E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSAn increasing number of parents may be choosing to delay or limit certain vaccinations for their young children, a new study shows, even as cases of pertussis, or whooping cough, continue to rise nationwide, with recent outbreaks in California and Washington.
The study, which examined medical records for 97,711 Portland children, found an almost four-fold increase between 2006 and 2009 in the percentage of parents who delayed or skipped vaccinations, researchers reported in the journal Pediatrics. Experts say that by delaying certain vaccinations, parents may be putting their children -- and those of others -- at a far greater risk of contracting deadly diseases, such as pneumonia and pertussis.
The new study examined the vaccination histories of children born in the Portland area between 2003 and 2009. Between 2006 and 2009, the number of parents who rejected government recommendations and made up their own vaccine schedules rose from 2.5 percent to 9.5 percent.
While the researchers could not say how typical the Portland results are compared to other areas around the country -- Portland schools reportedly have some of the highest vaccine exemption rates in the U.S. -- a 2011 study published in Pediatrics found that 13 percent of parents nationwide were using alternative schedules. Another study published in Public Health Report in 2010 found that almost 22 percent of parents were deviating in some way from the CDC's recommendations for infant vaccinations -- either by delaying shots, leaving out certain vaccines, or skipping vaccinations altogether.
The vaccine delays may not completely explain recent whooping cough outbreaks in states such as California and Washington, but “they certainly don’t help,” said Dr. Jaime Deville, a UCLA professor of infectious diseases in the pediatrics department.
The main reason parents give for delaying shots is fear their children will be harmed by receiving multiple vaccines at the same time, according to the study’s lead author, Steve Robison, an epidemiologist at the Oregon Health Authority. The vaccines most likely to be delayed by 9 months were for hepatitis B and pneumococcal disease (pneumonia).
For example, at both the two- and six-month visits the CDC recommends kids get a total of six vaccines. Even with some of them combined that adds up to a lot of shots. By age 4, children receive up to 28 vaccinations, based on the CDC immunization schedule.
Some parents believe they’ll get the same benefit if they spread the vaccinations out over more doctors’ visits rather than getting them all at once.
“There are rumors out there that your body can’t handle that many vaccines, that your body won’t be able to respond appropriately if you get several all at one time,” Robison said.
Experts say vaccines pose no harm to babies; even though multiple shots can be painful for a few moments, they say the consequences of delaying vaccinations can be much worse.
There are reasons for concern over the delayed vaccines. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention there were 2,325 cases of pertussis in Washington state through June 9, 2012, compared to 171 during the same time period in 2011. A 2010 outbreak in California led to 9,143 cases -- including 10 infant deaths -- the most cases in that state since 1947.
"We’d like parents to know that the recommended number of doses of a vaccine is what is needed to build adequate protection levels both for their child and for the community," Robison said. "One dose of a vaccine, such as for pertussis, doesn’t build enough protection."
By 9 months, infants on an alternative vaccine schedule had fewer injections than those with parents following the government recommended schedule -- an average of 6.4 versus 10.4 shots -- and more doctors’ visits for vaccinations.
What’s more, few had caught up with the recommended number of vaccinations by the end of the study.
One big problem with the modified schedule is that parents are bringing children who haven’t been appropriately vaccinated into the doctor’s office more often -- thus putting other kids at greater risk, said pediatrician Dr. Andrew Nowalk, an assistant professor at the Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center.
Deville is especially concerned about parents who are choosing to delay the pneumococcal vaccine until age 2. Infants are most vulnerable to pneumonia during the first year of life. "Parents who delay the vaccine until age 2 are leaving their children vulnerable during the period where it occurs at its highest frequency,” Deville said.
An added advantage of the pneumococcal vaccine is that it lowers the amount of bacteria living in kids’ noses and throats, Nowalk said. “So the children who aren’t getting vaccinated are more likely to be carrying the bacteria without being infected and spreading it to others,” he added. “When you don’t vaccinate your child you’re not only putting your child at risk but also those of others.”
Further, Nowalk said, there are lots of kids out there with immune deficiencies -- those with leukemia, or depressed immune systems because of organ transplants, for example -- who can't get vaccines. So they have to rely on everyone else getting vaccinated.
“When enough of the population is immunized, transmission is essentially stopped,” Deville explained. “The bottom line is that immunizations are extremely safe. They have the most value of any of our interventions when it comes to prolonging life and preventing diseases – not only for our own children but also for the community.”
Health officials in Washington state say whooping cough has reached epidemic levels. Hundreds of cases have been reported so far this year, six times more compared to the same period in 2011. NBC's Mike Taibbi reports.
Related:
Hidden hairs can strangle baby's tiny toes
Cutting compulsion affects kids as young as 7
Parents shouldn't have to sue over 'wrongful birth'
Leave a Comment:
I am thankful for all those that vaccinate. You and your children are the guinea pigs for all pharmaceutical companies. When you all have it straightened out and ONE vaccine in America can be proven safe and effective (as of right now, none of them can legally state this) then please let all of us who have done our research about vaccinations know. No one questions Dr. Oz (the praised DR of America) on why he himself tells America to go and get the flu shot..yet he will not give the shots to his children. Dr's know the truth. Unfortunately, vaccinations are also a paycheck for Dr's. You must start asking more questions, America.
And yes it is unfortunate that parents are vaccinating their children and yet the children are still getting the diseases they are vaccinated for...I am sorry you wasted your money, but it does put more money in some Dr's pocket. Thank you.
youre not an MD surely
Does anyone here know what's really in the vaccinations? Not only do you have the dead version of the virus, but they are filled with petrochemicals and animal by-products, including hoof material. A few years back, and doctor offered 10 grand to any pediatrician who would drink the product that the vaccine is put in to inject (the liquid that has no other purpose than to make the vaccine injectable) and absolutely no one took him up on the offer. That stuff is dangerous.
Hoof material? wow animals with hoofs must be dieing left and right.
Eye newt, tongue of dog, wing of bat, toe of frog... You an expert or did you just read that on Newsvine?
know what else hoof material is in? anything that contains gelatin. That includes jello, jam and jelly, plus many other foods.
Not to mention, but the H1N1 vaccine they were pushing so hard was not really tested. It could cause infertility in our children, or even the zombie apocalypse. half serious, but still. Did any one really think it was a good idea to make everyone take such an early form vaccine?
I have read thru most of the posts here, and I agree that one cannot be forced to have their children vaccinated. It is defintely a personal choice. I have not seen too many posts from people who have experienced these diseases first hand. My 3 WEEK old ended up in ICU for close to three weeks with whooping cough. Since she was less than two months old, she had not yet received any vaccinations yet. You cannot know how terrifying it is to watch your newborn fight for their life. As a result, I had my children all vaccinated as I never wanted to go thru that again and although vaccinations are not 100% effective, I wanted to do all I could to prevent having to live through a nightmare like that again! Nonetheless, my vaccinated children still contracted chicken pox, but ended up with very mild cases. Although they had their vaccines, I was never vaccinated for the chicken pox and never had it as a child, so I ended up with chicken pox, very sick, and close to being hospitalized. No way to tell if I caught it from them, or from whoever gave it to them. It is true that most vaccines lose their effectiveness with age, and without revaccination as a teen/adult you can spread these diseases to at risk people just as quickly as unvaccinated children can. So for those that say "keep your unvaccinated child away from mine", it is not always unvaccinated kids that spread these diseases.
I can respect a post like this. I'm not against vaccination itself. Some people make that choice.
But when someone wants to force or coerce a vaccine down my childs throat or anyone elses child...I have zero tolerance. None. I'll take anyone to task over this ideological stance.
Citizen
You hit the nail on the head:
There are very few people living who have experienced these diseases first hand because vaccines have nearly eradicated them!
Unfortunately, they are just waiting to make a comeback because of people's irrational fears.
Not getting your child vaccinated to me, is child abuse.
amazing how those of us born in the 50's made it to adulthood without all of those vaccinations . also amazing the fact that there were few if any peanut allergies , asthma , autism adhd , add , etc . also amazing that the children today with all of the vaccines seem to have a very poor immune system as compared to earlier years . vaccines can be a good thing , too many lumped together and given too early may be very bad indeed . the use of peanut oil and aluminum in vaccines without being identified as an additive could be behind some of the adverse reactions also .
I’m not going to get into a scientific pissing contest with those commenting here. I am pro-vaccine but what I came here to say is that, regardless of whether your child is vaccinated or not, it’s hard to take those parents who have no problem bringing their obviously sick child to public places, bringing them to school when they’re obviously sick, etc. This is blatant and total disregard for others because the parents simply do not want to be inconvenienced. If that’s the way they feel, they should not have had children in the first place.
We don’t live in a bubble and we simply cannot act like our decisions effect only ourselves. It’s unconscionable to think otherwise.
As the parent of a child with asthma, I can’t tell you how frustrating it is to be out in public and 1) have to deal with smokers who think they have the “right” to make themselves and everyone around them sick and 2) have to deal with selfish parents who insist on bringing their obviously sick children out in public. Your child’s “runny nose” is my child’s asthma attack. Your “right” to puff on your damn cigarette is my child’s asthma attack.
Just because you can doesn’t mean you should. Common courtesy should be the priority – sadly, in this day and age of ME ME ME – it has gone by the wayside.
I am a 50 something male now in my 7th week of dealing with Pertussis. Weeks 3 and 4 were really bad. I missed most of work in that time period. I was not correctly diagnosed until the 3rd week. I have had coughing spells where I couldn't breathe. The muscles in my rib cage are torn from coughing so hard. There are reported cases of Pertussis in the school districts in and around where I live. I most likely contracted it from my daughter, who was immunized, but goes to school with 1,600 other kids (she had a bad cough for a few weeks the end of April). I cannot imagine a child or elderly person getting this illness. It could be life threatening. Immunization is a recommended way to avoid this illness. Adults are now recommended to get a Pertussis vaccine along with a Tetanus booster every 10 years. I found out about this two weeks ago. A little late for me but it may do someone else some good.
The people who are questioning the vaccine schedule are educated people.
They may be "educated", but they are certainly not as smart as they think they are. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing....
If you "choose" not to vaccinate, and your child gets seriously ill, you should go to prison for child neglect. Period.
Maybe people would be less willing to take the chance if they had more skin in the game.
Since you're into accountability and would like some "skin in the game" then if someone vaccinates and STILL gets the illness then the doctor, nurse, pharmacist, and drug company should be sued for false advertising of "vaccine preventable disease". And if the child is harmed by the vaccine then the parents and the CDC should also be accountable. This would only be fair given your "skin in the game" proposal.
Maybe you'd be less willing to play internet doctor with other people's lives then.
You have room to talk. You are leaning the other way. You shoudn't play internet doctor either.
Kathleen, would you like some skin in the game also? Since you like to call DFACS on other peoples kids because they don't medicate them as you see fit? Perhaps you'd change your definition of child abuse.
By definition abuse implies harm is done. How dose not sticking needles and medication in your child constitute harm? My children are healthy. Probably healthier than yours. Only in your delusional world does not medicating healthy children = child abuse.
Remember I said these are educated parents who care about their children. Not ignorant negligent parents. Kathleen, what's your education level?
robert,
whats yours?
You can be educated and ignorant at the same time. It's called hubris. You are an excellent example.
I will take my chances following the advice of people who actually went to medical school instead of relying on google and Jenny McCarthey's latest book.
And I said "neglect", not abuse. You are simply rolling the dice that your child won't get sick, not to mention risking infecting others who are not old enough for specific vaccinations. If your unvaccinated child infects an infant too young for the whooping cough vaccine, may God have mercy on your soul.
And my education level is a Master's degree plus additional graduate hours.
It's only apparent that Oregon parents are becoming brainwashed with the whole "anti-vaccine" campaign and are fall susceptible to information that vaccines are harmful through baseless science.
Yet ANOTHER reason why people should have to apply for a permit to breed, so we don't have a legion of retarded parents causing another outbreak of some unGodly disease that can easily be preventible through vaccine.
Delaying or refusing vaccines, is not different in my eyes, then failing to properly feed your kids.
Yet another intolerant bigot who smacks of elitism. Would you like to discuss the science, the lack of science, and the ethics of corporate/governmental agencies or would you like to just keep espousing your nazi/fascist views of utopia and what you'd do to people who don't confirm to your version of what "ought to be" in the universe?
I have yet to see any real science from you. What peer review medical journals can you reference to support your point of view?
Only because you don't look.
aren't you dodging the question?
I do feel sorry for your children, I would not play with my childs life like you are. My education level is none of your business.What a shame :(
Judgemental attitude with a lack of reasoning skills is a pity. Would you care to discuss the science? Or are you OK judging and playing neighborhood vaccine watch old lady?
Just keep looking out your window for the boogey man.
Overestimating your intelligence is also a pity, Robert. Sadly, your children pay the price for that.
john,
I agree with you 100%. I have debated robert on other threads where he cries about other lifesaving medical treatment, all the while relying on copying and pasting conclusions from unreliable sources with no supporting data whatsoever. Just opinions and conclusions
He clearly has little to no actual understanding of the issues
I have also called him out on exactly the same thing; overestimating his intelligence.
Robert, now two people have told you the exact same thing. Time to start paying attention
My children are healthy. What price do they pay please. Please do tell.
Please prove where this is a true statement.
Everyone doesn't need a measles vaccine, John. Just like everyone doesn't need a Hep B vaccine or Chickenpox vaccine. The facts support this. It should be parent's choice and stay that way.
Eric, you claim you are a cardiologist and you admit to sacrificing 97-99% of your patients to find the ones who you think you can theorectically help. It makes sense that you would believe in mass vaccinating every child. You've been systematically trained in a certain philosophy. One that takes the face off of people and treats them as an amorphous blob sometimes called "population, the herd, statistics, risk factors, disease vectors, etc,.
1) You don't understand the data. If you did, you would know the number helped is far more than you think. However, you can't see that a study done over a 5 year period (and the resultant NNT) only counts lives saved during that time. What you are missing is the crucial fact that many more are saved over the next 10-20 years. However, a study that looked at a period of time that long would cost too much, especially to prove the efficacy of a drug 99% of doctors think works
2) You don't understand statistics. You still have yet to realize that NNT cannot distinguish between a low event rate and an ineffective drug. If the event rate is only 1%, then the maximum absolute risk reduction can only be 1%, and the NNT will be 100
While this is certainly an argument that this group of patients should not be given the drug, you cannot seem to grasp that this does not mean this drug is ineffective, especially when the event rate is high
3) You cannot do math. You are quick to dismiss a drug if it only helps 1 out of every 100 patients, but are very quick to advise NOT taking the drug because of a 1 in 10,000 adverse event rate
Vegas must love you....
Yeah, see #3. You are willing to sacrifice the small percentage of kids who may die if we halt vaccination in favor of the far fewer percentage of kids who may or may not have suffered any adverse effects.
Again, if it means even saving the life of 1% of children, then how can you turn it down when there has been no randomized, prospective trials showing harm even approaching that number?
So personalized medicine isn't here yet. Face it.
In light of that, what would you do? Do nothing? Treat no one? Let people die?
Thats why you could never, ever, ever be trusted with people's lives
No I understand it.
You don't know the number helped. In the low risk population it can't even be calculated. In the high risk meaning post heart attack it save 4%. That's a small fraction considering the massive amount of livers, kidney, and muscles you have to damage to achieve it
Doctors think works? That nice. That's nice in lieu of actual science because you say the real science would cost too much. Sounds like vaccine safety science attitudes to me. I like how you make up for the deficency in the evidence base science by speculating what you think would happen over the next 20 years. That's not science. That's potentially dogma. But that's how doctor's are taught isn't it?
You don't understand who benefits from a drug and who doesn't so you give it to 100% of them. I see you are clinging this this dogmatic view of medicine. Treat em all they're going to die anyway. You have no accountability for your practice of poisoning the masses.
If the event rate is 1% then why do you give 100% the drug to theoretically help the 1%? You don't understand what NNT exposes do you. It exposes bad medicine. But you can't see that.
I don't sacrifice any one. I don't poison people in the name of "the benefits outweigh the damage".
your logical fallacy here is "circular logic", also known as "begging the question"
Circular reasoning (also known as paradoxical thinking or circular logic), is a logical fallacy in which "the reasoner begins with what he or she is trying to end up with"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning
Your evidence that statins are bad is that, well, statins are bad. The best example of this is in the following excerpt of your post:
You counter evidence and numbers with conclusions as support for said conclusions
The closest you came to actual evidence was when you cited the lack of substantial benefit in low risk patients. However, you misinterpreted this data to come to an erroneous conclusion
You call me dogmatic, but you keep spitting out the same line (statins are poison) without presented ANY evidence--instead, just repeating your mantra over and over again
You need some debating lessons
Thanks, Doc. You said absolutely nothing.
And second, you need to go back to the other board if you want to discuss statins and your overprescribing rationalizing.
Correction. You understood nothing
Id be happy to educate you there if youd actually respond intelligently
Who said you were the teacher? You could do more for your patients if you could lead them to exercise and healthy eating choices. More so than all of the statin drugs in the world could do.
Whether you know it or not, you need it. Plus, Im more educated than you in this field. Thats a fact
Agreed. However, the fact thay you think you could tell a doctor how to better practice medicine sums up your problem very well
Evidence based medicine is evidence based medicine. It's not consensus based medicine or "this is the best we got medicine".
I don't care if all of your colleagues and drug funded teachers use statins. The save lives in only a small fraction of overall unsuspecting patients. Every patient believes it is saving them. It's not. This is a fact. You're just OK with unnecessarily treating 97%+ of the population and then downplaying the side effects.
This is a problem.
thanks for that eye opening revelation robert. Really earth shattering
Sometimes we go with the best we got. There are randomized prospective double blind trials for very few things in medicine. There isn't enough money on earth to fund all the studies that would be needed to test everything, although that's what would happen in a perfect world
Very few are funded and ALL are smarter than you, you can bank on that
Not true. Ive tried to explain the data to you multiple ways, but you lack the skills to understand it. For instance, you cannot comprehend that NNT only counts those events that happen within a 5 year window. What about 10 years? What about 20? You assume the event rate to be zero in perpetuity. I do not make such a silly assumption
How do you know? More assumptions
Unfortunately you cannot do math. Im saving 3% while putting 0.0003% at risk for serious side effects. I can't make this clearer for you
Only according to you. According to the AHA, ACC, AMA, EHA, RCHA, and every other medical association, as well as every other cardiologist on the planet we're doing the right thing
But robert says its a problem
Guess what--you don't matter
Grassley to the FDA: Are Statins Really Safe?
classic robert post
No evidence, no numbers
How many underreported symptoms?
What percentage?
Any objective evidence?
What gene is targeted?
What effect do statins have on this "gene"'s expression?
What side effects are missing?
come one, i'm suprised you can't see this for the garbage it is
Take it to the other board and discuss it with yourself over there. Mark my words. Statins will be psuedoscience before your career is over. But don't worry psychologists say you'll be able to rationalize why you engaged in it without critical inquiry. It's called cognitive dissonance.
thats surely more likely to give me an intelligent discourse than talking with you
Hahah..in your "educated" opinion...from someone who can't understand statistics that's meaningless
More opinion by robert in a field he's totally unqualified for. Fantastic.
Y'all really should get a room. <;-)
I get it, and the author of this article does not. The people that are refusing to vaccinate their kids just don't care about anybody else's kids but their own. They don't care about the community, the neighbors, the newborn next door, nobody. Try and get that, will you? I know of people who have taken sick children to Disneyland and spash-type playground places and tell them the child's chickenpox rash is an allergy. They were too cheap to cancel the vacation. Not for the child's sake but for their own sake. How awful is that? These parents don't care if somebody's child dies as long as it is not their child. If it does happen to their child, they would never, never admit that any part of it was their fault, they would scream and cry and blame someone who misled them. You people are all so selfish that there are no words to describe how the educated are so much worse than the uneducated on this issue. You are looking for the cause of autism in vaccines when you should look to all the convenience foods, shortcuts, labor inducing drugs, painkillers, etc. that make your life so much easier. You take away the medical science for your children while you grab on to everything that allows you more leisure time.
Excuse me. Did you say chicken pox? Could you tell me the statistics of someone dying from chickenpox at disneyland or the U.S.? What about the vaccine? If the child you're talking about is vaccinating then this whole post is a non sequitir. Was the child vaccinated?
It has been shown repeatedly by your "types" that you don't care about the vaccine injured. There are thousands of them. This denial attitude that is being fostered is disgusting and callous.
And with vaccine failure and overconfidence in certain vaccines, vaccine induced herd immunity isn't what you've been led to believe it is.
It took us so long in the field to get rid of the myth that autism was caused by "cold mothering." Decades to get rid of this false idea. It looks like it is going to take us even longer to get rid of the myth that vaccines cause autism. It is unfortunate because in the meantime childhood diseases that had nearly been eradicated continue to rise. As does the incidence of autism even though more and more parents choose not to have their kids vaccinated.
"The child psychologist who thought she had all the answers to parenting until she became one herself." www.themommypsychologist.com
I see you're playing the slippery slope fallacy.
Robert, to say that disease did not disproportionally affect children before vaccines is totally ignorant. I do a lot of genealogical research and I can't tell you how many babies and young children have had their lives cut short due to disease. Now of course we have antibiotics, but we are seeing an ever rising increase of resistance. Why take that chance? If your child has a reaction (fever, rash) to his/her first vaccine, then you have a very good reason to delay or reconsider. No one is arguing that. In fact I delayed the Hep vaccine only because I thought his risk of contraction was very low... he wouldn't be having sex, surgery or IV drug use anytime soon. But to have huge portions of the population NOT getting vaccinated is reversing all the gains we have made... not to mention the cost of immune compromised lives, work absenteeism, disability and medical treatment expenses.
The internet is full of craziness; IE Dr. Mercola's credentials have a lot to be desired and unfortunately there are a lot of intelligent and educated people out there with a dangerous perspective.
Also, one study does not make something definitive. There is usually a link, but the confounding factors are not considered (wine drinkers usually have healthier habits than whiskey drinkers, hence the increase in heart health).
Robert, you are very disrespectful.,(old Lady) I am not and elderly person.It just shows how rude you really are. No one should listen to any of your posts.You are immature and a child. Your arrogance will end up hurting your children. If you get chickenpox you can get shingles, and let me tell you, you do not want that for your children. You are a complete idiot.
I'm not talking about you personally as an old lady. I"m talking about the sterotypical nosy old neighborhood watch lady.
And don't clutch your pearls after you've already disrespectfully called others idiots and condescended them for raising healthy unvaccinated children.
Remember that older children and adults need vaccinations as well in order to keep healthy. For example, some vaccines like tetanus and whooping cough wear off and need to be repeated. Read Bob Fabio’s blog for more information about the vaccination debate and how you can keep track of your or your child’s vaccination schedule:
Vaccines don't keep you healthy. Do they keep you healthy when you go into a vaccine induced febrile seizure?
Tetanus is extremely rare and most people don't get regular boosters. Yet tetanus is still not a massive problem. Whooping cough vaccine doesn't work as long as previously thought (3 years and it doesn't work in every person). The California whooping cough vaccine debacle is evidence of this.
Whooping cough vaccine also does not keep people from harboring the bacteria. The vaccine is for the toxin that the bacteria produces.
Be careful not the through the baby out with the bath water--some vaccines are the ONLY defense we have against things like Rubella-caused birth defects (first trimester infection with rubella causes birth defects in 40 to 50% of the carried fetuses)/
Those children not fully vaccinated should NOT be allowed in public school or
the open populace. They should be kept in a closed community.
Schools require immunization records of each child for a good reason.
Epidemics could easily arise due to the ignorance of these parents.
If you claim an exemption for your children you are required to keep them home from school if an outbreak occurs.
You are either a completely brainwashed fool or someone in a position to benefit from the profit or control which mass vaccinations produce. Keep your fear mongering, most Americans have realized the BS which is vaccinations.
In my state, only 15% of pertussis cases are lab-confirmed. Parapertussis has been increasing steadily since the introduction of the acellular pertussis vaccine... Parapertussis is nasty; equally lethal for babies and young children and largely misdiagnosed (in recent years) as whooping cough. I had parapertussis and at the time it was categorized as severe acute bacterial pneumonia and treated empirically... perhaps this is why after being repeatedly exposed to "whooping cough," I have never gotten sick... I also had what may well have been pertussis at 23. Lots of people got sick in my area, which was poor (most ppl did't have health insurance). Everybody referred to it as "walking pneumonia." It was extremely contagious and displayed all the symptoms of whooping cough, right down to people cracking ribs from severe fits of coughing and the charachteristic "whoop." Eric, if he's around will call this anecdotal and insignificant, BUT, during the last two years of steady increases in cases in this State, there has not been a SINGLE reported case from this area... Interesting, anyway. I wonder if they'll ever do a study of titres to see how the patterns of immunity develop regionally...
Probably not. Far more efficient to say the science is settled, when it isn't, and just downpress any information to the contrary of the vaccine manufacturers.
yup.
I don't really care, by the way.
I have been lied to by enough doctors, and told the truth by others, to respect information AND be aware of the presence of DISinformation...
When, Eric, will we see lab-controlled research into the efficacy of vaccines NOT put out by the manufacturers of said vaccines...? Just wondering because it isn't so much that they have the most to gain, BUT that they have the most to lose should the results disagree with the propaganda...
now.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22381073
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20822347
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21576295
You should be on Mercks Defense team. They need you to set everyone straight and prove that it is impossible for the to commit fraud.
Op-Ed: Merck Caught Again in Vaccine Fraud
I'm sure they'll use these exact articles as direct proof of their defense. LOL.
my posts had nothing to do with merck's alleged fraud. So both of your posts are, again, irrelevant
I posted this elsewhere, but will again, here...
In Australia - they have a 95% vaccination rate, and yet, their pertussis rates are going up - so, despite this article suggesting the rise in pertussis having to do with not vaccinating, the data shows it has to be based on something else. In addition, it suggests that the vaccine would give immunity to whooping cough - this is not a true statement.
In peer reviewed document titled "Unexpectedly limited durability of immunity following acellular pertussis vaccination in preadolescents in a North American outbreak" released in March by Witt MA, Katz PH, Witt DJ.SourceDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Kaiser Permanente Medical Center, 99 Montecillo Rd, San Rafael, CA 94903, USA. David.J.Witt@kp.org
You can find the following:
Table 1 at the end of the document shows the percent of cases in vaccinated and it as follows: 86% age 2-7, 86% age 8- 12, 62% age 13-18, 81% age 2-18. So now you know who gets more pertussis. It is not the unvaccinated. He even says, in the introduction: “Our unvaccinated and under-vaccinated population did not appear to contribute significantly to the increased rate of clinical pertussis. Surprisingly, the highest incidence of disease was among previously vaccinated children in the eight to twelve year age group.”
The data shows that it is NOT the unvaccinated which are pushing the whooping cough incidence up.
The BEST treatment for Pertussis is Vit C. Google
"THE VITAMIN C TREATMENT OF WHOOPING COUGH
By: Suzanne Humphries, M.D."
For the details!!
PEOPLE! So many of these diseases were virtually stamped out in the NINETEEN FIFTIES AND SIXTIES! All of these conspiracy theorists and idiots claiming that THEY are doing these terrible things to US are costing the lives of children every day. To withhold vaccinations from your children exposes your children and the children of others to deadly risk! Dr. Sabin! Dr. Salk! Come back to us!
I don't believe in vaccinations and neither does my medical doctor. He has treated me for 20 years with homeopathic medicine. I rarely get bacterial or viral infections and when I do (I taught high school for 24 years), homeopathic remedies heal me in a few days. The body's own immune system is tremendously powerful. During the 1918 flue epidemis in Europe, fewer people died and they recovered sooner in the British hospitals that used homeopathic instead of allopathic medicine.
Big Pharma is making a fortune off vaccinations and weakening our immune systems as well, but the majority of the public is so ignorant about how the body works. Allopathic medicine just deals with the symtoms and not the cause of the illness.
Oops! Type!!! "flue" should be "flu."
"Type"???? I must be more tired than I thought. I, of course, meant to write "typo." As a former English teacher, I can't stand spelling errors.
Totally agree, any nation that has not mass vaccinated has always had fewer deaths from epidemics and had the epidemics last a shorter duration. Vaccines are taking the credit that good hygiene and diet deserve and cause more harm that good.
Looks like more and more Americans are seeing through this vaccination bs and protecting their families and communities through avoidance. Vaccinations are crap, look at the un-vaccinated groups of people, they are enormously more healthy, both physically and mentally, no vaccines for me. And for all you people who say, un-vaccinated people put others at risk, i ask how, go get your vaccines and you will be protected, ill rely on good diet and exercise.
The federal government quietly pays out hundreds of thousands of dollars each year to families of kids who have suffered injury or death from vaccines and the vast majority of claims are denied! How can any doctor say with a straight face that vaccines are safe? If they were effective there should be no concern about kids who are vaccinated getting infected by kids who are not. Injecting harmful viruses into our kids' bodies is a foolish and dangerous roll of the dice. The pertussis vaccine is widely known to be the most potentially harmful, the ages at which it is administered to babies corresponds with the ages at which "mysterious" crib death is most likely to occur.
My son's pediatrician actually looked me in the eye and told me that vaccine injury simply does not exist.
i agree with him
Your agreement is irrelevant. The statement that vaccine injury does not exist is a lie. Period.
Vaccine injury denialism itself is reason to explore the motive of the pro mass vaccine zealots. Eric, as a doctor you have morality, ethical, and scientific issues. No one reasonable denies vaccine injury can happen. If you do then I'll tag you as such so you can be dismissed by all.
I believe Eric is a sockpuppet(penquin) or a troll. There is no way someone can be this irrational, illogical, insane and be a doctor. .....Or maybe.
not any more or less relevant than your post
hahahahha...no one cares what you think robert. hahahaha
1) 99% of docs believe in vaccines
2) my statements are in line with accepted medical practice
3) you have done nothing to refute any of the independent studies I posted
4) you lack the education to judge me
thats enough for now
That's a strawman. Not all doctors are irrational and insanely in denial like you.
First of all consensus doesn't make truth. Second vaccine injury denial is not the accepted medical practice. they agree that it happens it just doesn't happen to real people. Only theorectical and certainly not in their office.
I'm not trying to convince YOU.
How pompous and narcissistic of you. Maybe you are a doctor?
Maybe you're this doctor. God help your patients if you ever have any.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqeC3BPYTmE
Its neither. Its a fact. And it directly contradicts your point. You say i act irrationally, when in reality, I act just like all other doctors
So the only possibilities are the entire medical establishment on earth is irrational, or you are
youre the one who brought up group behavior
source? Your imagination does not count
good, cause you suck at it
strawman. I wouldn't begin to judge a car mechanic--because I don't know about cars. I wouldn't judge a ballerina cause I know nothing of dance. It has nothing to do with who's "better" or "worse"; rather, it relates to a lack of skill set
You have no medical training beyond wikipedia and vaccinesareevil.com. Therefore, you are not in a position to judge medical practice
again, you are in no position to judge. I made that clear.
One could only come to this conclusion by using false logic. I didn't say vaccines nor antibiotics are worthless.
@Buffy: You want the right for your children to suffer disease? That right is not guaranteed in the Constitution. What is guaranteed in the Constitution is the greater good. You and your children will be vaccinated at gunpoint if necessary, for the greater good.
Self-will run riot, selfish and self-centered, my way no matter what, thinking that you can escape bacteria and viruses when we're the ones who are protecting your health by vaccinating. A healthy diet doesn't protect against pertussis. Infants don't have that defense.
My family will always be lined up to be vaccinated willingly for the greater good. This includes my autistic son.
You're welcome.
The logic is sound. Simply saying its not doesn't make it so
then we're in agreement