alleged falling immunization rates as well.
If fever is sooo important, then why have (some, not all) "doctors and nurses" been spending so much time telling parents to shove Tylenol into the mouths of babes at any sign of a slight temp increase all these years
Because some folks don't go by Evidence Based Medicine, or they shovel pills out in order to get annoying patients out the door with a minimum of hassle. Sadly not everyone (in any profession) always follows best practices.
Where I work we offer limited medical information to people calling on the telephone... though I am not a medical professional and am not qualified to offer any such information, I do know that a fever has to be pretty high and prolonged for it to be considered worth recommending that someone see a doctor about it or use antipyretics.
-- Steve
There is no evidence. Just unfounded speculation.
To further the analysis started by LW @55, the number of live births in California was about 512,000 in 2010. Allowing for death and anti-vax sentiments, let's assume 500,000 full-dose equivalents @ 4 doses, an ~97% uptake rate (which is probably high). That gives about 2 million doses, or at worse 21 extra cases of encephalopathy.
@58
So glad you find all of this so fucking hilarious. My severely autistic, nonverbal child has had a flare up of his bowel problems this week and is in severe PAIN. Think that's "hilarious" too?
I have been screaming about this shit for three years and I AM PISSED. Pissed at mainstream medicine for doing this to him and pissed at those on the "other" side who have gone out of their way to keep this information from getting out in order to protect their precious St. Andy. My kid is caught in the middle of all this, along with all the other kids who are suffering and their parents who are seeking answers.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'll be at the gastroenterologist's office today with my self-abusing son, so if I don't respond to your lovely posts right away, do forgive me.
"That gives about 2 million doses, or at worse 21 extra cases of encephalopathy."
And in exchange we *wouldn't* get 10 extra cases of death from pertussis.
Jen in TX, I don't think anyone here finds a child's agony to be amusing.
What is risible (because one can either laugh at it or cry because of it, so laughter is the more productive response) is the blatently-unreasonable scapegoating of medicine that results from some peoples' wild flailing-about for something to blame. It may be a coping mechanism for dealing with the stresses of parenting a sick child, but that doesn't mean it's good or healthy; drinking and spousal abuse are also coping mechanisms that aren't acceptable.
The cosmic joke is that too many people have turned their backs on the very medical research that may offer help; it's like drowning people refusing to wear life-jackets because they're afraid of being choked.
VACCINES DO NOT CAUSE AUTISM. WAKEFIELD IS A FRAUD. THIS IS PROVEN IN MULTIPLE SCIENTIFIC STUDIES AND AT LEAST ONE LEGAL COURT.
The way to help autistic children and their parents is not to revisit measles and polio on everyone else. It's to find the real causes, and to discover new therapies for the kids and means of helping parents help their kids. And going after "Big Pharma" doesn't do anything to help that.
-- Steve
Jen in TX, no one here finds your situation the least bit hilarious. But we also didn't know your current situation until you told us, so no comment on this post could possibly refer to your son's current misery.
@ Jen in TX:
I note that you are completely unable to actually support your claims, instead attempting to resort to emotional blackmail. It is blindingly obvious that I was referring to your unsubstantiated incoherent ravings as "hilarious," not your son's condition. I strongly suspect that you realize this full well and are attempting to shut down criticism by invoking an entirely unrelated issue.
@ Jen in Tex: You should have provided the article that you apparently read in the "Pediatrics" Journal entitled "Fever and Antipyretic Use in Children" (March 1, 2011.
I stated in my post (#34), directed at you:
"@ Jen in TX: Doctors and nurses have known for years that fever is an important part of the immune response...so there may be an association with decreased immune response with the use of an antipyretic such as Tylenol/acetaminophen."
Here is the direct quote from the Pediatrics Journal article:
"Despite insufficient evidence, many pediatricians recommend the routine practice of pretreatment with acetaminophen or ibuprofen before a patient receives immunizations to decrease the discomfort associated with the injections and subsequently at the injection sites and to minimize the febrile response.9,17,37,â,39 In addition, results of 1 recent study suggested the possibility of decreased immune response to vaccines in patients treated early with antipyretics."
The article in Pediatrics also discusses "febrile" seizures, which I did NOT make reference to. I discussed the trade off for fever causing grand mal seizures and/or status epilecticus in a child with a previously diagnosed seizure disorder. You do know Jen, don't you, that a "febrile seizure" is not a "grand mal seizure" and that a "febrile seizure" is not "status epilepticus"? You do know, don't you Jen, that "febrile seizures" do not lead to neurological impairment and that "grand mal" seizures may lead to neurological impairment and that "status epilepticus" is a life threatening event that can lead to Todd's paralysis and profound neurological loss?
Jen, if you had any education in seizures disorders or actually had a child with a grand seizure disorder, you would know that there is a world of difference between febrile seizures and grand mal seizures/status epilepticus.
Thank you for not arguing about causality.
The only thing clear is that you are a germ denialist. Read it again #4.
Jen in Tx: I have a long comment stuck in moderation. You should really not change the subject to your child's autism, when the discussion thread was about seizures.
Please stick around for my comment, it provides you with an education about a subject you are unfamiliar with; "febrile seizures, grand mal seizures and status epilecticus".
Lurkers may not be aware that Thingy has previously demonstrated a complete inability to grasp the notion of a hypothetical. Observe that Thingy @69 believes that the words "Let's suppose ... (even though that's not what later research showed)" mean "I concede that it is true that ..."
Once again we see that it is pointless to attempt to discuss anything with Thingy, which is why W. Kevin Vicklund are interacting with each other and not Thingy.
"VACCINES DO NOT CAUSE AUTISM. WAKEFIELD IS A FRAUD. THIS IS PROVEN IN MULTIPLE SCIENTIFIC STUDIES AND AT LEAST ONE LEGAL COURT."
I AGREE WITH ALL OF THE ABOVE! I HATE ANDREW WAKEFIELD FOR THE DELAYS HE HAS CAUSED. HATE HIM! IF I COULD ALL CAP THIS EVEN BIGGER I WOULD!
I KNOW vaccines do NOT cause autism, and the evidence that Dr. Shaw will present SUPPORTS that. THAT is what "some" are getting their feathers ruffled about! The evidence wrt acetaminophen is incomplete and I will be the very first to loudly acknowledge that. I want the evidence to BE more complete, even if this idea turns out to be all wrong! I NEED to KNOW!
@Sid - I find it very amusing that you go on about "baseless speculation" when your own position can only be supported by "baseless speculation."
Haha. This is what you call hypothetical: "Lunar eclipse causes encephalitis"
Unfortunately for you germ denialist, the IOM had already conceded that DPT causes encephalitis.
Apparently, the IOM report in 1991 speaks about causation, not correlation. Next.
Okay, I read it again. The word "establish" still doesn't appear in that quote. Nor does it appear in 1991 IOM in association with DTP and acute encephalopathy.
You lied.
Nowhere does the 1991 IOM report concede that DPT causes encepholopathy.
@35 Cynical P-
I know PubMed fu- Should I cite the still available study by the Geiers on the MMR
still not retracted -I think not. It is not "the Bible"-It took me 10 seconds to see it is still
not retracted.
Yeah like this:
Orac's last post (#8) while disingenuously trying to move the goalpost: January 16, 2012 11:28 AM
@ Offal...Here you are Bob...right in your own backyard:
The Bay Citizen
Marin Countyâs Efforts Against Whooping Cough Pay Off
By SYDNEY LUPKIN
Published: September 17, 2011
Last year, California experienced its worst outbreak of whooping cough in more than 60 years, and the disease hit hardest in an unexpected place: bucolic Marin County.
This year, the disease is still prevalent, according to the State Department of Public Health â but not, remarkably, in Marin. Only 10 new cases of the disease, also known as pertussis, have been reported in the county since January, out of more than 2,000 cases statewide. Last year Marin had 350 cases, out of more than 9,000 statewide.
Offal, the article then discusses the many educational seminars directed to the public and the thousands of vaccines administered at free public health clinics to provide primary series and booster vaccines against pertussis.
Everyone that I know employed in public health is delighted that no infants (white or little brown babies) have died from this disease, since 2010.
Offal...graduating from a fourth tier college with a "Fire Science Degree" does not qualify you to understand epidemiology.
@Jen in TX: Jen: take some deep breaths and calm down. You're going through a very tough patch right now, and have our sympathy for your son being in such pain. We know you just want the best for him. You're angry and frustrated, and no where near as coherent and logical as previous posts of yours have been.
We know how you feel about acetaminophen. But here, we need you to keep on topic. I also know, from previous posts of yours, that you have had your son vaccinated (at least some - I don't recall exactly).
Help us support the vaccinations of others to prevent pertussis in those who can't be vaccinated. Whether or not acetaminophen has a negative effect, no one can say. Yes, we may need more studies. But we all can truly say that NO ONE should have to experience pertussis. (I also had it as an adult; we didn't realize adults should be re-vaccinated. I'm just happy I didn't give it to my family and that my more vulnerable children HAD been vaccinated. )
"The + evidence + is + consistent + with + a + causal + relation + between + DPT vaccine + and + acute encephalopathy
What the heck is all the complain?
@Thingy: very good. Now post the REST of the conclusion. You've read that far, it's not much more to read...
ken:
Doesn't mean it is any good either. Especially in light of recent issues both Geiers have had with medical boards.
I am pretty damn sure, you're talking about other "stuff" other than acute encephalopathy.
Don't be like Orac.
@JenTX - I will echo the sentiments here, as a father, I know the feelings that can develop when faced with extreme hardships, especially involving one's children. My thoughts and prayers go out to you and your family.
I do hope that you take the discussions here as they are intended - a rational debate, with the overall intention to support the best possible medical research and outcomes - for anyone, child or adult, that requires medical attention, either now or in the future.
I wore a ring on the fourth digit of my left hand every day the year I was 17. I am currently married. The evidence is consistent with me having been married before I was 17.
Have I established that I was married before I was 17?
Iâve seen research reports showing variously that ânaturalâ infection of pertussis induces long-term immunity, as well as (a fairly recent) report indicating that the immunity from ânaturalâ infections isnât that much longer than that from the vaccine (i.e. relatively short-term).
I have wanted to follow-up on this, but have never found time. Does anyone have any comments on this issue.
@ ken--
Ah, I bow in respect to your mad PubMed skillz. However, my post was directed at Thingy, who requested (way back @10),
"Now show me a study that refutes the already established causation between DPT and acute encephalopathy,"
which I promptly did, to which Thingy apologized and capitulated. No, wait, I meant to say "perseverated and obfuscated." But what else is new.
The persistence of memory in PubMed does not have any bearing on the study I cited, unless you mean to imply that all citations in PubMed are potentially worthless and retracted.
What's that got to do with "causation" anyway? Next.
Pertussis is a bacterial infection, so like most bacterial infections the chances of long term immunity are limited. There is absolutely no immunity for tetanus if you survive it, just like if you get a strep infection (having had two children re-infected by a sibling who had it but no symptoms, I know this all too well).
Any way here is one paper:
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2005 May;24(5 Suppl):S58-61.
Duration of immunity against pertussis after natural infection or vaccination.
Note that the 1991 IOM report had 5 possible conclusions:
The IOM concluded that while evidence was consistent with a causal relationship, it was not sufficient to indicate a causal relationship. If it doesn't even indicate a causal relationship, it can't be honestly claimed to establish a causal relationship.
*defined as "The available evidence, on balance, tends to support a causal relation"
nothing. I'm testing to see if you understand what "consistent with" and "establish" mean. Answer the question, or admit you're lying.
A testimonial for the 201l winner of the *Crank of the Year Award:
This honor is bestowed upon Thingy, who has by its posting of thousands of cherry-picked articles and delusional posts on Respectful Insolence, been chosen for this honor.
Thingy's unusual "education" (none), professed employment in the health care field (none), its germ phobia (ample), its disease-promotion (abundant), its ability to interpret published studies and reports (none), its facility for composing and posting coherent remarks (none)...and, its magnificent command and use of its secret pidgen English dialect for its posts, has qualified Thingy for the "2011 Respectful Insolence Crank-Of-The-Year Award".
If nominations are open for the 2012 RI Crank-Of-The-Year award, I would like to be the first to nominate Thingy.
* Thanks Steve
Remember the movie "The Fugitive"? The evidence was consistent with Dr. Richard Kimball's having murdered his wife. The jury took this to mean that it was established that he murdered his wife. The U.S. Marshals were willing to look at whether later evidence really established that, and they concluded that it did not.
Thingy would have been hammering on the table saying, "No! At one time the evidence was consistent with his having murdered his wife and therefore he did! No other evidence is required or even allowed! Execute him!"
Lucky for Dr. Kimball that Thingy wasn't a Marshal.
Rule of thumb regarding the strength of association:
The absence of a strong association does not rule out a causal effect.
Therefore, the article you've posted does not in any way reject the previous IOM report in 1991.
@ lilady:
What, no recognition of the keen insight that no child would ever want to walk on the grass when a sidewalk is available? Or the psychic powers which enable the Thing to recognize a room in which a person with measles has recently been, and thereby avoid exposure? These are far more impressive than merely making up a new language (and assuming that everyone else is actually speaking Thingish)!
Haha. You're making that up. Again, where did you find those words in the original 1991 IOM report regarding acute encephalopathy.
Apparently, the evidence is consistent and "supports causal relation", no?
Then move on. Geez.
@ Jen in Tx: You attacked me in your post at #57...I refuted (my post # 77), what you thought you read in my prior post.
I also refuted what you interpreted from the Pediatrics article and your ignorance about types of seizures.
To repeat, febrile seizures are not grand mal seizures and are not status epilepticus. Febrile seizures do not cause neurological deficits. Grand mal seizures, fever-induced grand mal seizures, Todd's paralysis (postictal paresis) and status epilepticus, can and do lead to devastating neurological impairments and deaths.
Page 7. Where does it say it "established" a causal relationship, as you have falsely claimed. Are the authors lying when they claim that "it is insufficient to establish causality?"
*On the balance,* it supports causal relationship. What happens when we start adding studies to the balance that conclude "supports lack of causal relationship?" That balance stats tipping.
Also, supporting a causal relationship is not the same as establishing a causal relationship.
Then stop lying about "establishing." Geez.
@ Beamup: Thank you for your astute observations about Thingy's unique talents.
I do not take credit for the "walking on sidewalks" Thingy classic...was it Chris, who elicited that response from the Thingy? [claps hands]
I'd like to take a wee bit of credit for Thingy's other "classic" about measles containment in an Emergency Room. IIRC, when I posed the question about containment, Thingy replied "I don't need a clock (for closing off an examination room where a suspect case was examined, for a minimum of two hours)". It also stated that, "In the hospital where I work, we "terminally disinfect the examination room". I'm awarding myself extra points for getting Thingy to lie about its job in a health care facility.
Beamup, why not submit your comments in support of my nomination of Thingy for this year's "Crank-Of-The-Year" award to the nominating committee?
Here's the link to page 7 which W. Kevin Vicklund references:
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=1815&page=7
It says exactly what he stated: "Evidence indicates a causal relationship" was one possibility, but acute encephalopathy rated only "Evidence is consistent with a causal relation".
h_ttp://thesaurus.com/browse/establish
Main Entry: approve
Part of Speech: verb
Definition: allow, authorize
Synonyms: accede, accept, accredit, acquiesce, advocate, affirm, agree, assent, authorize, back*, bless*, boost, buy, buy into, certify, charter, concur, confirm, consent, dig*, empower, encourage, endorse, establish , get behind, give go-ahead, go along with, groove*, hats off to, lap up, license, maintain, make law, make valid, mandate, okay, permit, pronounce, push for, ratify, recommend, sanction, seal, second, sign, sign off on, stump for, subscribe to, support, thumbs up, uphold, validate
Antonyms: disallow, disapprove, invalidate, oppose, refuse, reject
------------
h_ttp://www.synonym.com/synonyms/establish/
Synonyms for establish
Synonyms (Grouped by Similarity of Meaning) of verb establish
Sense 1:
establish, set up, found, launch
open, open up
Sense 2:
establish, found, plant, constitute, institute
initiate, pioneer
Sense 3:
prove, demonstrate, establish, show, shew
confirm, corroborate, sustain, substantiate, support,affirm
Geez, I'm not even a native English speaker.
Lilady, does that mean I get to claim credit for Thingy's classic "slaughter the children"? It was still stumbling over that one as recently as yesterday.
No, his assertion was this regarding acute encephalopathy.
Obviously, he's bluffing,
To support means "to establish", no?
That wasn't about the causal relation between DTP and acute encephalopathy that was "insufficient to establish causality". You're barking up the wrong tree.
OK so show me an article that "supports lack of relationship" between DPT and acute encephalopathy. Well?
No. Not in an evidentiary sense.
Liar. Here it is once again:
"In August 1991, the Institute of Medicine released a report entitled Adverse Effects of Pertussis and Rubella Vaccines, which examined, among others, the relation between immunization with whole-cell diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP) vaccine and both acute encephalopathy and chronic neurological damage. The committee reviewed information from a wide range of both professional and lay sources and found that the evidence is consistent with a possible causal relation between DTP vaccine and acute encephalopathy, although it is insufficient to establish causality."
Are they lying?
Others already have. Address them first.
Now now, Thingy, don't you know it's bad form to lobby so hard for an award on your own behalf? Particularly one so prestigious as the Cubic Plutonium Klein Cup...
-- Steve
Lilady, does that mean I get to claim credit for Thingy's classic "slaughter the children"? It was still stumbling over that one as recently as yesterday.
Posted by: W. Kevin Vicklund | January 16, 2012 4:52 PM
I dunno...I think you might "claim credit" for its "slaughter the children" classic...if you were among the first to elicit that remark from Thingy.
I think we should not feed the delusional, ignorant, etc., etc., Sh** For Brains Troll. I was the poster that was garbed in a hazmat suit for 24 hours and had to undergo decontamination...to clean up the blog from Thingy's excrement, after its head exploded.
Okay, lilady, I'll stop. I think the point was made very clearly.
For those who are actually interested in post-1991 research on whole-cell pertussis vaccine, here is the link again:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/a-shot-in-the-dark-revisi…
Also, the question is historical; whole-cell pertussis vaccine isn't given anymore anyway.
Closer than "to reject"?
You sheep, that wasn't in the original report. Here are the components of number 2. Link given in #108.
And number 4.
I already did.
I was the one who got it started:
@600
@602
@604
So answer the question. Were the authors lying about their original report?
Thingy doesn't know what "infection" or "causation" mean. I don't think it's fair to assume it knows what "slaughtering", "infanticide", or "people" mean.
Kevin,
First off, you have to know what Lancisi's methods are before opening your big mouth. Understood?
Definitely not Lancisi's.
No, not Lancisi's. Lancisi's method involves "quarantine methods to segregate infected from uninfected herds."
Lancisi did not kill humans.
@ W. Kevin Vicklund: I hereby award you "credit" for eliciting the "slaughter the children" Thingy classic remark.
I am also reminding you that you are "next up" on the "Clean Up Thingy Excrement RI Blog" roster...I have some extra "contaminated waste red bags" to offer you.
Where is the Th1Th2bot, when you need it?
Andreas Johansson @119: nor does it know what "quarantine" means.
@ Andreas Johansson & LW: See how effectively we deal with and "terminally disinfect" the SFB Troll...when we talk around it?
I just found out that I received the combined DTP vaccine that became available in 1942, when I was an infant. Prior to 1942, the shots against diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis were given as 3 separate antigen immunizations. (Wikipedia)
Both of my children (born in 1970 and 1976), received the whole cell DTP series as well.
I was working in public health at the time (2002), that DTaP became available in the United States and I recall the death of an infant from pertussis...infected by a close household member, not immunized against the disease. It was truly heartbreaking and devastating for that family to lose an innocent baby, because of pertussis transmitted by another (not immunized) family member.
I see that the "Fire Science Expert" has not responded to my post...typical "hit and run" behavior for Offal.
The original 1991 IOM report regarding the evidence consistent with causal relation between DPT and acute encephalopathy was not a lie however appending something that did not exist from the original report like "it is insufficient to establish causality" is a BIG lie.
lilady, that's such a horrible event.
To the best of my knowledge, I have never passed on anything more damaging than a cold. I don't even want to imagine how devastated I would be if I passed on a disease to someone who *died* of it. Especially a baby. Especially if I could have been vaccinated but wasn't. I don't know how anyone would ever get over that.
I really miss Thingbot. I hope the Service Center reconsiders and reboots our favorite Thinglish simluator.
I miss the Thingbot too. It was positively lyrical at times.
@ LW: I had pertussis just before the Tdap vaccine was licensed. I am eternally grateful that I had no exposure to unimmunized infants.
There are expanded ACIP Recommendations for the booster Tdap vaccine usage. The ACIP now recommends that pregnant women past 20 weeks gestation and that anyone who has, or expects to have close contact with infant(s) less than one year of age, receive Tdap booster vaccine. (MMWR, October 31, 2011)
So, now that you have accused the authors of the 1991 IOM report of committing scientific fraud, why should I regard the 1991 IOM report as reliable?
Speaking of Shaw, he's putting on a study. Three, in fact, although one can "particate" in as many as wished.
I was wondering, hypothetically, if there are a greater number of pertussis cases, might that increase any potential for a mutation of the original bacteria, one that would be more difficult to vaccinate against?
I'm just a layman, so I defer to the experts if my question is only partially baked.
Andreas@119:
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty Thingy said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean â neither more nor less.' Lewis Carroll, Through The Looking-Glass,
On a trip down memory lane, we encountered this gem from SBM:
Ah, the days when it tried to make paragraphs.
You do know, don't you, that I was referring to the article you've mentioned in #23 which is NOT an official IOM report.
I must admit that the antivaxxers did affect my decision to get the Tdap. I had been putting it off because I hate shots and I figured I wasn't much at risk of tetanus, and pertussis and diphtheria weren't even on my radar. But now? No way I'm going to try to be a free-rider. I want that protection for myself, and I don't want to spread the disease, so I got my booster vaccine.
So the antivaxxers accomplished something.
@Tom-
Even though my whole family is vaccinated I was worried about the same thing.
Here is the article that I read last year.
http://www.kpbs.org/news/2010/dec/14/immunized-people-getting-whooping-…
Oh, sweeping up around this place is cracking us up. We recommend Googling "vaccine-induced warts."
Yes. If the authors committed scientific fraud in a peer-reviewed publication in 1993 discussing "The evaluative methods used by the committee are briefly described and the evidence underlying its conclusions presented," why should I believe that these same authors didn't commit scientific fraud in the original report?
Th1Th2bot Service Center, that is awesome. I googled as suggested and found this question from Thingy:
"Now tell me, is there a reason as to why someone shouldnât be getting polio, warts, otitis media, measles, pertussis etc. in the flu shot?"
Ah ... where does one even begin with a question like that?
I think one shouldn't be getting those things in a flu shot because they are bad things. I think most people would agree with me.
@ Th1Th2bot Service Center:
Because the poor bot has been subject to particularly malign verbal influence, do you think it might need rehabiliation? Perhaps read it poetry- I like Coleridge: he has a nice, trancey flowing quality- Longfellow too, especially "Evangeline"- it's calming. Young artists like the bot can be so fragile- we have to take good care of them.
Perhaps one of my comments is lost in moderation. Let me try again:
Re: apparent encephalopathy following DTP vaccination
Itâs been clear for several years that children who, in a common anti-vax meme, appeared to be 'developing normally as babies and toddlers . . . [who] were making eye contact, even potty trained, but then suddenly lost all those skills' have been explained in studies of allegedly vaccine-injured children to have had pre-existing mutations that produced those symptoms, including developmental regression.
These mutations are most commonly in the SCN1A gene (although they may occur less frequently in other genes, including those encoding related proteins). The aberrant protein products of the SCN1A gene are produced at a low level at birth, and then reach maximal expression at about the time when seizures begin, whether or not the seizure is in temporal proximity to vaccination. Since many of these mutations (about 700 SCN1A mutations have been identified) produce temperature-sensitive proteins, the genetic seizure disorder may be revealed by increased body temperature when the concentration of defective neuronal sodium channels reaches a critical level, whether that increase is due to a warm bath (or, in some animal experiments, warm air flow) or fever due to natural infection or vaccination. In the absence of a temperature effect, spontaneous seizures begin a bit later in development.
--Reyes IS, Hsieh DT, Laux LC, Wilfong AA. Alleged Cases of Vaccine Encephalopathy Rediagnosed Years Later as Dravet Syndrome. Pediatrics. 2011 Aug 15.
--Berkovic SF et al. De-novo mutations of the sodium channel gene SCN1A in alleged vaccine encephalopathy: a retrospective study. Lancet Neurol. 2006 Jun;5(6):488-92.
--Li BM et al. Autism in Dravet syndrome: prevalence, features, and relationship to the clinical characteristics of epilepsy and mental retardation. Epilepsy Behav. 2011 Jul;21(3):291-5
--Catarino CB et al. Dravet syndrome as epileptic encephalopathy: evidence from long-term course and neuropathology. Brain. 2011 Oct;134(Pt 10):2982-3010.
--Wiznitzer M. Dravet syndrome and vaccination: when science prevails over speculation. Lancet Neurol. 2010 Jun;9(6):559-61.
--Okumura A, Uematsu M, Imataka G, Tanaka M, Okanishi T, Kubota T, Sudo A, Tohyama J, Tsuji M, Ohmori I, Naiki M, Hiraiwa-Sofue A, Sato H, Saitoh S, Shimizu T. Acute encephalopathy in children with Dravet syndrome. Epilepsia. 2011 Nov 16.
--Wolff M, Cassé-Perrot C, Dravet C. Severe myoclonic epilepsy of infants (Dravet syndrome): natural history and neuropsychological findings. Epilepsia. 2006;47 Suppl 2:45-8.
You could easily verify the information you got from that 1993 article especially where is states "it is insufficient to establish causality" (pertaining to acute encephalopathy) if it recurs by checking on other sources. Well?
Also, there is a big difference between conclusion number 2 and number 4 and a thin line separating number 4 and number 5 ("being more persuasive").
lilady wrote: "It has always been a trade-off about the use of Tylenol pre or post immunization, for parents whose children have a diagnosed severe seizure disorder...where grand mal seizures or status epilecticus may be triggered by high sustained fevers."
The evidence does NOT show that prophylactic acetaminophen reduces the risk of febrile seizures. The 1987 ACIP recommendations were based on ONE preliminary study, and subsequent studies have FAILED to show any benefit.
With all due respect, lilady, don't make assumptions about my education or experiences, okay?
@ Th1Th2bot Service Center: Tell the bot we all (except Thingy) long for its interpretation of the SFB Troll.
When I read this from the same SBM blog...I, at first thought it was the bot:
"NO, because you cannot extrapolate animal testing to humans. My premise was, thimerosal is TERATOGENIC in humans, not in rabbits, understood? Also, the only attempt that was able to study teratogenicity in humans was unsuccessful because the fetus died of dose-related toxicity from thimerosal. So again, the lesson from this story is, if it is a rabbit, then it is not human."
Further up on that blog Thingy argues and insists...unsuccesfully...that Thimerisol is an adjuvant.
As Harriet Hall stated in the past regarding Thingy's refusal to answer when a question is posed to It, "is like trying to nail Jello to the wall".
elburto
Exactly there, elburto. This isn't about science but about sociology and philosophy.
Barrigon, we will believe you pulled everything you said out of thin air, so you will now need to provide the title, journal and dates of PubMed indexed studies on thyme curing pertussis, and the rest of what you claimed.
Otherwise, thanks for the chuckles.
Perhaps read it poetry
It's an unpredictable business. There were days of cleanup after somebody had the bright idea to feed it "The Prelude," and we had to call in a temp to simply intone "à saisons, ô châteaux" over and over again to prevent overheating during the process.
Nice post, ORAC. Safe and effective pertussis vaccines are inversely proportional. Nice.
Here's the actual statistics:
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/G/cases&…
Uh, you think, doctor?
Study: Whooping cough vaccination fades in 3 years
http://news.yahoo.com/study-whooping-cough-vaccination-fades-3-years-15…
"a lot faster than doctors believed"
-even the cult like science blogging believers thought it was longer.
Give Lilady a break. She was taught this in 1960. It was once believed that acetaminophen prevented seizures prophylacticaly and she's never thought to question that. To bad her mother, the CDC, said otherwise. You'd think she'd know that instead of espousing evidence-less ignorance.
If she followed this advice, which undoubtedly she did, the she should be aware that she also atagonized the very vaccines she believed in so much.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/167859.php
She ONLY practiced evidence based medicine.
@ Jen in Tx: Hello Jen...you were the one who took me to task when I discussed the "trade off" of interrupting the immunization immune response, by providing antipyretics to a child with a grand mal seizure disorder and/or history of status epilepticus.
Furthermore, after you commented, I provided you with a short lesson about febrile seizures-versus-grand mal seizures and status epilepticus. I also provided you with a recent (2011) article from "Pediatrics".
You have chosen to become fixated on "febrile" seizures and are still unable to comprehend my first posting at #34 and subsequent postings at #71 and #74 and you now state:
"The evidence does NOT show that prophylactic acetaminophen reduces the risk of febrile seizures. The 1987 ACIP recommendations were based on ONE preliminary study, and subsequent studies have FAILED to show any benefit."
Jen, look carefully at the 25 year old ACIP recommendations. They specifically address febrile seizures, children who have a history of febrile seizures or children whose family members have a history of seizures. Your 25 year old ACIP link, your 3 year old Pediatrics Journal link and your 19 year old European Journal of Pediatrics link ALL discuss antipyretics use for febrile seizures...not grand mal or any of the other severe seizure disorders.
You still, by your postings, have not shown my original statement to be wrong. In fact you have shown IMO, by your continued fixation on febrile seizures, your lack of reading comprehension of my posts and your own linked articles, a lack of knowledge about severe seizure disorders and status epilepticus.
@ Jen in Tx: I have a long comment stuck in moderation in reply to your comments...stick around.
@baglady
You fail to consider that, due to the epidemic nature of pertussis, one would expect a dramatic decline in cases after a cyclical peak such as we had in 2010 - vaccination campaign or not. Have you forgotten all that since the department of public health put you out to pasture?
@ Barrigon: So you have not provided any citations to treat pertussis with thyme, other herbs and colloidal silver.
I had pertussis a few years ago. Because of my experience as a public health nurse, I was concerned with the early symptoms of the disease and went to my physician immediately for testing and a prescription for an antibiotic. The antibiotic taken early in course of the disease, probably shortened the course of the disease...and definitely prevented transmission, once I had completed a 5 day course of antibiotics.
During the 6-8 weeks of my pertussis illness, I had to rely on a steroid inhalator, regular "cough" medicine during the day and prescription codeine medicine at night to ease the painful wracking coughing spells.
I didn't "turn blue" as infants do when infected with pertussis and as adults do, when they ingest colloidal silver.
I'm shocked that Barrigon isn't aware that sodium ascorbate to bowel tolerance is the preferred remedy among those in the know, with Otani (1936; Berl. klin. Wchnschn., 15, 1884) seemingly being the locus classicus.
Narad, you are a scary person with the vastness of your knowledge.
@ Offal: Oh, is that your "take" on the effect of educational programs, and the thousands of free pertussis immunizations provided at public health clinics, in California? Did the California Department of Public Health consult you for your "expertise" in "fire science"?
Or, did the Los Angeles Fire Department consult you for your "expertise" in "fire science" when the arsonist was torching all those buildings?
I'm still licensed as a registered nurse, Offal. I bet I'm making more money on my investments than you do...I stay away from pork belly commodities.
You fail to consider that, due to the epidemic nature of pertussis, one would expect a dramatic decline in cases after a cyclical peak such as we had in 2010
I'm having a hard time figuring out what in particular you're responding to, but perhaps you'd like to play identify the cycle.
What a painful thread.
The Thing must go. It's time of usefulness as a practice drone is long past. It's just spitting dust now, hammering weakly at a nail that never existed in the first place. It's not even wrong any more, it's just gray word salad and bile. Please Orac, pull the plug on the Thing. It's won the first annual RICOTY⢠award. Let it quit while it's . . . ahead.
Barrigon, really? Thyme for Pertussis? Sounds like you've fallen for the Young Essential Oil party line on the "efficacy" of various essential oils? I imagine you have and I once did, dwelling as I did in Wooville and smelling of Helichrysum, Lavender and Thieves. I swore they worked on my . . . let me see, what was it they were helping me with? Oh, that's right, I was never actually sick, just another of the worried well spending thousands a year on nonsense until I finally woke the fuck up and smelled the snake oil. Citations please, and not from some moonbat publication.
Hi,
tried to get a boost shot for pertussis here in Germany from my doctor last year. (I am not so much afraid to get the disease but transmitting it to smaller children below 3 month). I am now 46, so my immunization is old (schooltimes). He told me this was suggested not before age of 50/60 "perhaps". I should have persisted. Anyway he probably didn't want to have this shot in his budget (practitioners in Germany have a budget for all patients and no money when they exceed it); I did get a boost for Tetanus, Diphtery and Polio though.
Rolf
Thingy's refusal to answer when a question is posed to It, "is like trying to nail Jello to the wall".
A stronger comparison is called for. I propose "kicking Jello up the beach" or "trying to nail a dead whale to the wall".
> A stronger comparison is called for.
>
> Posted by: herr doktor bimler
How about, "like teaching jello not to be stupid"?
lilady @98:
But if you combine the two ('com'posing and 'posting') you get another talent that thingy possesses - composting coherent remarks into an incoherent babble, fertile for humor.
lilady wrote: "Hello Jen...you were the one who took me to task when I discussed the "trade off" of interrupting the immunization immune response, by providing antipyretics to a child with a grand mal seizure disorder and/or history of status epilepticus."
lilady, I "took you to task" because you appeared to be defending the evidence-free practice of prophylactic acetaminophen administration before vaccination when there is no "trade off." Prophylactic acetaminophen doesn't do diddly squat to prevent seizures, grand mal or otherwise. It. does. nothing! Giving acetaminophen before immunizations is BAD SCIENCE.
"You have chosen to become fixated on "febrile" seizures..."
Right. Which acetaminophen does nothing to prevent with or without a history of grand mal seizures. That was what my original comment was in reference to, which you responded to by saying there is some sort of "trade-off" to reducing the immune response to vaccination, which there is NOT.
I repeat: ACETAMINOPHEN PROPHYLAXIS IS BAD SCIENCE!
Orac knew this thread was done after his blunder in #8.
Jen, I have a question, what is your basis for becoming so fixated on acetaminophen as an autism cause? You have managed to dodge the vaccine nonsense bullet and you are correct about anti-pyretic overuse for fevers so you do appear to follow some evidence-based literature.
And I am sincerely sorry you had a bad time and I hope your son gets some relief. Do you have a support system?
And of course there's Thingy's classic "I can tell if it's polio if there's paralysis." My favorite.
W. Kevin,
Oh look! Your own Steven Novela had his own conclusion quite different than yours.
So why didn't he mention anything about acute encephalopathy? May be because he's so clever that the abstract both of you are referring to was poorly written that he had noticed the error and you didn't.
@Grant (#92)
Here's a study that looked at the duration of immunity from pertussis infection vs. immunity from vaccination:
Duration of immunity against pertussis after natural infection or vaccination
They found natural immunity lasts about 4-20 yrs, while vaccination protection lasted 4-12 yrs. The authors called for more research into waning immunity from vaccination to determine the best timing for boosters. A search on PubMed could give you some additional studies to read.
In a place* where it's saturated with OPV, who couldn't?
*India has had 58,659 paralysis last year. Still Orac thinks "polio is now on the verge of being eradicated". My favorite.
If Todd W. is correct that vaccination protection only lasts only 4-12 years, then I imagine that a *very* large portion of the adult population is unvaccinated / under-vaccinated (by very large portion of the adult population I mean just about everyone... lol). But go ahead and blame the "unvaccinated children"... because that makes so much sense.
Vaccines cause more problems than they prevent unfortunately.
@ Jen in Tx: For the last time...you commented on my statements about the use of antipyretics to prevent grand mal seizures in a child who has a PRE-EXISTING AND HISTORY of a grand mal seizure disorder/status epilepticus. You have continued to fixate on Tylenol and febrile seizures and your guru "Dr." Shaw, who is not a neurologist and not a medical doctor. He is a crank with a "theory that Tylenol causes autism" that you have plugged into. He operates a crank laboratory that tests urine for people diagnosed with autism, fibromyalgia and other disorders.
Sorry to burst your bubble Jen, you are not an expert on grand mal seizure disorders that often "break-through" in the presence of fevers (from actual infections or certain immunizations).
Jen, you are an angry person because you are dealing with a child with a disability. You have now embarked on finding the reason for your child's disability by buying into crank theories advanced by a crank theorist using junk science.
You might also look into the study of seizures...febrile and the serious types of seizures such as grand mal, psychomotor, Lennox Gestaut. I hope you never have to see a child in status epilepticus and a child with postictal paresis.
They will still call it protection though when they actually meant secondary vaccine failure.
I know I probably shouldn't do this, but...
@Duh?
So you would do what? Scrap vaccines altogether and let the diseases run amok?
Yes, with regard to pertussis, the problem of unvaccinated or undervaccinated adults looms large. They can contribute quite a bit to the spread of this disease. What does that mean? Not that the vaccine is bad and should be scrapped but that adults need to keep up to date on their boosters.
That does not excuse unvaccinated kids as a vector for disease transmission. While they may not be the sole factor of pertussis epidemics, they, like un- or underimmunized adults, are a contributing factor.
@duh?
Have you heard about booster shots?
That's partially correct. The adult population is under-vaccinated for pertussis, however, as adults they (most) have been exposed to pertussis and "boosted", that is not the case with young children.
No one is blaming the children but rather hysterical and very wrong parents. Look at this stat for instance (vaccination status): http://www.ewashtenaw.org/government/departments/public_health/news/201…
And this is just one county.
You might want to add some facts to that statement.
Science Mom,
I believe that my son and others like him have a problem with sulfur metabolism. This was an area of research that was started in the early to mid 1990's by Dr. Rosemary Waring right before the whole thimerosal-and/or-MMR-causes-autism nonsense started. This was a very promising area of research that has still not been fully explored, although there is some recent interest being shown in it again with regard to gut bacteria. There is some interesting work coming out that looks at gut bacteria metabolites and its effects on the sulfation pathway. (antibiotic overuse, anyone?) I believe that this is what is happening with my son right now, since he had had a (partial) round of antibiotics for an ingrown toenail a couple of months ago. He is currently improving somewhat with a round of Flagyl that we started on Friday. His previous self-injury episodes have been triggered by Tylenol (the last time was severe enough to land him in the state hospital) and he also reacts badly to FD&C food colorings (which was why his round of antibiotics was only a partial one-it was full of pink dye, and I really should have known better.)
Rather than continue to derail this thread further off topic, feel free to visit my FB page, (link in my name) where I have posted various articles related to this topic that I have collected over the past 3 years.
Orac,
Thanks for the reminder. I now have a query in at my doctor's office, as to whether my 2009 shot was the TDaP booster or just tetanus. (This has been on my mind because a friend of mine is expecting a baby at the end of February, and I want to be able to visit.)
Barrigon,
FWIW I did quite a bit of research into thymol and carvacrol, the active ingredients in thyme and oregano oils, a few years back. They are antimicrobial, but only at concentrations that are irritating to human tissues, so their therapeutic index is low. They are not particularly effective against gram negative organisms like pertussis, so it seems very unlikely that the herb thyme is of any use at all in the treatment of pertussis. If you could get a high enough concentration of thymol or carvacrol into someone's respiratory system to inhibit bordetella pertussis you would very probably kill them in the process.
Wow. The tenacious troll triumvirate turned out to tell tales on this topic, didn't they? It's been a while since I've read Augustine, Thing, and Bob in one thread. I haven't gone through all their comments just yet. I need to go grab some adderall (extended release, of course) and then come back. For what it's worth, Bordetella pertusis only has humans as hosts. With an adequate vaccination campaign, it could be wiped off the planet.
But those with vested interests in promoting these diseases will not allow it. Too much money in homeopathy to be made.
(See what I did there?)
I hope you have a sound scientific paper that giving tylenol to children with a history of grand mal seizures will prevent them. It would stop all of your personal attacks on Jen. You could actually provide evidence to support your claim. All you would have to do is say "see".
You've made an error, Lilady. Science doesn't support you. Do you have any evidence for your claim of seizure prevention?
@ Rolf Schmolling: Here, I believe, are the current recommendations regarding adult pertussis vaccines from the German STIKO (Standing Committee on Vaccination):
"Furthermore, STIKO recommended adding a one-time pertussis booster to the adult vaccination schedule to expand the cocoon strategy in place since 2004. The recommendation of a booster vaccination with an acellular pertussis vaccine every 10 years for persons employed in the care of pre-school children and for healthcare personnel in paediatric, gynaecologic and obstetric health facilities was extended to persons employed in schools and in other institutions caring for older children, and to all healthcare personnel. These recommendations were based on available epidemiological data showing an increase in incidence from 7-10 cases per 100,000 inhabitants in 2002-2004 to over 30 by 2007. Moreover, the high burden of pertussis in infants at 94 hospitalised cases per 100,000 infants in 2007 suggested that the previous cocoon strategy was insufficient".
Source: Eurosurveillance Report, April 22, 2010
Duh?:
Now that is some pretty bold selective cherry picking. Did you miss the part where Todd said "They found natural immunity lasts about 4-20 yrs,"? Do I need to put the word "natural" in bold for you?
Duh? concludes from his cherry picking of what Todd wrote:
Except, oh aptly named person, even after spending three months trying to cough up your lungs with a real pertussis infection you may still only have immunity for as little as four years.
Now it is up to you to show how the DTaP and Tdap vaccines cause more problems than actually getting pertussis, diphtheria and tetanus. Just post the title, journal and dates of the PubMed indexed papers that prove your point.
Ren
That's delusional thinking. It's also ideology.
False dichotomy.Just because someone doesn't get a pertussis vaccine doesn't mean they promote disease. Logic fail for propaganda purposes. I believe it was intentional and dishonesty by a public health official.
@ Jen; I read your referenced "study" and quite frankly, was crap. The methods were so poor, I couldn't even discern what they did (a good methods section would allow someone else to replicate). The results were also dodgy as they were mentioned but not fully reported. Additionally, depending upon the age and weight of the children tested (she didn't even report that), they may have been overdosed with a single dose of acetaminophen. Most importantly, even she doesn't implicate Tylenol but rather uses it as a "probe". She also doesn't state that any substances that she tested cause autism, but rather can exacerbate symptoms. We already know this and we can't say that sensitivities are unrelated co-morbidities or related to autism.
I can certainly understand how desperately you want answers but you are going down an unproductive rabbit hole here.
@Augustine: First, you still owe me an apology for your "color commentary" against me. Second, it's not delusional. We did it with smallpox. We can do it with anything whose sole host are humans. No delusion there. Third, by "those with vested interests in promoting these diseases" I mean quacks who sell remedies that do nothing against vaccine-preventable diseases like whooping cough.
So, where's the apology?
Todd, you need to get current on the literature. Natural immunity found to last 30 years or longer.
Todd, you need to get current on the literature. Natural immunity found to last 30 years or longer.
Thanks for the citation, Bob.
It's only 23 times more likely they acquire disease and who is more likely to spread disease, those hacking up a lung and aerosolising the contents thereof or someone with subclinical disease? 'Cause we all know how responsible anti-vaxxers are about keeping their precious snowflakes quarantined.
Regarding antipyretic use for infants and children with a history of a grand mal seizure disorder and/or status epilepticus, prior to and after DTaP Vaccines:
INFANRIX-Full Prescribing Information (November, 2011)
Section 5 Warnings and Precautions
5.4 Children at Risk for Seizures
For children at higher risk for seizures than the general population, an appropriate antipyretic may be administered at the time of vaccination with a pertussis-containing vaccine, including INFANRIX, and for the ensuing 24 hours to reduce the possibility of post-vaccination fever.
(See similar wording Daptacel and Tripedia DTaP vaccines Full Prescribing Information...under "Warnings and Precautions" sections
Narad:
I am also curious what was more recent than 2005? I found one with that number that said "Our results support a period of natural immunity that is, on average, long-lasting (at least 30 years) but inherently variable."
Perhaps Mr. Schecter should learn the definitions of the following words, though he may have difficulty because he is quite math illiterate:
estimating
inherently
variable
It also says: "Our estimates suggest the average duration of immunity is much longer than is currently thought (at least 30 years), but that some individuals would lose immunity quite rapidly." and "Moreover, more than 10% of the population would have lost immunity within 10 years, which is not in contradiction with clinical reports."
Oh, wow it is a mess, and does not say what Schecter thinks it says, which is why he did not include the citation.
Lilady,
Package inserts are not peer reviewed evidence. For all we know, that package insert might be a copy and paste job from many years ago, printed off and stuffed in the box by some high school dropout. That insert does not provide any references to support the assertion that prophylactic acetaminophen administration will prevent a febrile seizure, either. Just let this go. You are making yourself look very foolish, and I say that with all due respect. This dead horse was beaten to a bloody pulp long before you came here. I am a long time reader and contributor to this blog, and regular readers know that I will back up my claims with evidence. (Although I will be the first to admit that the evidence I present is not always of the highest quality, I'll sometimes post it anyway in order to generate discussion.)
Science Mom,
While I appreciate your concern for my lack of productivity, until I see some high quality evidence that refutes the acetaminophen/autism hypothesis, I will continue to pursue it.
Jen, there is no autism/acetaminophen hypothesis; your own citation doesn't even support that. Besides, what ever happened to biological plausibility, robust study design and replication? Someone could come along, like our Mr. Dochniak for instance with his latex-autism nonsense, you like the sound of it but then it's the scientific community's job to refute it? Sorry, but that is just as brain-dead as the vaccine truthers' claims.
@ Jen in Tx: I thought you were leaving...so that you would not derail this thread.
No Jen, it is not a "paste-up" job "stuffed in the box"...why don't you go the "Full Prescribing Information" for the DTaP vaccines, ask your child's pediatrician for the product insert or look at the current years PDR under "biologicals"?
You still don't know "diddly squat" (your words)...about severe preexisting severe seizure disorders, such as grand mal, psychomotor and Lennox Gastaux seizure disorders and status epilepticus.
You don't know "diddly squat" (your words)...about the control of these severe seizure disorders with anticonvulsant(s) prescribed by a pediatric neurologist with frequent anti-convulsant blood tests for therapeutic range(s). Nor are you aware of Valium suppositories that parents can administer to a child to stop cluster seizures.
BTW, I went to your website. You state you are a licensed vocational nurse. Just a hint Jen...be careful, be very careful about what you post...that might be construed as giving medical advice.
lilady, you've still provided no real evidence to support your assertion that pre-vaccine Tylenol prevents any type of seizure. Buh-bye now.
Regarding the length of naturally acquired immunity to pertussis versus vaccine-based immunity: I would cheerfully take a pertussis vaccine every year along with the flu shot, if that's what it took to protect me against "the hundred-day cough". Even if the natural infection granted me immunity for thirty years, I'd rather take thirty shots over thirty years than suffer through something like that.
I've had the flu and I've had pneumonia. They were bad enough and pertussis sounds worse. I can't imagine why anyone would take that over a few shots.
augustine @185:
A delusion is a "false belief held with absolute conviction despite superior evidence" (per Wikipedia). So, having insulted Ren in this fashion, no doubt augustine is prepared to enlighten us as to what part of this statement is false, citing with specificity the superior evidence.Â
Does augustine claim there is a non-human host for Bordetella pertussis?  What is it?
Does augustine claim there is some mechanism would unfailingly prevent eradication by an adequate vaccination campaign? Remember, it's not enough to say that the current vaccine isn't sufficiently effective for eradication, for that simply implies that the current vaccine is not adequate. Nor is it sufficient to say that people will not cooperate (as they did with smallpox), for that merely implies that we can't mount an adequate vaccination campaign.Â
Nope, augustine has to show -- by superior evidence, remember -- either that there is a non-human host (invalidating the first sentence of Ren's statement) or that no vaccination campaign can eradicate Bordetella pertussis (invalidating the second sentence). Or both, of course.
I await augustine's superior evidence.
augustine @185 (my first comment on this went into moderation, but I shall persevere):
A package insert? Seriously. Not only are you a psuedo christian, you also seem to be a pseudoskeptic. I hope you aren't one of the ones who "poo poos" package inserts when one brings up side effects.
Some peer reviewed literature that shows giving tylenol reduces vaccine induced febrile seizure in healthy children OR ones with a history of grand mal seizures would be the appropiate response.
Yelling "you don't know anything about grand mal seizures. I do!" doesn't cut it.
Barrigon, where are you citations for your claims about pertussis and thyme? Why should we care about anything you say if you just pull them out of thin air?
Oops, wrong thread.
Um, no... something seemed to happen to his comment that had a link in his name. But he now says:
Citation required.
I really like the way Jen in TX specifies that it might be a high-school dropout who puts the package insert in the package, because that would make a lot of difference.
Kind of like when your old paperboy's route gets taken over by a different paperboy, and the new paperboy isn't as smart as the one who used to deliver the paper, and so the news articles aren't as insightful anymore.
@ Jen #178
You probably already know this, but Flagyl is a brutal medicine. I feel for your son. It's likely he'll feel awful the whole time he's taking it (ten days, I assume). I've taken it for diverticulitis, and never felt worse in my life. Long after the diverticulitis pain was gone, the Flagyl kept me deathly ill. I only point this out since your son apparently does not have purposeful speech and cannot tell you how he feels. Just in case you don't have prior experience with Flagyl, just wanted to let you know that it may be causing you son's ramped-up pain and misery.
Brave Sir Robin Wingnut masquerading as "Anthony":
MM, you are still an idiot. Please stop obsessing over me.
Well, mass hysteria is not only a possible explanation for the symptoms of "12 high school girls," it is the most likely explanation for Barrigon's nonsensical anti-vaccine statement.
http://www.buffalonews.com/city/article707323.ece
@ Antaeus Feldspar: Some "high school dropout"...who works for three separate vaccine manufacturers?
@ brian: That story is "headlined" at AoA. Every (in)conceivable cause (HPV vaccine, H1N1 vaccine (3 years since it was administered), pesticide spraying (Buffalo in January?) and other fantasies, are being discussed by the posters there.
One of the threads is about the HIPPA (patient privacy) law and regulations...because public health staff would not discuss the girls' diagnoses. One poster has "advanced the theory" that the patient privacy laws is...you guessed it...a plot by Big Government in cahoots with Big Pharma...to "hide the real cause of the girls' symptoms".
I know I shouldn't feed the Ugh Troll, but:
Delusional thinking eh? Why do we no longer vaccinate against Smallpox? Why is Poliomyelitis almost extinct? And how is eliminating dread diseases "ideology"?
Delusional thinking eh? Why do we no longer vaccinate against Smallpox? Why is Poliomyelitis almost extinct? And how is eliminating dread diseases "ideology"?
They're both sustained by vaccination, except that smallpox is now vaccinia and AFP has been diagnostically substituted for poliomyelitis. Get with the program.
Answer: put on some clothes, see a police officer or a judge about your citation, and grow some chromosomes.
Oh, Rob Hood, KE5BMP, why are you so embarassed by the identity that you have established for yourself that you must constantly try to slink away from it and reappear in poorly assembled costume disguises?
@Narad
To my knowledge vaccinia is not routinely given as a routine vaccine to most of the human population, but typically to those who work in scientific labs or the military.
At least that is the case here in Canada (http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/im/is-cv/). Maybe someone else can comment, but the lack of smallpox existing in the population is that there is none (outside of a few labs) in the environment ... being eradicated from it's one reservoir.
Barrigon #195
Here are more than ten cases of people developing argyria after ingesting silver products that are often marketed as colloidal silver. Most of them ingested very much higher doses than those normally recommended in CAM circles, often silver salts resulting from making it with tap water instead of distilled water, adding salt to the water or to extended preparation times. However one developed it after ingesting 6 ounces of colloidal silver made "properly" with distilled water daily for 3 years.
Now I've gone to the trouble of finding you those cases, find me some convincing evidence (not anecdotes) that ingesting colloidal silver, or any kind of silver, has any beneficial effects at all. Ingesting colloidal silver has risks but no clear benefits.
Also, I don't believe the "post Gardasil syndrome" you mentioned exists - prove me wrong with some evidence.
If Barrigon wants us to believe in this "post-Gardasil syndrome" he's going to have to cite evidence better than that provided by the colonists of Salem Village to support their claims of "post-evil-eye syndrome".
Narad,
Don't you mean varicella and monkey pox?
Again, I'm amazed that these loons seem to think that disease eradication is bad? Don't they realize that we can stop administering the vaccines once the diseases have been eliminated? I mean, we've already crossed smallpox off the list, polio should be the next one gone & measles could be on that list as well - accept it is the by their very actions (or inaction) that these anti-vaccinationists are prolonging the necessary interval for keeping the vaccine programs going.
If they claim vaccine manufacturers are making such huge profits on vaccines, then by keeping disease reservoirs active, they are actual increasing both the time-scale and scope of the vaccine programs, which should mean tons more money for Big Pharma, right?
Of course, they also can't seem to get their heads around the profit of treatment vs. prevention.....
@ 196: "There are 12 high school girls suffering from post Gardasil syndrome right now."
Sounds too much like "There are exactly 57 card-carrying members of the Communist party working in the Department of Defense" to me. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056218/quotes?qt0387534)
Cite the source, or stand and be mocked.
-- Steve
Again, I'm amazed that these loons seem to think that disease eradication is bad? Don't they realize that we can stop administering the vaccines once the diseases have been eliminated? I mean, we've already crossed smallpox off the list, polio should be the next one gone & measles could be on that list as well - accept it is the by their very actions (or inaction) that these anti-vaccinationists are prolonging the necessary interval for keeping the vaccine programs going.
If they claim vaccine manufacturers are making such huge profits on vaccines, then by keeping disease reservoirs active, they are actual increasing both the time-scale and scope of the vaccine programs, which should mean tons more money for Big Pharma, right?
Of course, they also can't seem to get their heads around the profit of treatment vs. prevention.....
There is a small portion of the video of the "Today Show" appearance of some of the "afflicted" girls on the internet.
Meanwhile, back at AoA, noted science journalist Dan Olmsted weighs in. For some reason "Dr. Dan" does not outright support, but rather draws the analogy of all the "stuff" Big Government did hide (conspiracies), that he detailed in his ground-breaking investigative book.
Meanwhile...other posters there, are fixated on the HIPPA "conspiracy"...*"Why doesn't HIPPA apply, when a health department announces a measles case?"*
So, here we go, again. It is fantastic that the girls and their parents went "public" about their diagnosis...rather than continue this "charade", thus killing this story in its infancy.
However, some of the parents have formed a support group...ripe for the picking at AoA.
For all reasonable people the story is a dead issue...however AoA won't let this one die. Can anyone forget Desiree Jennings?
*Doh, because measles is a highly transmissible vaccine-preventable infectious disease.
*Double Doh, because some groups (parents who opted out of the MMR vaccine for their children and babies too young to have received the vaccine)...are vulnerable.
*Triple Doh, the identity of the measles index case is never revealed by health department staff.
Fact. The USG had abandoned routine smallpox vaccination even before the disease was eradicated.
Same strategy as it was in smallpox. They'll have to stop their infection-promoting agenda first before they can claim "eradication".
I hate to bring up what may be old or finished business, but could somebody please explain (or point me to an explanation of) the evidentiary difference between supporting and establishing a causal relationship?
Don't you mean varicella and monkey pox?
I really should keep better notes.
Another game with facts. Yes, routine smallpox vaccination was abandoned in the United States before the disease was eradicated BECAUSE it was eradicated in the United States. The last remnants of smallpox were in Africa and SE Asia. As countries eradicated, they were able to abandon vaccination, maintaining surveillance for cases so that vaccination could be immediately done around a case's contacts.
Thing, we see through your game. If this were chess, you'd be held in constant check.
Fact. Smallpox was just a plane ride away.
Fact. Herd immunity for smallpox did not exist between 1971 and 1980.
Go directly to the center of the argument.
3. Evidence does not indicate a causal relation.
5. Evidence indicates a causal relation.
h_ttp://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309044995&page=7
Go directly to the center of the argument.
4. Evidence is consistent with a causal relation.
5. Evidence indicates a causal relation.
h_ttp://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309044995&page=7
@228, Please disregard "3. Evidence does not indicate a causal relation."
I'd like to see you try.
Given that insane troll completely misunderstands (and really doesn't understand at all) how sciene works, nor understands how the vaccine survelliance program works - thinks it is all some kind of vast conspiracy, but with no real idea of what the supposed "end-game" or results are supposed to be (I mean really, even the FEMA Camp / NWO people have a more reasoned end-game / end result to their conspiracies) - plus purposely mis-states facts, doesn't listen to rebuttals of its purported position, etc - it is completely pointless to attempt to engage insane troll.
"Fact. Smallpox was just a plane ride away."
"Fact. Herd immunity for smallpox did not exist between 1971 and 1980."
FACT: The last reported cases (8) in the United States, resulting in one death, occurred in Texas, in 1949.
FACT: There were no cases reported in the United States between 1949 and 1980 and, routine childhood vaccinations against Smallpox were discontinued in 1971.
FACT: Travelers to foreign countries and from foreign countries were required to have proof of smallpox vaccination for several years after 1971.
FACT: Another "success" for the United States public health system.
-FTFY, SFB delusional troll.
What is the rationale of continued use of smallpox vaccine if the disease had already been "eradicated" in the US since 1949?
Why discontinue in 1971 and not immediately after 1949?
How about after 1949? Did it work?
That wasn't a success. That was an exit strategy. You'll see that again with polio.
Why discontinue in 1971 and not immediately after 1949?
You've really outdone yourself with this attempt at a retort.
Because herd immunity had not been reached and a new outbreak was possible given the right circumstances.
Because it was then that herd immunity was achieved, and the probability of smallpox getting here from one of the last few bastions became tolerable.
You're here, aren't you?
What?
Anyway, check-mate. Thing loses by default (in logic) yet again. Good game, Lloyd. It's good to come and spar with you once in a while to keep up on the latest nutbaggery from the antivax camp without resorting to giving their websites more clicks.
Jen in TX's moral indignation on the part of her son is particularly funny to me, because I'm the opposite statistic: an adult woman with an auto-immune disorder who found out the hard way a month ago that my whole-cell pertussis vaccination had worn off. It seems there are some vaccine-objectors in my kids' schools: the disease took advantage, affecting a few children directly and also coming home to knock me sideways. It has been a painful, exhausting, and medically expensive time for me, too, Jen, and will continue to affect me for a long time thanks to my diminished immune system. Why are you so cavalier about MY health?
@HashiMom
That particular Jen was bringing up an issue of giving Tylenol to children receiving the vaccine, not the vaccine itself. (there is another jen that occasionally posts against vaccines, so that may be your confusion)
Regarding herd immunity tosmallpox:
By my calculations, herd protection to smallpox in the general US population did not fall below herd immunity levels until shortly after eradication was announced, at about 1981 or 1982, due to a much smaller R0.
Like what circumstances? See #227.
Where is herd immunity for smallpox between 1971 and 1980? Well?
That was a non answer.
Yes, many people were harmed than were "protected" by vaccines (well, vaccines don't really protect). Take OPV for example. India has achieved it's highest recorded case of paralysis last year since it's first use of OPV. Time to abandon the sinking ship, Commander. It's a total failure.
No, you're just circling around in a vicious cycle of contradiction and cluelessness.
Again, how do you calculate herd immunity between 1971 and 1980? Where are your variables?
@insane troll - its math, something you wouldn't understand. Just like everything else in this & all of the other threads.....
Me@224 asking about...
I'd prefer dumbed-down definitions with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back telling what each one was â like in an Evidence 101 textbook.
I've come to believe that the insane troll doesn't understand what the insane troll says.
Try fairytales otherwise make your own hypothetical situation. RI is very good at it.
(Hint: Can't you see no one has entertained you except me?)
Variables:
P1970 = US population 1970
B = Total births 1971-1980
D = Total deaths 1971-1980
H1970 = Herd protection 1970
R0 = basic rate of reproduction for smallpox
Procedure:
Pi = pop immune 1980 = P0*H0 - D*H
Ps = pop suscept 1980 = P1970*(1-H1970) - D*(1-H1970) + B
H1980 = Herd protect 1980 = Pi/(Pi+Ps)
Results:
If H1980 > 1/R0 then there is still herd immunity. Note that this makes the conservative assumption that none of the deaths are of children born 1971-1980, and that deaths are otherwise evenly distributed between immune and susceptible individuals.
P0*H0 - D*H should read P1970*H1970 - D*H1970
Where are these variables?
H1971
H1972
H1973
H1974
H1975
H1976
H1977
H1978
H1979
If you can' find them therefore:
H1980
I hated advanced mathmatics / statistics in College, but even I understand what Kevin put together there.
So insane troll believes the moment you stop vaccinating that all individuals vaccinated in the past suddenly become suceptible again?
Thanks for the mathematical explanation of herd immunity, Kevin. It was very informative.
I was referring to the generation of susceptible population born between 1971 and 1980.
Where is your source of herd immunity during that period?
Airports? LOL.
The insane troll doesn't really understand mathmatics at all, does she? There are always going to be unvaccinated individuals - in the case of smallpox, I would not have been vaccinated, because I suffer from excema (runs in the family unfortunately, so my father wasn't vaccinated at the time either).
If you can't follow that there was still sufficient numbers of vaccinated individuals around between 1971 & 1980, then you are a complete and utter lunatic (not that you weren't before or are now anyway).
Since you lack math skills, scientific skills, or any amount of actual reasoning - I continue to laugh in your general direction..
To find H1971, set B = Total births 1971 and D = Total deaths 1971 and perform the above calculation; the process can be repeated for each subsequent year (using Hx-1 and Hx for H1970 and H1980 and setting B and D as per that year). It can be shown that doing it year by year gives the same answer to H1980 as doing it by the original method.
Yeah find H1971 FIRST! Before you calculate. Well?
Remember: Your last herd protection as you noted was
H1970
Come on, show me your math skill.
Pi
That is, the people who acquired immunity prior to 1971 and were still alive.
Sample problem:
In an initial population of 1000, 95% of individuals have immunity. After one year, 20 people have died and 25 have been born without acquiring immunity. What is the expected herd protection?
Initially, there are 950 people immune and 50 people susceptible. 19 immune and 1 susceptible individuals have died, and 25 susceptible individuals have been born. This gives us 931 immune and 74 susceptible individuals, or 92.6% herd protection. For any R0 less than 13.6, herd immunity is maintained.
NB: there is one other typo in my posting @245. "H1980 > 1/R0" should read "H1980 > (1-(1/R0))"
It is not necessary to calculate H1971 to find H1980 if I have P1980 as well as B and D for 1971-1980.
Well, that is for those who have had the disease or was vaccinated. How about the new herd of susceptible and unvaccinated individuals, where do they derive their acquired immunity?
I wasn't aware that anyone was claiming the un-vaccinated or unexposed populations had acquired immunity ... isn't the point that they don't have immunity, but because there were so few cases of smallpox in the world (and none in the US) and a large vaccinated population that would prevent spread, that they could withdraw regular vaccination for the general population.
You have erroneously concluded H1980 simply because your variable H1970 is known. Now find H1971. If that is too troublesome for you, then find herd immunity for that year alone.
Why don't you explain why it is erroneous to calculate the herd protection in 1980, if you know the 1970 number? Is there some approximation you do not like?
They don't. You asked where they derived their herd immunity.
Well if you want to become part of the so-called immune herd, then you have to acquire something. That's what vaccinators preach all the time.
First, it's smallpox and the least thing the government can do is to abandon the herd.
We are talking specifically about the smallpox vaccine, which is no longer given to a large percentage of the population ... hence falling below herd immunity levels. No one is claiming that we still have vaccine rates for smallpox that would give us herd immunity (except maybe you?).
I never thought I'd meet someone that would actually fail the Turing test, but now I have.
Geez. How about this herd? Where did its immunity come from? How did the herd become immune sans acquired immunity?
Absent or "Falling below herd immunity levels" is something you don't want to happen in the presence of smallpox. Yes I am referring to the period between 1971 and 1980.
I know it is useless to reply but ...
In comment 258 the acquired immunity you speak of was for the un-vaccinated population after 1971. The answer to that question is "they don't".
People who acquired immunity prior to 1971 did so through the vaccine or exposure (hopefully few got theirs this way).
It's painful witnessing such spectacular cluelessness.
Where did its immunity come from? How did the herd become immune sans acquired immunity?
Treating this as a genuine question, and answering non-mathematically, this immunity comes from the vastly lowered chance of anyone encountering someone with a communicable case of the disease.
If someone with immunity encounters the pathogen, the pathogen doesn't get a chance to reproduce. Therefore that person can't spread the disease to those who don't have the immunity. If you boost the percentage of the population with immunity high enough, the odds of a pathogen finding a non-immune host to infect become so low that it just never gets the chance to spread in its limited time frame of communicability.
I'd use a fire-fighting analogy here, except that I know that Th1Th2 doesn't handle analogies/metaphors well...
-- Steve
That is true, but what is your point. Yes it was decided not to give the vaccine to the general population ... but the number of smallpox cases in the world were small by then. It must have been deemed an acceptable risk (managed by requiring visitors and people travelling to have a smallpox vaccination, etc).
@Krebiozen:
It is, I think I'm going to write some thesis and work on a paper ... nothing soothes the nerves like doing some good science.
Exactly what I was saying, this particular herd has no immunity against smallpox.
Theirs and theirs alone.
But it is part of and mixed in with a much larger herd, of which the vast majority of the rest does posses immunity against smallpox. Therefore, as a whole, the herd does posses herd immunity.
Acquired immunity is an individual effect. Herd immunity is a population effect.
Like what I said, if you want to gain immunity, then you have to "acquire" something. Obviously you're contradicting what this poster has said:
No, I don't accept analogies/metaphors. Those are only for children with imaginary friends. But you can always explain to me the benefit of OPV in promoting secondary spread of infection to the susceptible and uninfected therefore "boost[ing] the percentage of the population with immunity high enough". Well?
Thingy, your cognitive deficits never fail to astound.*
"Herd immunity" doesn't mean that every member of a group has aquired immunity; it means that the group as a whole will not see an outbreak because the disease can't reach members who don't have aquired immunity. That's all... it's not some magical process, just the way probabilities stack.
-- Steve
* resisting urge to use gestures and sign language to circumvent the perceptual chasm
I find it truly amazing that insane troll can have such a poor grasp of reality - though she has proven it time and time again, to have such a denuded individual that is still able to operate a modicum of technology is pretty incredible.
Somehow, the fact that children were born after the end of the smallpox vaccine program in the United States, in its mind, invalidates that entire eradication program, even though, at that point, the total number of worldwide cases were so small, isolated, and tracked, that the chances of a re-infection or outbreak beyond those areas were deemed so remote that the benefits of continued vaccine coverage were now out-weighed by the risks of the vaccine (the smallpox vaccine was definitely not the safest of the lot).
Because insane troll believes that the entire medical establishment is dedicated to spreading diseases - even though insane troll will still accept that the majority, if not almost all show no symptoms of said diseases - to some kind of neferious end, again, which insane troll cannot or will not articulate.
It is funny to watch the gesticulation of a maroon....
@Thingy:
Let's start at Square 1 â What is your definition of herd immunity?
That is the question. Looking forward to an answer.
h_ttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11078115
Neither "immunisation nor infection" exists in the US in the period between 1971 and 1980.
btw
I once asked Th1Th2, after it had made some inane comment re herd immunity, if it was familiar with the concept of disease reservoirs. The answer was to the effect of: The discussion is about immunology not epidemiology..
Just being mixed in with the immune herd does not give or confer acquired immunity to the non-immune herd, does it?
Again, if you want to be part of the herd then you have to acquire something. Why don't you practice what you always preach to the susceptible.
"Herd immunity applies to immunisation or infection, human to human transmitted or otherwise. "
Of course Thingy forgets to include the next sentence:
"We propose that it should have precise meaning for which purpose a new definition is offered: "the proportion of subjects with immunity in a given population". This definition dissociates herd immunity from the indirect protection observed in the unimmunised segment of a population in which a large proportion is immunised, for which the term 'herd effect' is proposed."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11078115
They are proposing to change the definition of Herd immunity not the efect.
And the reason "the disease can't reach members who don't have acquired immunity" is....
Airports.
So much for herd immunity.
So Th1Th2 using your newly acquired definition of herd immunity, using your own words to verify thatyou understand what you quote, please detail your comprehension of what constitutes a "herd effect".
People who travel to or from areas where the disease is prevalent are required to be immunized.
And if this person comes into contact with a mostly vaccinated population then it can't spread, because they are immune. If they do transmit it to someone who is un-vaccinated, then it is unlikely to spread since most people an infected person will meet are immune. This will limit transmission due to the statistically unlikely chance of transmitting the disease. Herd immunity or Herd Effect does not mean it is impossible for anyone to get the disease, but it does make it less likely, and less likely to spread.
No one is saying that it provides perfect immunity to un-vaccinated populations but yourself.
No, I don't accept analogies/metaphors.
Really? "Like a tiny moth swirling around a candle light"? "Stop playing around and man up"? "Now go find the squirrel; you're barking up the wrong tree"? "I smell fish"?
Perhaps you only emit them in hilarilously clumsy fashion.
Ever heard of asymptomatic infection, re-infection and secondary vaccine failure among the vaccinated?
What I'm saying is that herd immunity is a myth.
And for the herd who don't travel outside of the US, where's their source of immunity?
Again, no one here is saying vaccines are perfect, so what is your point? Are you saying they don't work at all, or not enough, so that this herd effect cannot occur?
Lets not call it herd immunity, but as the paper that you incompletely linked to says (It also mentions they are suggesting this as the term Herd Immunity is poorly defined, not that it does not occur) ... that the herd effect might be a better term for the the protection offered by decreasing the chances of disease in un-vaccinated populations by a larger vaccinated population. Would this make you happier?
What is your definition of the herd effect?
@ Steve, stewartt1982, Lawrence, Narad and lurkers:
re: analogies/ metaphors.
OK. Sometimes certain people have problems with abstract thought- as children grow up *most* will develop at least *some* ability in this area by adolescence ( formal operational thought, executive function) *however* not all do. This may have diagnostic significance as tests may demonstrate. Analogies and metapors are usually mis-interpretted, taken literally and understood concretely. In order to create a reasonably good metaphor, analogy or joke, you need to be able to isolate the underlying conceptual identity/ similarity in two instances *despite* a superficial appearance of diversity. This process is similar to mathematical operations that go beyond simple enumerative efforts which can be demonstrated concretely. We can expect that these folks will have problems in a few of these areas: mathematical, verbal analogy/ metaphors and jokes & sarcasm.
If you catch my drift...
See stewartt1982 #286:
"And if this person comes into contact, etc...."
Thingy: And for the herd who don't travel outside of the US, where's their source of immunity?
Me: See stewartt1982 #286 â "And if this person comes into contact, etc...."
What I'm saying is that herd immunity is a myth.
Did you have a traumatic experience involving Joseph Campbell or something?
OK Narad. I don't accept faulty analogies and metaphors.
OK Narad. I don't accept faulty analogies and metaphors.
Define "faulty."
Again, all I'm saying regarding vaccines is they work really---in promoting infection.
1. Asymptomatic and symptomatic infection
2. Reinfection
3. Primary infection
4. Persistent infection
5. Latent infection leading to reactivation
6. Revertant mutation
OK did I miss something?
Nope. "Herd effect is determined by herd immunity."
As above.
FYI, Th1Th2's concept of truth and falsehood is that anything that agrees with or supports her worldview must be true, even if any being with functional sensory organs can see otherwise.
Again, all I'm saying regarding vaccines is they work really---in promoting infection.
1. Asymptomatic and symptomatic infection
2. Reinfection
3. Primary infection
4. Persistent infection
5. Latent infection leading to reactivation
6. Revertant mutation
OK did I miss something?
Proof.
Again, all I'm saying regarding vaccines is they work really---in promoting infection.
And, as you have convincingly demonstrated by your own hand, nobody, anywhere, seems to give a rat's ass about this inner-speech imprecation.
Really?
There's one.
Really?
Why, yes. What part of "inner-speech imprecation" were you not getting?
Take your own advise.
Non sequiturs are not substitutes for answers, Th1Th2. There is no reason whatever to think that you have ever convinced anyone, anywhere, of any element of this trip. The fact that your magic bullet is an "insult" that doesn't mean anything is merely icing on the cake.
The comment from me quoted above at #301 was an attempt to show Th1Th2 that even if we accept her unconventional definition of the word "infection", universal measles vaccination would lead to the end of measles and ultimately the end of measles vaccination. Not only did she fail to follow the point, but she now waves it around like a victory flag. That's why I don't bother engaging with her any more. There is something fundamentally wrong with her ability to follow simple logic and process information, but sadly she appears to completely lack insight into this.
@Krebiozen - she is so fundamentally wrong & has different opinions on what reality is that it is impossible to engage her in any type of conversation, because the sky isn't even blue on her planet.
@305
It's pretty much the walking embodiment of confirmation bias.
So are you disavowing what the CDC has taught you regarding the measles vaccine when it states:
h_ttp://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/PDF/rr/rr4708.pdf
Of course that is false. Like smallpox, "eradication" was preceded by first abandoning vaccination. You'd think it didn't happen to measles? Try atypical measles and killed measles vaccine.
What's the difference it would make if you label the pro-pox (chicken pox) infection promoters too? Would you be lying if you don't?
"Silence is the great teacher, and to learn its lessons you must pay attention to it."
Well, you're disappointed because your manipulative didn't work.
@ Krebiozen:
Lack of insight often accompanies the other problems I outlined above. Anosognosia refers to an inability to see that there *is* a problem. It may also involve inadequacy at looking at the global situation, i.e. the whole picture, but a proclivity to pick around the edges and obsess over tiny details. Needless to say, I have seen much of this in my sceptical travels. I'm sure you can figure out where.
There's the word salad too.
The bot makes more sense.
Great point. Tell that to those who discontinued the killed measles vaccine, chastise them for their "proclivity to pick around the edges" and ask them why they were "obsessed over tiny details".
Well?
Infection didn't work, vaccine is a myth. Yes I am referred to smallpox in airports.
Well? OK.
From link posted by Th Bluff n Puff..
Thanks humpty
297
"Again, all I'm saying regarding vaccines is they work really---in promoting infection.
1. Asymptomatic and symptomatic infection
2. Reinfection
3. Primary infection
4. Persistent infection
5. Latent infection leading to reactivation
6. Revertant mutation
OK did I miss something?"
Yes. You forgot to provide citations detailing each of the above, both as an individual, as well as an overall percentage of total vaccinations.
"Clinical" measles, mumps, and rubella. Subclinical and asymptomatic infection caused by the vaccines are discarded as non-reportable case incidence.
So no supporting evidence as per #314 will be coming from you then?
Are you arguing about causality or the risk? You have to be clear or you'll end up hibernating like Orac. You've been warned.
We regret that the need to zealously guard our commerce marks forces us to state explicitly that we are not comment 312.
Rowrbazzle, evidence that supports a hypothesis makes it more probable that the hypothesis is true. But to establish a hypothesis means to prove it is true. It's possible for the same evidence to support several different, contradictory hypotheses - but ultimately, only one hypothesis can be established as the truth.
@#317
I'm not arguing about either. I'm asking you what evidence you can offer to support the following claim you make.
You should know me better by now humpty. I'm not one for playing your "I'll move the goalposts and you follow" games. Having said that, you could enlighten us with the stats on the risk of each of the above eventuating..let's say, the risk per 1000 vaccinations?
Right now I have a more interesting pursuit to attend, but I'm counting on you to have come up with something which, at least you believe, supports your claims by the time I return.
Oh dear! Stand by for humpty's inThection definition rant.
Antaeus Feldspar,
Thanks, that helps, but I'm still befuzzled.
In general terms, what is the basis for evaluating evidence? How does supportive evidence become establishing evidence?
A simple example would help, but not in the biological or health sciences (if possible) as they're not part of my scientific training.
1. Asymptomatic and symptomatic infection
2. Reinfection
3. Primary and persistent infection
4. Primary and latent infection leading to reactivation
5. Revertant mutation
Time travelling back to 1968. Don't forget your bell bottoms.
Quoting from Thingy's link:
CDC
h_ttp://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00001185.htm
Schneck, 1968Â
Link @323
Here is a reference that provides pretty good evidence that measles vaccine not only does not cause SSPE, but prevents it from occurring. It's also not a single case report, and is somewhat more "fresh" than the link @323.
Thingy is still on about SSPE using a decades old statement with no genetic testing? Not to mention SSPE doesn't develop in 10 weeks.
Why anyone keeps engaging this insane idiot is beyond me.
I particularly like the conclusion:
"Conclusions Successful measles vaccination programmes directly and indirectly protect the population against SSPE and have the potential to eliminate SSPE through the elimination of measles. Epidemiological and virological data suggest that measles vaccine does not cause SSPE."
In other words, a patient believed to have been exposed to wild-type measles was given prophylactic treament (Ig) as well as a vaccination (presumably with LAV). In the absence of serologic studies, it is impossible to determine whether it was the wild-type virus the patient was exposed to, the LAV in the vaccine, or an earlier subclinical case that caused the SSPE.
Duh? Let's see the results and how clever these crooks fool the readers.
Verily I say unto you, those are for the people in your neighborhood (hehe) who had had primary natural measles infection prior to their receipt of measles vaccines because these morally, ethically and professionally corrupt vaccinators know that SSPE is NOT caused by re-infection (i.e. SSPE is a persistent measles infection). Obviously, in this case the measles vaccine "in those with an established benign persistent wild measles infection" did NOT cause the SSPE. Of course, the same is true when the primary measles infection is acquired from the measles vaccine prior to re-exposure to wild-type measles virus, then the SSPE is caused by primary measles vaccination, and not the natural measles.
For your information, every one except Schneck was oblivious with regards to the then unknown link between SSPE and measles vaccines and this was what, 5 years later since measles vaccine was launched in 1963. So that in 1969, a registry for SSPE was established due to this horrible outcome.
Also, it's not just one case scenario. There were several cases that were reported following Schneck's findings in 1968.
Even the CDC had acknowledged that some of the recent cases of SSPE were actually caused by measles vaccines.
CDC link above.
In case it wasn't clear, immune globulin is only given when someone is believed to have been exposed to a pathogen (or certain poisons). The rabies shot and anti-venin for snake bites are other examples of immune globulin. The protection is only temporary, as you're using antibodies made by others.
No you got it all wrong. Immune globulin were actually given concomitant with the not-so-attenuated measles vaccine during primary vaccination in the 1960's. You've confused it with the other indication of immune globulin not involving primary vaccination. And besides this happened in 1968, wherein vaccinators were still clueless about SSPE and measles vaccines.
Also, the findings were supported by histologic evidence as one requirement for the diagnosis of SSPE
Just as I expected. You have confused the indication of immune globulin given simultaneously with the measles vaccine in the 1960's with the one in your mind. Of course, your explanation is still relatively true; inject the kids with "poison" (measles vaccine) then give them the "anti-venom" (immune globulin).
From The Thing's link:
Of course, there's also the fact that virology studies indicate that SSPE is associated ONLY with the wild-type virus, and not with the vaccine virus. Also from the CDC:
www.cdc.gov/measles/about/complications.html (Sorry, I can't do links from this terminal).
Ahh I see what the problems are with these infection promoters;
1. They lack the capacity to determine the chronological order of events.
2. They are ignorant about primary infection and re-infection.
This is very well true. Primary infection with wild-type measles virus do cause SSPE.
Of course, because SSPE is not caused by measles re-infection "among persons who have previously had measles disease or received live measles vaccine".
If primary measles infection is caused by natural measles (prior to measles vaccine), then this is true.
And here's what they tell you if the measles infection is caused primarily by the measles vaccine (no history of natural measles). They have alibis:
OMG...Did SFB Troll state "No you got it all wrong. Immune globulin were actually given concomitant with the not-so-attenuated measles vaccine during primary vaccination in the 1960's. You've confused it with the other indication of immune globulin not involving primary vaccination."
(I forgot that SFB Troll has "expertise" in the indications for the use of specific IGs such as TIG, RIG, HBIG and VZIG as well as "expertise" in the indications for use of IG.)
IT will of course, provide "citations" for ITS statements.
@336:
Res ipsa loquitur.
TBruce:
Ah hah! I wondered if the terminals I saw in the hospital hallways and patients' rooms were occasionally used for a five minute Internet break by the staff. Especially the areas that said to turn off the cell phones and had no wifi.
Five minutes?
Oops, don't let admin see this.
Genetic testing was not a prerequisite in diagnosing SSPE during that time. And of course this: Link given @322.
Yup, that includes genetic alteration of the early Edmonston measles vaccine virus.
In it's typical course (caused by wild-type), no, it doesn't. But they knew since 1968, that the measles vaccine can cause accelerated development of SSPE in individuals without history of natural measles.
No not just yet. Instead I will first ask this incompetent and stupid nurse on the indication of immune globulin on why it was given simultaneously with every measles vaccination during the 1960s.
Hey here's a rope.
@insane troll - here's your mule....
Instead I will first ask this incompetent and stupid nurse on the indication of immune globulin on why it was given simultaneously with every measles vaccination during the 1960s.
Perhaps you'd like to demonstrate that it was.
Th1Th2 (#341):
It's not a prerequisite for diagnosing SSPE in this time, either. However, now that SSPE has become so rare, especially in those countries where measles vaccination uptake is nearly universal (odd coincidence, that), SSPE cases in developed countried are routinely sequenced. And - another odd coincidence - all of the sequenced SSPE cases have been caused by the wildtype measles virus. By extension, that would mean that none of the sequenced SSPE cases were caused by the vaccine strain of measles.
Now, I'll be among the first to say that having none of the SSPE-related measles strains originate from the vaccine strain doesn't mean that it can't happen or even that it hasn't happened (I wish Th1Th2 could be so honest), but it does give us a "ceiling" or maximum percentage of SSPE cases that could have been caused by the vaccine strain (I make it less than 0.1%). Remember - especially you, Th1Th2 - that this is the maximum percentage of SSPE cases that could be caused by the measles vaccine strain, given that none of the sequenced SSPE cases to date have been caused by the vaccine strain.
Now, when we further consider that - in the US for instance - about 90% of people under the age of 50 have received the live-attenuated measles vaccine and that the total annual number of wild-type measles cases in the US is less than 200 (or so), the SSPE sequence data is even more impressive.
Each year, about 3.5 million US children get the live-attenuated measles vaccine for the first time. Each year, less than 200 children get wild-type measles (for the first time, it is assumed). Yet, given the ratio of 17,500 vaccine strain "infections" to each wild-type infection - each year - all of the sequenced SSPE-related measles strain have been the wild-type.
I'm assuming that Th1Th2 is basing this on the Schneck (1968) paper - which he/she apparently still hasn't read. Let me be brief - Schneck based the assignment of SSPE to the measles vaccine based on timing - often ridiculously short time intervals. Since he had no way of confirming that the SSPE-related measles strain was actually the vaccine strain, he assumed that the SSPE was caused by the vaccine strain (an assumption he was criticised for at the time) and made the further unsupported assumption that the time course of SSPE would be massively shortened if it was caused by the vaccine strain.
Of course, a simpler and - as it turned out - correct conclusion would be that the children who developed SSPE shortly after getting the live-attenuated measles vaccine had been previously infected with wild-type measles but had not been diagnosed.
Come on, Th1Th2, can't you do better than that?
Prometheus
Here Narad. Learn the "essential".
SFB Troll: "No you got it all wrong. Immune globulin were actually given concomitant with the not-so-attenuated measles vaccine during primary vaccination in the 1960's. You've confused it with the other indication of immune globulin not involving primary vaccination."
Me: "IT will of course, provide "citations" for ITS statements."
SFB Troll: (Digging, using a larger shovel) "No not just yet. Instead I will first ask this incompetent and stupid nurse on the indication of immune globulin on why it was given simultaneously with EVERY measles vaccination during the 1960s."
Me: I'm still waiting....
As much as it pains me to say this, Th1Th2 is correct.
Rubeovax (an attenuated Edmonston B strain) was the first measles vaccine (introduced in 1963) and was insufficiently attenuated. As a stop-gap measure, it was often given along with a small dose of either measles immune globulin or a slightly larger (but still very small) dose of gamma globulin in the opposite arm. In 1968, the more attenuated Attenuvax vaccine was approved for use and the need for immunoglobulin disappeared.
What this has to do with whether or not the current measles vaccine strain can cause SSPE or even if the Rebeovax strain of 1963 - 1968 was causing SSPE (as reported by Stuart Schneck in 1968) is beyond me. The differences noted in clinical trials carried out in the late 1960's were less fever and less rash with the "further attenuated" Edmonston B virus (Attenuvax) compared to Rubeovax.
Prometheus
Here Narad. Learn the "essential".
Or, you may want to learn the "English." Let us review.
Killed vaccine? Nope. LAV? Sorry, Rubeovax/A.S.A. was already being marketed in 1965.
As much as it pains me to say this, Th1Th2 is correct.
Oh, no. If it gets to play stickler for word meanings, so does everyone else.
Rowrbazzle, I don't think there's a hard-and-fast line determining which evidence establishes a conclusion and which only supports it. I think that's why committees of qualified people are needed to review evidence and determine what level it reaches. I could be wrong.
Is there a reason as to why it's not a prerequisite? I'll tell you the reason later. Heck, I actually gave the clue @341.
It's not a coincidence rather it's expected when you're replacing wild-type with vaccine-type measles virus, hence the need for measles surveillance.
Well, like any other surveillance, genetic sequencing is only a reporting tool that monitors incidence of SSPE.
Like I said, that will be inconclusive since identification of the cause of SSPE as wild-type or vaccine strain measles virus has not been possible.
You're not arguing about causality; you're talking about the risk.
It was based on post-mortem histologic findings supporting the diagnosis of SSPE.
There's no way Schneck could confirm this because his findings preceded any knowledge or speculation on measles infection and SSPE connection. He was the first to report this event while the vaccinators were totally clueless amidst mass immunization. Also, his histologic finding is also included in the current SSPE diagnostic criteria. Assumption? Tell that to CDC.
That would be an assumption.
Obviously, I was referring to every "not-so attenuated measles vaccines" I wrote @333.
Why would they not give immune globulin, you tell me.
Obviously, I was referring to every "not-so attenuated measles vaccines" I wrote @333.
In which case you are still wrong, as "every" does not mean "many." I didn't make your bed for you.
SFB Troll still will not provide citations and changes the subject once again. Digging itself in deeper, it states EVERY measles vaccine administered during the 1960s was given with Immune Globulin.
SFB Troll doesn't get to translate into pidgen dialect Thinglish, "some", "many" or "every".
I'm still waiting....
I'm afraid you really lost the "ESSENTIAL" Narad. Every not-so attenuated measles vaccine MUST be given with immune globulin.
Do you need a dictionary?
And the vaccinators' knowledge base regarding SSPE-measles connection before 1968---zero,nil, nada, 0, zilch
Thingy is still not providing citations for "All measles vaccines in the 1960s were administered with immune globulin".
Still waiting....since it replied four hours ago "No not just yet".
Here's the finding:
Now time to reduce your stupidity rate @ KVO, incompetent nurse.
Every not-so attenuated measles vaccine MUST be given with immune globulin.
Which, oddly enough, is demonstrably false.
The Thing's own reference states that the Edmonston B vaccine, licensed in 1963, was given in conjunction with anti-measles immune globulin because it wasn't sufficiently attenuated. The Moraten vaccine, licensed in 1968, was adequately attenuated, and didn't require the immune globulin administration. Therefore NOT all measles vaccines in the 1960's were administered with immune globulin.
The Thing is incorrect. Surprise, surprise.
The Moraten vaccine, licensed in 1968, was adequately attenuated, and didn't require the immune globulin administration.
This observation is not necessary to demonstrate that Th1Th2 has devised yet another pedantic corner for itself to back into. Rubeovax was also used with an aspirin-only regimen.
And because of "Excessive Virulence". So to further attenuation, immune globulin is essentially required.
It did not require immune globulin because further attenuation was done through forty additional passages that resulted to a less reactogenic strain compared to the not-so attenuated Edmonston B strain.
Every not-so attenuated measles vaccine MUST be given along with immune globulin.
Final result:
(an optional regimen for use at the physician's discretion)
Of course, Narad lacks the capacity to distinguish between "ESSENTIAL" and "OPTIONAL"
Measles vaccines and ASA--what a perfect combination, isn't it Narad?
Of course, Narad lacks the capacity to distinguish between "ESSENTIAL" and "OPTIONAL"
*I* don't? I'm afraid that flipper-to-outlane in semantic pinball doesn't earn an extra ball.
SFB Troll...I'm still waiting for the citations to your statements...it's been 6 hours:
"No you got it all wrong. Immune globulin were actually given concomitant with the not-so-attenuated measles vaccine during primary vaccination in the 1960's. You've confused it with the other indication of immune globulin not involving primary vaccination. And besides this happened in 1968,..."
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean â neither more nor less.'
'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master â that's all.'
Time to "terminally disinfect" Thingy Humpty Dumpty Troll.
This is followed a little below by this:
Then this:
Liar.
Perusing the primary literature from 1960-1969 (ie, Google Scholar set for "measles vaccine globulin" for dates "1960-1969"), it is clear that there was a variety of ways the measles vaccine was administered. LAV by itself, LAV with Ig, LAV with aspirin, KMV by itself, KMV followed three weeks later by LAV, and finally 2nd gen LAV by itself. Ig was available and approved, but not essential. People could, and did, get the original, first-gen, not-attenuated-enough vaccine without immune globulin or anything else.
Except the prediction made in 1993 that it would be "unlikely" turned out to be wrong, as several dozens studies since then have shown. Are all these scientists lying?
You know, it was once predicted that automobiles would never go faster than a horse (WR: 55 mph). Am I lying when I claim that my top speed when driving to work today was over 70 mph?
Clearly, Th1Th2 is either incapable of honest discourse or has greatly diminished reality-testing abilities. Predictably, it has mis-stated my comments as some sort of agreement with it's ludicrous position that the live-attennuated measles vaccine could have caused SSPE.
The citation it is so enamoured of - Schneck (1968) - did confirm SSPE by histopathology, but that technique is incapable of distinguishing which strain of the measles virus caused the disease.
What Schneck found was a small number of SSPE victims who had received the live-attenuated measles vaccine at some time prior to their diagnosis. In some cases, the time interval between receiving the vaccine and the onset of SSPE symptoms (which are not subtle) was significantly shorter than what we now know about the natural course of the disease. At the time, the connection between SSPE and measles was relatively new, so I suppose we can excuse Dr. Schneck for believing thatthe vaccine might have caused the SSPE cases he saw.
Th1Th2's mistaken statement, "...the indication of immune globulin on why it was given simultaneously with every measles vaccination during the 1960s." apparently requires a more detailed deconstruction before it will recognise it's error:
[1] Immune globulin was given with many doses of Rubeovax - not "every" dose, not even most.
[2] Rubeovax was the only live-attenuated measles vaccine available from 1963 to 1968; after 1968, Attenuvax was available and proved so popular (even though it gave lower antibody titres) that its manufacturer dropped Rubeovax in 1973.
This is charateristic of the intellectual dishonesty of Th1Th2 and one of the reasons I am reluctant to engage it directly. There is no data supporting the claim that measles vaccine - of any type or at any time - can or did cause SSPE. Yet Th1Th2 clings to the obvious (in hindsight) error of an article published 43 years ago so that it can petulantly claim to be "right".
Pathetic.
Oh, and before I go - Th1Th2 seems to claim that SSPE-related measles viruses can't be assigned to either wild-type or vaccine strain origin because the SSPE-related strains have all mutated.
While it is true that the defining step in the development of SSPE appears to be a mutation of the virus, those mutations are in specific regions of the genome. The genome regions that are mutated in the vaccine strains are different from those mutated in SSPE-related strains, so the origin of the virus can still be determined.
Once again, Th1Th2 takes a small truth and wraps it in layers of nonsense to form a big lie. Intellectual dishonesty or mental illness? You make the call.
Prometheus
Regarding Thingy's intellectual dishonesty, see @331 : "For your information, every one except Schneck was oblivious with regards to the then unknown link between SSPE and measles vaccines and this was what, 5 years later since measles vaccine was launched in 1963. So that in 1969, a registry for SSPE was established due to this horrible outcome."
In other words, the measles vaccine was launched because of the known bad results of measles: encephalitis, brain damage, blindness, deafness, paralysis, pneumonia, death. Thereafter it was determined that measles was *even worse* than previously realized, as it also caused SSPE, and so a registry for SSPE was established. Thingy "thinks" this is some kind of condemnation of the measles vaccine.
Oh, man! It's so hard to decide!
I vote for dishonesty.
@ TBruce, W. Kevin Vicklund and Prometheus- and lurkers:
While I agree with you, I would put "liar" and "dishonesty" in quotes because I doubt that the person being described can discriminate truth from lies or external reality from thoughts about it. A few years ago a young man ( anecdote not work related) told me sincerely that two teenaged girls from the West Indies had created a system that transmitted obscene thoughts and insults directly into his head- while the wires were located in a wall in his home- they simultaneously had power to transmit wherever he went and were silent to other people. He believed this with all of his heart and would argue vorciferously with anyone who disagreed. Needless to say, eventually this idea got him into a lot of trouble- when he started talking about "getting those girls". But, it was "true" for him and possibly more "real" than what he encountered in daily life- people, cars, buildings. I think that the variant we see @ RI is not very far removed from "Private Radio WI".
W. Kevin Vicklund,
Which study had ever shown to identify the original sequence of the wild-type measles virus that could have caused the primary measles infection from which they assumed to have resulted in the development of SSPE?
Thingy @373 :
We've been through this before, though Thingy pretends we haven't.   Review of the effect of measles vaccination on the epidemiology of SSPE, accepted September 6, 2007, in the International Journal of Epidemiology.Â
And so is modern sequence analysis incapable of determining the original strain of the measles virus that could have caused primary measles infection. Have you ever wonder why genetic testing is NOT even a diagnostic criteria for SSPE?
Interestingly, that thing you described as an "error" 43 years ago is also the basis of the diagnostic criteria for SSPE today.
The operational word there is "assigned", but not diagnostic. Because any mutant virus, including the vaccine virus, can be assigned to its parental wild-type strain.
True.
There.
From that article it states:
More information on Halle:
So is it true when they stated that "identification of the cause of SSPE as wild-type or vaccine strain measles virus has not been possible"?
My comment (#369) in reference to Th1Th2:
After reading Th1Th2 (#375), I realise that I should have included a third option: both.
For people interested in how the mutated SSPE-related measles virus can be linked to circulating measles strains, I recommend:
and
and
These studies (and several others) show that - surprise! - Th1Th2 is wrong about this, as it is about a great many things.
Prometheus.
Mistakes will be made-How many "vaccine" reactions are misdiagnosed?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/18/us-whooping-cough-idUSTRE80H1…
You can find a list of such sequences tabulated in Table 4 of the review linked @327. As this is a review, the original studies are found in the references. Note that all vaccines are from clade A. Thus, almost all of the SSPE sequences listed can't possibly be from vaccine strains. Of the four listed from clade A, the first three are believed to be from the same sample, and one of those studies listed the sequence in enough detail to be certain that it is from a non-vaccine strain. The other clade A sequence is also detailed enough to be certain it is from a non-vaccine strain.
@ken - I'm confused how that article could lead you to believe that it supports your assertion....but then again, I'm sure you can rationalize just about anything that you think might support your anti-vaccine position.
I thought ken was suggesting that many or most diagnoses of "vaccine reactions" are misdiagnoses. That's certainly consistent with the article he posted.
I am most certainly not anti-vaccine- I would love to see polio erradicated like small pox. You made that assumption.
@ken - based on available evidence (your previous posts) I think it was a very reasonable assumption.
You know, we can eliminate measles as well, you in favor of that?
There fix that for you.
@insane troll - just because you say something doesn't make it so. Your assertions in this case have been refuted over and over and over again, at this point, its just sad to see an individual lack any such level of reasoning.
You need help - professional help.
What these studies trying to prove is that the measles virus recovered from SSPE patients differs from wild-type measles virus and vaccine strains.
Actually this case is no different from AFP-Polio cover-up.
I agree, the idea that AFP is all really misdiagnosed polio, and the idea that SSPE is caused by measles vaccination are both paranoid fantasies that fly in the face of all the evidence. If I was going to cover up a such conspiracies I wouldn't report AFP or SSPE cases at all. I guess Big Pharma never thought of that.
Actually the evidence of the vaccine viruses is there, in stools or in the brain. OPV recipients usually excretes the virus in the stools. And when the vaccinated presents with paralysis, they will be discarded as not having polio if their stools only contain the OPV-like virus. Ditto for the measles vaccine. Their only interest is the mutation that took place. FWIW, there's a surveillance for the vaccinated population.
From the CDC-
The last cases of naturally occurring paralytic polio in the United States were in 1979, when an outbreak occurred among the Amish in several Midwestern states. From 1980 through 1999, there were 162 confirmed cases of paralytic polio cases reported. Of the 162 cases, eight cases were acquired outside the United States and imported. The last imported case caused by wild poliovirus into the United States was reported in 1993. The remaining 154 cases were vaccine-associated paralytic polio (VAPP) caused by live oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV).
And when the vaccinated presents with paralysis, they will be discarded as not having polio if their stools only contain the OPV-like virus. Ditto for the measles vaccine.
"Ditto"? What in G-d's name are you talking about? Is this supposed to translate into "And when the vaccinated presents with SSPE, they will be discarded as not having measles if their [fill in the blank] only contain the vaccine-like virus"?
Well, you have to otherwise you could't claim that vaccines have worked.
Did your "brain" fail to analyze the first sentence?
Did your "brain" fail to analyze the first sentence?
You don't seem to grasp that these aren't parallel constructions.
"The last imported case caused by wild poliovirus into the United States was reported in 1993. The remaining 154 cases were vaccine-associated paralytic polio (VAPP) caused by live oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV)."
Poliovirus in the stool. Measles virus in the brain. What's the confusion Narad?
Poliovirus in the stool. Measles virus in the brain. What's the confusion Narad?
The crux of your AFP routine is that AFP is polio even in the absence of wild, vaccine, or vaccine-derived virus in the stool, including cases in which an NPEV is found. The very testing that you thus demand in the case of AFP you now reject in the case of SSPE.
Now tell everyone again how "Every not-so attenuated measles vaccine MUST be given with immune globulin."
I've not been following closely, but is thingy saying that (let's consider SSPE and measles), that when someone who is vaccinated presented with SSPE-like symptoms, that they will be discarded (from a study for instance) because their brain would contain the vaccine strains? (and using Thingy logic, the scientists would discount it as being SSPE).
I was looking at this small study from England and Wales here where they do brain biopsy's on 5 of the cases, 2 of whom were vaccinated and had no prior known measles history. All 5 biopsy's indicated they had exposure to the wild strain of measles. So they did not simply discard cases presenting SSPE and had been vaccinated out of hand.
Thingy displays a rather touching faith in the abilities of scientists. In its mind, scientists are incapable of error -- any observation published in a scientific journal was, ipso facto, absolutely correct and complete in every particular. Although it firmly believes that scientists lie, it does not believe that any scientist, ever, under any circumstances, could be mistaken.
Thus, a report from 1968 that SSPE appeared to be caused by the measles vaccine is believed by Thingy to be absolutely correct and unquestionable, even though there was no way at the time to confirm that the virus in the victim's brain really was the measles vaccine virus and not the wild-type measles virus.
Of course, Thingy also believes that scientists lie at almost every opportunity to protect vaccination, so it believes all subsequent studies of SSPE, that show using modern tests that the wild-type virus can cause SSPE but the vaccine virus has never been observed to do so, are fraudulent.
No, their routine is to discard any case of paralysis as not being polio if the stool presents with only vaccine-related poliovirus (OPV-like, more than 99% sequence homology). Justifiable? NPEVs are discarded automatically as non-polio, well duh.
No it's not, is that "The identification of the cause of SSPE as wild-type or vaccine strain measles virus has not been possible." They don't even use this as a diagnostic criteria.
And why should you not give immune globulin to a not-so attenuated measles vaccine? You tell me.
unknown @396 :
Source: the CDC article "Polio Disease - Questions and Answers".
Thingy @401 :
The CDC acknowledges cases of paralytic polio caused by OPV. As usual, Thingy lies even when presented with evidence of its lies. Â
I wonder how thingy gets the brainpower to convert oxygen into carbon dioxide.
This is not responsive.
"Duh," indeed. Poliovirus+NPEV is broken out. Nonetheless, you're stuck re AFP with "It's a fictitious disease label invented by WHO to redefine poliomyelitis."
No loitering allowed.
No, but for anyone without a history of measles prior to the receipt of measles vaccine will be discarded as nonvaccine-induced SSPE if they can correlate the mutant virus in the brain to the existing wild-type virus that might have caused the primary infection (i.e. during an outbreak or epidemic), otherwise, they will assign a new strain.
Their findings did not identify the original sequence of the wild-type measles virus that had caused the primary measles infection.
Which one? The OPV can cause two different paralytic polio.
There is no vaccine-induced SSPE to be found. And your sentence construction has been slipping. Put down the Killepitsch and explain why SSPE incidence has been falling and why you promote reversing this.
Here Narad. Learn.
h_ttp://www.who.int/bulletin/archives/80%283%29210.pdf
Again how many paralytic cases were reported in India last year and where discarded as AFP because they have only isolated a vaccine-related poliovirus (no, Narad this is not the same as VDPV)?
Did you just realize I wasn't even referring to NPEV? Well duh, because it's irrelevant since these are viruses other than wild-type poliovirus and OPV.
But you can always answer.
Here Narad. Learn.
Learn what? Why are you bringing up VDPV? Repeating the obvious does nothing to defend your assertion that AFP is "a fictitious disease label invented by WHO to redefine poliomyelitis."
You're right, AFP is fictitious when they actually meant VAPP. So how many VAPP and VDPV cases are there in India last year Narad? Sorry I'm just trying to see if you know what to count.
3163 and 7, respectively. Out of 57,552 patients tested. See, it is reported, contrary to your statement. Just on a different report. And no, it's not listed as non-polio AFP.
Sorry I'm just trying to see if you know what to count.
No, you're just trying weasel out of an untenable situtation, something one might think you'd be better at by now. Oh, and it's still time to man up and explain why you are an SSPE promoter.
I know they are being reported but where is VAPP classified under?
I never said it was listed as "non-polio AFP".
G*d I hate idiots. Can we move on to something else? All I know is for SFB troll thinks that vaccines have eliminated nothing and we have been duped by the 'reclassifying' of all diseases so as to hide them. It doesn't matter what else we say. I say we move on. Next I want SFB troll to outline her ideal of health care. She keeps hating on this one, so she must have some idea. But then again, she never answers questions either so I will remain frustrated.
Save your time Narad by reading #336. You're barking up the wrong tree again.
That's gotta be better than screwing the pooch, as you should know, Thingy.
I know they are being reported but where is VAPP classified under?
Try again, this time in English, infection promoter.
Th1Th2 (#406):
This is a specious objection to the findings of this study (and many others). As has been mentioned numerous times, the genomic regions used to identify measles virus strains - including the all-critical distinction between vaccine strain and wild type - are not those that are mutated in SSPE-related strains. As a result, sequencing the viral genome will show whether or not the SSPE-related strain could have come from a vaccine strain.
Th1Th2 is being intellectually dishonest when it insists that recovering the entire original genome sequence is necessary to identify the source strain of SSPE. This is no more valid than insisting that all ten fingerprints need to be recovered from a crime scene to identify the perpetrator. [Note: I realise that Th1Th2 can't understand analogies, but it may be of some help to other people reading this thread.]
Prometheus
I read this blog and all its comments with great interest (it took a while). Let me begin by saying wow, I had no idea this movement had gained any creditability with anyone in the US or Europe. Anyway, I have a suggestion for all of the thoughtful scientists and physicians that have responded to the comments posted by the skeptics of vaccination; do not waste your time trying to convince them with scientific evidence. They are blinded by beliefs, and beliefs are emotional, and irrational, and often formulated without having any experience (i.e., none of these skeptics have had whooping cough, so itâs not bad and we should let people develop immunity through exposure), knowledge (e.g., they read an article, now they are an expert and should ignore those who have spent years studying vaccines) or evidence (yes, lets ignore all the data from many thoughtful, respected investigators and pay attention to one investigator that publishes results from poorly designed studies). You cannot change someoneâs beliefs (e.g., you either believe in God or you donât), so why try? But you did your best and it was a thorough job. Hopefully, your efforts have provided uninformed readers with information they can use to develop an informed opinion. Of course one could argue that is value of refuting the comments posted by skeptics in response to Oracâs post (an excellent post by the way), so I should shut up and let you get back to work.
Ooops.
Gee, didja miss this part?
I know it was in plain sight and all. Another entry for the "Thinglish Medical Encyclopaedia"
Painful. Just painful.
@ Krebiozen, painful indeed and even moreso that it took her three days to come up with that little gem.
Oh gee, did you miss this part too?
And why is this important? Because SSPE is not caused by measles virus re-infection which explains why vaccinal strains were not found. But how about for those cases without history of measles exposure but vaccination? The answer is at #421.
So did they find the original measles virus that could have caused SSPE? The answer is NO.
Painful it is....for you.
Surprise, surprise. Thingy can't read a phylogenic tree.
If you look closely at the tree, none of the bolded strains are in the genotype A branch. When they say "post-vaccinal cases (genotype A) from the last two Argentine outbreaks were included," they are talking about measles cases, not SSPE cases. This tree was constructed by taking consensus reference strains (A, B1, B2 C1, D6, etc), adding in measles strains [both wild-type and post-vaccinal] found during the last two outbreaks (non-bolded ARG####), and then adding in the SSPE sequences (bolded ARG##SSPE). Figure 2 in fact shows that the SSPE-related strains could not have come from a vaccine strain.
Painful it is....for you.
I'm afraid that even your ability to cause laughter isn't that strong.
To have an SSPE case, a case of primary measles infection is a MUST.
I know what your problems are and I am not surprised. Check #336.
Here's some more text for SFB to torture:
Irrelevant (and if I'm guessing right as to what you mean, not accurate - there is nothing that prevents a second infection from causing SSPE). Not all primary measles infections lead to SSPE. The "post-vaccinal case" sequences refer to people who came down with measles after vaccination, not to people who came down with SSPE after vaccination. None of the genotype A sequences are bolded. Therefor, none of them are from SSPE patients.
Yes, Science Mom, you're clearly showing utter ignorance regarding SSPE...even in the following paragraph you quoted. What a shame.
This only makes sense because these patients have previously had wild-type measles infection prior to their receipt of the measles vaccine. You don't get it do you? SSPE is NOT caused by measles virus re-infection or re-exposure.
I'm pretty sure insane troll doesn't even understand what it is trying to say anymore.....
I see Thingy is desperately trying to drive attention away from the fact that it didn't understand Figure 2.
Note to Thingy: Figure 2 does not, contrary to what you implied, include cases where the only known measles exposure was the vaccine.
What kind of a numbnut are you? SSPE is a persistent measles virus infection; it is NOT a secondary measles infection nor SSPE is caused by measles reinfection.
SSPE is rare but a primary measles infection is a prerequisite.
And the idiocy continues. SSPE will not result in the absence of a primary measles infection either caused by wild-type or vaccines, hence the postvaccinal genotype A.
For the very obvious reason that SSPE strains differ from wild-type and vaccine strains. Do you follow? Genotype A strains exist in both vaccines and wild-type.
Of course, because SSPE patients actually have mutated measles virus you call SSPE virus, which is neither a wild-type nor a vaccinal strain.
It looks though that you are the one who's totally, no not confused but ignorant.
As you all know, those cases are accessible.
Th1Th2 (#421, #424, #428, #432 amd #434):
Wow. Generally, when people demonstrate an "epic fail" in understanding papers they cite, the typical response is to either run away and hide (i.e. not comment on the 'blog for a week or two) or (less commonly) forthrightly admit that they misunderstood what the paper was saying and apologise.
It is the rare bird that tries to brazen it out in front of dozens of people who do know how to read scientific papers and who do understand how a phylogenetic tree works (and, more importantly, the molecular genetics behind it).
I'd say that Th1Th2 was one of a kind, except that there are a couple others that irregularly comment on this 'blog who are equal in their arrogant ignorance.
You go, Th1Th2! Don't let all of that sciency mumbo-jumbo about data get in the way of your "One True Path"!
Amazing!
Prometheus
It is painful for me to see someone completely misunderstand and misinterpret an elegant piece of science like that.
And it looks to me that these infection promoters just got some pretty painful whoopin'
The title of this thread is fitting.
The fat lady just sang.
Watching insane troll is like watching Custer declare victory at Little Bighorn...
Uh-oh...*SFB* Troll's head is about to explode.
I cleaned up this blog the last time when *SFB* Troll messed it up. It took me 24 hours, in a HazMat suit and...30 Red Bag Waste bags to clean up after Thingy.
*SFB* Sh** For Brains
The fat lady just sang.
Yah, but you're playing the Bride of Lammermoor.
Yes, but look; Thingy takes (what should be) an embarrassing episode (for a sane person) and proclaims victory!
This is awesome.
Normally I just find thingy's brain droppings annoying.
But ...
Strewth!
re 445
I've been absent with work so I need to ask: Did I miss mm (Lucy) coming out of the closet?
Sauceress , who knows? It looks like he is drinking a bit earlier than he usually does.
I once farted on purpose in class to interrupt a stupid professor from teaching the moronic mud to man theory of evolution.
Ah, Rob Hood, KE5BMP, the course load for an associate's degree in Electronics Technolgy from Holmes Community College of Grenada, Mississippi, doesn't include biology.
Although I'm sure they're proud of the credit you bring to the institution at every turn.
I see scat-talking, morphing-sockpuppet troll from Eupora Mississippi is back.