Responses to Links From a Pro-Vaccinator

This post is in reponse to a pro-vaccination post that had an amusement of links.  If there are research articles that you would like to me to read feel free to add it as a comment.  I require full pdf versions.  I’ll still consider making fun of the articles you provide even if I don’t have a full pdf, the articles below are abstract only. I avoid mentioning names of bloggers when it comes to political posts unless ask.  Feel free to argue against this as well.

1. Asthma and allergy in children with and without prior measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination

  • At age 5, 533 of 555 children had been vaccinated for MMR.
  • MMR vaccination early in life may have a protective effect against allergy at least up to age 7 and against asthma through age 13 yrs.

You would think that if there was an association that vaccinations and not having allergies & asthma this information could be used to follow up and create more research on this subject?  Immagine that, vaccination preventing allergies.

22 anti-vaxxers, 533 vaxxers. 22 isn’t very statistically good compared to 533. And if there are health reasons why the 22 didn’t vaccinate in the first place?.

2. Vaccines are not associated with autism: an evidence-based meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies.

I have seen a lot of these types of articles.  They pick and choose articles that they want to include while ignoring those that they don’t.  It’s pretty biased if you want an objective opinion.

3. Vaccines, allergy, & asthma

  • Asthma and allergic disease rates have increased dramatically in the last few decades.

And yet vaccines are supposed to reduce asthma and allergic reaction rates?

  • Without vaccination, such illnesses are spread rapidly irrespective of hygiene or sanitation standards. This also does not fit with the hygiene hypothesis.

You mean that aren’t stopped, because if you can ignore hygiene if you vaccinate, that’s a different claim.

4. Vaccines: The real issues in vaccine safety

Maybe I clicked a wrong button somewhere, this looks anti-vaccination.  The article speaks to how scientists slowly move towards safer vaccines and the problems involved with that.

  • That was a known risk of the vaccination, which causes roughly one case of the disease per 2.4 million doses, often in people with an immune deficiency. A safer, inactivated, polio vaccine was available at the time, but the oral vaccine was cheaper, easier to administer and thought to be more effective at controlling outbreaks.
  • Vaccines face a tougher safety standard than most pharmaceutical products because they are given to healthy people, often children.
  • But vaccines do carry risks, ranging from rashes or tenderness at the site of injection to fever-associated seizures called febrile convulsions and dangerous infections in those with compromised immune systems.
  • Serious problems are rare, so it is hard to prove that a vaccine causes them. Studies to confirm or debunk vaccine-associated risks can take a long time and, in the meantime, public-health officials must make difficult decisions on what to do and how to communicate with the public.

Have you ever considered research in the public sector? Getting grants is hard, getting funding is difficult, getting involved in research period means giving up the $$ involved in the private sector, and getting a PHD to get involved.  The private sector, where the goal is to make money, is obviously going to not publically talk about it’s failures.

There was a safer option available, but it was cheaper.  How is that a tough safety standard?  I question whether the parents were given a choice between the two and decided to go with the less safe option.  Nowadays that are multiple vaccinations available for every major disease, and parents are still not being told about the risks and different options.  They are given the cheaper dose.  Period, no questions asked.

This article accepts many risks, and says that there may be others that haven’t been specifically diagnosed to vaccines.  If risks are accepted how can there be no risks involved?

5.First Pertussis Vaccine Dose and Prevention of Infant Mortality

  • Pertussis-related deaths occurred among 258 of 45 404 cases.
  • All deaths occurred before age 34 weeks at illness onset; 64% occurred before age 6 weeks.
  • But most of the babies who died in that study were under 6 weeks old, the earliest age when the DTaP (the pertussis, or whooping cough, vaccine) can be given.
  • Getting the vaccine won’t guarantee that a baby who catches the disease won’t die, but it drops the risk by 72%.

I’ll skip where I make fun of the low statistical value of the anti-vaxxers.  258 deaths is 0.5% of those who end up infected. 92.88 deaths (based on 64%), 0.2% died in the vaccine permitted age.

The 72% risk is in the statistically questionable area.  The vaccines don’t remove any risk part should be noted.

So even if the child gets pertussis, the risk of serious damage is less than 0.2%.  And yet parent’s are not allowed to make the choice where they take this risk, of 0.2% as the less of the two evils concerning the risk of vaccination.  And this choice is not only considered off, but one that questions the mother’s morals and right to being equal.

6. Family of Perth baby who died of whooping cough hope to raise awareness, prevent further deaths.

And yet the idea of pushing vaccinations on kids is important.  And Awareness concerning adults whose immunity has ran out is second issue, something not as important.

This is a special circumstance concerning one single person. If one person is equal to one person you need to take into account the deaths caused by vaccination: Vaccine Death Toll Rises

7. Confirmation Bias

And yet ignoring anti-vaccination information and focusing on pro-vaccine is not the same?

8. In opposing the anti-vaccination movement, a sledgehammer cannot win battle of the needle

  • Let me be clear. I am no fan of the anti-vaccination movement. I can’t stand the free-riding hypocrisy that, under the protective, disease-free cover of everyone else’s dutiful vaccination, affords itself the luxury of a “personal choice” to abstain.

This assumes that the choice is made to take advantage of herd immunity. My post about this argues that your “Herd Immunity” is counter-productive.  So my belief is that by vaccinating your child you are putting other children at risk.  I’m certainly not being hypocritic.

  • I shudder at the easy suspicion of profit-hungry “Big Pharma” that somehow vanishes at the feet of essential oil merchants or alternative therapists, despite their own bulging profits.

It hasn’t vanished, but thank you for making assumptions.

  • I detest the unprincipled scepticism of medical science that so brazenly rejects the prevention  vaccination offers, but the moment something strikes, rushes to the emergency ward with total trust, seeking a cure.

I wouldn’t rush to the emergency ward seeking a cure I don’t know about.  I know what the cure is, and when it comes to medications it is regulated and legally only permitted for sale by you doctors.  That is why I would have to go there.

As for everything else, I want to pick and chose. I know what treatment I want, and I would like the right to deny it if I wanted.  Like when I get wheat bread instead of white bread.  I know I want a sandwhich, I know I need food to live.  I would like to pick the food that I consider to be healthiest.

  • Like many of today’s American anti-vaxxers, they simply held the government has no business being in our lives and rejected outright the idea of being policed through medical treatment.
  • If there is a truly modern strain of anti-vaccination, it is the New Age objector; suspicious of the whole enterprise of medical science, entranced by the human body’s ability to heal itself, forever celebrating the natural over the synthetic.

If being able to make a choice for yourself rather than having it made for you is “modern” so be it.  This isn’t a discussion about organic food.

  • If you’re on the verge of believing this is some form of government control, is anything more likely to tip you over the edge than the government resorting to force?

The Australian forced vaccinations.  I’m still amused that people believe that the government is out to get them and control them.  It’s a pretty narrow minded view, and not in the way someone would first think.

The Arrow and Vaccines

Is the show just poking fun at the science behind vaccines, do the creators really not know the science behind them either?

The city is going to be hit with a bio-engineered attack that will kill a decent percentage of those infected if not all those in the range.

But a vaccine taken will provide you immunity.  Except for the fact that they stole the vaccine days before the attack.  The body obvoiusly can’t build an immunity in days, that’s the point of them in the first place, so that the time it takes (weeks/months) to create the immune response cycle is taken before infection begins.

So, the show is either making fun of the population for blindly following ineffective vaccines, or the show is indicating that those who defend them don’t even know the science behind them.

Anti-Vaxx: Aluminum & The Blood Brain Barrier

This post may be a letdown, and the information doesn’t argue for either side.  Therefore, no tags for now.

The proposed method of actioin concerning Aluminum and brain damage is quite simple;

Aluminum passed through the blood brain barrier utilizing metal/ion transfer proteins.  Once inside the brain aluminum acts as an agent to produce damage in susceptible individuals utilizing the Amyloid Cascade Hypotheses.

The scientific data surrounding aluminum isn’t as highly developed as mercury is.  (It is recently used to replace mercury after all).

Similar to that of Mercury, Aluminum is not figured to damage indiferently, but rather only those with certain factors.  Which can’t be tested in the same way mercury associated factors can be.

Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety

  • Post-mortem examinations of humans with Alzheimer’s disease show that there are high concentrations of aluminum in the brain.
  • However, aluminum normally is not found in healthy brain tissue and researchers do not know how the metal gets into the brain.
  • Some researchers compared the aluminum concentration on brains of subjects affected by Alzheimer’s disease and age-matched controls. They found no differences between the two groups, suggesting that elevated aluminum concentration may be associated with age.

Aluminum IN VACCINE INJECTIONS have been connected to the Gulf War Syndrome in adults.  Adults are already developed where babbies and children are not, so wouldn’t the risks be higher for children?

  • Although concerning a war where the enemy was considering biowarfare, and with the vaccine not *linked,* it is possible the aluminum is not the cause.

Anti-Vaxx: Decline the HepB Vaccine

Although doctors are going to suggest newborns getting the HepB (Hepatitis B) vaccine, I’ll say I disagree.  And you can determine for yourself if your child needs the vaccine before birth.

HepB is transfered:

  • Sexual contact
  • Blood transfusions
  • Contaiminated needles/syringes
  • Childbirth

The vaccine is intended to protect the child from the mother during the process of childbirth.  Adults do not need to worry (much) about HepB because they will clear out the infection without help.

Newborns may have a chance as low as 5% of being able to clear the infection, and children as low as 30%.  And if they can’t, they will have a 40% lifetime risk of death from cirrhosis or hepatocellular carcinoma.

The estimated efficacy in prevention of chronic hepatitis B infection was 95% as compared to the infection rate in untreated historical controls.{5}

So if you are pregnant, or have a child you should get tested to determine the risk is that you will pass hepB. The test is simple, and will determine your immune state, and infected state.  You can use this information to determine if you will give your newborn the vaccine.

HepB Vaccine: https://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/r/recombivax_hb/recombivax_pi.pdf

  • 5 mcg of hepatitis B surface antigen
  • All formulations contain approximately 0.5 mg of aluminum
  • 1% yeast protein
  • The vaccine contains <15 mcg/mL residual formaldehyde

Aluminum may be even more toxic than mercury.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/01/27/mercury-in-vaccines-was-replaced-with-something-even-more-toxic.aspx

With three doses of 0.5mg each, the HepB vaccine is, so far, the vaccine with the biggest amount of heavy metals that I’ve ran accross.

Anti-Vaxx: The Cost of Personal Opinion

It’s amusing that scientists expect you to take their word on their findings.  Then they’re upset when you don’t.

I’m educated, I want to believe you, but I’m not going to pay $40 to read each of your articles.  It appears as though I can’t even subscribe.

PMID:24814559[PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE] : http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X14006367

If I don’t have access to the information I can’t give an opinion on it, and I certainly won’t take your word for it.

Anti-Vaxx: Number of Deaths vs. Number of Infections

If you look at data that attacks vaccination, that in fact says that vaccination is pointless you can notice that these graphs involve the number of deaths, not infections.  Those that agree that hygiene and advancement in medicine have played a factor agree that the number of deaths are going to drop over time regardless.

However, they also argue that the number of deaths are going to be low, but not zero.  And that the vaccination numbers did in fact drastically change the number of infections.  So let’s pull up a graph that uses CDC data.  (Rather that one passed around from article to article to publication.)

http://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/graph-us-measles-cases

You are more than welcome to look at the CDC data yourself.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/G/cases-deaths.pdf

1940-1950: http://www.nber.org/vital-statistics/historical/vsus_1950_1.CV.pdf

However, you have to realize that the number of infections above do not take into account the increased population, or rate.  They also do not go farther into the past.

http://www.vaclib.org/intro/measles-intro.htm

It does look like vaccination did at least have some impact.  I wish I could have information on the age of those infected & a graph of rate per those susceptible.  The data for infections basically remained the same from 1920 to 1960, so perhaps without vaccination they would still be the same?  (~400,000cases/year). Even with a growing population that’s a lot of cases.

Why You Should Be Afraid of Your Dentist

This is categorized under “Anti-Vaccination” because it is under the same idea and guidelines.  Assuming that thimerosal is a risk, vaccinations do not compare, and neither does mercury from fish.

Pulled from: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-108hhrg98046/html/CHRG-108hhrg98046.htm

STATEMENT OF RICHARD FISCHER, D.D.S., INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY OF ORAL MEDICINE AND TOXICOLOGY

Dental amalgam or silver mercury fillings contain 50 percent mercury, which is more toxic than lead, cadmium or even arsenic. These dental fillings contribute more mercury to body burden in humans than all other sources combined. In fact, the amount of mercury contained in one average size filling exceeds the U.S. EPA standard for human exposure for over 100 years.

Mercury vapor which escapes from these fillings is readily absorbed into the body, accumulates within all body tissues and has been shown to cause pathophysiology. In the case of pregnant women with mercury fillings, the mercury readily passes from her fillings into her lungs through her bloodstream through the placental barrier and into the developing child, whose central nervous system and immune system are especially vulnerable to this poison.

The fetus developing in the average American mother will be born into this world with more mercury from its mother’s dental fillings alone than it will receive from all the vaccinations it receives during its first 5 years of childhood. And I would add, those vaccines, without the trace, that was with the full load of thimerosal.

Scientists around the world have come to realize that even minute amounts of mercury can cause permanent neurological harm to young children and developing fetuses. The EPA recently announced that 630,000 babies are born each year with too much mercury in their bodies, and that one woman of childbearing age in 12 has enough mercury in her system to put her at risk to giving birth to a retarded child.

In response, the FDA has issued advisories to pregnant women and women of childbearing age to reduce their dietary intake of those fish which are known to contain elevated levels of mercury, such as tuna, swordfish and shark. But according to leading toxicologists, including the World Health Organization, only 20 percent of mercury body burden in adults is derived from diet. In contrast, 80 percent is derived from dental fillings.

As of today, the FDA has yet to advise these same women whom they warned against eating fish to avoid having mercury fillings placed in their mouth. If 20 percent is a problem, why isn’t 80 percent a bigger problem?

In 1987, upon the advice of the FDA dental device panel, the FDA accepted not dental amalgam but its premixed and separate components, amalgam alloy as class 2 and dental mercury as class 1. Class 1 is for devices that present no risk of harm and therefore are subject only to general controls for good manufacturing procedures. That’s right, the FDA classifies mercury, the most neurotoxic element on the planet, to be of equal risk to humans as toothbrushes and dental floss.

In 1998, the FDA ruled that mercury is not generally recognized as safe. However, it left dental mercury as a safe and effective class 1 dental device. Since all other medical uses of mercury have been banned, why should we assume that the only safe to implant it is in the human mouth?

Scrap amalgam, that unused portion of the filling material remaining after the filling material remaining after the filling is placed into a patient’s tooth, must be handled as a toxic waste disposal hazard. It cannot be thrown in the trash or buried in the ground or incinerated. It must be stored in an airtight vessel until properly disposed of. How can we justify storing this same mixture inches from a child’s brain stem and declare it harmless?