Peter Hotez

Surprise! Relatively small decreases in vaccine uptake can lead to big increases in vaccine-preventable disease!

oracknows — Wed, 26 Jul 2017 08:05:43 +0000

Surprise! Relatively small decreases in vaccine uptake can lead to big increases in vaccine-preventable disease!

One of the most common tropes used by antivaxers is to attack herd immunity as not being real. Herd immunity, or as its sometimes called, community immunity, is a name for a phenomenon in which in a population with high levels of immunity to a disease members susceptible to the disease are protected. Basically, because the vast majority of members of the population are immune to a disease, that disease can't gain a foothold in the population and lead to an outbreak or an epidemic. Basically, transmission from person to person is interrupted because any susceptible person who becomes infected is surrounded almost completely by people who are immune. Thus, although individuals or small groups of individuals can become infected, in a population where a sufficient percentage of is immune the immune population serves as a "firebreak" on outbreaks, preventing them from spreading too far, protecting both those who are vaccinated and those who are not.

In this day and age, herd immunity is almost always achieved not through natural infection, but rather through vaccination. It's why public health officials emphasize high levels of vaccine uptake. How effective herd immunity is depends upon how infectious the agent being vaccinated against is, how effective the vaccine is, and what percentage of the population is protected by it. For instance, for a disease like measles, which is among the most contagious of vaccine-preventable diseases for which the vaccine is greater than 90% effective, the percentage of the population that needs to be vaccinated to achieve herd immunity typically from 90-95%.

So why would herd immunity be such a threat to antivaccine beliefs? The reason is simple. It's another major benefit of vaccines. More importantly, the existence of herd immunity undercuts another favorite antivaccine talking point, which is that, by choosing not to vaccinate their children, antivaxers are not endangering any one and that vaccinated children have nothing to fear from their unvaccinated children, because they are protected. Of course, obviously one problem with that argument is that many vaccines are not 100% effective, which is another reason why why herd immunity is so important.

Sadly, we see evidence of this effectiveness when vaccine coverage falls. Antivaxers will frequently point out that vaccine coverage in a state is at a very high level, and that's frequently true. However, it is pockets of low vaccine uptake, where vaccination rates fall below that needed for herd immunity in communities where antivaxers are concentrated. But what would happen if vaccine uptake declined nationwide? Well, a recently published study out of Stanford University asked that question. Basically, it was a study modeling what would happen under various scenarios if vaccine uptake. The reason is obvious:

The routine vaccination of children is declining in Texas and other areas of the United States where they allow for personal belief and other nonmedical exemptions to childhood vaccination requirements. In these areas, there is growing vaccine hesitancy—defined as a delay or refusal to accept vaccination based on personal beliefs despite availability— that could accelerate gaps in vaccine coverage across the United States. The determinants of the parental decisionmaking process on whether to vaccinate their child are complex and context specific, but are often influenced by misinformation, false claims regarding vaccine safety, and a low perceived risk of infectious diseases among other factors. While the sources driving vaccine hesitancy (eg, the “antivaxxer” movement, celebrity endorsement, and online content) have historically been outside of science and government, there have recently been calls for a special government commission on vaccine safety, despite overwhelming scientific consensus on the safety and effectiveness of vaccinations. If the panel were to draft policies that relax childhood vaccinations requirements, the already declining trends in vaccination coverage in US children may decline further. The aim of this study was to estimate the potential public health and economic consequences of declining childhood vaccination, a result of a growing vaccine hesitancy movement, using the case example of measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccination and measles virus.

I've written before about declining vaccination uptake in Texas. It goes counter to the inaccurate stereotype of antivaccine beliefs and vaccine hesitancy as being primarily the province of hippy-dippy, granola-crunching lefties in that antivaccine sentiment is driven by a potent mix of pseudoscience and far right libertarian anti-government regulation sentiment. Basically, antivaxers have figured out how to weaponize their views by coupling them to right wing rhetoric about "freedom." Not surprisingly, Dr. Peter Hotez, a pediatrician and public health researcher at Baylor and founding dean and chief of the Baylor College of Medicine National School of Tropical Medicine in the Department of pediatrics, is co-author on this study.

So what did the investigators do? Basically, they used publicly available data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to simulate county-level MMR vaccination coverage in children 2-11 years in the US. They applied a stochastic mathematical model, which was adapted to infectious disease transmission. Using the model, they estimated a distribution for outbreak size related to vaccine coverage. The predicted effects of declines in nonmedical exemptions were modeled and validated it against an independent data set from England and Wales.

So what did the model show? Not unexpectedly, with increasing nonmedical exemptions comes increasing numbers of measles cases:

The authors also found:

We found that a 5% decline in MMR vaccine coverage in US children would result in a 3-fold increase innational measles cases in this age group, for a total of 150 cases and an additional $2.1 million in economic costs to the public sector (Figure).With declining vaccination coverage, the size of outbreaks increased. Increased MMR vaccine coverage in children, through elimination of children with nonmedical exemptions or other mechanisms, increased national MMR coverage to95%prevalence (state variation, 91%-98%).We predicted that this strategy would reduce annual cases of measles by 20% (from 48 to 38 cases) and was an effective strategy to mitigate annual measles cases and costs.

Basically, minor declines in MMR vaccine coverage (in this case, from 93% to 88%) can result in major increases in the number of measles cases. Indeed, the authors note that their model, if anything, probably underestimates how much the number of measles cases can increase if MMR vaccine uptake falls significantly:

This modeling analysis likely predicts a conservative estimate for a rise in measles cases associated with declining immunization status because of foundational model assumptions and since we limited our analysis to US children (age 2-11 years). The model is designed to simulate outbreaks in highly immunized population and nonendemic settings. However, large reductions in MMR vaccine coverage could allow for measles to become endemic again, which is not accounted for in this model, and would likely result in thousands of annual measles cases. Owing to constraints on data for immunization status in the adult population and social mixing structures, we limited our analysis to children ages 2-11 years who contribute approximately 30% of the annual measles cases. However, the number of cases of measles would be much larger when accounting for other age groups, such as infants, adolescents, and adults. This increased number would be, in part, driven by infants younger than 12 months who are not yet eligible to receive measles vaccines, as illustrated in the sensitivity analysis modeling an expanded age group (0-11 years). Finally, the upper limit of the prediction interval in the base case analysis demonstrated substantial nonlinearity, suggesting the possibility for large outbreaks due to random chance with small reductions in vaccine coverage.

This is an important point. As is the case now, even with high overall vaccine uptake over a wide geographic area (e.g., the state of California or Texas) there can exist pockets of low vaccine uptake where outbreaks can and do occur. It is not unreasonable to predict that if the overall vaccine uptake for the whole country declines from 93% to 88% there will either be more areas with vaccine uptake low enough to compromise herd immunity or that existing areas of low uptake will have lower uptake still, to the point where it's way below the level necessary for herd immunity. Then, of course, as the authors point out, the model doesn't even account for all the vulnerable children, such as those too young to be vaccinated, as was pointed out:

“Outbreaks happen in communities, so we need to zoom in further than just national or statewide statistics when it comes to vaccination rates,” said Maimuna Majumder, a researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge who wasn’t involved in the study.

For example, one recent study in California found county-level measles vaccination rates as low as 70 percent even though the statewide average was 90 percent, Majumder said by email.

Whenever a study or public health official has expressed concern about low vaccine uptake in California, as in during the debate in 2015 over SB 277, the bill that passed into law and eliminated non-medical exemptions to school vaccine mandates in California, antivaxers have keyed in on that one statistic, that statewide vaccine uptake was high. While high average uptake is a good thing, if there are pockets where the uptake is well below herd immunity levels, outbreaks of vaccine-preventable disease become more likely. Fortunately, SB 277 appears to have been working well thus far. In just one year, there are fewer counties with exemption rates high enough to be concerning, and exemption rates overall have plummeted. No wonder antivaxers hate it.

Obviously, this is a modeling study, and a model is only as good as the assumptions used to construction and the data used to generate it. However, the results of this study are in line with what we already know. Decreasing vaccine uptake leads to more outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases, more cases, and more suffering among children. (Just look at the Somali immigrant community in Minnesota, where American antivaxers have convinced the Somali community that the MMR vaccine causes autism, resulting in a huge plunge in MMR uptake and the expected concomitant measles outbreak.) Antivaxers will try to deny that, but the evidence is overwhelming that vaccines work and that when antivaccine sentiments take hold children are endangered. If we're not careful, we could be sliding back towards a time when measles was endemic, as the UK did after Andrew Wakefield published (and publicized) fraudulent science that incorrectly concluded that vaccination with MMR was a risk factor for autism. The UK is only now recovering to the point that it was before Wakefield. If we're not careful, we'll be next.

oracknows Wed, 07/26/2017 - 04:05

Tags

Antivaccine nonsense

medicine

Pseudoscience

Skepticism/Critical Thinking

It isn't rocket science - diseases just need access to hosts. Even a small drop can increase the "chinks in the armor" which allow diseases to be exposed to the vulnerable and enhance transmission.....

I saw a report on that same study on Ars Technica last night. I was wondering how long it would be before Orac blogged about it ;)

You listening, Jay? This is what your "alternate" vaccine schedule is risking. A three fold increase in measles cases with an approximate cost per case of $20,000 that could add millions in additional public health costs to Santa Monica (your taxes will have to go up to cover it).

And that's not even considering the human costs. Hmph.

Role of MMR II vaccine contamination with GAD65 containing chick embryo cell culture in the etiology of type 1 diabetes
http://www.bmj.com/content/358/bmj.j3429/rr

Q. Are transgender people a part of community immunity (a.k.a., herd immunity).

If the answer is YES, then transgender people should also be allowed to protect the herd through military service.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/26/politics/trump-military-transgender/index…

Hypocrisy destroys democracy.

The cost numbers also match other studies that looked at costs of outbreaks.

More evidence, if we needed any, that anti-vaccine activism costs us in suffering and costs.

I am skeptical Texas legislators would be affected enough by this, but who knows? The fact that Dr. Hotez is local might help.

Well, the Republican Party claims to be the party of fiscal responsibility.

Allowing the state to bear the burden of the paranoia of a few is not fiscally responsible. And I don't care what the libertarians say, this is not a personal liberty issue. No one has a right to infect other people.

Oh, Vinu. For a moment I was worried that the BMJ was posting nonsense. But then I checked and saw you were just hawking another of your silly "studies".

A friend suggested anti vaxers also anti Trump, possibly based on a legislature in Texas supporting anti vax. He and I both retired physicians have suggested it should be a legal requirement for parents to see that their kids are vaccinated.
Certainly should be anti Clinton which is purported to desire national Neal rules,but not a political,party item but a group who don't trust any medical science and are still seduced by Wakefield, Kennedy, and actors.
In history of U.S. Many splinter medical Groups and confidence men who follow the preacher and like to drink the Gatorade or cool aid..
Would that this discussion could,help those change belief.

@ Vinu (#3),

Thanks for sharing!

I've got absolutely no respectful insolence for your work, only curiosity and admiration.

Can someone please explain to me why, if this study is accurate, we don't have massive measles outbreaks amongst adults who long ago lost any immunity from their MMR vaccination? There are likely millions of adults in the US who are no longer immune to measles, not having had the MMR in well over 20 years, so you would think that for any small measles outbreak amongst kids, like the one in Disneyland, you'd also see many cases amongst adults over the age of 50 whose last MMR shot was likely over 30 years ago?

Wow, he has certainly taken the idea of self-reference to a whole new level....

@MB - because in most people, the MMR does confer lifelong immunity.

The fact that we don't have large outbreaks shows the efficacy of the MMR.

MJD, did you read the two comments on Vinu's "paper" that blows his I'll conceived "theories" out of the water and into the stratosphere? It might moderate your admiration.

Hint - if vaccines cause diabetes, why aren't we all diabetic? Another hint - anedoctal evidence. Yet another hint - no evidence that egg embryo cells contaminate vaccines. (Writing as one whose brekkies is two eggs on toast!)

Mr. Big @10: That's an excellent question!
The answer is that immune memory is not the same for all diseases. In general humans make very long lasting immunity to yellow fever, smallpox and measles. In general humans make crap, very short term immune memory to pertussis (whooping cough), both the disease and the vaccine. It's annoying.

The reason that the common "childhood" diseases were called that in the days before vaccines is that they were most often seen in children because if you got it as a child (and survived) you were very unlikely to get it as an adult.

That's how the idea of variolation came to be. Before any vaccines there was a process by which a person was deliberately exposed to a mild form of smallpox. They would get the disease, but generally a milder, more survivable form, and then would be protected against it in the future.

It doesn't work for everyone and every disease, but for the population at large, it does work. That's why we're here in the first place.

Thanks for asking!

Right now on Facebook a mom is debating me on the gardisil vaccine and is making crazy claims and getting likes for each crazy claim. I am so disappointed in humanity now. No facts, just emotional plea... then one mother said she only has one child (I only have one child) and will not take the risk... I remind her about Polio. The Disney debacle. She won't stop!!

My child is fully immunized. I recently had the shingles vaccine and while I had a reaction I would do it again! I was counting the days until insurance would pick it up. I have seen too many people suffer with Shingles. I may still get it, but I know it will be a whole lot easier having had the vaccine than not. I have no idea why these moms are so scared of vaccines. One mom claimed she had over twenty years in the pharmaceutical industry. I wanted to ask, in what position so badly but, I can't. My child is still connected to these weirdos.

Yeah, vinu what you've linked to is no kind of a research study, but a letter to the editor of the BMJ that you managed to get published on their website.

One of the comments on Research Gate to your "analysis" is too delicious not to share:

"I am not suggesting you need to run such experiments for a technical report, but I would seriously suggest that you take time to understand the biology of both vaccinations and type 1 diabetes."

Helen, it must be very demoralizing, but these people are doing bad research in the extreme wackadoodle corners of the internet. There are many articles (and comments) that demolish their concerns at Science Based Medicine and here. Recommend they look here. Then try to turn it off. But stand firm. Hang in there.

@ Panacea #2

Assuming we take Dr. Jay at his word, I doubt it's clear from the model what the risks would be if vaccination rates in X percentage of the population were only Y percentage, but only for children below the age at which Dr. Jay "advocates" for kids to get their shots – if the vax uptake was then appropriately high for kids age 3 and older...

We can't easily gauge the effect of pediatricians vaccinating on a delayed schedule as we can't just assume their patients would otherwise receive their shots on the recommended schedule. Parents with minor qualms about the MMR might vax on schedule if no doctor is available to recommend and provide the delayed service. However, parents with more qualms about the MMR might not vax at all unless some trusted physician avers "it's definitely safe if you wait a bit." If the later outnumber the former, the lax-vaxer pediatrician is actually aiding public health rather than harming it, at least in the short term. That might well be the case in localities prone to becoming anti-vax clusters.

For example, looking at the situation in the Twin Cities, I'd rather have Somali families immunizing their kids late than not at all. Since their freak-out is based on their unfamiliarity with ASD, and shock at having receiving several ASD diagnoses within their community, it would follow that this could be greatly relieved if the shots were delayed until after the age where ASD typically presents – hard to blame the vaccines then.

This does not mean that I'm willing to let Dr. Bob entirely off the hook for the Disneyland outbreak, or even give Dr. Jay a free pass unless/until he can verify that he doesn't enable non-vaxers and actually succeeds in getting otherwise reluctant parents to go along with immunizing on the delayed schedule. I'm just urging caution in judging any pediatrician who actually adheres to the practices Dr. Jay claims.( It seems pretty clear that Dr. Bob is an anti-vax enabler extraordinaire, handing out bogus medical exemptions and the like....)

MJD #9,

You are welcome.

Bovine serum albumin (BSA) contaminated vaccines and membranous nephropathy (MN):

In response to:

"Have you considered bovine serum albumin (BSA) contaminated vaccines as the source of both BSA and BSA antibodies in these patients?"

Dr. Du writes:

"That is a very interesting question I never thought about. Immunization of some types of mouse strains (e.g. BALB/c) with cBSA can induce MN-like kidney disease. ..."

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51182667_Early-Childhood_Membr…

Dr. Pinheiro, an endocrinologist, commenting on my MMR/diabetes article:

"It´s very very interesting! The Increasing in type 1 diabetes in children last years must have an ambiental etiology and an etilogy could be antibodies against chicken GAD65 which cross-react with human GAD65."

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317127703_Comparative_Pathogen…

Increased MMR vaccine coverage in children, through elimination of children with nonmedical exemptions[...]

I wonder if we are soon gonna see antivaxxers posting about the study, with this little excerpt interpreted as a call for a genocide of unvaxxed.

Helen, share where and we can come to back you up.

One other factor where waning immunity in adults would have a different effect on outbreaks to lack of immunity in children is the contact factor.
Most adults have less contact, and less intimate contact, with other people in their daily routine than do children. Children spread germs very effectively. Normal adults not so much, even less in asia where it is considered a good idea to wear a mask.

Good grief - will wonders never cease? MJD (#4) has said something with which I agree wholeheartedly.

*Goes for a lie down*

@Rebecca Fisher: yes, he said something admirable, then went back down his rabbit hole when he complimented Vinu.

@Vinu: Love the cherry picked comments. And the fact that you all go round and pat each others backs on all sorts of theories and don't so any real research.

@Craig, very true. There are certain circumstances that encourage the spread of disease. Day care, college dorms. Situations that aren't found in adults. There's a reason I refer to my young nieces and nephews as "The germ vectors."

Mr Big: Actually, a lot of adults over 50 had the measles virus, not the shot. There are ways to tell whether immunity has waned, and I think people who work in health care usually have blood drawn to check whether they're still immune. I'd suggest that should be expanded to adults who work in education and the military.

One of the major vectors of disease up until the '40s was the military, simply because that's what happens when you get a lot of people living together for long periods of time who have to share toilets, bunks,meals, do not get a lot of time for hygiene and are constantly under stress.

@PGP: I had the measles. I've had the MMR multiple times. I'm one of those lovely people who don't develop immunity to measles (fortunately, I did develop and maintain a rubella immunity from rubella - but I don't mind that it gets boosted with the MMR). Also didn't seroconvert with the Hep B series. My body is weird.

I get titers drawn and the new docs are always surprised...But - but- but - your medical records say you HAD the measles?? Yup. I depend on herd immunity. Thank you to everyone who seroconverts and protects me.

@PGP
Good point on testing education staff. The military probably not so much. New recruits get a shitload of vaccines which should cover any 'waners'.

MIDawn: Yes, I remember you mentioned that you have no immunity to measles. But most people do seroconvert. I recently had a blood test (I have anemia, and HIV screening is now mandatory, so I figured as long as I was there, might as well get tested for everything.) Next time I have a blood test, I might get my titers checked. Though my Mom and Dad both have measles immunity and I had all my shots.
But it can't hurt to double check, especially now that the Niblet is around.

Good grief – will wonders never cease? MJD (#4) has said something with which I agree wholeheartedly.

Aside from the incoherent ("herd immunity") and off-topic parts, I take it.

On MJD (#4)
Actually, I don't understand what transgenders have to do with herd immunity. Being transgendered isn't contagious.

Perhaps it's my lack of unsterstanding of English, but the post doesn't make much sense at all.

@Renate, it's a reference to a news story that broke yesterday.
The Orange-haired, small handed pussy grabber has decreed that transgender individuals will no longer be allowed to serve in the U.S. military. This despite the fact that transgender people before undergoing transition, are disproportionately likely to enlist.

Re MJD's post -- leaving out the fact that it's another obvious hijack attempt on his part, I think we all agree with it.

Perhaps it’s my lack of unsterstanding of English, but the post doesn’t make much sense at all.

Trust me, your command of English is better than MJD's.

Helen Hollis - hang in there and keep debating the anti-vax mommies. You may not change their minds, but your comments will be out there for others to read, and a few people who are wavering about the value of vaccination may well be convinced by your words.
As for the shingle vaccine, everyone should have it. My husband had shingle three months ago; he was very ill for a week and is still suffering with nerve pain and general weakness. So, in my experience, the vaccine is well worth it.here in the UK, it's only availble to those aged 70-80. I have some time to go before I'm eligible, but I'll be waiting at the surgery door the day after my 70th birthday!

Helen: let me add to Mrs. Grimbles encourgement. You won't change the minds of BSC people. But you may change the minds of people who haven't made them up yet. I have had people tell me they would have fallen for anti vax nonsense if I hadn't explained how the immune system works to them.

Vinu: that a couple of people might be thinking of a potential hypothesis based on a question you asked is not a ringing endorsement of your nonsense. Once these people sit down and read the literature, they're going to figure out its nonsense. Neither of those folks have any expertise in immunology.

PGP: nursing students have to show documentation of vaccination prior to starting nursing school. If you don't have your vaccination records, you can provide a titer as proof of immunity.

My mother lost my vaccination records at some point. Proof of immunity was not required when I first went to community college in 1983 because it was assumed if you graduated high school you were up to date. By the 90's, vaccine uptake had dropped due to the DTP scare, and outbreaks of vaccines preventable diseases had nursing programs a bit more cautious. When I went back for my RN in 1994, I was asked for records I no longer had, and got a titer which proved my immunity (I keep that lab record and have used it multiple times since as proof of immunity).

MI Dawn: I also have not sero converted to the Hep B series, which I've had twice. One employer wanted me to get it a third time, and I signed the waiver after that. I don't see the point of getting a vaccine I know won't take. If at some point an employer DEMANDS I get the series, I'll either have to get a letter from my doctor or do the series again . . . which of course will more likely than not fail again. But I'll do it to keep my job.

Honestly, I don't understand my co workers who wear a mask for six months out of the year rather than just getting the damn flu shot. So you might, I repeat might, get the icks for a couple of days. Still better than the mask.

Mrs. Gimble (# 37) writes,

I have some time to go before I’m eligible, but I’ll be waiting at the surgery door the day after my 70th birthday!

MJD says,

Hope your husband is fully recovered from the Shingles.

About getting the shot, tell them that you believe your "true" date of birth was at conception and maybe they'll give you the shot ~ 9 months earlier. :-)

Just trying to help!

Panacea--I got tired of wearing a mask so I get the flu shot. I also certainly have nasal carriage of many pediatric-office viruses which I bring into nurseries and NICUs in spite of that one rather ineffective but harmless flu vaccine. Therefore, when I do have a baby in the NICU, I will always defer to the neonatologists' daily exams and I avoid touching that baby myself. (All my other vaccines are, of course, up to date.)

Your post #38 is really filled with cognitive dissonance. There will soon be a third MMR recommended/required for those who don't convert after the first two. You should get that third Hep B series. I will waive the requirement for a smiley face icon here.

"In this day and age"--Orac . . . wow. I am in the midst of doing a completely hypothetical, retrospective and prospective study showing that a 5% decrease in studies like the one cited here will lead to nearly a 32% increase in fact-based decision making. I'm very disappointed to see you discussing this paper. Anyone who doesn't already believe that herd immunity is important is a clown and will not be influenced either by Hotez, et al or by you.

No cognitive dissonance here, Jay. In spite of my working in health care, I'm actually pretty low risk since I don't work directly in care delivery anymore. I don't start IVs much these days, I rarely give injections. I supervise my students doing those things. Once I become an FNP, I might be at a slightly higher risk, but still less than you'd think.

And regardless of my actual risk, if the medical literature were to suggest a third series would be advisable, I'd probably get it. But it doesn't show that, to my knowledge.

MMR on the other hand, is a disease with potentially deadly consequences. It's a vaccine everyone should get but there are still rare people like MI Dawn who will never sero convert. If there's evidence a third shot would reduce even those incredibly low numbers, and I didn't sero convert after two, then I'd go for the third without complaint. But if it still didn't work (and as MI Dawn points out, she HAD measles and still isn't immune) well, that's why herd immunity is so important.

I am allergic to tetanus. When I got a booster in 2003 after I got cut pulling an unresponsive patient out of a trashed motor vehicle, my entire left upper arm became very red and swollen, and the injection site blistered. In 2013, the local hospital required a pertussis booster for everyone who worked in the hospital, including nursing students and me, the instructor. We were in the midst of a local outbreak of pertussis, you see.

I couldn't find pertussis by itself. The pediatricians only had the DTaP. The health department didn't have it. My doctor wasn't sure he could get it, and he said it would be expensive and probably not covered by insurance even if he could get it.

He suggested putting me on a course of prednisone and Benadryl to protect against a possible allergic reaction from another TDaP, and I agreed. Because the plan made sense, and a booster was in my best interest anyway.

I could have gotten out of it btw. All I had to do was wave the ADA and demand reasonable accommodation. I didn't do clinic at the hospital in question, you see. I always did clinic at another hospital that wasn't asking for a TDaP booster. My manager wanted everyone to get it in case she needed me to go to that one hospital.

Nice try, Jay, but FAIL.

And while the flu vaccine could be better, I get it every year without fail . . . because the last two times I either didn't get it, or waited until too late, I got the full blown full flu: fever 103 F, aches, chills, the whole nine yards, and both times I got pneumonia and was sick for WEEKS.

Never. Again.

Recently on Barfblog.com there was a story concerning an anti-vaxxer group who lied to a school board about talking about organic fruits. Instead they showed an anti-vaccine video (article didn't say which one). The AVers are stooping pretty low to get out there message. It appears they maybe in trouble legally also.

Rich -

"The Courier Mail reports that the Miami State High School was deceived by the anti-vaccination activists, which is a common tactic:

ORGANISERS of an anti-vaccination documentary screening have allegedly tricked a Gold Coast state school into showing the film after telling officials they were running a seminar on organic vegetables.

The Gold Coast Bulletin also reports the deception by the AVN and Vaxxed:

ANTI-vaxxers ‘tricked’ a Gold Coast school principal in order to spread their inaccurate documentary, says a fuming Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk.

Premier Palaszckuk today slammed the lobbyists for misrepresenting the true reason for the meeting.

“My initial advice is that there has been misrepresentation from that organisation to the school in question, where they conveyed to the principal that it was to be conveying information about organic produce.

The ABC has also reported the deceit:

A Gold Coast principal was hoodwinked into hiring out his school hall for a screening of a controversial anti-vaccination documentary, Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk says.

“My preliminary advice is that there has been some misrepresentation to the school in question,” Ms Palaszczuk said.

“They conveyed to the principal that it was to be conveying information about organic produce.”

https://reasonablehank.com/2017/07/26/queensland-public-high-school-hir…

Mikema: New recruits get a shitload of vaccines which should cover any ‘waners’.

My bad. Other people have mentioned that, but I forgot it. Although I suspect I nailed the reason for the 'shitload' of vaccines.

Panacea: Yup. My mom's a nurse, and works with high-risk patients, so she had to do both.

Jay Gordon: All my other vaccines are, of course, up to date.
Sure they are, Mr. I-don't-give-the-MMR.

@ Renate

MJD isn't saying transgenders in general have anything to do with herd immunity. His analogy is between military service and herd immunity. Within herd immunity, we count on everyone to protect the community as a whole. We don't harm the community by excluding people we just don't like from participating in this protection. In his analogy, MJD is framing military service as also a form of community protection. Thus, excluding willing individuals from service because they're transgendered is as counter-productive as it would be to prevent guardians from getting their kids vaccinated because they happen to be transgender.

So i wouldn't say the post doesn't make sense, but that the sense it makes is rather outre, or stretched, or idiosyncratic. It seems to involve a very uncritical view of the U.S. military, but that's par for the course in discussing any social policy within the military, and within those brackets I wouldn't say MJD is totally wrong in the comparison...

At one of the hospitals where I'm on staff (and where health care workers are required to get flu shots to protect patients), one of the lab employees used to wear a mask all through flu season rather than get the flu shot. I can't imagine how people can stand doing that all day long out of fear or as a protest mechanism (there are of course exemptions for those with valid medical reasons).

Jay Gordon: "Panacea–I got tired of wearing a mask so I get the flu shot."

Good for you. Our recalcitrant lab employee finally got fed up too and decided it was better to get the shot.

"Jay Gordon: All my other vaccines are, of course, up to date.
Sure they are, Mr. I-don’t-give-the-MMR."

PoliticalPig--I give the MMR. My vaccines are up to date.
And, don't call me a liar or I'll call you a

@JustaTech

I don't think the current measles vaccine gives lifelong immunity. The CDC requires two MMR shots, so that would mean one shot does not lead to lifelong immunity. The CDC is silent in regards to the length of immunity after the second shot as far as I can tell.
As well, there are many adults who got the measles vaccine in the mid 60s, which didn't work, but didn't get natural measles either. Therefore they should not have any immunity to measles unless they've been vaccinated twice since with MMR which is unlikely. In Canada, the two doses of MMR wasn't implemented until 1996, so anyone vaccinated prior to that in Canada is likely no longer immunized. You'd think we'd see many adults that received the ineffective measles vaccine, or were vaccinated in Canada prior to 1995 catching measles from measles outbreaks, yet we don't, at least not like you would think given how contagious it is. Puzzling.

Panacea—My comments were unnecessarily snarky. If you work with needles, even occasional IVs and injections, Hep B is an important vaccine. I consider it more important than the MMR but that’s open to debate.

Decades ago, there was a single pertussis vaccine (whole cell) and the demand was very small so manufacture stopped. We need it back again because, like you, some people develop adverse reactions to tetanus vaccination.

I need to change my "name" to "Totally Traumatized"! Went to corner store for ice cream and there was a SUV with a big decal on the rear window "The biggest lie in history is that vaccines are safe and effective."

I'm poleaxed! Never saw that before.

PGP #28

Back in the Good Old Days of the Spanish War and the AEF, people loved to talk about the hardiness of the good old frontier boys and their superior marksmanship - having grown up on shooting down bears and coyotes and Indians - but the Army quickly learned to quarantine such regiments in barracks until anyone who was going to die from one or another common ailment died and stopped being a burden to the organization.

#48 Mr. Big:
CDC supplied info on measles vaccine:
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/meas.html#vaccines

"Duration of Immunity
lifelong
...
vaccine-induced immunity appears to be long-term and probably lifelong in most persons. "
.
.
Note it was only the 1963 killed vaccine that was ineffective and there has been live attenuated vaccine produced since 1963 (Edmonston B) followed by the live further attenuated Schwarz strain in 1965, finally settling on the live more attenuated (Moraten) Edmonston-Enders strain in 1968.
https://explorevaccines.wordpress.com/2011/04/03/name-that-strain/
and:
https://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/history.html
.
There aren't a lot of folks wandering around who haven't been infected with wild measles or haven't received at least 1 dose of a live attenuated vaccine.

Robert I Bell: Back in the Good Old Days of the Spanish War and the AEF, people loved to talk about the hardiness of the good old frontier boys and their superior marksmanship – having grown up on shooting down bears and coyotes and Indians – but the Army quickly learned to quarantine such regiments in barracks until anyone who was going to die from one or another common ailment died and stopped being a burden to the organization.

One of the more interesting features of the Spanish Flu was the more robust your immune system was, the more likely you were to die. As far as the 'robustness' of the fighters of the Spanish War go, no one ever remembers that Theodore Roosevelt was actually fairly sickly for most of his early life.

Jay Gordon: Oh, stop it. You were a lying misogynist snake a few years back and you're still a lying misogynist snake. You think a few glib quips will make people forget your history. Doesn't work on me, jerk. I still remember the time you went after Lilady, and the internet never forgets.

Maybe you give the MMR now, probably not.But you only give it because you were pressured to, not because you made the decision on your own. And even now, you're still willing to risk your patient's lives by waiting three years. I don't even know why you became a doctor. Helping people is the last thing on your mind. You should have been a mercenary.

Therefore, when I do have a baby in the NICU, I will always defer to the neonatologists’ daily exams and I avoid touching that baby myself. (All my other vaccines are, of course, up to date.)

1. ...and the neonatologist somehow has magically different nasal carriage than you? C'mon...lame excuse. If you want to examine a baby then (a) don't be actively sick, (b) don't pick your nose, and (c) wash your damn hands well before doing your exam.. You do understand germ theory, don't you?

2. Defers to neonatologist's exam because: (a) won't get paid by insurance anyhow for doing his own exam in NICU, and (b) probably won't get paid by family for cash-pay billing for NICU exam, and, (c) NICU infants are almost always never old enough to examine for the purpose of telling parents they don't have to vaccinate based on his own personal experience which trumps all science.

@Mr Big #48:

I don’t think the current measles vaccine gives lifelong immunity. The CDC requires two MMR shots, so that would mean one shot does not always lead to lifelong immunity.

FTFY. And it doesn't matter what you think (or more correctly, want to believe). What matters is what the evidence says. And given that adults vaccinated as children don't get measles, it works.

As well, there are many adults who got the measles vaccine in the mid 60s, which didn’t work...

There is a difference between less effective and completely ineffective. That early measles vaccines were less effective than later ones doesn't mean they were ineffective.

You’d think we’d see many adults that received the ineffective measles vaccine, or were vaccinated in Canada prior to 1995 catching measles from measles outbreaks, yet we don’t, at least not like you would think given how contagious it is. Puzzling.

See comments above about less effective vs ineffective. In addition, community immunity is very good at preventing measles from jumping to immunologically naive patients.
TL:DR You are just another antivaxxer downplaying the effectiveness of vaccination as a tool to stop disease and using tactics and tropes we've seen and refuted literally dozens of times before.

@Rich & @shay,
Just for clarity, the 'tricked high school' was in Australia (not Florida) and they (of course) showed Vaxxed.

The Vaxxed morons seem to be having difficulty booking venues. (Yeah!) In some cases ticket holders don't know the venue until 2 hours before the showing to reduce protests.

I love how anti-vaxers try to claim that the MMR isn't effective by waving their hands & making all sorts of assumptions - yet Rubella, for instance, has been eliminated from the Western Hemisphere, and a country like Mexico has as close to ZERO measles cases as you can get (and the US, despite a population of more than 300 Million people, has no endemic transmission of measles either).

So, what's their explanation for this? Well, to them, it couldn't possibly be that we have a highly effective vaccine & still an extremely high rate of vaccination as well......as opposed to say, Europe, where, in some countries, vaccination can be spotty - resulting in epidemics of tens of thousands of cases.

Jay Gordon: "Decades ago, there was a single pertussis vaccine (whole cell) and the demand was very small so manufacture stopped."

How many decades ago are we talking about? The DTP vaccine was licensed for use in 1949.
I doubt vaccination safety will be enhanced by employing a whole-cell pertussis vaccine which kids would presumably receive on a separate visit to the pediatrician ($$ from the additional office visit might look attractive to certain peds, and could be sold as lowering the Vaccine Toxin burden as compared to the combined vaccine).

@Mr Big: In case you missed it *I had the measles*. The holistic, honest-to-goodness "you'll get lifetime immunity if you get this" measles as a child. I also got (because my grandfather was a GP and strongly believed in vaccines) every form of vaccine that came down the pike (recommended for regular patients, not things like yellow fever) while he was in practice. (He SAW all the horrible things that can happen to kids/families with VPDs so he was strongly pro-vaccine. We also had autism in our family BEFORE vaccines expanded beyond smallpox).

I don't seroconvert. My MD thinks I *may* be OK if measles breaks out here even without a MMR, but I'd much rather not take that risk at my age. And, like Mrs Grimble, I'm counting the years till I can get the shingles vaccine, which is 60 years old here in the US

@Lawrence: and, of course, neither the US nor Mexico have areas where there are lots of poor people living in slums with lousy diets, bad water, poor food and shelter like those *OTHER* countries that have horrible measles outbreaks with deaths....oh wait....
(/sarcasm, just in case it's missed)

#55 Julian Frost said, "There is a difference between less effective and completely ineffective. That early measles vaccines were less effective than later ones doesn’t mean they were ineffective."
Yep... and the live attenuated vaccines weren't even less effective. In fact the 1st one was more effective but caused more unwanted side effects (fever, rash) than the later versions... kinda' like the whole cell pertussis vaccine vs. the acellular pertussis vaccine.
.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1227617/pdf/amjphnation000…
EDMONSTON B AND A FURTHER ATTENUATED MEASLES VACCINE-A PLACEBO CONTROLLED DOUBLE BLIND COMPARISON
George Miller, M.D.; et al.
Aug. 1967
Note seroconversion rates of the various vaccines - Table 5, page 1337:
"Edmonston B - 97.6% seroconversion
Further attenuated (Schwarz) - 95.8% seroconversion"
.
No surprizes. The less attenuated Ed. B invoked a stronger immune response than did the further attenuated (further weakened) Schwarz strain - see Fig 2.
Both provided very good seroconversion rates and titers so anyone vaccinated with them that did seroconvert is probably immune for life.
.
So much for the anti-vax trope that there are huge quantities of older and elderly who are not immune to measles because of the 'poor performance' of the 1960s vaccines.

My sister doesn't seroconvert for chicken pox, and three people in my immediate family have had shingles (my dad, and my maternal grandparents). Fortunately, I'm adopted, so probably not susceptible to that myself, but I really wish I could get the shingles vaccine early anyway. My sister has had chicken pox twice and has been vaccinated three times, no results.

I also know someone who is naturally immune to smallpox. She also lived through the 1950 influenza epidemic that killed two of her brothers within three weeks of each other. (She was also the only surviving child of a set of triplets, so she is an only child who should have been one of five.) And she was born during WWII in southwestern Ontario, Canada, so we're not talking about the 19th C. here, or someone who lived in a developing country or something.

I was in the cohort that got a possibly-defective measles vaccine here in Canada, so a couple years ago I got revaccinated. I came down with bronchitis a few days later, but I don't think it was related, although I wondered at the time.

Since children have started getting immunised routinely for HiB, I no longer get horrible sinus infections that go from nothing to catastrophic in a matter of hours and spread like wildfire to my ears, throat, and chest. That used to be an at least semi-annual thing for me, and nearly killed me when I was in graduate school in 1999, since it turned into pneumonia along with the sinus, ear, and throat infection. I can't prove those two things are related, but I feel they are. Theoretically, HiB is supposed to be one of those things you only get once, but...

Re: "neither the US nor Mexico have areas where there are lots of poor people living in slums ". From what I read, Mexico has 97% vaccination rate for measles and similar rate for other diseases. They keep track of every child, and if a child is late, then the nurse visits the home and vaccinates the kid right there. If parents are at work, the nurse does it anyway then leaves paperwork with a babysitter. Nurses visit slums as well.

@kitty: that was my point. Mexico (and the US) have some horrible social problems in some areas. But with high levels of vaccinations, those children aren't dying of measles like we see in other countries.

@Julian Frost
"FTFY. And it doesn’t matter what you think (or more correctly, want to believe). What matters is what the evidence says. And given that adults vaccinated as children don’t get measles, it works."

Whoa, a little pedantic aren't we? Lol...Sorry if I said "I think" instead of "the evidence presented by CDC vaccine researchers...blah, blah, blah". What are you, a first year med student or something? Lighten up there pal.

"There is a difference between less effective and completely ineffective. That early measles vaccines were less effective than later ones doesn’t mean they were ineffective."

Sorry, but I was quoting directly from the CDC page which states that the measles vaccine from that era "was not effective", so you are, in a word, wrong.

"This recommendation is intended to protect those who may have received killed measles vaccine, which was available in 1963-1967 and [b]was not effective[/b]."

If you are going to play Mr Pedantic, perhaps you should check your own facts before making a fool of yourself. Or not.

"TL:DR You are just another antivaxxer downplaying the effectiveness of vaccination as a tool to stop disease and using tactics and tropes we’ve seen and refuted literally dozens of times before."

Off your paranoid delusional meds again?

Off your paranoid delusional meds again?

Oh, G-d, not Philip Hills.

@Mr Big #65, whom I suspect is Travis:

Sorry, but I was quoting directly from the CDC page which states that the measles vaccine from that era “was not effective”, so you are, in a word, wrong.

I notice that you didn't link to this CDC Page in any of your comments. Link, please.

Off your paranoid delusional meds again?

This, Travis, is why you keep getting caught out.

Sorry, but I was quoting directly from the CDC

O RLY? You mean this? Let's review your comment, shall we?

I don’t think the current measles vaccine gives lifelong immunity. The CDC requires two MMR shots, so that would mean one shot does not lead to lifelong immunity. The CDC is silent in regards to the length of immunity after the second shot as far as I can tell.
As well, there are many adults who got the measles vaccine in the mid 60s, which didn’t work, but didn’t get natural measles either. Therefore they should not have any immunity to measles unless they’ve been vaccinated twice since with MMR which is unlikely. In Canada, the two doses of MMR wasn’t implemented until 1996, so anyone vaccinated prior to that in Canada is likely no longer immunized. You’d think we’d see many adults that received the ineffective measles vaccine, or were vaccinated in Canada prior to 1995 catching measles from measles outbreaks, yet we don’t, at least not like you would think given how contagious it is. Puzzling.

Where is this "quoting directly" part? This?

As well, there are many adults who got the measles vaccine in the mid 60s, which didn’t work, but didn’t get natural measles either.

"If you received a measles vaccine in the 1960s, you may not need to be revaccinated. People who have documentation of receiving LIVE measles vaccine in the 1960s do not need to be revaccinated. People who were vaccinated prior to 1968 with either inactivated (killed) measles vaccine or measles vaccine of unknown type should be revaccinated with at least one dose of live attenuated measles vaccine. This recommendation is intended to protect those who may have received killed measles vaccine, which was available in 1963-1967 and was not effective."

How many, Chuckles? Would a picture help?

One blessing of multiple chronic health issues: my PCP uses the ones he can to let me get shots early. Trying to remember if I was able to get the shingles vax yet. I know I did all the pneumococcal ones.

@Mr Big #65, whom I suspect is Travis

Oh, I doubt that.

Here we go:

In March 1963 the first two measles vaccines were approved for use in the United States: a live vaccine produced by Merck (Rubeovax) and a formalin-inactivated one produced by Pfizer (Pfizer-Vax Measles–K).[7] In September 1963 the US Surgeon General Luther Terry published a statement on the status of measles vaccines.[8] The live vaccine had by this time been given to some 25 000 people in the United States. A single dose produced an effective antibody response in more than 95% of susceptible children—a response that trials had shown persisted for at least three years. Although 30% to 40% of these children showed signs of temporary high fever and a rash after vaccination, side effects could be reduced by coadministration of γ globulin. The inactivated vaccine was generally administered, in field trials, on a three-dose monthly schedule. Although this produced no side effects, antibody levels were lower than with the live vaccine, and it was not known whether they persisted beyond six months.[9] A combined schedule had also been tried. If a dose of inactivated vaccine was given a month or so before the live vaccine, reactions caused by the live vaccine were greatly reduced. The surgeon general recommended that children without a history of measles be immunized at approximately aged nine months.[10] There seemed to be no reason to begin a mass immunization program; the decision to immunize could be left to individual medical practitioners and parents.

The situation in the early 1960s was thus that live attenuated vaccines appeared to offer long-term protection against measles. Their side effects, however, were a matter of concern, and attempts to develop further attenuated, less reactogenic strains continued. (The Schwarz strain would be licensed in 1965, and Merck’s more attenuated “Moraten” strain in 1968.) Inactivated vaccine produced no side effects, but it was unclear whether it could provide protection of adequate duration. If protection was of too short duration, there was a risk of measles infection being postponed to an older age, when its effects could be more serious.

@Julian Frost
Sorry, here you go.

http://bfy.tw/D6mv

Didn't realize you were so inept at this interwebz stuff. I should have known based on your mostly fact-free posts. My bad.

^^ Risky click of the day, Mr Big. Why the link shortener??? Without letting the site run scripts (Noscript is your friend, people), it looks like dodgy garbage.... It is *imgtfy.com* and it looks like a site to show people how to 'Google' like your five years old.

Mr Big, #72: Julian asked for a link to the source you used, which you claim to be CDC. You responded with a LMGTFY link for a sentence entirely different from the one you had uttered and attributed to CDC.

Are you too inept at this interwebz stuff to give a link to your source, or are you expecting Julian search through all the CDC pages to try to divine the one you used? I understand it's easier for you that way, since when Julian finds your quote to have an entirely different meaning when placed in context, you can reply that it's the wrong guess on his part.

That's why citations are required when claims are made.

Thank you Tim and Se Habla Espol.
@Mr Big #72, when I asked for a Link, I meant a link to the actual Page on the CDC Website you claimed you were quoting from. Posting a link to LMGTFY is not proof.

Are you too inept at this interwebz stuff to give a link to your source, or are you expecting Julian search through all the CDC pages to try to divine the one you used?

Ahem.

@MI Down - sorry, I missed it. You are absolutely right.

On generic vaccination topic. I am in my late 50s, yet somehow managed to miss getting chicken pox as a child. For some reason, "childhood diseases" passed me by. Other kids in school got them. Got it at the age of 32 instead, it was no fun, and it's possible - though, obviously, not definite - that my POF was somehow related given that symptoms started shortly after. Of course, correlation isn't causation and all.... But still, with the vaccine had been licensed just a few years earlier. The kid I got it from was current on all vaccines, but this one wasn't yet in use.

Having just gotten through early Lyme - still finishing up antibiotics, was lucky enough to get the typical rash. made me read up again on the vaccine. I could vaccinate my cats for it if they had been going out, but not myself. Big thanks to anti vaxxers and lawyers.

Just to butt in about Hep B vaccine courses:

Jay Gordon to Panacea:

Your post #38 is really filled with cognitive dissonance. There will soon be a third MMR recommended/required for those who don’t convert after the first two. You should get that third Hep B series.

Jay, Panacea has had 2 full courses of Hep B vaccine and not responded serologically. That's 6 injections, FYI. The MMR primary course is 2 shots, and if someone sometime determines that it should be 3 shots (who has said this?) then that has no relevance to the situation with Hep B or Panacea's situation.

Panacea should not just get another standard Hep B vax series as you suggest. After 2 failed attempts, this would not work. He probably need not worry if he gets exposed - he may be protected anyway via anamnestic immunity.
If he really needs to gain documented confirmed seroconversion for work purposes, the options are for him to get a high dose (40mg/ml) series IM, and if that fails, to get a course of high dose (40mg) vaccine via 5 intradermal shots 2 weeks apart.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4621464/

Dingo: She ;) I'm a girl.

Thanks for linking to the article. I was not aware a high dose Hep B vaccine was available. I always decline the series since my second set did not sero convert me, but I've lost the documentation of the 2nd series (a job I had 17 years ago, so Employee Health likely doesn't have it either). So if I do get an employer who just insists, this gives me an option that at least has a chance of working instead of wasting time and money on a series that won't.

Looks like "Mr. Big" has learned the lesson that APV learned a few years back (http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/12/05/no-the-cdc-did-not-just-ap…) - if you provide a link, people will notice if you lie about what the link says, so you're better off just lying, and refusing to provide a link.

Wow, didn't realize that commenters here can't even follow a link or do a web search. If I provide a link, will I also have to describe where on the page the text is located? Should I include a short tutorial on how Internet Explorer works, what a hyperlink is and what a mouse is? I know the page was the first result from a Google search using the quote, but I guess even that was too taxing.

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/mmr/public/index.html

@kitty
A Lyme vaccine can't work. You can catch Lyme disease every summer your entire life, never acquiring immunity from it. If you want to dose yourself with Osp A and try and do the community a favor by disinfecting your local ticks using your own blood, have at it. Let us know how you get on.

Should I include a short tutorial on how Internet Explorer works, what a hyperlink is and what a mouse is?

Yes please, could you please come here to help me figure out how to install Internet Explorer please?

I have a hard time making it run on my system.

Alain

Alain: Why would you want to run explorer on your system?

Wow, didn’t realize that commenters here can’t even follow a link or do a web search.

Way to miss the point. Anyone can make a claim and then say "search for yourself" when challenged to provide proof. You did not (at first) post a link to the CDC page when asked for evidence. Around here, if you make a claim, it is your responsibility to provide supporting evidence.

Should I include a short tutorial on how Internet Explorer works(?)

It wouldn't help. I'm using Chrome.
As for your link, if you had been reading the comments carefully, you would have realised that Narad in #68 posted the exact same link and pointed out that you misquoted what it said. It's the word "here" that's coloured blue.

@PGP #83: I think we need to have a "Sarcasm" sign a la The Big Bang Theory for you. Alain was being sarcastic. I have worked out from some of his other comments that he uses Linux. Internet Explorer (and its follow up Edge) doesn't run on Linux.

A Lyme vaccine can’t work.
Evidently Big Vet hasn't received the message.

JF: Computer illiteracy strikes again.

That's OK. Nobody really gets Explorer to run well on their system anyway.

They don't even make it for the Mac anymore (thank god).

An op-ed commentary on the Stanford study appears in today's Wall St. Journal.

Generally a good piece, with one groaner - parents who refuse vaccination for their children on various grounds are referred to as "conscientious objectors" in the war against infectious disease.

In reality, these parents (and especially the hardcore antivaxers and antivax physicians who urge them on) are a fifth column working to bring vaccine-preventable diseases back into prominence.

PGP,

Julian is right, we need a sarcasm tag; a very subtle one.

Alain

"As for your link, if you had been reading the comments carefully, you would have realised that Narad in #68 posted the exact same link and pointed out that you misquoted what it said. It’s the word “here” that’s coloured blue.'

Yup. Narad seemed clueful enough to easily find it, why couldn't you? I quoted directly from the CDC web page. That's why "was not effective" is in quotes, see? Couldn't be simpler.

I can only guess that commenters here are so rabidly obsessed with vaccine promotion, that even when the CDC itself says one isn't effective, extreme cognitive dissonance sets in, and you become unable to even do a simple search to confirm. Sad. Science requires no sacred cows. Vaccines, at least on this supposed "scienceblog" clearly are one, to the point where even when the CDC admits a vaccine didn't work, y'all argue otherwise. Kind of pathetic, really. Keep your confirmation biases at the door.

Apologies accepted.

Why would anyone apologize?

You said "many" people vaccinated in the 1960's were vaccinated with an ineffective vaccine. You also said the MMR doesn't confer lifelong immunity.

Narad showed you how that statement is wrong. The ineffective vaccine was used in a four year time frame. Note that ineffective doesn't mean NEVER effective. So the CDC recommended a booster with the newer MMR.

The statistics show a dramatic drop in the number of measles cases starting in 1964 (when the ineffective MMR was being given). That drop flattened out near zero with a couple of minor bumps. After the 2nd dose was recommended it went to ZERO and native measles was deemed eradicated (meaning the only measles in this country comes in from somewhere else).

The system worked exactly as it should. Continuous monitoring of vaccines identified a vaccine that wasn't living up to expectations (not dangerous, just not working well), replaced it and recommended a booster for those who got it.

NO WHERE in there is any evidence the CDC thinks the MMR does not confer life long immunity. If it didn't, measles would be endemic in ADULTS as the immunity wore off. We'd have seen a big spike in adult measles cases in the 80's and 90's among the VACCINATED population.

We didn't see that. We have every reason to believe the MMR confers life long immunity.

I got my MMR in that time frame, btw. I am immune to measles.

I quoted directly from the CDC web page.

Only after the fact, which is to say, your buffoonish intellectual dishonesty is in front of limelights that you turned on all by yourself.

@Mr Big #91:

I quoted directly from the CDC web page.

Quoted directly? As Narad showed in #68, you took what was written there out of context and then "added" to it. You took the fact that there was a killed vaccine that the CDC found was ineffective and said that people vaccinated against Measles in the 1960s were no longer immune. But you omitted that there were attenuated Measles vaccines available contemporaneously with the killed vaccine, and that these were over 95% effective.
You lied by omission and you were busted.

"This recommendation is intended to protect those who may have received killed measles vaccine, which was available in 1963-1967 and was not effective."

Not really sure how you can somehow read that this quote from the CDC and think it means something other than what it says. The 1963-1967 measles vaccine was "not effective". Not partially effective, not mostly effective, not even somewhat effective. It was "not effective". IE: did not protect the recipient from the measles.

Clearly the vaccine indoctrination by commenters here is so strong, that even when a manufacturer admits that a vaccine is "not effective" the confirmation bias kicks in and commenters try and ridiculously make claims as to what "not effective" really means. What's next? What the meaning of "is" is?

They shouldn't call this site scienceblogs, since it appears that bloggers/commenters here have little understanding of what science really is.

*sigh* In the 1960's two main vaccines became generally available in the US and UK for the first time. One was a live vaccine. It worked really well, but it had side effects. The other was the inactivated vaccine you refer to.

There were reports of a measles like illness, especially when someone got the live vaccine after the inactivated one. There were varying reports on how long immunity lasted.

The problem really wasn't that the inactivated vaccine wasn't effective. It's that it wasn't as effective as the live vaccine because no one was really sure how long the immunity would last. The process worked the way it was supposed to and that vaccine was abandoned in favor of one that had side effects but was more reliable. The number of measles cases dropped like a stone, and later MMR vaccines finished the job. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4007870/

What you've tried to claim is that MODERN vaccines don't confer life long immunity based on this one inactivated vaccine and that's simply not true.

Despite one of the first two vaccines being ineffective or at best only moderately effective and soon dropped, the other was very effective and was replaced by another effective vaccine in 1965.

Measles incidence dropped considerably in the next few years and then went to almost zero when a second dose was added.

If the vaccine weren't effective or immunity waned, we would see periodic like we do with pertussis and mumps.

@Mr Big #97:

Not really sure how you can somehow read that this quote from the CDC and think it means something other than what it says. The 1963-1967 measles vaccine was “not effective”.

Once again, you lie by omission. As has been pointed out several times already, there were several vaccines in use in that time period. One (a killed vaccine) was not effective but the others had seroconversion rates of over 95%. To repeat Reality's comment #61:

Edmonston B – 97.6% seroconversion
Further attenuated (Schwarz) – 95.8% seroconversion

I think its clear that you don't understand what a "lie by omission" is. The attenuated measles vaccine that was sold in the mid 1960s didn't work, was not effective, however you want to put it. Everybody knows this, so you can quit arguing a simple, well-known, well-documented fact. Immunity didn't last more than a few months, leaving the person with no immunity. If you got that vaccine, and didn't get the measles, then you are likely walking around today with no immunity.

I apologize if somehow that intrudes on whatever magical fantasy you've built up in your head about vaccines, but here in the real world where science lives, we don't cheerlead, we look at evidence. If a vaccine or medicine doesn't work, we don't paper over it and continue cheerleading like you do, we do something about it.

Mr Big @101: Why do you assume that the people who got the killed measles vaccine never got any other measles vaccine?
That specific one didn't work and was removed from the market. Why do you think that the people who had gotten it never got another measles shot that does work? That doesn't make any sense at all.

Also, how many people are we talking about anyway? A thousand? Ten thousand? Fifty?

There's a lot of relevant data missing and you've made some unsupported assumptions.

Ahem....

Measles epidemiology and vaccine use in Los Angeles County, 1963 and 1966

Mass measles immunization in Los Angeles County

And then about ten years later:
The Benefits From 10 Years of Measles Immunization in the United States

So in other words, what Chris is saying is measles immunization worked even back then. Which is what I said.

And we did do something about it. We fixed it. That's why we got to ZERO native cases of measles around the turn of the century. The measles cases we have currently came here from other countries.

The surprising find in the Los Angeles county study (one study, two papers), was that there was a definite shift in epidemic trends, even though the vaccine coverage was limited.

Community immunity was in play, which is part of why the effect of a not very effective vaccine was muted. Though some suffered years later, like Dr. Snyder:
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/measles-gets-a-helping-hand/

By the way, those who are old enough to the get not so great vaccine are well over fifty years old. I don't hear much about a measles epidemic among baby boomers.

Mr Big you seem to be making a mountain out of a mole hill. The slice of the US population that may have been affected by the less effective vaccine would be in their early fifties at this time (I had measles prior to the vaccine). Most the affected population either had the measles at some point in time or had the more effective vaccine later. Also, even though I had the measles when I was young, 30 some years ago while coaching a 3/4th grade basketball team I contracted the measles again. The only affect from the second case I got the measles rash (spots) but otherwise was fine.

If you so worried about measles vaccines, look at many parts of the world where measles are either endemic or pandemic. Maybe you should help do something about that.

@Mr Big #101:

I think its clear that you don’t understand what a “lie by omission” is. The attenuated measles vaccine that was sold in the mid 1960s didn’t work, was not effective, however you want to put it.

Did you not read Reality's comment #61? Here is the relevant part of it.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1227617/pdf/amjphnation000…
EDMONSTON B AND A FURTHER ATTENUATED MEASLES VACCINE-A PLACEBO CONTROLLED DOUBLE BLIND COMPARISON
George Miller, M.D.; et al.
Aug. 1967
Note seroconversion rates of the various vaccines – Table 5, page 1337:
“Edmonston B – 97.6% seroconversion
Further attenuated (Schwarz) – 95.8% seroconversion”
I've bolded the key part. The (attenuated) Edmonston B vaccine had a seroconversion rate of 97.6% while the Schwarz vaccine, which was further attenuated, had a seroconversion rate of 95.8%.
So in "the mid 1960's", there were two attenuated measles vaccines being used, and each had a seroconversion rate of over 95%. Cut it how you like, that IS effective.

Mr Big #101:

The attenuated measles vaccine that was sold in the mid 1960s didn’t work, was not effective, however you want to put it. Everybody knows this, so you can quit arguing a simple, well-known, well-documented fact. Immunity didn’t last more than a few months, leaving the person with no immunity. If you got that vaccine, and didn’t get the measles, then you are likely walking around today with no immunity.

You have been informed the vaccines were over 95% effective, so what is left is the 5% of individuals who received these vaccines in the mid 1960s and who did not develop protective immunity.

They would comprise what percentage of the adult population today... less than 0.1% maybe?

@Panacea #41 --

I'm several days late, but please accept this standing ovation for a wonderful response to Mr. Cognitive Dissonance. : - )

#109:
Now I understand what you mean by "lie by omission". I guess you accused me of that so quickly because it is obviously your strategy of choice. You posted remarks about 2 measles vaccines, but [b]omitted[/b] the killed, ineffective measles vaccine, which like I stated above was "not effective".

That's pretty much the definition of a "lie by omission". Nice try, but you ain't foolin' anyone. Not sure why you would even lie about such a thing. Are you employed by the vaccine industry? I really can't think of any other reason why you would try and lie about something that is easily found on the CDC website, as well as many other health websites, pubmed, etc. Why attempt a cover up of a well known fact that happened 40 years ago? Bizarre.

Mr Big @112: I'm confused. What is your point again?
A vaccine was made. It was found to not be as effective as desired. It was removed from the market 60 years ago.

And?
Like, those are the facts, no one is arguing about that.
So what is your point?

"So what is your point?"
My point, clearly elucidated above, is that there are likely to be adults walking around without immunity to measles, since they got an ineffective vaccine during a period of low measles outbreaks. Ineffective measles vaccine + no measles = no measles immunity.

What is your point? Do you have one beyond defending the vaccine industry at all costs no matter how many lies of omission it takes? It doesn't seem so. I'll have to find other websites to get truthful vaccine information, since this website seems to play fast and free with the truth.

Mr Big why don't you worry about the children that have idiot anti-vaxxer parents that will not get them vaccinated. The total of at risk children for measles is far greater than the small population of fifty year olds that have some risk of contracting measles. It appears your moniker doesn't apply to you thinking ability.

Mr Big: "My point, clearly elucidated above, is that there are likely to be adults walking around without immunity to measles..."

Which is why that anytime there is a measles outbreak it is suggested that those born in 1957 and later check their vaccine status. Since I was in the era of that dodgy vaccine and there was no one around to tell if I had had measles, I got an MMR a couple of years ago.

So, seriously, you don't have much a point to those who can actually figure out simple algebra.

Mr Big why don’t you worry about the children that have idiot anti-vaxxer parents that will not get them vaccinated. The total of at risk children for measles is far greater than the small population of fifty year olds that have some risk of contracting measles.

Moreover, the "clearly elucidated" "point," as it were – wholly lacking in quantification as it is – wholly ignores the basics of SEIR models.

What I keep wondering about is this:

" In Canada, the two doses of MMR wasn’t implemented until 1996, so anyone vaccinated prior to that in Canada is likely no longer immunized.[*] You’d think we’d see many adults that received the ineffective measles vaccine, or were vaccinated in Canada prior to 1995 catching measles from measles outbreaks, yet we don’t, at least not like you would think given how contagious it is. Puzzling."

Well, what's so puzzling? That one's premises may be a crock of sh*t? Was this supposed to introduce some sort of gushing evolutionary river of sh*t? It seems to have gone nowhere.

[*] "Vaccination is not immunization" trope duly noted.

"Like, those are the facts, no one is arguing about that."

If that's true, why are all these commenters arguing?

Because, "Mr Big", you brought up the irrelevant issue, and kept harping on it.

Get over it.

Because you keep making the same wrong point over and over, Mr. Big.

Chris, you probably didn't need a booster. An MMR titer would have told you if you had immunity or not. That's what I got when Mom lost my vaccination records.

@Mr Big #112:
>blockquote>You posted remarks about 2 measles vaccines, but [b]omitted[/b] the killed, ineffective measles vaccine, which like I stated above was “not effective”.The reasons I didn't bring it up is because
a) it was already acknowledged;
b) it was not germane to the point I was making.
In #10, you asked:

Can someone please explain to me why, if this study is accurate, we don’t have massive measles outbreaks amongst adults who long ago lost any immunity from their MMR vaccination?

Lawrence and JustaTech pointed out that (in general) the Measles vaccine or Measles component of the MMR Vaccine conferred lifelong immunity and PGP mentioned that most over 50's got Measles and were thus immune.
In your comment #48 you argued that the second shot proved that the first shot on its own was not enough, and then you wrote:

there are many adults who got the measles vaccine in the mid 60s, which didn’t work, but didn’t get natural measles either.

Reality responded at #52:
Note it was only the 1963 killed vaccine that was ineffective and there has been live attenuated vaccine produced since 1963 (Edmonston B) followed by the live further attenuated Schwarz strain in 1965, finally settling on the live more attenuated (Moraten) Edmonston-Enders strain in 1968.

In #61, Reality gave the effectiveness of the Edmonston and Schwarz vaccines:
“Edmonston B – 97.6% seroconversion
Further attenuated (Schwarz) – 95.8% seroconversion”.
You then proceeded to misrepresent what the CDC said, among other things.
As for your question to me "Are you employed by the vaccine industry?" no. I work for an IT development firm.
In #114, you finally laid out your argument.

[T]here are likely to be adults walking around without immunity to measles, since they got an ineffective vaccine during a period of low measles outbreaks. Ineffective measles vaccine + no measles = no measles immunity.

The bottom line is this:
1) In 1963, two vaccines against Measles were introduced. An ineffective killed one and the highly effective Edmonston B attenuated vaccine. In 1965, the attenuated and also highly effective Schwarz attenuated vaccine became available.
2) Not everyone vaccinated from 1963-1967 was vaccinated with the ineffective killed vaccine. Many were vaccinated with either Edmonston B or Schwarz.
3) After the ineffectiveness of the killed vaccine was discovered, it was withdrawn (in 1967) and most (if not all) of the people who had received it were revaccinated with one of the more effective attenuated vaccines.
Your initial argument was and is wrong.

Begging for the ability to edit or preview my comments.
@Mr Big #112:

You posted remarks about 2 measles vaccines, but [b]omitted[/b] the killed, ineffective measles vaccine, which like I stated above was “not effective”.

The reasons I didn’t bring it up is because
a) it was already acknowledged;
b) it was not germane to the point I was making.
In #10, you asked:

Can someone please explain to me why, if this study is accurate, we don’t have massive measles outbreaks amongst adults who long ago lost any immunity from their MMR vaccination?

Lawrence and JustaTech pointed out that (in general) the Measles vaccine or Measles component of the MMR Vaccine conferred lifelong immunity and PGP mentioned that most over 50’s got Measles and were thus immune.
In your comment #48 you argued that the second shot proved that the first shot on its own was not enough, and then you wrote:

[T]here are many adults who got the measles vaccine in the mid 60s, which didn’t work, but didn’t get natural measles either.

Reality responded at #52:

Note it was only the 1963 killed vaccine that was ineffective and there has been live attenuated vaccine produced since 1963 (Edmonston B) followed by the live further attenuated Schwarz strain in 1965, finally settling on the live more attenuated (Moraten) Edmonston-Enders strain in 1968.

In #61, Reality gave the effectiveness of the Edmonston and Schwarz vaccines:
“Edmonston B – 97.6% seroconversion
Further attenuated (Schwarz) – 95.8% seroconversion”.
You then proceeded to misrepresent what the CDC said, among other things.
As for your question to me “Are you employed by the vaccine industry?”, no. I work for an IT development firm.
In #114, you finally laid out your argument.

[T]here are likely to be adults walking around without immunity to measles, since they got an ineffective vaccine during a period of low measles outbreaks. Ineffective measles vaccine + no measles = no measles immunity.

The bottom line is this:
1) In 1963, two vaccines against Measles were introduced. An ineffective killed one and the highly effective Edmonston B attenuated vaccine. In 1965, the attenuated and also highly effective Schwarz attenuated vaccine became available.
2) Not everyone vaccinated from 1963-1967 was vaccinated with the ineffective killed vaccine. Many were vaccinated with either Edmonston B or Schwarz.
3) After the ineffectiveness of the killed vaccine was discovered, it was withdrawn (in 1967) and most (if not all) of the people who had received it were revaccinated with one of the more effective attenuated vaccines.
Your initial argument was and is wrong.

Panacea: "An MMR titer would have told you if you had immunity or not."

Hmmm, the choice to walk down to the local pharmacy and pay $50 for a shot from a teeny tiny needle. Or make an appointment with my doctor, get a blood draw and pay for lab tests that would not be covered by insurance... more than $100.

Plus the fact that I got mumps for a second time, and it is popping up again.

How do I choose?

"That’s what I got when Mom lost my vaccination records."

My mother died when I was eleven years old, and my dad is clueless.

"get a blood draw"

From a much bigger needle. Also, last blood draw causes a bruise that lasted more than a week.

#109:
Now I understand what you mean by “lie by omission”. I guess you accused me of that so quickly because it is obviously your strategy of choice. You posted remarks about 2 measles vaccines, but [b]omitted[/b] the killed, ineffective measles vaccine, which like I stated above was “not effective”.

That’s pretty much the definition of a “lie by omission”. Nice try, but you ain’t foolin’ anyone.

The irony, it burns. Let's review the actual comment by "Mr Big" that engendered Julian's purported "lie by omission":

I think its clear that you don’t understand what a “lie by omission” is. The attenuated measles vaccine that was sold in the mid 1960s didn’t work, was not effective, however you want to put it. Everybody knows this, so you can quit arguing a simple, well-known, well-documented fact.

Whoops, "Mr Big," dismayingly, seems not to know the difference between "attenuated" and "killed" [sic], or if he does, chose to double down with tedious bluster over his own error.

And then about ten years later:
The Benefits From 10 Years of Measles Immunization in the United States

The original link was broken by the mystery SB prefixing. The paper is here.

Aaargh. Thanks.

And I had checked it in another window. I try to do this before posting a link, because some have retreated behind a paywall or were moved elsewhere.

One of my favorite studies comparing pertussis outbreaks versus vaccine policy has been moved multiple times. The last one is to the site of one of the authors:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Chen7/publication/13631420_…

What I like about that is it has a nice clear account of why this claim (which I saw posted yesterday elsewhere) is an idiotic lie: "What about SIDS. Japan has almost no incidents of SIDS / the lowest rates in the world. They delay vaccinations until 24 months!"

(my luck, even without extra html, that link will be borked)

And I had checked it in another window.

I got hit by this SB weirdness not too long ago, as well. It seems to have been fixed.

^ Just to explain in more detail, this is how the original link came through:

h[]tp://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2017/07/26/surprise-relatively-small-decreases-in-vaccine-uptake-can-lead-to-big-increases-in-vaccine-preventable-disease/comment-page-1/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1435674/pdf/pubhealthrep00160-0015…

The real link was there, but SB prepended itself.

^^ And, in fact, that "http://" was added auto-craptacularly when I tried to paste the original. I, for one, prefer my comments to be delivered as entered.

Narad, the rules of HTML and HTTP differentiate between local links and global links. A link that starts out with a //, possibly preceded by https: (or another protocol specifier) is global; otherwise, it's local. Local links don't work very well world-wide, so many blogging engines convert them to global ones. The result that WP gave was the global version of the local link you gave it.

That is just too much weirdness, and annoyances. I muck them up enough all by myself!

"and most (if not all) of the people who had received it were revaccinated with one of the more effective attenuated vaccines."

Citation? That sounds like wishful thinking. My guess is that they didn't. Things were different back then, we didn't have internet, etc, so most people likely had no idea the vaccine was not effective and pulled. The other two vaccines you mentioned were also pulled off the market, which commenters omitted to mention for some reason.

It's not wishful thinking. It's what happened. We know this because measles rates dropped so precipitously. If these folks hadn't been revaccinated, we'd know from infection rates.

The other two vaccines were pulled off the market because they were replaced with a better vaccine. That happens; we get a perfectly good vaccine, but maybe it has side effects. We develop a newer one that produces the same or similar immunity, but has fewer side effects. So we switch.

Vaccines undergo constant review and revision.

Heck, even Andrew Wakefield was developing a new MMR vaccine.

Narad, the rules of HTML and HTTP differentiate between local links and global links.

Please just don't do the grandmother, eggs, suck, how to, thing, really. It can autolink if it wants to (and in the past, I've had to poke it with a stick to see when it would), but it's never OK to add characters to a comment.

Things were different back then, we didn’t have internet, etc

That would be "the internet" that still documents that your previous tantrum amounted to pouring a bucket of shіt over your head in public, right?

@Se Habla Espol: I'm also not finding an RFC with this global/local rule that you mentioned.

Narad, what I called 'global' is referred to in the specs as 'absolute'; what I called 'local' is 'relative'. Try rfc 1808, "Relative Uniform Resource Locators". There may be a more recent rfc on the subject, as usual.

Some people swear by them, others swear at them. WordPress seems to be in the latter category.

@Mr Big #133:

Things were different back then, we didn’t have internet, etc

Internet no, but we did have etc. When inoculations were given, the lot number and type were recorded against the recipient. Although harder than today, it would not be impossible to find out who was vaccinated with the killed vaccine and get them revaccinated when they came for a doctor's visit. All the Health Department would need to do is send out letters to every doctor's office and clinic.

...so most people likely had no idea the vaccine was not effective and pulled.

As I mentioned above, letters from the Health Department to every clinic and doctor's office, and that would be handled.

The other two vaccines you mentioned were also pulled off the market, which commenters omitted to mention for some reason.

Not mentioned? Reality @ #52.

...finally settling on the live more attenuated (Moraten) Edmonston-Enders strain in 1968.

So it was mentioned. And the Moraten strain is still exceptionally effective.

There may be a more recent rfc on the subject, as usual.

Looks like RFC 3986. Thanks, but note that I haven't read it yet.

"Hmmm, the choice to walk down to the local pharmacy and pay $50 for a shot from a teeny tiny needle. Or make an appointment with my doctor, get a blood draw and pay for lab tests that would not be covered by insurance… more than $100."

Yes. Also consider time it requires to get the test results including the appointment to get tested which may be important if you are traveling e.g. to Europe now or there are cases locally.

I am in my late 50s, and until very recently I'd been 100% sure I was vaccinated against measles as I was vaccinated against everything required as a kid. But after reading on this blog about measles in Europe- I am traveling there in a couple of weeks, I suddenly started to wonder. After some reading, it turned out in the country I grew up in, the measles vaccine was only introduced in 1968. While they consider people my age probably immune because of that, I wasn't really sure as I knew I hadn't had measles. Somehow childhood diseases - other than rubella - passed me by, I even only got Chicken Pox at 32 (not fun).

The doctor suggested a titer test first - this was a couple of weeks ago. I actually was thinking of just getting the shot, but figured it'll be just a few days and I was curious especially as a friend in the same position tested positive for antibodies. Also, in my state pharmacists aren't allowed to give MMR. Well - it took several days to get an appointment - as the doctors were booked and nurse practitioner out on vacation - to send me for titer test, and the clinic requires an appointment before it. Then, apparently, there were a few days to get the results. It turned out, no, I am not immune. Interestingly, I was immune to other diseases. Rubella was no surprise just shows the diagnosis at the time was correct, but I was sure I hadn't had, yet I got a pretty high antibody count - in the hundreds. Probably had a very mild case - I remember other kids in my school class getting it, I just didn't get sick enough to notice.

At any rate, I did get my MMR shot today, now hope, I have enough time to get immunity, but CDC tells two weeks, so it's OK. Hopefully, I'll not get high fever or anything just in time to board the plane. BTW - I credit this blog with telling me about measles in Europe.

@Mr Big "A Lyme vaccine can’t work. ..." It works for dogs. No, I am not planning asking my vet for it... there is a company now working on the version for humans. Also, the first Lyme vaccine produced in 1994 reduced new infections by 80%. Sure it wasn't perfect, but it was working, and yes, I know that antibodies don't provide immunity, but the way the particular vaccine worked was effective.

@Panace

"It’s not wishful thinking. It’s what happened. We know this because measles rates dropped so precipitously. If these folks hadn’t been revaccinated, we’d know from infection rates."

With no citations, that's exactly what it is: wishful thinking. I guess you commenters only demand evidence when it suits your confirmation bias? Otherwise, anecdotes like this one are just fine? You are mistaking correlation with causation. Just because measles infections went down, you can't claim it was just automatically because of the vaccine. That's marketing, not skepticism and certainly not science. Measles cases also went down prior to the release of the vaccine. Are you going to give MMR credit for that as well?

@kitty
"It works for dogs."
Great. I am not a dog.

"No, I am not planning asking my vet for it… there is a company now working on the version for humans. Also, the first Lyme vaccine produced in 1994 reduced new infections by 80%. Sure it wasn’t perfect, but it was working, and yes, I know that antibodies don’t provide immunity, but the way the particular vaccine worked was effective."

The current vaccine being worked on is similar to LYMErix, namely dosing you with Osp A to hopefully disinfect the ticks that attach to you. Unfortunately, the actual effectiveness of LYMErix is unknown, because the Lyme disease test was changed when it was released to ignore the proteins the vaccines were created from. That's one of those tricks where you can make a vaccine look like it works by changing the testing for the disease. That's just dishonest imho.

But here's a question for you. Why bother dosing patients with Osp A to hopefully disinfect attached ticks when you can just make a typical vaccine that creates antibodies to the germ itself, like MMR, and many others?

Yawn. Before the 1960s just about every child had measles by at fifteen:
The Clinical Significance of Measles: A Review

Then something happened, and it pretty much disappeared in the USA (except for imported case):
From http://www.census.gov/prod/99pubs/99statab/sec31.pdf
Year.... Rate per 100000 of measles
1912 . . . 310.0
1920 . . . 480.5
1925 . . . 194.3
1930 . . . 340.8
1935 . . . 584.6
1940 . . . 220.7
1945 . . . 110.2
1950 . . . 210.1
1955 . . . 337.9
1960 . . . 245.4
1965 . . . 135.1
1970 . . . . 23.2
1975 . . . . 11.3
1980 . . . . . 5.9
1985 . . . . . 1.2
1990 . . . . .11.2
1991 . . . . . .3.8
1992 . . . . . .0.9
1993 . . . . . .0.1
1994 . . . . . .0.4
1995 . . . . . .0.1
1996 . . . . . .0.2
1997 . . . . . . 0.1

" because measles infections went down, you can’t claim it was just automatically because of the vaccine."

If the 90% drop in measles between 1960 and 1970 in the USA was not from vaccines, please enlighten us with an alternative reason. Provide citations.

"If the 90% drop in measles between 1960 and 1970 in the USA was not from vaccines, please enlighten us with an alternative reason. Provide citations."

Sorry, that's not the way science works. You can't make claims, then ask others to disprove them. That would be like me saying that measles cases went down because of better hygiene. You disagree? Then prove it wasn't better hygiene, with citations.

You've made the classic mistake of assuming a correlation is causation.

"Then prove it wasn’t better hygiene, with citations."

We cannot prove a negative. But I can ask you what fantastic hygiene change occurred in that decade to cause an airborne disease plummet. Explain exactly how measles plummeted. I already gave you in comment 103 what happened in Los Angeles county with the measles vaccine.

We really want you to tell us the alternative reason. Come on! Entertain us!

Do not mention deaths. Do mention any other decade, unless it was at least a 90% drop. Do not mention any other disease. Do no mention any other country. In short: don't change the subject.

Oh, and about that "hygiene" hypothesis (otherwise known as a really wild guess), I shall present this evidence: Measles vaccine coverage and factors related to uncompleted vaccination among 18-month-old and 36-month-old children in Kyoto, Japan

It says:

In Japan, measles vaccine coverage has remained low, and either small or moderate outbreaks have occurred repeatedly in communities. According to an infectious disease surveillance (2000), total measles cases were estimated to be from 180,000 to 210,000, and total deaths were estimated to be 88 [11,12]. Measles cases are most frequently observed among non-immunized children, particularly between 12 to 24 months.

So what hygiene crisis happened in Japan in 2000 to cause measles to become common, and deadly? Provide citations.

@146
So you can't prove a negative (which actually isn't true, you can) but you expect me to? That's not the way science is done. You can't just assume a vaccine works, you need actual data, not just a correlation. Again, you are mistaking correlation for causation.

I figured at a site called scienceblogs, folks would know how basic science is done. You can't even assume having antibodies means you have immunity these days, as sometimes that isn't the case, and people get the disease even though they have antibodies. Science is tricky.

Come on! Answer the questions!

Why did the incidence of measles in the USA plummet 90% between 1960 and 1970?

And what "hygiene" crisis in 2000 caused measles to rise and kill so much in Japan?

Sorry Chris, that's not science. You have it backwards. You have to use data to prove something is true, not just assume it is because something seemingly correlated occurred. My uncle had a heart attack while eating a cucumber sandwich. So I guess cucumber sandwiches cause heart attacks right?

The way you seem to think it works is that you make a claim, and if no one else can refute it, then it must be true. I guess God must exist, because you've claimed he does, and I can't prove he doesn't. Lol...I wish it worked that way but in the real world it doesn't.

I gave you data. At least four different PubMed indexed papers. I can't help it if you don't understand it.

Here is some more:
Impact of Vaccines Universally Recommended for Children—United States, 1900-1998

Evolution of Measles Elimination Strategies in the United States

Now what data do you have that hygiene caused measles to plummet in the USA between 1960 and 1970?

And what hygiene crisis happened in Japan to increase measles incidence so much in 2000?

"I guess God must exist, because you’ve claimed he does,..."

Oh, you are a special kind of idiot. Did you just get fired from Google recently?

@150
Hmmm...it appears you're simply indulging in ad hominem. Typically, that's the last bastion of a person with no argument, which appears to be the case here, since you have no data supporting the claim that those that got the ineffective measles vaccine in the sixties were revaccinated at some point later. Its also clear you can't tell the difference between correlation and causation so there is little point in further discussion about how science works. I suggest enrolling in a science class to see what its all about.

The pro-vaccine argument runs something like this.
The scientists who developed measles vaccines in the 60's predicted those vaccines would be effective in reducing incidence of measles based on similar efforts against smallpox, diphtheria and polio.

Despite the ineffectiveness of one of the vaccines, that prediction proved true as shown by the numbers Chris cited. The effectiveness was further increased by adding a second dose of the measles vaccine, which reduced incidence to near zero and eliminated endemic transmission of measles in the western hemisphere.

The effectiveness continues to be shown by recent outbreaks like the Disneyland case and the Minnesota Somali community outbreak which were started by nonvaccinated individuals traveling abroad. In both cases people who were not vaccinated were much more likely to get the disease than others who were vaccinated.

Your original argument was that one of the original vaccines was ineffective and you were very worried about these vulnerable individuals contributing to an outbreak. Based on 50 years of experience shown in Chris's data, that hasn't been a problem.

We might share your concern if you could cite an outbreak where vaccinated individuals were equally likely to get the disease as non-vaccinated. Or show a recent case (last 10 years) where even one of the people getting the disease had only received the 1963 ineffective killed vaccine.

Mr Big @147 You said you can prove a negative.

Please do.

While you are at it, please definitively prove that none of the people who received the ineffective measles vaccine ever got any other effective measles vaccine for the rest of their lives.

"Based on 50 years of experience shown in Chris’s data, that hasn’t been a problem."

Again, correlation does not imply causation. Don't take my word for it, look up the terms correlation and causation and see what you find.
I"ll start you off:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation

I'll give you a concrete example. My senile grandmother was having a mouse problem in her house. So she decided to put out a bunch of mouse traps, but forgot to put bait in them, so of course they didn't catch anything. My not senile grandfather, meanwhile, had an exterminator over to clear up the problem. However, since my grandmother hasn't seen a mouse since she put out the unbaited traps, she claims that the mice saw the traps and all decided to leave the house lest they get trapped. I don't have the heart to tell her the traps had no effect on the mice. So even though the mice all disappeared soon after she put out the traps, correlation doesn't imply causation. Does that help?

Mr. Big: "Hmmm…it appears you’re simply indulging in ad hominem."

No. It was an insult. I did not dismiss your comment for what you are, but what you said. Which was pretty nonsensical. Especially your total dismissal of the given data. Plus your little story about mice and your grandmother is entertaining because it shows you do not have a clue.

So exactly why did measles incidence plummet 90% between 1960 and 1970 in the USA?

And what "hygiene crisis" in 2000 caused measles to return to Japan and kill at least 88 kids?

Don't knock yourself out with all that hand waving.

@153

You dIdn't take university maths I assume. Proving a negative can be easily done using a proof by contradiction among many other methods. For centuries it was thought possible to square a circle. However, it has been proven impossible. In other words a proof was created that proves a negative, that squaring the circle cannot be done.

As to your other claim that all recipients of the failed measles vaccine were subsequently vaccinated with a successful vaccine, so therefore have lifelong immunity, all I would need to do is find a counterexample: IE: One person who received the failed measles vaccine that didn't get any further measles vaccinations and also didn't get measles. Not hard to do at all with the right resources.

Regardless, science requires proof of something (or not something). You can't just say because my uncle had a heart attack while eating a cucumber sandwich, that cucumber sandwiches cause heart attacks. Even if you knew 1,000,000 people who had heart attacks while eating cucumber sandwiches, that's still not proof that cucumber sandwiches cause heart attacks, just like saying measles cases went down after a measles vaccine was introduced doesn't prove that the measles vaccine was the cause of fewer measles cases. Science doesn't work that way. If we banned cucumber sandwiches, and the rate of heart attacks also happened to go down, would you then also then claim that's proof that cucumber sandwiches cause heart attacks?

It's always fun to watch people like Mr Big step into an argument. He's apparently developed a series of routines which allow him to sidestep questions. We've already seen the 'ad hominem' routine, the 'correlation does not equal causation' routine and the 'you don't know science' routine. (There may be more, but I'm not in a manure-shoveling mood.) The common factor that all of his little intellectual autoeroticism routines seem to share is that Step #1 is to reject the data.

Indeed. Now all that's left is to see if Mr. Big is really Travis. We'll know soon enough, I'm sure.

"Proving a negative can be easily done using a proof by contradiction among many other methods."

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! That is hilarious. This is not about the four color map problem. This is pure statistics. You don't have a clue. But your little stories are hilarious.

I take it that "Mr Big" has elected to skip copping to his disastrous "lying by omission" self-soiling.

Ah yes, more ad hominem. The last bastion of those who have no argument. I guess it can be frustrating to try and argue when you don't have the science education to back it up, but you should try and refrain from it as it tends to have a boomerang effect, no matter how many of you pile on.

Now all that’s left is to see if Mr. Big is really Travis.

You're greatly overestimating Travis J. Schwochert's creativity, IMNSHO.

This:
https://i2.wp.com/freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/files/2017/08/science…

Ah yes, more ad hominem.

Where would that be?

It is hilarious in that this guy does not understand words he attempts to use. I don't see an ad hominem. Nor do I see any actual math from him. I am laughing at him.

The overarching issue is that he's dishonest. If you're going to accuse someone of lying when your own words plainly demonstrate that it is in fact you who was in the wrong and then compound the problem by (1) trying to ignore its being pointed out and (2) bitching stupidly when item 1 is pointed out, you're not worth the time of day.

But his little stories were just so darn cute!

I am sorry, between this thread the one at Pharyngula about the idiot that got fired from Google, I can't stop laughing.

Sorry, but pathetic attempts at cyber bullying don't disprove science, no matter how much of it there is. You can all pile on with more ad hominem, or whatever immature games you care to play, but it doesn't change the facts.

I'm saddened that most commenters here have nothing better to do than troll other commenters with ad hominem. Me, I'm headed back to the lab to do some work after a much deserved break. I'll have to go elsewhere for an answer to my question regarding cucumber sandwiches it seems, since no commenters here seem to understand basic logic or science.

"I’m headed back to the lab to do some work"

After the lab test be sure to do a cat scan.

I take it that the "boomerang effect" will be kicking in promptly once "the lab" of "Mr Big" catches wind of the intellectual degeneracy of the RIgulars.

So laughing at Mr. Big's lying and that he still does not know what "ad hominem" means is now cyber bullying. It was certainly a good thing I was not drinking anything. Snort!

Mr. "Big": I had already given you a citation on measles rates, if you'd bothered to read it. Post #98: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4007870/

Chris also gave you multiple citations on this. Really, dude. Learn to read.

And now we see that there is a loop counter somewhere amongst all the other sub-routines: "If loop count = n, then initiate flounce routine."

Even if you knew 1,000,000 people who had heart attacks while eating cucumber sandwiches, that’s still not proof that cucumber sandwiches cause heart attacks, just like saying measles cases went down after a measles vaccine was introduced doesn’t prove that the measles vaccine was the cause of fewer measles cases. Science doesn’t work that way. If we banned cucumber sandwiches, and the rate of heart attacks also happened to go down, would you then also then claim that’s proof that cucumber sandwiches cause heart attacks?

Oh dear. Science doesn't work what way? I take it your "lab" has nothing to do with epidemiology, biomedical nor statistics.

Panacea: " Really, dude. Learn to read"

Then Mr. Big whines "But that is too hard!"

Science Mom: "I take it your “lab” has nothing to do with epidemiology, biomedical nor statistics."

That is my bet also.

@Mr Big:

Me, I’m headed back to the lab to do some work after a much deserved break.

Sure you are. And I'm flying my private jet back to O. R. Tambo International Airport having watched yesterday's eclipse.

I guess I'm in the minority, but I think Mr Big does have a lab.
.
Based on his screen name and his comments here, my supposition is that it consists of a basement bedroom, an inflatable sex doll, a copy of Vaxxed and a penis enlarger.

I would wonder whether Mr Big's lab has had its rabies vaccination.

If Mr Big is worried about cyber bullying, perhaps he should close his Sarahah account. I just read it's used for that a lot.

On a more serious note, we could have looked at things that increased in the 60's like watching color tv or reading Spiderman and the Hulk and looked to see if there was a correlation. But instead, we in effect did real science. We made a prediction that a mass vaccination against measles would reduce the incidence of measles and then tested it by actually doing it. And guess what? It worked!

We've unfortunately also done the reverse test in several places with bad consequences.

If Mr Big thinks vaccines are the mousetrap factor (obvious but wrong), he should at least propose a plausible candidate for the hidden exterminator factor.

And if he really thinks vaccines had nothing to do with it, why all the hoo-rah about one ineffective vaccine 50 years ago?

It reminds me of people who keep talking about a paradigm shift which will magically change reality into the way they think it is despite the data.

Real paradigm shifts don't change the data. They just change the way we understand and explain them.

And whether it was vaccines or some hidden factor, what we did in the US in the 60's obviously worked.

#168 where he says our comments "don't disprove science" is especially funny because he never cites any science we have failed to disprove.

Sorry, Mr Big, but science shows that the measles vaccine is very effective and very safe.

And we ignore that at our peril.

Opus@177,

With handcuff and rope?

Alain

Alain,

Handcuffs and ropes are generally used with real people. Um, or so a friend tells me.

Of course, there's an xkcd for that.

I was going to just make the obligatory David Carradine/Eli Wallach Circle of Iron reference here, but then W—dia told me this:

Carradine was tapped to play Duke Leto Atreides in Alejandro Jodorowsky's aborted Dune adaptation in the late 1970s.

Mr Big @ 156:
Hahahaha! I am genuinely wiping away tears I'm laughing so hard. Oh my goodness.

Yes, I have taken university math. I've studied math that would make you stomach churn and your eyes cross. I've taken classes that involved the phrase "Start by visualizing a point on a 5-dimensional hypercube".

And that's just the math I've done. The math I've seen? It would make Lovecraft weep in fear.

So don't tell me about math. I bet you're one of those people who thought Fermat's last theorem was trivial.

But all of that is beside the point. Proofs in math are totally disparate from proof in science.

Hypercubes are more than what I have ever done. Though I have done some topology (heat transfer, which I hate). I also read math books for fun, including Simon Singh's one about Fermat's last theorem.

Yes, Mr. Big's comment was totally hilarious.

When the next big outbreaks happen, they'll probably happen in Texas

oracknows — Fri, 02 Dec 2016 06:00:33 +0000

When the next big outbreaks happen, they'll probably happen in Texas

Back in the day, I used to write posts with titles like When the outbreaks occur, they’ll start in California. I even wrote a followup, When the outbreaks occur, they’ll start in California, 2014 edition. The reason, of course, was that California was one of the epicenters of vaccine hesitancy as well as the home to some high profile antivaccine-sympathetic physicians, such as Dr. Bob Sears (who’s known for making Holocaust analogies about bills tightening school vaccine mandate requirements) and Dr. Jay Gordon (who’s known for continuing to claim, against all evidence, that vaccines cause autism). Of course, it was true. The outbreaks did happen in California, culminating with a large outbreak after Christmas 2014 known as the Disneyland measles outbreak.

Then a funny thing happened in 2015. California passed a bill, SB 277, eliminating non-medical exemptions to school vaccine mandates. The law took effect this school year, and antivaccine activists are, of course, not pleased, assembling a motley crew to oppose the law. Time will tell whether SB 277 has its intended effect of increasing vaccine uptake and maintaining herd immunity, but early indications are that it will.

Now, apparently, we have to turn our attention to another big, populous state where public health is potentially being endangered. Now, most people would probably assume I’m referring to another coastal state with a lot of liberal politics and crunchy New Age-y types, like California, but I’m not. I’m referring to Texas. Yesterday, I saw an article in Science by Kai Kupferschmidt entitled Why Texas is becoming a major antivaccine battlefield:

Peter Hotez used to worry mostly about vaccines for children in far-away places. An infectious diseases researcher at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas, Hotez is developing shots against diseases in poorer countries such as hookworm and schistosomiasis.

But now, Hotez is anxious about children much closer to home. The number of schoolchildren not vaccinated against childhood diseases in Texas is growing rapidly, which means that the state may see its first measles outbreaks in the winter or spring of 2018, Hotez predicted in a recent article in PLOS Medicine. Disgraced antivaccine physician Andrew Wakefield has set up shop in the Texan capital, Austin, and a political action committee (PAC) is putting pressure on legislators facing a slew of vaccine-related bills.

"Texas is now the center of the antivaxxer movement,” Hotez says. “There is a big fight coming,” adds Anna Dragsbaek of The Immunization Partnership, a nonprofit organization in Houston that advocates for vaccinations.

Now, in fairness, the article notes that currently Texas still has one of the highest rates of vaccine uptake overall, but as I try to pound home time and time again, it’s not just statewide uptake rates that matter. It’s local pockets of low vaccine uptake that lead to declining herd immunity or community immunity. Whatever you want to call the phenomenon of high vaccine uptake protecting even those who can’t be vaccinated or won’t vaccinate, we’re starting to see a situation in Texas that is worrisome and possibly outright alarming: skyrocketing rates of personal belief exemptions, from 2,300 in 2003 to nearly 45,000 so far this year, more than a 19-fold increase. A graph from the PLoS Medicine article tells the tale:

Looking at that graph, I see little sign that it’s starting to plateau, and public health officials agree. The trend looks as though it will continue. If I were a public health official in Texas, I’d be alarmed, and they are. Of course, at the risk of being repetitive—but when did that ever stop me?—I have to emphasize that it’s not just raw numbers. After all, Texas is a big state. If those numbers were spread out, the trend would still be of concern, but not quite so alarming as it is. From the PLoS article by Peter Hotez:

Measles vaccination coverage in certain Texas counties is dangerously close to dropping below the 95% coverage rate necessary to ensure herd immunity and prevent measles outbreaks. For instance, in Gaines County in West Texas, the percentage of exemptions is now 4.83%, while in Briscoe County in the Texas Panhandle, the percentage is 3.55% (Table 1) [5]. In the very large Austin Independent School District (Travis County), the exemption rate is at 2.02% [5]. Especially troubling are many of the private schools, mostly in Travis County—the Austin, Texas area—where exemption rates often exceed 20%, including more than 40% of the Austin Waldorf School [6]. The rising numbers of nonmedical immunization exemptions across the state in combination with pockets of very low coverage in vulnerable populations is extremely troubling.

Now, I know what antivaccine apologists will say here. They’ll say that those rates are still high. Yes, that is true, but the trend is in the wrong direction. As noted by Hotez, in some counties MMR uptake is falling close to the range where herd immunity will start to waver. It’s not there yet, but it’s trending that way, which is why Hotez is concerned that by next winter there could be outbreaks. Then, of course, there are the private schools, such as the Waldorf Schools (schools I like to refer to as disease vectors because of the Waldorf philosophy that discourages vaccination), much like the case in California. These schools almost always have very high personal belief exemption rates and low vaccine uptake rates.

It’s not as though Texas hasn’t had outbreaks yet, either. For instance, in 2013 there was a measles outbreak centered at a Texas megachurch. The outbreak started when a person who contracted measles overseas visited Eagle Mountain International Church in Newark, located about 20 miles north of Fort Worth, Texas. This particular church is part of Kenneth Copeland Ministries. (Terri Pearsons is Kenneth Copeland’s daughter.) Kenneth Copeland and Terri Pearson promote all sorts of “natural healing” woo that you could easily find at Joe Mercola’s website, and, as is so common with believers in “natural healing,” they are (or at least were) antivaccine. In the wake of the outbreak, Terri Pearsons actually encouraged those who haven't been vaccinated to do so, adding that the Old Testament is "full of precautionary measures." Sadly, this is a common theme. Antivaccine warriors remain stubbornly antivaccine until the consequences of not vaccinating hit home.

Of course, I have no idea whether this sermon represented a true change of heart. Googling “Terri Pearsons” and “vaccines” brought up scads and scads of hits about the Eagle Mountain measles outbreak, but I didn’t have time to keep searching for more recent statements by Pearsons on vaccines. I do know that, even at the time, Pearsons’ statements were contradictory in that she still expressed concerns for “very young children with a family history of autism.” In any case, fundamentalist religious communities have become a new center for vaccine resistance and disease outbreaks, and Texas has those in abundance, which is another reason for concern in the face of rising personal belief exemption rates. They represent a fertile ground for antivaccine pseudoscience to take root.

There’s another thing Texas has that contributes to measles outbreaks, unfortunately, and that’s Andrew Wakefield:

But Hotez believes the situation in the Lone Star State is more perilous. One factor is the arrival of Wakefield, widely seen as the father of the modern antivaccine movement. Wakefield published a paper in The Lancet in 1998 that alleged a link between the MMR vaccine (which combines shots against measles, mumps, and rubella) and autism. Several large studies have failed to find the link, Wakefield's paper was retracted in 2010, and he was disbarred as a physician after the U.K. General Medical Council found him guilty of dishonesty and endangering children. Wakefield has appeared at screenings of his film Vaxxed, released in April, all over Texas and has testified at many city councils, Dragsbaek says. “He is definitely a major influencer.”

I’d be somewhat cautious about this assessment, though. Andrew Wakefield has lived in Texas for well over a decade, basically having fled his home in England after having sparked an antivaccine panic there. I have no doubt that Wakefield is a major influencer. Also, in 2016 he’s been more active than ever, having released an antivaccine propaganda film, VAXXED, that peddles the conspiracy theory that is the “CDC whistleblower” and promotes pretty much every common antivaccine lie known to the antivaccine fringe. His partners in woo, Del Bigtree and Polly Tommey, have been traveling the country to show up at screenings and promote the movie. Sometimes they’re even joined by Wakefield himself, who is a rock star among antivaccine activists. Sometimes they meet with federal legislators; sometimes they meet with state legislators; sometimes they meet with Donald Trump. (OK, Wakefield and his fellow travelers only met with Trump once, but once is bad enough.)

I just want to emphasize, though, that this goes way beyond just Wakefield:

Meanwhile, a PAC named Texans for Vaccine Choice has sprung up after state Representative Jason Villalba, a Republican lawyer from Dallas, proposed scrapping nonmedical exemptions last year. (The Texas House of Representatives voted down the bill.) “While they do not have a whole lot of money, they have a lot of people that they can deploy to interfere in primary campaigns,” Dragsbaek says. “They made Villalba's primary campaign very, very difficult.” Rebecca Hardy, director of state policies at Texans for Vaccine Choice, says the group is not trying to convince parents that vaccines are dangerous, but fighting for their right not to immunize their children. (It's also helping them apply for exemptions.)

We have our own version of this PAC in Michigan, but fortunately it seems not to have anywhere near the influence. The Texas PAC is more active, including its online presence. It peddles the usual antivaccine myths, with articles resenting being called out for pseudoscientific beliefs that endanger children and instead trying to peddle the risible narrative that these parents have made a “thoughtful decision to selectively, delay, or decline vaccines in the state of Texas.” I like to call such decisions pseudo-thoughtful. They appear thoughtful to parents because the parents actually do think a lot about their decisions, but they aren’t really thoughtful in that the parents’ thought is wasted because it’s based on misinformation, pseudoscience, and conspiracy theories. Particularly hilarious is an article that tries to make a virtue of being a crackpot—excuse me, a cracked pot. Of course, yet another of my irony meters exploded when I read a post on an antivaccine site complaining about trolls.

It’s a common misconception that antivaccine views and vaccine-hesitancy are primarily the provenance of crunchy coastal liberals. They’re not. As I point out frequently, antivaccine views are the pseudoscience that transcends political views. Unfortunately, we very well might be seeing evidence of that in Texas when the next measles outbreaks happen there.

oracknows Fri, 12/02/2016 - 01:00

Tags

Antivaccine nonsense

complementary and alternative medicine

Skepticism/Critical Thinking

complementary and alternative medicine

That's the sad thing, antivaccidiots lean to both sides of the political spectrum. It is like the episode of south park with the time migrants: aging hippie liberal douche and intolerant redneck conservative both being so dumb on this matter. The former thinks anything involving a corporation is automatically evil and thinks we can live on a commune "naturally." The latter is just mad whenever a new scientific breakthrough leaves one less thing attributable to an invisible man in the sky. Oh, and toss in the anarchist-caliber libertarians who just hate the FDA and any other government agency.

Over and over I say it, just like with that megachurch Orac mentions. This won't end until an outbreak leaves a lot of people dead. It will literally take a 1930s-style flue epidemic taking a couple dozen lives to wake some of these people up. The annoying thing is modern medicine can save far more people who catch these diseases now than fifty years ago, which the antivaccidiots try to use as evidence that vaccines aren't necessary.

Rebecca Hardy, director of state policies at Texans for Vaccine Choice, says the group is not trying to convince parents that vaccines are dangerous, but fighting for their right not to immunize their children.

I'm not about to take Ms. Hardy's unsupported word that she isn't anti-vaccine or that her organization isn't trying to convince parents that vaccines are dangerous. Why would parents exercise their "right not to immunize their children" unless they thought that vaccines were dangerous? (In the case of children who qualify for legitimate medical exemptions they would be right, but that's a minority of cases.)

Furthermore, there is the well-known principle that your right to swing your fist in the air ends at my face. Likewise, parents' "right to not vaccinate their children" (for non-medical reasons) should not override other parents' right to not have their children needlessly endangered by the children of non-vaccinating parents. That's just basic ethics. Which the large subset of anti-vax parents who call themselves "fundamentalist Christians" ought to have learned in church if nowhere else, and most people learn from their parents.

I'll make a motion to put Arizona 2nd in line behind Texas for outbreak likelihood given that: (1) Arizona had the nation's worst MMR vaccination rate per the CDC for 2015 ( 84%, http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona/2015/09/02/cdc-arizon… ) and, (2) an analysis of kindergarten vaccination rates found that "About three out of every five kindergarten classes with 20 or fewer students had such low vaccination rates last year that measles could easily spread among the children" ( http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona-investigations/2016/0… ).

True, Arizona does not have Wakefield, but it does have the perhaps even more disgustingly stupidly ignorant, openly anti-vaccine moronic duo called "The Drs. Wolfson", who recently sold out an event in Phoenix ironically called "Wide Awake", which is soon to be a "documentary" in the same way Vaxxed is.

These groups are emboldened by the election of this next President. They are aggressively going after legislators at the federal and state levels. What I do not understand is why vaccine advocacy groups are sitting back and letting this happen so damn passively.

"Likewise, parents’ “right to not vaccinate their children” (for non-medical reasons) should not override" the rights of children not to have unpleasant, potentially very damaging, if not fatal, preventable diseases...

@Zach #1
" This won’t end until an outbreak leaves a lot of people dead. It will literally take a 1930s-style flue epidemic taking a couple dozen lives to wake some of these people up. "

This would convince most anti-vaxxers, but the die-hards still wouldn't be convinced. I think they only thing that would make the die-hards vaccinate is if most of the doctors and scientists suddenly decided that vaccines were bad and recommended that no one get them.

Most of the rabid anti-vaxxers also don't believe in regular dental care, drink raw milk, believe in homeopathy, etc. It's more about defying authority. If the authorities said not to vaccinate...

I think this is a good time to apologize on behalf of all my fellow Texians.

We're sorry for being home to Burzynski, Thoughtful House, Andrew Wakefield, the Texas Board of Education, Mike Adams the Health Ranger, and a radical mixture of ultra-libertarian separatists (Republic of Texas nutters) and old hippies drying out in our western deserts; our redneck swamp people in the east, and the People's Republic of Austin, which will support anything involving "ancient wisdom", anti-corporatism, or involving cannabis as medicine.

We're sorry for the Marfa Lights, mega-churches, people who protest outside mosques with AR-15s, open carry at Chili's, guns in university classrooms and laboratories, and we're especially sorry for Rick Perry (oops).

I'm sure I missed some, but just rest assured that there's a Rational Underground here, too. We'll continue to fight... and we will win.

In addition to thus active PAC, Texas is home to Dawn Richardson, who does advocacy for nvic, and however misguided, is highly competent.

On the other hand, Texas has a talented and devoted team in their immunization coalition that works hard to protect Texas' children.

This is a very well timed post Orac. I live in Texas, and there are actually 2 small mumps outbreaks in Texas right now - in Dallas and in Johnson County, near Dallas.

Hopefully they are contained, but I am concerned that it does not bode well for my state. And the situation would probably be worse if it was cases of measles rather than mumps since measles is so much more contagious.

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/health/Mumps-Cases-Identified-in-North-Texas…

Eric Lund:Likewise, parents’ “right to not vaccinate their children” (for non-medical reasons) should not override other parents’ right to not have their children needlessly endangered by the children of non-vaccinating parents. That’s just basic ethics. Which the large subset of anti-vax parents who call themselves “fundamentalist Christians” ought to have learned in church if nowhere else, and most people learn from their parents.

Ethics and morals aren't the same thing and never have been. Fundamentalist Christians tend to do or encourage a lot of things that aren't ethical, like forcing women to have kids they don't want, forcing people into conversion therapy, covering up domestic abuse and rape cases in their community and defending child abuse that is disguised as training. They consider this moral because God is fine with them punishing people who are 'sinful.' God is, in general, a totally unethical being.

From the CDC: Who should not get vaccinated?

Any child who suffered a brain or nervous system disease within 7 days after a dose of DTaP should not get another dose.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/should-not-vacc.html

MJD says,

How can such statements reinforce vaccine confidence?

@ Orac and minions,

If a child suffers a brain or nervous system disease within 7 days after a dose of DTaP and thereafter the parents refuse to give their other children the DTap are they antivaccine quacks?

@10 Michael

That statement alone does not reinforce confidence, but the knowledge of how rare actual issues occur. So does the evidence of that statement that the cdc does, in fact, research vaccine safety. I don't think anyone is arguing that there should be zero vaccine exemptions ever.

The problem is that parents who don't know what they are talking about are trying to avoid vaccinating their children for non-medical reasons. These reasons include, but are not limited to a hatred of the US government and anything remotely related to a federal policy, religious beliefs that ignore scientific evidence, a deep distrust of modern medicine based mostly in conspiracy theory, and the narcissism that simply donating the genetic material to a child means you become the expert in all matters relating to that child.

The problem is that the quacks harm the children who have legitimate reasons, supported by research and evidence, to not receive a full vaccine schedule. Everyone who is able to should vaccinate so that we don't infect those who can't.

The existence of one medical reason does not create evidence supporting anti vaccine beliefs that have been proven false over and over and over and freakin' over. That's not even considering how much time and money is wasted re-testing and re-proving that Andrew Wakefield was wrong.

It's all those immigrants; Dey took ur hurd imunty

If a child suffers a brain or nervous system disease within 7 days after a dose of DTaP and thereafter the parents refuse to give their other children the DTap are they antivaccine quacks?

Not for that reason, no.

Zach says (#11),

That statement alone does not reinforce confidence, but the knowledge of how rare actual issues occur.

MJD says,

Then the CDC should place some statistics next to the warning so parents can better understand the incidence of such vaccine induced diseases.

In my opinion, this lack of effective communication only reinforces antivaccine tendencies.

I hope Gilbert's post @12 is snark, but I see no obvious signs that it is.

If a child suffers a brain or nervous system disease within 7 days after a dose of DTaP and thereafter the parents refuse to give their other children the DTap are they antivaccine quacks [sic]?

Not for that reason, no.

Um, if you say so. It's curious that susceptibility to "common vaccine injury" is accepted by the colander-wearing brigade as being mamesh genetic, but the subject is utterly taboo when it comes to autism per se. Everything must be once (or twice, or thrice) removed.

I hope Gilbert’s post @12 is snark, but I see no obvious signs that it is.

One more step, and the data reduction will be complete.

The CDC continues to use the phrase "Herd immunity" when describing vaccination rates.

The definition of the word "herd" when used as a noun is as follows:

a large group of animals, especially hoofed mammals, that live, feed, or migrate together or are kept together as livestock.

Again, this incorrect and inappropriate terminology used by the CDC continues to erode consumer confidence in vaccines.

In Orac's posting yesterday (12/1/16), a video showed Dr. Humphries using the phrase "community immunity".

It's amazing how dissension can sometimes force a desirable change in how we think and communicate.

some 250 children held in Dilley this weekend were mistakenly given full adult doses of the Hepatitis A vaccine...

“Children have been forced to sleep with the lights on, are subject to intrusive checks regularly throughout the night, and have been dragged from their beds at 4:00 am to be given shots while their mothers must stand helplessly by without being told what is going on or being allowed a say in the matter,” ...

... she visited Dilley over the past week and met with a mother who complained that her 4-year-old child was “feverish, not eating, having trouble walking, and complaining of the pain in his leg” after receiving the vaccine. “The latest incident again makes clear why children and their mothers should not be detained,” Hines said in a statement. “Private prisons cannot care for families and these facilities must be closed.”

http://www.houstonpress.com/news/hundreds-of-detained-immigrant-kids-in…

So, maybe vaccines aren't so safe when mandated and administered by an inept bureaucracy.

Ironically, Mexico and a lot of central American countries have better vaccine uptakes than the US does.
Also, MJD, get out of MN. Shouldn't you be with your fellow dimwits, not preying on the Somali community?

PGP says (#20),

Also, MJD, get out of MN. Shouldn’t you be with your fellow dimwits.

MJD says,

I'd like to work at the CDC in Atlanta, GA and help improve the vaccine-safety communication effort.

I think people should stop being so bloody precious. Stop whinging about the term 'herd immunity'. Realise we are an unusually intelligent animal and nothing more.

Eric:
I consider the mocking 'redneck spelling' in Gilbert's #12 an obvious sign of snark. I also take Gilbert's #19 as an example of his typical response when minions take his ironies too straight. Which is never to clarify his intent, but to double-down on what you think he's saying with a reference to some news item, which he just puts here without actually saying what credence or importance, if any, he may think it has. In short, he's not taking a position; he's just twitting your sensitivities,

@ NumberWang
How 'bout you stop being so bloody condescending, and realising that the connotations of 'herd' when applied to collective immunity increase the probability children with suffer needless threats from VPDs?

And how 'bout you stop being so bloody stoopid, since – especially in TEXAS (that would be the Longhorn state) – the connotations of 'herd' go way beyond 'animal', and are pretty much mutually exclusive with "unusually Intelligent"?

@ c0c0rdance:

You left out Jake Crosby @ University in Austin ( see his 'Autism Investigated' blog**)
and Gary Null's The Texas Villa ( health resort/ retreat) in Mineola,
TMR's 'Tex' a/k/a Thalia Michelle Seggelik ( sp) of MAMMA ( a MJ advocacy group)
and Alex Jones.

** I know you have a strong stomach I've seen your work.

"Crunchy coastal liberals" -- A relatively minor point to be sure, but after a few decades of being stereotyped as LaLaland and worse, we of the coastal persuasion do get a bit weary of the whole thing. My county has approximately the population of the state of Michigan (give or take a couple hundred thousand) and voted about three-fourths for Clinton in the recent election. Somebody remind me of how those stalwarts of red blooded American values, Michigan and Wisconsin, voted. I merely point out that there is liberalism and there is crunchy, and the two are not necessarily the same thing. You might also remember that Bob Sears is holed up in a conservative corner of the state's second most conservative county. I suspect that one reason for California's reputation is that it was a wide open place where people of all persuasions settled, so they had to either learn to live among each other or start a new civil war. A spirit of tolerance on the broad scale is characteristic of California, with some fairly conservative places interspersed.

I might also point out that Sears and Gordon together make up about 0.2 percent of the pediatricians in the area. I would suspect that they get more publicity than they deserve, partly based on the fact that some national news comes out of this region.

@ Bob G:

Right.
Here in that other bastion of liberalism, crunchy doesn't usually apply except possibly out in the ( so-called) Country where rich people, artists and hippies reside- some of them growing organic vegetables / dying fabrics naturally as a sideline.

Some of the liberal elites are actually elites- working in the markets, buying companies, running things in general etc.

Ironically, Mexico and a lot of central American countries have better vaccine uptakes than the US does.

Really, PgP? What does it matter? For part of 'undocumented' is not knowing the vaccine status -- To shoot'em up with it all in a minimum time frame must be prudent, right?

I'm waiting for immigrants to be blamed for spreading leprosy when the reality is that, after coming here, they were introduced to the local cuisine; indigenous 'possum-on-the-half-shell' aka armadillos which harbor the disease.

http://www.livescience.com/52792-armadillos-leprosy-bacteria-spreading-…

Actually, Gilbert - if vaccination status can be determined by available records (and yes, US authorities do check with their south of the border counterparts), then vaccines aren't given when not necessary.

crunchy doesn’t usually apply except possibly out in the ( so-called) Country where rich people, artists and hippies reside

And even then, only a subset of these are anti-vax.

Having lived in northern New England for mumblety-mumble years, I'm familiar with crunchy liberals. Those are the people who elected Bernie Sanders Mayor of the People's Republic of Burlington, and subsequently Representative and Senator from Vermont. The spillover of that crowd into western New Hampshire, plus their compatriots in places like Nashua, Concord, Portsmouth, and Dover, has been enough to turn this once thoroughly Republican state[1] purple despite the influx of self-selecting Republican voters moving from Massachusetts into the bedroom towns of Rockingham and Hillsborough Counties. But one can be a crunchy liberal and still be practical--being practical is a necessity in places with winters that last as long as ours do. Are some of them anti-vax? Probably. But so far (knock on whatever is handy), not enough to matter.

[1]When I first moved to New Hampshire I registered as "undeclared" (i.e., independent) because in many cases the Republican primary was the de facto election (we have semi-open primaries here). I finally dropped the pretense in February as (1) that is no longer the case and (2) I am not willing to wear a hazmat suit, as would be needed for me to take a Republican primary ballot these days, at the polls. Come January we will have an all-Democratic congressional delegation; as recently as ten years ago it was all-Republican.

Nifty, Lawrence. Many are escaping oppresion from south and central America --

I'm sure their real names of John Barnett, John Bigboote, John Camp, John Careful Walker, John Chief Crier, John Cooper, John Coyote, John Edwards, John Fish, John Fledgling, John Gomez, John Grim, John Guardian, John Icicle Boy, John Jones, John Joseph, John Kim Chi, John Lee, John Littlejohn, John Many Jars, John Milton, John Mud Head, John Nephew, John Nolan, John O'Connor, John Omar, John Parrot, John Rajeesh, John Ready to Fly, John Repeat Dance, John Roberts, John Scott,
John Smallberries, John Starbird, John Take Cover, John Thorny Stick, John Two Horns, John Whorfin, John Wood, John Wright, and John Ya Ya all have accurate medical histories. ICE's google fu must be really powerful.

My bad; How could I forget the higher echelon of John Valuk, John Emdall, John Gant, and John Parker.

Despite the excellent BB reference, you are still a putz....

Guess you've never spoken to border patrol agents....

Gee, Gilbert @31, that list of names sure sounds like you're saying nasty things about Native Americans.

Some here have been accused of tarring with a broad brush, but you choose to use a hose and an industrial fan.

MJD @18: Fun Fact! Herd immunity is also found in heard animals!

Besides, I *like* the image of herd immunity as a herd of bison (immune persons) circled up to protect the young against wolves (VPDs).

OK, Justa Tech;

Count upon the sun
As it will always watch you growing
Count upon the land
To sow the seeds in every young man.

Beating on the drum
Shouting at the moon
No matter what the promise is
I'll never move from this old land of mine.

The promise is to pay
Just watch the people try to steal
The land beneath the clay
The land on which our blood has stained the grass.

Beating on the drum
Screaming at the moon
Promises, oh promises
I'll never move from this old land of mine.

It's a far far cry
>From all the words of exultation
A far far cry
How each child is supposed to be equal
I'm amazed
As you look the other way
To this day
We still don`t believe

Far far cry
Beating on the drum
Far far cry
Screaming at the moon
Beating on the drum
Far far cry

How long do we need to push our brother to the ocean
How long do we need to push our sister to the sea
How many broken promises until we get the message
That until we know the equal we will never feel the free?

It's a far far cry
It's a far far cry
It's a far far cry
So until we know our equal
We commit our suicide.

Beating on the drum
Screaming at the moon

Count upon my heart
As you can feel the earth is beating
Count upon my love
And there is heaven for the taking
Count upon the rest
Count upon the last
Count upon the past
As it will wait until we're coming home.

Far far cry
It's a far far cry
It's a far far cry
It's a far far cry

How long do we need to push our brother to the ocean
How long do we need to push our sister to the sea
How many broken promises until we get the message
That until we know the equal we will never feel the free?

Oh snap, it's another Jon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzRQuSC220g

Of course I heard animals!

@ JustaTech #33
The list of "Johns" Gilbert posted is from the film Buckaroo Banzaii.

In the movie, Buckaroo, a neurosurgeon/particle physicist/race car drive/rock star discovers the Earth was invaded by an alien race called the Red Lectroids in 1938. They were accidentally sucked here through an interdimensional warp and stranded due to the backwards state of Earth technology. In the present, the Lectroids have all become employed by defense contractor Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems, where they are building a space warship for themselves under the ruse of working on a new bomber for the U.S. Air Force.

Buckaroo's team, the Hong Kong Cavaliers, finds out about Yoyodyne and hacks into their computer. They discover that everyone there has the first name John, with various odd last names such as Yaya and Smallberries. At first they believe it to be a joke, but then they notice all the Yoyodyne employees applied for Social Security cards on November 1, 1938 and all in the same town: Grover's Mill, New Jersey.

The list Gilbert posted was created by fans scrutinizing stills of the Yoyodyne employee list shown on-screen in one of the Cavaliers hand's and adding the names there to the ones spoken as dialogue by the characters looking at the list.
And, it's not Bigboote, it's Bigbooté,..

@ JustaTech #33
The list of “Johns” Gilbert posted is from the film Buckaroo Banzai.

Buckaroo’s team, the Hong Kong Cavaliers, finds out about Yoyodyne and hacks into their computer. They discover that everyone there has the first name John, with various odd last names such as Yaya and Smallberries. At first they believe it to be a joke, but then they notice all the Yoyodyne employees applied for Social Security cards on November 1, 1938 and all in the same town: Grover’s Mill, New Jersey.

The names in #31 compose the entirety of the list of Yoyodyne employees complied by fans from scrutinizing stills of a paper list shown on-screen in one of the Cavaliers' hands and adding the names there to the ones spoken as dialogue by the characters reading from the paper.

And, it’s not Bigboote, it’s Bigbooté,..

sadmar @37: Ah, thanks! I've never seen Buckaroo Banzai (although I think I've seen some of their props in a museum).

Gilbert, I apologize.

Thx, sadmar. It seems to be a play on the effectiveness of knowing who/quantifying immigrants who may not wish to divulge their personal info -- I know the feeling.

I suspect that one reason for California’s reputation is that it was a wide open place where people of all persuasions settled, so they had to either learn to live among each other or start a new civil war.

Something something Spahn ranch something.

MJD: I’d like to work at the CDC in Atlanta, GA
And sabotage vaccines. Fixed that for you.

Oh and what a surprise, Gilly's going full white-sheet on us again. I'm sure the Klan has internet forums, why doesn't he hang out there instead?

Ya know, I thought that list looked familiar. Gil, isn't that movie a bit intellectually challenging for you? I'd think the Captain Underpants fandom would be a more suitable place for you.

I'm currently in Amarillo, which has it's own Adams/Null wannabe in Roby Dean Mitchell.

He has a huge billboard on the west side near his office north of I-40. In October it said Amarillo's best doctor, neglecting the fact that his license was suspended in 2012.

He has changed it to

Vaccines Can Cause Autism
Choose Intelligent Design

But he should have added

Carry a Glock

which is apparently part of his little black bag.

http://m.amarillo.com/news/local-news/2016-06-24/former-amarillo-doctor…

Incidentally, he was acquitted because he has.a concealed carry permit which had been temporarily suspended.

I looked up his eponymous web site and it had no articles on autism and only one search result for vaccines.

Vaccines Can Cause Autism
Choose Intelligent Design

Crank magnetism at its finest.

And what makes this idiot think packing heat will help him with his problems?

@Erix Lund

It beats me.

Not sure if it's any safer than his cancer treatment!

Narad: "Something something Spahn ranch something"

Too soon.

But yeah, there was that. I suppose another example of our crunchy liberalism is that we've had two female United States Senators since 1992, and nobody even seems to notice it as an achievement or as unusual. On the other hand, I have it on good authority that until recent years, medical care in southern California was something of the wild west, with unqualified doctors operating their own private surgical hospitals and occasionally doing a lot of harm. Doctors transplanted from Philadelphia and Boston were a bit shocked at what they saw.

JustaTech @38

I've never even heard of Buckaroo Banzai...Is this 'cos of my age or 'cos I'm UK-ian?

@Murmur, I saw it on TV once a great many years ago. I vaguely remember it.

Perhaps Rebecca Hardy will consider adding to her list parents' right not to use car seats, Everyone knows that the safest place for an infant or small child is in mommy's arms.

@Murmur: Here is the IMDB page. The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai: Across the 8th Dimension was made in 1984, and is something of a cult classic.

Roby Mitchell had his Texas medical license revoked back in 2005; the board issued a cease-and-desist order in 2012 to try to stop him from continuing to practice medicine (strange, since injecting a patient's blood into a cow's udder and then having him drink the milk sounds like a swell melanoma treatment to me).

Mitchell (or should I say, "Dr. Fitt")'s Facebook page shows he is a disciple of a certain Friend Of The Blog:

https://www.facebook.com/DrFitt/posts/1085840198149491?comment_tracking…

The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai: Across the 8th Dimension was made in 1984, and is something of a cult classic.

Cult classic? Cult classic? It''s absolute bedrock. Breaking Away could be called a "cult classic." Real People and The Deer Hunter might as well be called "cult classics" for all the traction that references to them is likely to have by this standard.

Repo Man I'll grant you. Wax, fer sure. But not Buckaroo Banzai.

Bullshit. The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension is about as stone cold cult classic as exists out there.

Thinking that prosecuting attorney in San Anton may actually be a character from the 8th dimension.

^ Ummm, Ordinary People, that is – haven't had coffee yet. I propose the simple standard described here by The Handsome Family:*

Some folks are like umbrellas
They pass through your life with little meaning
And then there's the ones who make you hang on to every word

* Although Flannery O'Connor is in sub-umbrella territory as far as I'm concerned. The song is also correct about the projective plane.

The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension is about as stone cold cult classic as exists out there.

Strangely, nearly everyone here seems to be well aware of it.

Consider the readership of this blog. The reason everyone who reads this blog knows about it is because of the nature of people who tend to be attracted to this blog. Now try going outside of the sort of skeptic, science-oriented, science fiction-loving bubble. You'll find that few will have heard of it.

"Where ever you go, there you are...."

Now try going outside of the sort of skeptic, science-oriented, science fiction-loving bubble. You’ll find that few will have heard of it.

Don't make me start a GoFundMe campaign to support a NORC survey.

...injecting a patient’s blood into a cow’s udder and then having him drink the milk...

Eugh.

Going back to Buckaroo Banzai, there were plans to turn it into a TV show. I think it would have worked better in that medium.

Going back to Buckaroo Banzai, there were plans to turn it into a TV show. I think it would have worked better in that medium.

That notion is utterly horrifying to me – it's too dense. I recall some talk of actually making the "promised" sequel,* but that's just silly.

* For true obscurity, I think the same throwback device was employed at the end of the Doc Savage movie with Ron Ely.

There is still a plan to turn BB into a TV series for Amazon with Kevin Smith. The problem is that the intellectual property rights issue is very convoluted, which has tripped up previous attempts to make a sequel. This time, a lawsuit over IP rights has driven Kevin Smith to drop the project. Will someone else pick it up? Who knows?

http://www.ew.com/article/2016/05/16/kevin-smith-buckaroo-banzai-tv-ser…

http://deadline.com/2016/07/buckaroo-banzai-tv-series-deal-kevin-smith-…

http://screenrant.com/buckaroo-banzai-tv-series-kevin-smith-rights-movie

http://www.ew.com/article/2016/11/28/kevin-smith-buckaroo-banzai-tv-ser…

Thanks, DB.

But if course the friend us not anti-vaccine and neither is the movie!

Pull the other one too while you're at it.

At least I know where to find firewood if I figure how to use it in my electric only apartment.

LoL, Kevin Smith?

Buckaroo, I don't know what to say. Lectroids? Planet 10? Nuclear extortion? A girl named "John"? Jay and Silent Bob?

I did love the Cameo appearances.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0261392/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1x_BdsFZ74E

There is still a plan to turn BB into a TV series for Amazon with Kevin Smith. The problem is that the intellectual property rights issue is very convoluted, which has tripped up previous attempts to make a sequel. This time, a lawsuit over IP rights has driven Kevin Smith to drop the project. Will someone else pick it up? Who knows?

Now, that's geekery. I was just going to ask the fellow at the dollar store (Palestinian, but his family has relocated to Lebanon; his wife just earned an Ed.D. and found the job market to be awful) whether he knew it.

The imaginary survey instrument is poking into my moving-on-Monday freakout, though: Worcestershire sauce – relatively obscure, or cult classic? Spumoni (my grandmother used to get pint boxes from Walgreens)?

Will somebody turn off that gosh darn Sadmar klaxon?

At least I know where to find firewood if I figure how to use it in my electric only apartment.

Did Karen Black have an electric oven in the third part of Trilogy of Terror?

OK, I'll knock it off.

The reason I thought that a TV series would have been better was due to sadmar's comment that Buckaroo is a "neurosurgeon/particle physicist/race car driver/rock star". That's an extremely...wide reaching character, and that's why I believed it would have worked better over a TV Series as opposed to a two-hour film. More room for the character to do stuff.

I'm not really in the Buckaroo cult, fwiw. Some of the riffs you can do it in everyday life are fun, especially 'John Bigbooté' but also other Lectroid 'John' bits and Dr. Lizardo impressions.

The main reason I know the film is that it came out when I was in grad school and a lot of younger media studies academics were into it, as... ready? ...something that dovetailed with pomo culture theory. IIRC, well known cul-studs-and-pomo dude Larry Grossberg had a "No matter where you go, there you are." t-shirt.

If you want obscure cult from that era: Liquid Sky.

Don’t make me start a GoFundMe campaign to support a NORC survey.

I'm not sure the minions could hit the GoFundMe goal, since you'd have to come up with $500,000 to get Anthony Mawson to put up a web-poll here:

1. Are you inside or outside the skeptic, science-oriented, science fiction-loving bubble?
( ) INSIDE
( ) OUTSIDE

2. .Have you heard of The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension?
( ) NO
( ) YES

Watch for the results to be published in Frontiers In Communication. Subscribe now!

"sadmar klaxon"?? huh??

Lord John Whorfin: Will somebody turn off that gosh darn klaxon?

def. klaxon: an electric horn or a similar loud warning device.
????
=======

(strange, since injecting a patient’s blood into a cow’s udder and then having him drink the milk...

Yum. Is that some kind of occult practice of the dark art, or something?

Dear Tony, I am so looking forward to the Spirit Cooking dinner at my place.

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/15893

http://www.infowars.com/spirit-cooking-clinton-campaign-chairman-invite…

More room for the character to do stuff.

Yah, but "neurosurgeon/particle physicist/race car driver/rock star" is really just the first 20 or so minutes of the movie. Buckaroo is simply a hero. Let us* recall, for example, the character Scooter.

This is what called to my mind the Doc Savage angle. SRSLY. Tom Swift could fit into this mold, but not a part-and-parcel ensemble. G-d help us from Buckaroo MOTW episodes. Kolchak was much better suited.

* TINU.

Loved Buckaroo Banzai! Peter Weller, John Lithgow, Ellen Barkin, Jeff Goldblum, Christopher Lloyd... very fun movie!

I’m not sure the minions could hit the GoFundMe goal, since you’d have to come up with $500,000 to get Anthony Mawson to put up a web-poll here

That was my initial guess, but I think I could talk them down.

“sadmar klaxon”?? huh??

I'm packing for a move. If you haven't seen the movie, do so immediately. If you have, don't post lengthy cut-and-paste summaries.

Ahh yes. Moving sucks.

I hope you have use of a good car.
_____

I wasn't going to ask JustaTech to go watch the movie just to explain Gilbert's joke.

Cosmic coincidence...? The Red Lectroids seem to have invaded the "Bogus Internet Survey" thread @ comment #139...

Gil: Why don't you just go hang out with your fellow trogs at Brietbart? You don't need to keep dropping your trumpturds here. Seriously, everyone knows you're in the Klan.

"It’s a common misconception that antivaccine views and vaccine-hesitancy are primarily the provenance of crunchy coastal liberals. They’re not."

Yet earlier you point out that the highest rate of non-medical exemptions is in Austin - the most liberal city in Texas.

Yerushalmi, good spot!

Yet, how does the liberalty of Austin score when compared to cities outside of Texas?

injecting a patient’s blood into a cow’s udder
This sounds like a case for the Humane Society.

PgP, I'm not in the clan..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c65T90Q3OZ8

Trump's cabinate picks are starting to scare me; Jeff Sessions (do not want), Mike Pence (banned kratom), moar torture, stop-and-frisk. But most importantly, as I've predicted here before, possibly cosying up to that instigator of extrajudicial killings over there in the Phillipines.

President-elect Donald Trump wished the Philippines well in its bloody war on drugs during a call with President Rodrigo Duterte Friday, according to statements by the Philippine leader.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/duterte-donald-trump-praised-philippines-dr…

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/03/philippines-rodrigo-duter…

Blood and cow's milk are natural, so the treatment must be good.

On a related front, we should solve the opiate crisis by giving people marijuana instead of pain pills. Draymond Green of the Golden State Warriors apparently thinks so.

"You look at something that comes from the earth -- any vegetable that comes from the earth, they encourage you to eat it, you know? So I guess it does make a little sense, as opposed to giving someone a manufactured pill. Like, if something takes your pain away the way some of these pills do, it can't be all good for you."

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/warriors-draymond-green-agrees-with-s…

Have some datura, henbane, pokeweed and poison ivy, Draymond. They're all "vegetables from the earth".

Cannabis is good for pain but maybe not as good as this natural herb, https://www.regulations.gov/docketBrowser?rpp=25&so=DESC&sb=postedDate&… for many people.

In other anti-vax news...

It appears that Dan Olmsted
( Age of Autism,/ yesterday/ weekly (fish) wrap)
is *almost* pleased that Real Clear Science has named his site one of the worst on the 'net. He is only surpassed by Natural News ( #1) and Mercola (#3).

Dan might set his sights higher .. or is it *lower*?

Correction: Mercola (#2).
I can actually count .

DB:
Sheesh!

1. First of all, nobody is looking to Draymond for expert opinions on anything but basketball. Nor is Draymond presenting himself as any sort of authority.

2. He's just bullsh*tting. He was responding to reporter asking for comment on remarks Steve Kerr had made about medical marijuana, which had drawn criticism:

[12/2] If you're an NFL player, in particular, and you got lot of pain, I don't think there's any question that pot is better for your body than Vicodin. And yet, athletes everywhere are prescribed Vicodin like it's Vitamin C, like it's no big deal.
[12/3] The conversation was really about pain relief in professional sports. Because of the way the world works, the way the media works, what is a very serious conversation about pain relief turns into the headline, 'Kerr smokes pot.' But I'm actually kind of glad it became an issue. It's a very important issue to talk about. You get handed prescriptions for Vicodin, Oxycontin, Percocet, NFL players, that's what they're given. The stuff is awful. The stuff is dangerous. The addiction possibility, what it can lead to, the long term health risks.

The issue that's really important is how do we do what's best for the players. If you do any research at all, the stuff they're prescribing is really bad for you. The stuff that they're banning is fine. I'm always struck every time I'm at home on the couch watching a sporting event, some drug commercial comes on and they show these happy people jumping in a lake, rowing a boat, and you just wait for the qualifier: 'Side effects include suicidal thoughts and possible death.' And you're just like 'this is insane'. It's insane. It really is. And yet the stigma is not on those drugs being prescribed day and night to anybody. The stigma is on something that's relatively harmless.

I do find it ironic that had I said that I’ve used OxyContin for relief from my back pain, it would not have been a headline, And I always feel bad for the NFL guys. Playing in the NBA, I had lots of injuries, plenty of pain. I never took anything like the opioids we're talking about. But NFL guys, those guys are basically in a car wreck every week. Sometimes twice in five days which is another issue. But when they're prescribed that, it's really scary. Especially when they're prescribed by team doctors when you do research on the possible repercussions.

When Draymond was asked about the resulting Kerr-fuffle, of course he stood up for Kerr, who is not only his coach but an all-around great guy. So he tried to make the same points about football players and the dangers of opiods, and also that pot is stigmatized far beyond it's danger in comparison. This was an on-the-spot interview, so he just grabbed the first Draymondian expression that popped into his head, which was basically, 'Why y'all afraid of vegtables? I thought they were supposed to be good for you.' He's a guy who's known for colorful hyperbole, a sort of un-serious expression that still addresses some serious point.

In short, the NBA fans who are the primary audience know the context, and won't take him literally.

3. Kerr and Green were only discussing pain treatment for professional athletes, not the opiod crisis in general. Their argument is not that all athletes be given medical cannabis, and none given opiods. It's that players would be better served if effective-enough, less-dangerous pain treatments were available for those for whom they would serve.

4. As far as the non-pro-jock population is concerned, that still sounds like a damn good idea to me.

That's an awful lot of dithering, considering the main point was to highlight the idiocy of saying "any vegetable that comes from the earth, they encourage you to eat it, you know?"

Opioids also derive from or are related to "vegetables that come from the earth".

I realize that I'm addressing someone who thinks physicians just hand out pills willy-nilly without considering other approaches.

# 59 Orac
Now try going outside of the sort of skeptic, science-oriented, science fiction-loving bubble.

Hey, I'm in that bubble and I never heard of it but I almost never watch movies and I don't own a television. Clearly I am ignorant of most popular culture. Thank heavens.

I hope you have use of a good car.

Use of? Sure, although in a limited fashion, as I'm moving into somebody's sunroom. I got me a truck coming, too, up to the storage space.

But you've failed to infer my surname as it's credited in print on rare occasions. One's vehicle represents the state of one's ego, and vice versa, of course.

Gil, dope fiend, you voted for him;, or more charitably you decided to throw your vote away by"voting" for a third party because your bro feelings were hurt by seeing a competent woman running for office. You don't get to complain about the great Orange Id now. So why don't you go away to your native douchebro habitat?

You can only call it dithering from a stance that somehow "idiocy" inheres without exception to the words 'any vegetable that comes from the earth, they encourage you to eat it, you know?' regardless of context.. THAT is idiocy. You are also being evasive about the subtext of your comment: "we should solve the opiate crisis by giving people marijuana instead of pain pills." If you were merely concerned about the naturalistic fallacy of plant/natural/good – pill/manufactured/bad there was no need to frame that with a snide crack at the availability of medical marijuana. Perhaps what you consider 'the main point' was the least telling part of your comment. perhaps, regardless of your imagined intent something else functions very much as 'the main point'.

Speaking of 'dithering,' what shall we call your response to getting something important quite wrong, by shrugging it off as 'not the main point'? Which point you only generated by taking Green's words out of the context – not just the context of who he is and who he's speaking to which would be bad enough, but out of the context on the printed page. Or, as I believe skeptics call it, cherry-picking.

I can't say that I've read into it much. I've never been a guy who has done it, period, so I can't say that I know much about it. But from what I hear from, whether it's /b>football guys, I think a lot of them do it because of all the pain that they go through. And when you read Steve's comments, it makes a lot of sense. You look at something that comes from the earth -- any vegetable that comes from the earth, they encourage you to eat it, you know? So I guess it does make a little sense, as opposed to giving someone a manufactured pill.

Green declares he has no knowledge or authority on the subject of medical marijuana, but he guesses there might be a little that's sensible in Kerr's comments, based on what he does know about football players prescribed opioids for the pain the game wreaks on their bodies. Kerr's point was 'If we're going to let football players take dangerous opioids, it makes no sense to deny them relatively harmless medical pot.' Green expressed that with a typical-for-him off-the-wall metaphor Or, if you will, a "joke', in that neither he nor his fans actually think everything that grows is a 'vegetable' in the sense of what your mom told you to you had to finish eating before getting desert.

Why on earth do you imagine this mild off-the-cuff comment from a professional basketball player is worthy of posting here? Unless, maybe you have some 'issue' beyond your declared 'main point'? Lest you be unaware, there are many many folks in North America who would read 'Draymond Green thinks we should solve the opiate crisis by giving people marijuana instead of pain pills' as 'another Black gangsta just selfishly looking to get a free pass on his partyi drugs'. Good job snipping off the part where Draymond says, "I've never been a guy who has done it, period".

You also cherry-picked distorted Green's printed comment by lopping off the end:

Like, if something takes your pain away the way some of these pills do, it can't be all good for you... he talked about Vicodin and Toradol -- like, you can be completely hurting and then take a Toradol shot and go through a game and feel nothing. Is that really good for you over the course of time? I doubt it. So I think it makes a lot of sense...when you really dive into what he actually said and not the initial thought of, "Oh man, it's weed,"

IIRC, sbm, advocates have made exactly this point about medications that cover up symptoms in a way that may lead to further injury. And that in reference to average J. Does, not extraordinarily fast and powerful athletes taught to 'play through pain' as they hurtle into full-speed collisions with one another.

I’m addressing someone who thinks physicians just hand out pills willy-nilly without considering other approaches.

Ha ha ha. Like I wouldn't recognize the little trick of using language that fails to distinguish between global application and limited application. Back at ya' "I'm addressing someone who thinks physicians hand out medical vaccination exemptions without getting valid documentation of a justifying condition." Doctors, you just can't trust 'em.

What I have actually said is I know of many PCPs who will prescribe benzos at the drop of a hat. I have also said psychiatrists sometimes prescribe meds when other approaches might be better, because that is all they are able to offer within the systemic restrictions imposed by insurance companies and medical groups. I have never said these limited cases involved the prescription of pills "without considering other approaches"; more like "under-considering other approaches." Other than those things, I can't say I know what you might be referencing.

you’ve failed to infer my surname

I didn't try. Are you really Al Jourgensen? Hazel Motes?

One’s vehicle represents the state of one’s ego.

My vehicle is a '96 Honda Civic with a dying battery, two worn out tires, rust starting to creep on the rocker panels, and an interior that hasn't been vacuumed since who-knows-when littered with discarded fast-food wrapping and – usually – a haphazardly unfolded road map. But it's the Del Sol model with a VTEC so it has a little character, charm and even a pit of pizazz on occasion. Really. That's my real car. And while I've honestly never thought of it, it does represent my ego to a 'T'.

Also seriously, I hope you've got a space-heater for that sunroom. As you probably know, I'm from Minnesota, and I'm getting shivers just thinking about rooms w/o insulation in your neck of the woods.

@ jrkrideau

If you have a computer, that's all you need to catch the cool sci-fi movies and shows, while retaining your ignorance of most pop culture, which is mostly dreck.
**cough, cough**bittorrenrt**cough, cough**

You can also get a good idea of what is and isn't worth checking out from Rotten Tomatoes and other review/fan websites. For Sci-Fi shows I've already gushed here at RI over the most excellent 'Mr. Robot', but 'Black Mirror' is really good, too. "Fringe' is a somewhat older show that was good most of the time, though the long-term narrative just fizzles as with most continuing shows with serial elements.

For not terribly old sci-fi movies: Children of Men, Snowpiercer, Another Earth, The Lobster...

One of my favorite flicks of recent years is the unconventional 'biopic' Experimenter, based on the life and work of Stanley Milgram. Highly recommended to all.

Since we're now discussing films on this thread, I'd like to mention a recent one that was a crashing disappointment to me and a lot of other people.
Absolutely Anything
Directed and co-written by Terry Jones and featuring him and the rest of the Monty Python members as well as the late Robin Williams. The story involves a teacher, Neil Clarke (Simon Pegg), being given the power to do absolutely anything he wishes by a group of aliens as a test. If he fails, Earth will be destroyed.
I was expecting a triumphant last hurrah from the Pythons and Williams. What I got was a mediocre, dull, cliched and mostly unfunny film. Check the reviews on "Rotten Tomatoes". It's judged rotten, and for good reason in my view.

National Academy of Medicine: Vaccines contain not only peanut oil, but sesame, fish and soy oils.

pg. 241
https://www.nap.edu/catalog/23658/finding-a-path-to-safety-in-food-alle…

"Allergens in Vaccines, Medications, and Dietary Supplements

Physicians and patients with food allergy must consider potential food allergen exposures in vaccines, medications, and dietary supplement products (e.g., vitamins, probiotics), which are not regulated by labelling laws.
Also, excipients (i.e., substances added to medications to improve various characteristics) may be food or derived from foods (Kelso, 2014). These include milk proteins; soy derivatives; oils from sesame, peanut, fish or soy; and beef or fish gelatin. The medications involved include vaccines;
anesthetics; and oral, topical, and injected medications. With perhaps the exception of gelatin, reactions appear to be rare overall, likely because little residual protein is included in the final preparation of these items. The specific risk for each medication is not known.
Vaccines also may contain food allergens, such as egg protein or gelatin. "

The result:
http://www.bmj.com/content/355/bmj.i5225/rr-0

@vinu, Citing something You yourself wrote as proof for the claims you're making is regarded as onanistic.

Julian Frost: "Citing something You yourself wrote as proof for the claims you’re making is regarded as onanistic."

And just stupid. So is the being onanistic... that is also very stupid, because it does not prevent anything.

#96 Julian Frost,

I did not write the NAM report ...

@vinu, the extract you posted above has the words "potential", "may be food or derived from foods" and "reactions appear to be rare overall, likely because little residual protein".
That's not proof.
We had this discussion before around a year ago. What you have is a lot of conjecture, and very little hard data.

Vaccines contain not only peanut oil, but sesame, fish and soy oils.

Err, no.

The full quotation, right over there at #95, is:

The medications involved include vaccines; anesthetics; and oral, topical, and injected medications.

I have this feeling that, in this list, oral and topical medications are the ones containing animal or vegetable oil, but it's just me.
I guess one shouldn't expect dietary supplements to contain stuff coming from food.

The result:

Err, no. Not "the result".

A badly-written recap of your arguments that you piggybacked in the comment section of a bona fide scientific article with conclusions opposite to your opinion.

@ Narad:

In the *sunroom*? It sounds so Victorian,
At any rate, good luck with that.

"Vaccines also may contain food allergens, such as egg protein"

No sh1t Sherlock, erm they grow some of the viruses in eggs and have been using animals to grow viruses since the 1800s. Strange that there wasn't a surge in Beef allergies, from way back then.

Now either you knew that and are maliciously spreading Fear, Doubt and Uncertainty.

Or you didn't know this and should be dismissed as someone who doesn't know what they are talking about.

Pick one.

Well, the state of one's vehicle as representational as one's ego..
that's debatable.
*Par example*, my own ego is quite fine thank you but I drive ( most of the time- I have use of others' vehicles as well) an ancient faded, black 4wheel drive thingie that would look perfectly at home barreling across the savannah in order to photograph cheetahs or to deliver medical supplies to a stranded outpost .
But it runs astonishingly well despite its years so how can I give it up?

Denice@103: I'm with you on that point. I drive a vehicle which is old enough that, if it were a person, it could legally buy alcohol in the US. But it handles curves nicely (an important consideration where I live) and does well in light to moderate snow (also an important consideration where I live). It even does well on dirt and gravel roads--surfaces that many SUVs seldom if ever see. The car has been up the Mount Washington Auto Road, as well as through Sandwich Notch on a rainy day.

It helps that most of the time I walk to wherever I'm going. But I can depend on the car to get me there if I need to get somewhere beyond walking distance

In other anti-vax news...

Today Anne Dachel ( AoA) discusses Orac/ Orac's friend, Dr DHG in regards to his article about Trump's choice for Secretary of HHS. Adams and Bolen have the goods on these fellows.
See comments.

Julian: Have you ever seen Brazil? I think Terry Jones or Eric Idle wrote the script. I need to find a copy to own. I’d also recommend the History of Future Folk, and if you haven’t seen Childhood’s End or the Day the Earth Stood Still, you’re in for a treat. (Also, I’ve been listening to a lot of old podcasts, and I found a rebroadcast of R.U.R., the Czech play responsible for the word robot joining the English language.)

The peanut-oil-in-vaccines meme continues to circulate despite zero evidence.

An antivaxer I recently encountered triumphantly submitted as proof a decades-old patent application for a vaccine, which mentioned possible adjuvants to be used with it, including peanut oil. There was no indication the patent application ever was approved, that the vaccine was ever trialed or OK'd for use, or that any ingredient of it ever included peanut oil.

Standards of evidence in antivax-land are notably lax.

Peanut oil is not approved by the FDA for use as an adjuvant in vaccines.
Peanut oil is used in injections.
Kelso, J. M. 2014. Potential food allergens in medications. J Allergy Clin Immunol
133(6):1509-1518; quiz 1519-1520.

Since it is approved for injection, cross contamination to vaccines is easily possible and why would people invest in controlling contamination by a ingredient approved as safe?.
The problem is that designation that peanut oil is safe, is WRONG.

It is impossible to remove proteins completely from peanut oil.
The human immune system is THE best protein detector.

It takes a lot less protein to cause the development of allergy than it takes to cause an allergic reaction. Please see details here:
http://www.omicsgroup.org/journals/evidence-that-food-proteins-in-vacci…

Have you ever seen Brazil? I think Terry Jones or Eric Idle wrote the script.

That's one of my favorites. Though, it was written and directed by Terry Gilliam; Michael Palin, also of 'Python fame, plays the particularly dark part as Dr. Jack Lint.

Arresting Officer: This is your receipt for your husband; and this is my receipt for your receipt.

"...We're all in it together, kid."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olXUIcb80N0

Gil: Stop pretending to be an intelligent lifeform. No one's impressed. Seriously, go back t o Reddit and the My Little Ponies, you mega-creep.

I suppose Gil is a good example of the sad little boner problem plaguing the sci-fi community and specifically the Hugos right now.

Vaccines contain not only peanut oil, but sesame, fish and soy oils.

Oh dear God, not this again.

the sad little boner problem plaguing the sci-fi community

Lord, you are acerbic. The Sad and Rabid? I had never heard of them until you were 3itching about it awhile ago. I have it on good faith that those attempting to game that system will soon not be too much fun:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjFTubAdXP8

Children of Men, Snowpiercer, Another Earth

sadmar, since the first two on your list was so powerful, I just watched the other one-- Seeking redemption and botched that way up to; A strange little flick, Thx.

I'd like to throw in The Quiet Earth (also 1985 and filmed in New Zealand).

"I've been condemed to live."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dB1tYT_iNkQ

And since PgP likes Terry Jones, Eric the Viking (1989).

Director:Terry Jones
Writer:Terry Jones
Stars:Tim Robbins, John Cleese, Mickey Rooney

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097289/

# 89 Narad

One’s vehicle represents the state of one’s ego

I have a 5 year old Norco Aviva with brand new bright red panniers. Not quite sure what it indicates about my ego but I get great mileage. I figure about 25km/banana.

I need to get the winter tires on tomorrow.

# 93 f you have a computer, that’s all you need to catch the cool sci-fi movies and shows, while retaining your ignorance of most pop culture, which is mostly dreck. **cough, cough**bittorrenrt**cough, cough**

I'll have to learn. Experimenter definitely sounds interesting. His experiments were quite famous when I was a psych undergrad a few years ago.

I’ll have to learn.

One would also need something that plays all the various formats:
http://www.videolan.org/vlc/index.html

Eric Idle wasn't involved in writing Brazil. Terry Gilliam wrote the original story and the first draft of a screenplay with a guy named Charles Alverson – who didn't get a credit and didn't like the direction the film went from there anyway. The screenplay was then re-written over a number of drafts by Tom Stoppard, the celebrated English playwright of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead., Jumpers., and Travesties. Gilliam made changes to the shooting script, which he has described as "making a bit of a mess of the neatness that Tom had brought to the film, and then tried to make it a bit more murky." However the story and dialogue retain a lot of Stoppard's trademark absurdist wit. Here are some Stoppard one-liners, mostly from R. & G.. Do note that they're written from the perspective of the characters, whose ideas are not necessarily the same as the author's:

“Eternity is a terrible thought. I mean, where's it going to end?”
“We are tied down to a language which makes up in obscurity what it lacks in style.”
“A man talking sense to himself is no madder than a man talking nonsense not to himself.”
“War is capitalism with the gloves off”
“If they are all so obsessed with change they should begin by changing for dinner.”
“The media. It sounds like a convention of spiritualists.”
“If rationality were the criterion for things being allowed to exist, the world would be one gigantic field of soya beans! ”
“People do terrible things to each other, but it's worse in the places where everybody is kept in the dark.”
“Atheism is a crutch for those who cannot bear the reality of God.”
“The scientific approach to the examination of phenomena is a defence against the pure emotion of fear.”
“I've lost all capacity for disbelief. I'm not sure that I could even rise to a little gentle scepticism.”
"I was trying to face one way or the other and I got confused and fell over. Let that be my epitaph.”

G: What's the first thing you remember?
R: [thinks] No, it's no good. It was a long time ago.
G: No, you don't take my meaning. What's the first thing you remember after all the things you've forgotten?
R: Oh, I see... I've forgotten the question.

________

True story: I saw Brazil on it's release in an old movie theater that had been duplexed by just building a wall down the middle of the original auditorium. The original screen had been slightly curved, and the seating pattern had been slightly concave to account for that. This left each part of the halved auditorium with the screen at an angle. The projectors, in the old booth, also beamed out at an angle in the remodeled house, from positions close to the new center wall. Anyway, I was there by myself at a poorly attended early evening screening, so I had my choice of seats. I planted myself at my chosen distance from the screen, close to dead center on the projection – which in this hatchet-job remodeled theater put me in a seat right next to that added center wall.

This wall was built on the cheap, and as Brazil went on, I was repeatedly distracted by noise coming through the divider from the half-theater showing a different movie on the other side. Not just the boom crash explosion soundtrack, but the chatter and exclamations from whoever was sitting in the mirror image seats to mine. I looked over to the wall a few times in annoyance, may even have said 'shut up!'. It mas me against them.

And just then, the scene below came on the screen. When the movie was over, I walked home in a daze, as if I'd just passed through The Twilight Zone
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jr3eIAIFyo8

^^ sadmar, nailed it!

@ Eric Lund:

Mine is over 21 as well.

I've driven it in all sorts of horrible conditions : relatively deep unplowed snow, ice, sand, rocks, water, up unpaved steep roads and overgrown rocky forest paths where branches scratched its exterior and roof.. Occasionally, I helped people who WERE stranded by snow or flood- mostly the elderly- when they needed meds or food.

People stop me in parking lots offering to buy it. I'm waiting for someone who can offer me a movie deal.

At other times, I can be seen in a pale gold Jaguar or either a black Japanese or Korean functional vehicle.

Interesting that you draw a parallel between Texas and California. These two states are not as separate as you might think. Migration from California to Texas has been relatively large over the past decade, dwarfing immigration to Texas from any other state. 60,000 Californians moved to Texas in 2013 alone.

So this may be one factor lowering vaccination rates in Texas. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if migration out of California to other states, including Texas, increased after the passage of SB 277.

I hope you've all read the latest shocking revelations about the HPV vaccine as detailed on the real health news websites like Health Impact News and David Icke's site. Another actual scientist just like Dr. Thompson (Mahin Khatami, formerly of the NCI) has ripped the cover off the HPV vaccine scam and revealed the truth. Excerpt from the abstract in Clinical and Translational Medicine:

"Analyses of data and hidden agenda behind repeated failed outcomes of cancer research and therapy, status of American health, safety concerns for HPV vaccines and future research considerations are summarized in this commentary. A closer look at cancer science reveals that highly power structure (system) in medical establishment vs. anti-system and chaos in cancer research (‘medical/scientific ponzi schemes’)* is potent recipe for failed therapeutics that kills patients but generates huge corporate profit."

Yes.

Khatami also tells us that cancer is a delayed hypersensitivity reaction, that HPV vaccination causes premature aging, and reveals that emerging clinical data demonstrates the health dangers of HPV vaccination.**

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40169-016-0126-1

All in all, a fun read, and better not criticize Dr. Khatami as she can be litigious (a superior at the NCI (where Khatami worked before being the object of "forced retirement" in 2009) took out a Peace Order against her to prevent alleged harassment, and wound up being sued by Khatami).

http://www.semmes.com/publications/cases/2012/02/federal-torts-claims-a…

*The paper chastises cancer specialists who, in the immortal words of Rumi, "cannot see the camel in the minaret but can see the hair in its nose!"
**I'm a bit confused about the scholarly references Khatami supplies to document the clinical harms of HPV vaccination, as both involve articles in Health Impact News focusing on rather different subjects (one is by Barbara Loe Fisher blasting flu vaccination, and the other is a rant about the vaccine "police state".

failed therapeutics that kills patients

Imagine my surprise and disappointment that no-one at Springer is proof-reading the Abstracts. What is Dr Khatami's first language?

Imagine my surprise and disappointment that no-one at Springer is proof-reading the Abstracts.

It's pretty bad overall (e.g., "the evil part of human being"), but that one could maybe be filed under "singular in construction."

^ Ah yes, "<blocquote;gt;"; my 'k' key seems to be trying to compensate for the 'm' key's hyperactivity.

my ‘k’ key seems to be trying to compensate for the ‘m’ key’s hyperactivity.
I blame the highly power structure.

Better buy Khatami's book ("Cancer Research and Therapy - Scam of Century - Promote Immunity [Yin-Yang]") before it's suppressed by the power structure. From the summary on Amazon (only $48 for the paperback edition!):

"This report assesses the multi-factorial criminal motives that a highly sophisticated medical hierarchy [cancer establishment] designed for creation and control of a sick society that is drug-dependent. The power of establishment grew since 1955 when public was inoculated with million doses of virus-contaminated polio vaccines that sharply increased the deadly cancer incidence and mortality and many chronic diseases. This book is timely as additional funding [VP Biden Moonshot Initiative] is provided to support the same establishment that created the cancer tragedy for huge corporate profits...The author believes that ‘Love doesn't want people to stay ignorant and frightened. Love doesn't value obedience over all else. Love doesn't judge and find some lives, or loves, more valuable than others. Love doesn't use people and throw them away...’ Jay Jason Stacy."

Better buy Khatami’s book (“Cancer Research and Therapy – Scam of Century – Promote Immunity [Yin-Yang]”) before it’s suppressed by the power structure.

I am happy to wait for the copy-paste trolls to quote the best bits.

The author believes that ‘Love doesn’t want people to stay ignorant and frightened. Love doesn’t value obedience over all else. Love doesn’t judge and find some lives, or loves, more valuable than others. Love doesn’t use people and throw them away…

I'm reminded that HHCBH Art Kleps used to recommend Love's Body by Norman O. Brown as an example of (IIRC, potentially) Snazzm thinking, but I've never gotten around to it.

Love’s Body by Norman O. Brown

I tried reading "Love Against Death" once, only to discover that Brown had set out to beat the records previously set by Freud, Marcuse and Lacan for ex-cathedra bullsh1t.

Please see details here:
http://www.omicsgroup.org/journals

Oh dear. Paying the low-life grifters at OMICS to include your claims in one of their journal-shaped dumpsters means that you have wasted your money on a write-only press release.

Judging a book by its cover?
The BMJ and NEJM published references to it.

Why don't you provide the EVIDENCE instead?
You talk about evidence based medicine but practice EMINENCE based medicine?

I believe that the good Herr Doktor practices aquavit based medicine.

aquavit based medicine.
It is a form of herbal therapy that is traditional among my people. The herbs being caraway and coriander, mainly.

Narad, forgive my ignorance but what is "Snazzm Thinking"?

I offer the following as another means of avoiding thinking too hard about the fact that Jim O’Neill is one of Trump's less-awful cabinet picks, compared to the Putin-crony Secy of State, the anti-labor Labor Secy, the climate-change denier head of EPA (paraphrasing SNL, he's excited to protect oil companies from the environment) — and, finally, the guy who thinks Hilary Clinton and John Podesta just might have been running a child sex-slave ring out a bunker tunneled underneath a pizza joint named Comet Ping Pong. He is, of course, going to head the National Security Administration. And no the Senate doesn't have to confirm that one, so the General is absolutely in like Flynn. So clever, that Donald!

If you wanted to speculate on the consequences for science [or reason, or facts, or other boring archaic yada yada yada] of any of that, or what the FDA will be like under a SeaSteading trans-humanist techno-fascistic vampire, you'd be over on the other thread. You sure wouldn't be here trying to reassure yourself with haughty one-liner dismissals of freudo-marxism as "ex-cathedra bullsh1t" while such normally stuffy sources as The New Yorker are pondering that we're so deep in the eff(ed)-lulent that Frankfurt Farms bullsh1t (which only seems ex cathedra if you don't understand those guys were so anti-cathedral they tore down any edifices anyone tried to erect underneath them) just might offer some clues to how we got into this fine mess.

But here you are, so amusing distraction shall be my aim, and bandwidth be damned! Let the ol' superego relax, and fire up the id drive for some Fun with Freudianism!
______

As therapy, I don't doubt the consensus that Freudianism pretty much sucks eggs. However, as a source for useful ideas in film and culture criticism, with the right spin a dose of Ziggy still rocks, and even (albeit rarely) a pinch of re-processed Jack Lacantunderstandhim too. (Woe be it to anyone fool enough to bother reading the original of Lacan, or so I've been told in clear enough tones by people smarter than I am, such that I never risked my sanity trying).

But first, this: A guy I knew in my grad school days who was into the Frankfurt School had a favorite anecdote about Marcuse (I have no idea if it was apocryphal): Since Herb had written Eros and Civiization, when The Sensuous Man hit the best-seller list, some scribe had the thought to seek out ol' Herb in hopes of getting some erudite commentary on this new pop publishing phenomenon. Marcuse just told him (or so the story goes) "I don't need a book to tell me how to f***." If that's ex cathedra, don't tell the Pope.
________

For basic Freud-via-Marcuse applied to movies, see Robin Wood's eminently readable, "Introduction to the American Horror Film" Since i doubt any minions will look it up on Google, I'll leave a (slightly condensed) sample here. Remember, 'theory' is mainly written by socially marginal weirdos trying to flip starchy conventional wisdom on it's head. The good stuff always retains elements of a kind of intellectual slapstick. In short, it's FUN!:

One might say that the true subject of the horror genre is the struggle for recognition of all that our civilization represses or oppresses, its reemergence dramatized, as in our nightmares, as an object of horror, a matter for terror, and the happy ending (when it exists) typically signifying the restoration of repression...
Dreams—the embodiment of repressed desires, tensions, fears that our conscious mind rejects—become possible when the censor that guards our subconscious relaxes in sleep, though even then the desires can only emerge in disguise, as fantasies that are innocent or apparently meaningless. One of the functions of the concept of entertainment—by definition, that which we don’t take seriously, or think about much (“It’s only entertainment”)—is to act as a kind of partial sleep of consciousness. This is why seemingly innocuous genre movies can be far more radical and fundamentally undermining than works of conscious social criticism. The old tendency to dismiss the Hollywood cinema as escapist always defined escape merely negatively as escape from, but escape logically must also be escape to. The fantasies are not meaningless; they can represent attempts to resolve those tensions in more radical ways than our consciousness can countenance.
It becomes easy, if this is granted, to offer a simple definition of horror films: they are our collective nightmares. The conditions under which a dream becomes a nightmare are that the repressed wish is, from the point of view of consciousness, so terrible that it must be repudiated as loathsome, and that it is so strong and powerful as to constitute a serious threat.

Wood's most cited example of this thesis (though he didn't make a major point of it himself, really) was the monstrous family of Texas Chansaw Massacre representing the return of the repressed "exploited and degraded proletariat” expressing our repressed fears of "the logical end of human relations under capitalism” i.e. cannibalism. See, I told you, this is fun stuff!
____________

For Lacan by way of marxist-feminism, see "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema" by Laura Mulvey. The essay may seem like impenetrable gibberish, but if you have a simple Lacanian-jargon decoder ring, it's actually not only clear (and, as such, possibly makes it lousy Lacan, not that I care) but a model of a well structured essay. Which is not to say it's 'right'. Again', it's primary value is setting out a provacative line of argument, and a certain amount of metaphor and hyperbole come with the territory. It's a mistake to take this stuff too seriously or too literally, which cinema-bros are wont to do with Mulvey. "Methinks the dudes doth protest too much!" ;-) Remember again gang, this is Fun with a capital F and that stands for Feminist Film Theory! And since I think quiz games are major fun, there's a little film puzzler at the end.

In a world ordered by sexual imbalance, pleasure in looking has been split between active/male and passive/female. The determining male gaze projects its fantasy onto the female figure, which is styled accordingly. In their traditional exhibitionist role women are simultaneously looked at and displayed, with their appearance coded for strong visual and erotic impact so that they can be said to connote to-be-looked-at-ness…
She holds the look, plays to, and signifies male desire. The presence of woman is an indispensable clement of spectacle in normal narrative film, yet her visual presence tends to work against the development of a story line, to freeze the flow of action in moment of erotic contemplation. Traditionally, the woman displayed has functioned on two levels: as erotic object for the characters within the screen story, and as erotic object for the spectator within the auditorium, with a shifting tension between the looks on either side of the screen.
An active/passive heterosexual division of labor has similarly controlled narrative structure: The male figure cannot hear the burden of sexual objectification. Hence the split between spectacle and narrative supports the man's role as the active one of forwarding the story, making things happen. The man controls the film fantasy and also emerges as the representative of power in a further sense: as the bearer of the look of the spectator, transferring it behind the screen to neutralize the extra-diegetic tendencies represented by woman as spectacle. As the spectator identifies with the main male protagonist, he projects his look onto that of his like, his screen surrogate, so that the power of the male protagonist as he controls events, coincides with the active power of the erotic look, both giving a satisfying sense of omnipotence.
A male movie star’s glamorous characteristics are thus not those of the erotic object of the gaze, but those of the more perfect, more complete, more powerful ideal ego conceived in the original moment of recognition in front of the mirror. The character in the story can make things happen and control events better than the subject/spectator – just as the image in the mirror was more in control of motor coordination.
But in psychoanalytic terms, the female figure poses a deeper problem. She also connotes something that the look continually circles around but disavows: her lack of a penis, implying a threat of castration and hence unpleasure. Ultimately the meaning of woman is sexual difference, the absence of the penis is visually ascertainable, the material evidence on which is based the castration complex essential for the organization of entrance to the symbolic order and the Law of the Father. Thus the woman as icon, displayed for the gaze and enjoyment of men, the active controllers of the look, always threatens to evoke the anxiety it originally signified.
The male unconscious has two avenues of escape from this castration anxiety: preoccupation with the reenactment of the original trauma (investigating the woman, demystifying her mystery), counter-balanced by the devaluation, punishment, or saving of the guilty object; or else complete disavowal of castration by turning the represented figure into a fetish so that it becomes reassuring rather than dangerous (hence overvaluation, the cult of the female star). This second avenue, fetishistic scopophilia, builds up the physical beauty of the object, transforming it into something satisfying in itself. The first avenue, voyeurism, on the contrary, has associations with sadism: pleasure lies in ascertaining guilt (immediately associated with castration}, assuming control and subjecting the guilty person through punishment or forgiveness.

If you followed any of that (and you could, if you tried) you might be able to guess what classic Hollywood film (from 1958) Mulvey praises for so thoroughly foregrounding the dynamics of scopophilia (literally 'pleasure of looking' btw) and the controlling aspect of voyeurism that they come out in the open, such that. "the process of identification normally associated with ideological correctness and the recognition of established morality [is revealed] and shows up its perverted side." You've probably seen it. If not, you should. Hint: Not long ago, it moved past Citizen Kane into first place in a critics poll of The Greatest Films Of All Time.
________

You may resume being serious, at your own discretion.

As therapy, I don’t doubt the consensus that Freudianism pretty much sucks eggs.

M. Scott Peck, a psychologist and author of several books I read wrote that psychotherapy worked best for people who needed it the least. To my mind, that's a sign of a poor treatment.

[Y]ou might be able to guess what classic Hollywood film (from 1958) Mulvey praises for so thoroughly foregrounding the dynamics of scopophilia...

Gigi.
Ok, I'll admit I had help. Quiz crossword yesterday had the answer. "1958 film starring Maurice Chevalier and Leslie Caron (4)".

As I recall, Vertigo passed Citizen Kane back when Roger Ebert was still alive.

Gigi is a fun film, but I don't recall it even breaking the top ten.

Julian might have been joking about 'Gigi'.

The answer, of course, is 'Vertigo'.

As much as Mulvey's essay has been attacked over the years as a paradigm of strident feminism (unfairly... but that's a long story), it sure helped illuminate Vertigo's importance to all sorts of stuff, revive and enrich the discussions around the film. Film theory and criticism is more abut kicking up important and unsettling questions than finding any kind of definitive answers.

When 'Vertigo' was released, in '58, the questions driving its thematic were ones most people refused to even entertain, much less try to answer – and the film had been a box office disappointment. It did not have significant re-releases in the next decade, and was one of five Hitchcock films withdrawn from distribution in 1973 – the year Mulvey's essay was first published, as it happens. So she was looking more to a neglected work by a master than a certified 'classic'.

Whatever you may think of Mulvey's ideas (or her prose), there's no question the ideas filtered out of academia and were a key element in the re-evaluation of 'Vertigo' when it was into back into distribution in '83 and released on video in '84. This is what good film/media scholarship does: enriches and deepens our discussions of how creative works speak to thinks that matter, for good or ill, or often some of both.

If any of you are film buffs: the Criterion DVD of 'Peeping Tom' has an accessible and fascinating full-length critical analysis commentary track by Mulvey. That film, released in 1960, had been labeled 'the British "Psycho"', but received such a vitriolic reception it ruined the career of director Michael Powell ( ‘49th Parallel’ ‘Stairway to Heaven’ ‘Black Narcissus’ ‘The Red Shoes’). It, too, is now considered both a classic, and a masterpiece. Roger Ebert wrote:

Other movies let us enjoy voyeurism; this one extracts a price. "Peeping Tom" is a masterpiece precisely because it doesn't let us off the hook, like all of those silly teenage slasher movies do. We cannot laugh and keep our distance: We are forced to acknowledge that we watch, horrified but fascinated.

Fake news. Poor reporting. Sub journalist.
Just to start out, herd immunity refers to the effects of a wild microbe passing through a population and conferring permanent and inheritable immunity. The fact is that vaccines do no such thing. They work in a chronic rather than acute manner, and do not confer immunity. Did you know that the Disneyland outbreak was mostly among people who had been vaccinated? Learn how to do research and understand science before you write such bullshit.

Point one:

"Fake news" ≠ "something I disagree with."
"Fake news" ≠ "sloppy or biased reporting." (My "reporting" is not sloppy, although I freely admit my bias in favor of rigorous science.)

Point two: I am not a journalist. I never claimed to be one. I am, however, a physician and scientist well versed in matters of vaccine science for someone who doesn't specialize in it. As such, I can call your tropes for what they are: Bullshit. You do not understand herd immunity. Also, it's not the gross numbers of vaccinated versus unvaccinated who fall ill in an outbreak of vaccine-preventable disease. It's frequently the case that, because there are usually many more vaccinated than unvaccinated, the number of vaccinated who fall ill will be higher than the number of unvaccinated. However, when you normalize to the numbers of each and look at the attack rate, the risk of falling ill, is much, much higher if you are not vaccinated, as high as twenty times higher or more.

Finally, you are using a new, blatantly obvious technique used by purveyors of false news in which anything you disagree with is labeled "fake news." My response: "Fake news." You keep using that term. I do not think it means what you think it means.

"It’s frequently the case that, because there are usually many more vaccinated than unvaccinated, the number of vaccinated who fall ill will be higher than the number of unvaccinated. "

So logically, the vaccinated ill are responsible for a larger portion of the outbreak/spread than the unvaccinated. The PRIORITY therefore should be improving vaccine effectiveness instead of focusing on the smaller issue of coercing the unvaccinated to vaccinate. And, if simultaneously, vaccine SAFETY is improved, there may be no unvaccinated to fight over ...

@Robin Guara:
Everything you have written is wrong. Thought you'd like to know.

Fake news. Poor reporting. Sub journalist.

Say, Robin, have you met Kristina? You both seem to be fond of necromancing comment threads to complain about "the journalism."

herd immunity refers to the effects of a wild microbe passing through a population and conferring permanent and inheritable immunity

You don't say. Have any examples of this phenomenon in humans?

So logically, the vaccinated ill are responsible for a larger portion of the outbreak/spread than the unvaccinated. The PRIORITY therefore should be improving vaccine effectiveness instead of focusing on the smaller issue of coercing the unvaccinated to vaccinate. And, if simultaneously, vaccine SAFETY is improved, there may be no unvaccinated to fight over.

That' some serious missing of the point.

Sorry, how?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3076704/
" The phenomenon of “oral tolerance” has been known for over a century, viz, hyporesponsiveness to a fed antigen on subsequent challenge with that antigen."

Century old stuff, still perfectly relevant. And this oral tolerance was discovered a hundred years ago while researching injected food proteins causing food allergy.

THE BIOLOGICAL REACTIONS OF THE VEGETABLE PROTEINS.

http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/8/1/66.short

Wells and Osborne were studying sensitization (development of food allergy) caused by
injections of vegetable proteins. They noted during their study that ingestion of these proteins provided protection against future sensitization by injection (oral tolerance).

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312125211_Professional_Miscond…

Robin Gaura #143

Did you know that the Disneyland outbreak . . .

You are wrong. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6414a1.htm

The majority of the 159 patients with reported measles in the 2015 outbreaks were either unvaccinated (71 [45%]) or had unknown vaccination status (60 [38%]); 28 (18%) had received measles vaccine. Among the 68 U.S. residents who had measles and were unvaccinated, 29 (43%) cited philosophical or religious objections to vaccination, 27 (40%) were ineligible because they were too young to receive vaccination (26 patients) or had a medical contraindication (one), three (4%) represented missed opportunities for vaccination, and nine (13%) had other reasons for not being vaccinated

If you have to lie to make your point, maybe you should re-think your position.