Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Measles Resurgent Due To Fear of Vaccination

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the don't-take-medical-advice-from-nude-models dept.

Medicine 668

florescent_beige writes "In the September Mayo Clinic Proceedings, Gregory Poland, M.D. writes that 'More than 150 cases of measles have been reported in the United States already this year and there have been similar outbreaks in Europe, a sign the disease is making an alarming comeback (abstract). The reappearance of the potentially deadly virus is the result of unfounded fears about a link between the measles shot and autism that have turned some parents against childhood vaccination.'" This follows the recent release of a massive review of studies into the side effects of vaccination, summarized here by Nature, which did not find convincing support for the idea that MMR shots caused autism.

cancel ×

668 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

It's a shame... (5, Insightful)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263260)

Unfortunately, it's not only those who refuse vaccination that end up at risk.

Re:It's a shame... (5, Insightful)

uncanny (954868) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263268)

Really, the ones who refused the vaccinations probably got vaccinated when they were kids. But they are making the decision to put their kids lives at risk

Re:It's a shame... (5, Funny)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263376)

So you're saying the vaccine makes people stupid?

Re:It's a shame... (1)

ciderbrew (1860166) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263404)

I don't think the vaccine had much to do with it; but the end result is still the same.

Re:It's a shame... (4, Insightful)

Kagetsuki (1620613) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263444)

No, it just helped the stupid ones survive. Science has killed natural selection.

Re:It's a shame... (2, Insightful)

digitrev (989335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263490)

You don't understand the idea of natural selection, do you?

I'm going to take some liberties with the science here (I'm a physicist, not a biologist), but the gist of it is simple. Humans have been "selected" for large brains. Basically, various evolutionary pressures favoured larger and larger brains in certain situations, which led to the human brain. These brains are capable of a great number of things, including the sciences that lead to vaccination.

Natural selection doesn't mean what nature does in absence of humanity, it means those that survive to reproduce get their genes passed along. It's a long term statistical process, that doesn't care what the pressures or responses are, only that you survive long enough to reproduce and keep your kids alive.

Besides, where did we get this idea that there's any difference between "natural" and "artificial" life? This comic [abstrusegoose.com] sums it up quite well, in my opinion.

Re:It's a shame... (1)

return 42 (459012) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263498)

Yes, because contagious diseases preferentially kill stupid people. Oh, wait...

Stupid people do not get vaccines (1)

mangu (126918) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263596)

because contagious diseases preferentially kill stupid people

In this case that's absolutely correct, or should we say contagious diseases preferentially kill stupid people's genes.

People who make decisions about their children's health based on what a celebrity said in the Oprah show are stupid, no doubt about it.

Re:It's a shame... (5, Funny)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263584)

Science has killed natural selection.

That's natural selection's fault. It should have adapted.

Re:It's a shame... (1)

discord5 (798235) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263448)

So you're saying the vaccine makes people stupid?

I think it's safe to say it didn't make them smarter than they were before the vaccination at least.

Re:It's a shame... (0)

ClintJCL (264898) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263276)

If those vaccinated are still at risk -- that's one less reason to bother getting a vax, as far as many are concerned. It's taking a perceived risk in exchange for a non-guara

Re:It's a shame... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263304)

If only these stupid ninnies would feel that way about everything else. Why bother ruining everything for the rest of us to "think of the children!" if nothing is 100% certain to work? Sadly, the majority of them are probably flaming hypocrites who scream and rail at anyone (other than themselves) who dare not sufficiently "think of the children!" no matter how futile the effort.

Re:It's a shame... (3, Insightful)

rednip (186217) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263324)

People people who get in car accidents sometimes die in spite of wearing seat belts, maybe you should stop wearing yours.

Re:It's a shame... (2, Insightful)

TheEyes (1686556) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263392)

Actually, the people most at risk are those who cannot be vaccinated: the very young, and those with weak immune systems. If not for them, I wouldn't care about this sort of thing; for those who choose to ignore science and lose their children to easily preventable disease it's nothing more than Darwinism at work, but it's a tragedy when people die because their neighbors are fools.

Re:It's a shame... (0, Flamebait)

silas_moeckel (234313) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263572)

Remember depending on where and how you live the measles vaccine still can have a higher chance of serious to deadly outcome as apposed to the chance of getting measles and having a serious to deadly outcome. Having a pediatrician that's used to servicing hacidic(sp) Jews helps as they can have religious issues with vaccines. When I did the math for my son he had much higher chance of dying from the vaccine than measles oddly he did not get it. It was also about the only one he needed to skip the others were less dangerous and/or he had a high chance of a bad outcome not getting it.

Re:It's a shame... (4, Insightful)

digitrev (989335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263632)

Fine, but I'll bet your calculation depended a lot on herd immunity. If enough people stopped getting the vaccination, the risk for dying from measles jumps right the hell up. Just like we're seeing here. I applaud you for doing the math, but consider the fact that when the immunization rate drops too low, measles could come back huge. And people will die in droves, just to remind us that vaccines are good. Please, consider getting your son vaccinated against measles anyways.

Re:It's a shame... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263410)

If those vaccinated are still at risk -- that's one less reason to bother getting a vax, as far as many are concerned. It's taking a perceived risk in exchange for a non-guara

Pardon my assumptions here, I do not work with immunizations, just simple math. However, if a vaccination is 99% effective against contracting a disease, that means that only 1% of the population is at risk for contracting it. If the other 99% are not, then you only have a very small vector of infection. Those immunized literally create a barrier around those not. Now, if someone is not immunized at all, their risk of contracting the disease is the same as the 1% of people who got the immunization but it turned out to be unaffected. Bonus points - if the unimmunized are lucky, and everyone else gets the immunization, then the immunization is protecting them as well! the problem here happens when many people forgo the immunization. the barrier of protected people drops as the number of disease vectors shoots up. Ignorance and fear towards an immunization could result in the infection of many others who took the risk to protect themselves and others. Those who avoid the perceived risk are selfish assholes.

Re:It's a shame... (1)

sFurbo (1361249) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263432)

It is probably going to be said a million times but, here goes:

Firstly, no vaccination is a 100% guarantee. The best give some high 90's percent chance of immunity, many much lower. However, even when you are not fully immunized from a vaccine, it can still mean you get a much milder case of the disease.
Secondly, not all people can be immunized. Children too young to have a fully working immune system, people with cancer or some immunodeficiency. They, in stead, rely on herd immunity: If enough of the surrounding people are immunized, they won't get the disease. So, by choosing to not get immunised when you can, you basically make life much worse for children with cancer. I would say that that is a group who could use any break they can get, and does not deserve to be made more miserable.

Re:It's a shame... (-1, Flamebait)

ClintJCL (264898) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263478)

They're already going to die from cancer.

Re:It's a shame... (1)

sFurbo (1361249) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263516)

We are actually becoming quite good at treating some cancers, so no, they are not all going to die of cancer.
But if you really want to argue that way, we are all going to die of something, somehow, so why bother doing anything? Why are you typing these posts? Everybody who reads them are going to die. Why forego vaccination? We are going to die anyway.

Re:It's a shame... (1)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263538)

Not all cancers are fatal.

Re:It's a shame... (2)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263552)

Why not just put the gun in your mouth and pull the trigger? Life is a zero sum game, and we're all going to die anyway, amirite?

Re:It's a shame... (2)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263562)

That's a pretty moronic thing to say. Cancer survival rates have been on the rise for decades. But part of that survival is using therapies that can really screw with the immune system, so that group is at far higher risk of contracting serious infections.

Fuck there are some really stupid twats on /.

Re:It's a shame... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263590)

The whole idea of herd immunity protecting people who don't get the vaccination is a fallacy. If you are vaccinated, you can still spread and carry a disease - you just won't get sick yourself...

Re:It's a shame... (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263434)

The trouble with vaccine 'efficacy' is that it really operates in two different ways, with both being required for full effect:

You get the direct reduction in vulnerability of vaccinated individuals, varying somewhat by vaccine and disease or disease strain, well above zero; but generally not perfect. You also get, if a sufficiently large percentage of the population is vaccinated, a crash in the disease's ability to spread, because it can't move to enough new hosts before running its course in existing ones. This demographic crash contributes the rest of the efficacy.

Unfortunately, it is trivial for free-riders to take advantage of the second form of vaccine efficacy, without actually contributing to it, right up to the point where that mechanism breaks down for everyone...

Re:It's a shame... (5, Informative)

tbannist (230135) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263620)

It is shocking how stupid some people can be.

The vaccine isn't 100% effective, there are very few things which are. According to the National Network for Immunization Information [immunizationinfo.org] one vaccination is 95% and two is 99.7% effective. The U.S. started giving 2 shots in 1989. That probably means there are between 10 and 15 million people in the U.S. who received the vaccine who are still vulnerable to Measles.

Now, I do have a degree in Mathematics so you can take my word on the fact that a 0.3% is much less than 100%. There is a 0.01% of a child having a reaction, and a 0.00001% of a child having a severe reaction, and 0.000001% of a child having an anaphylactic reaction. No children have died as a result of the vaccine in the United States since 1990. Before vaccination started (in the 1960s), 450 people died annually from measles and another 4000 got encephaltis. Again, I give you my assurance that 0 is much less than 9000.

The risks of just one disease the MMR vaccine protects against far greater and more severe than the risks of the vaccine.

Re:It's a shame... (5, Informative)

digitrev (989335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263282)

Yeah. My friend's brother has an allergy to the vaccine, and his health relies on herd immunity. When idiots like these (and my one uncle; I don't really talk to him anymore) refuse to vaccinate their kids, my friend's brother is the one most likely to get hurt by this.

Re:It's a shame... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263436)

Your friends brother would die and be removed from the gene pool naturally. It's natures way of getting rid of poor stock. You think the rest of the world should be forced to so something they're not happy about for one person you won't see in a few years?! This associate of yours isn't going to last, he can't travel, can't meet anyone that has traveled, and will have to live in a plastic bubble, or a cave in isolation, because sooner or later he will come in contact with a carrier.

Re:It's a shame... (2, Insightful)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263460)

People like you are a bigger drag on human progress than an army of those with "poor stock"...

Re:It's a shame... (2, Informative)

digitrev (989335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263518)

You're an ass. If it weren't for science, none of us would be alive, because we wouldn't have made it out of the dark ages. We'd still be filthy and have no knowledge of diseases, and dieing when you were 50 would be a regular part of life. Get fucked you ignorant shit-eating asshole.

Re:It's a shame... (1)

return 42 (459012) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263528)

Wow, quite the humanist, aren't you? Never mind how good a person this might be, how much contribution he might make to the world, or how many people care about him. He's "poor stock", get rid of him.

Re:It's a shame... (3, Insightful)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263568)

Just another eugenicist. They were the Libertarians of yesteryear, selfish and wicked.

Re:It's a shame... (1)

cheaphomemadeacid (881971) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263292)

how did you get to that conclusion? Vaccination = immunity = why give a fuck what others do? If it doesn't give immunity why bother with the shot? =)

Re:It's a shame... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263320)

how did you get to that conclusion? Vaccination = immunity = why give a fuck what others do? If it doesn't give immunity why bother with the shot? =)

Children have to be a certain age before they can be vaccinated. It's those young kids who are put at risk by these nutjobs.

Re:It's a shame... (1)

catmistake (814204) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263602)

It's those young kids who are put at risk by these nutjobs.

I do not doubt the consequences of herd immunity failing, but I don't believe there is any moral imperitive for vaccination even if the lack of vaccination places lives at risk. The way to convince those refusing to vaccinate their children is with science and cold facts, and not with fallicious argument (i.e. to exaggerate, if you refuse to vaccinate your child, you are murdering mine).

Re:It's a shame... (5, Informative)

digitrev (989335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263356)

Because vaccination does not guarantee immunity. Sometimes the vaccinations don't take hold immediately. For example, my fiancee had to get at least 3 Hep B vaccinations because her body didn't react properly the first few times. Or some people have a weakened immune system, and can't produce the antigens. Or what about people who would love to get vaccinated, but can't, because of an allergy to the vaccine? All of those people, and many others, rely heavily on what's called herd immunity.

Herd immunity relies on a sufficent percentage of the population being vaccinated. That way, there are no vectors to people without the immunity. You can't get sick if you don't encounter the bacteria, and if everyone you meet is vaccinated, then you'll never get sick.

However, if someone isn't vaccinated, but is strong enough to fight it off, they could pass it to you. And if you have a weak immune system, that can lead to severe short and long term consequences.

Re:It's a shame... (3, Informative)

sFurbo (1361249) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263398)

It is probably going to be said a million times but, here goes:

Firstly, no vaccination is a 100% guarantee. The best give some high 90's percent chance of immunity, many much lower. However, even when you are not fully immunized from a vaccine, it can still mean you get a much milder case of the disease.
Secondly, not all people can be immunized. Children too young to have a fully working immune system, people with cancer or some immunodeficiency. They, in stead, rely on herd immunity: If enough of the surrounding people are immunized, they won't get the disease. So, by choosing to not get immunised when you can, you basically make life much worse for children with cancer. I would say that that is a group who could use any break they can get, and does not deserve to be made more miserable.

Re:It's a shame... (1)

SirGarlon (845873) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263484)

At first I was going to say, "how do you figure?" but then I realized you are right: there are some who are too young to be scheduled for vaccination, and some who are too poor to have access to the vaccine, and there may be others who would want to be vaccinated but can't be for medical reasons. So yes, the pool of unvaccinated people is larger than the pool who refuse the vaccine based on truthiness [wikipedia.org] .

Jenny McArthy (5, Funny)

Mike Mentalist (544984) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263262)

Stick to getting to your tits out please and leave the science to the ugly people.

Cheers.

To all anti-vaxxers (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263266)

Well done you fucking idiots.

Re:To all anti-vaxxers (1)

digitrev (989335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263388)

Agreed. Get fucked, anti-vaxxers. Enjoy knowing that your decisions have been indirectly responsible for the deaths of hundreds, all so you could have absolutely no effect on your child getting autism.

Re:To all anti-vaxxers (1)

GNious (953874) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263450)

Get fucked, anti-vaxxers.

Considering theirs might be a set of genes we want to get out of the gene-pool, I'm not sure that is the correct request.

Re:To all anti-vaxxers (1)

digitrev (989335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263532)

I don't mean by another human. That would be terrible. I'm referring to the "sandpaper covered rake shoved sideways up their ass" kind of fucked. You know. The fun kind. ;-)

Re:To all anti-vaxxers (1)

return 42 (459012) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263540)

Anti-vaxxers aren't anti-vaxxers because they have genes for stupidity. I know a sysadmin who's an anti-vaxxer. They're anti-vaxxers because no one ever bothered to teach them how to evaluate claims critically.

Re:To all anti-vaxxers (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263582)

Darwin's coming to collect, they had their chance.

natural selection at work (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263270)

'nuff said

Re:natural selection at work (1)

mfh (56) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263288)

Geeks will inherit the Earth.

Re:natural selection at work (1)

digitrev (989335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263378)

If it was just the anti-vaxxers and their offspring, then maybe I'd agree with you. It's a callous attitude, but we can't protect people from themselves. But the anti-vaxxer crowd weakens herd immunity, which causes people who can't, not won't, but can't get the vaccine, to get ill. And since those who can't get the vaccine often have weakened immune systems, this leads them to be in a worse situation than if you or I got it.

Re:natural selection at work (1)

SomePgmr (2021234) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263628)

Normally I'd say this, except that you expose people who can't get the vaccine (yet or ever). Or the people it doesn't work for. It's dangerous and irresponsible beyond just hurting your own kid.

Fear of Vaccines (2)

mfh (56) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263272)

This kind of fear is akin to the fear of oxygen and it's fueled by the fear of science by the superstitious.

Re:Fear of Vaccines (2)

rednip (186217) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263360)

It's the reactionary media which sometimes gets board with straight politics and delve into vaccine fear to mix up the programming some.

Re:Fear of Vaccines (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263612)

While I'm against the death penalty in general, I'd quite happily put that on hold to have Andrew Wakefield put in the electric chair. That evil scamster is behind all of this. Why he isn't at least spending his life behind bars is beyond me, considering the damage he has done.

What percentage of those infected... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263274)

... were 'vaccinated'?

Strangely enough, these statistics are incredibly hard to find. If 'vaccination' worked, then the statistics would show this - they would show that all or 99% of those infected with measles, had NOT been 'vaccinated', and the pro-vaccination shills would be shouting it from the rooftops. Their silence speaks volumes.

Dr Hadwen saw through the fraud of 'vaccination' over a hundred years ago, and none of his talks have ever been refuted. Why is that?

http://www.whale.to/v/hadwen.html
http://www.whale.to/v/hadwen1.html
http://www.whale.to/vaccines/hadwen1.html

'Vaccination' is a massive medical fraud.

Re:What percentage of those infected... (2)

digitrev (989335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263310)

You ignorant asshole.

What about people who were vaccinated, but the vaccination didn't take? What about people with allergies to key ingredients in the vaccinations? What about people with compromised immune systems, where the vaccination simply can't take hold?

I wouldn't have a problem with people refusing to be vaccinated if it meant that they and their offspring died. Is that a bit cruel? Yeah, but people die for worse reasons every day, so I'm not going to complain about some idiot letting his kids die because he refused to listen to logic and reason.

But when people die because someone else didn't vaccinate their kids? Because the local vaccination ratio dropped too low for herd immunity to take place? That's when I get pissed off.

Re:What percentage of those infected... (2)

yourmommycalled (2280728) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263318)

Really? Really? How can post here and not be able to read? Why not try the article in Nature or maybe the Mayo Clinic for refutation of Hadwen bullshit. More superstition rather than science.

Re:What percentage of those infected... (5, Informative)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263370)

Im not sure theres ever as clear as a correlation as this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Measles_US_1944-2007_inset.png [wikipedia.org]

I mean, there doesnt even seem to be a shadow of a doubt that the shots are effective, whatever other complaints you might want to make about them.

Re:What percentage of those infected... (1)

BitterKraut (820348) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263386)

The fact that it's hard to find anyone who dares to advertise vaccination in public has to do with the risks involved. Although the figures are very low, they're not zero. Who wants to be confronted with the mother who lost her otherwise healthy baby due to an allergic shock incurred by the vaccination process? I think that, apart from laziness or ignorance, these risks (possibly exaggerated in perception) are also the main reason why people shy away from vaccination.

Re:What percentage of those infected... (1)

sFurbo (1361249) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263416)

It is probably going to be said a million times but, here goes:

Firstly, no vaccination is a 100% guarantee. The best give some high 90's percent chance of immunity, many much lower. However, even when you are not fully immunized from a vaccine, it can still mean you get a much milder case of the disease.
Secondly, not all people can be immunized. Children too young to have a fully working immune system, people with cancer or some immunodeficiency. They, in stead, rely on herd immunity: If enough of the surrounding people are immunized, they won't get the disease. So, by choosing to not get immunised when you can, you basically make life much worse for children with cancer. I would say that that is a group who could use any break they can get, and does not deserve to be made more miserable.

Re:What percentage of those infected... (1)

ledow (319597) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263420)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a4/Measles_incidence_England%26Wales_1940-2007.png/220px-Measles_incidence_England%26Wales_1940-2007.png [wikimedia.org]

Nobody (with standing) has EVER claimed that a vaccine is 100% effective at stopping whatever it is supposed to. It's impossible. For a start, evolution dictates that something stronger and more powerful and able to overcome the vaccine will, eventually, come along (that's what MRSA is, for instance) - and it's actually (in avoiding natural selection terms) worse if only a tiny minority of people are susceptible to the disease/virus/whatever than if everyone is susceptible or everyone is immune. It provides greater scope for a successful mutation to arise.

As always, dickheads with zero medical experience telling people what they should or should not do have been the bane of humanity and cost more lives than the accidents of doctors, or an ineffective vaccine.

You don't get vaccinated for YOU. You get vaccinated for OTHERS. Those with compromised immune systems, those who you would spread the disease to, those you would be an asymptomatic carrier for (Typhoid Mary), etc. You don't get immunised against German Measles (Rubella) for yourself - you do it so that you DON'T give it to that pregnant woman in your family, or who lives down the road.

That said, I haven't had any vaccinations since my school days (for purely selfish reasons that have nothing to do with their safety), but then I avoid almost everything that otherwise normal people think is "essential" in medicine nowadays - including headache tablets, stomach remedies, cold remedies and just about anything that comes in a blister-pack.

In terms of medicine, a vaccination will never be perfect, but that doesn't mean it can't eradicate a disease to the point that it leaves living memory either permanently (smallpox), or in first-world countries (polio).

Re:What percentage of those infected... (1)

gilleain (1310105) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263492)

Dr Hadwen saw through the fraud of 'vaccination' over a hundred years ago, and none of his talks have ever been refuted. Why is that?

A hundred years ago, it was just about still possible to be unconvinced by the germ theory of disease - now, not in the slightest. As for 'seeing through the fraud of vaccination', you do realise that this is basically nonsense?

What am I saying? It's like trying to convince flat earthers or geocentrists, or creationists...

In a cruel twist of irony... (5, Interesting)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263286)

The MMR vaccine has not shown signs of causing neurological problems; but Measles, in the not-as-rare-as-one-might-like cases where it progresses to include Encephalitis, certainly has...

Darwin (1)

thegarbz (1787294) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263294)

And thus we see natural selection at work once again.

Re:Darwin (2)

atomicstrawberry (955148) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263408)

Unfortunately that would only be the case if refusing the vaccines removed them from the gene pool, but unfortunately it doesn't. Instead if exposes people who cannot have the vaccine due to allergies, immune system deficiencies etc. Not to mention the increased risk that in an environment where most people are immune to infection but some people are not there can be increased chance of it mutating and becoming more virulent or even potentially being able to work around the existing immunities.

Re:Darwin (1)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263414)

Except that te parents who chose not to vaccinate their kids will not get it because their parents weren't nutjobs.

Or kids allergic to the vaccination will get it because herd immunity is lower.

Its not like that at all.

Re:Darwin (3, Informative)

digitrev (989335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263418)

I'm sick of hearing this shit. People die because of this. And not just the anti-vaxxers' kids, but people who, for one reason or another, don't or can't develop the immunity, despite getting the vaccination. Or people who can't get the vaccination.

fear resurgent due to vaccine threats (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263308)

uncle sam remains despondent. its' representatives at atmostfear inc. are claiming that as fear & hate are now our leading export, that production will need to rise to meet the demand from its' depopulationary genocidal customers.

disarm. tell the truth. feed the hungry. the only mathematically & spiritually correct options.

as for the sociopath weapons (including vaccines) peddlers, & their neogod customers.... see you there.

Re:fear resurgent due to vaccine threats (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263406)

You forgot to ask if we call this weather.

I look forward to a reduction in blindness (1)

Trepidity (597) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263322)

It is well documented [nih.gov] that the measles cures blindness, so I can only congratulate the orchestrators of this anti-vaccine campaign for having the vision to improve America's public health in such a manner.

Please, please, get that shot! (5, Interesting)

Metiu (14532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263328)

This year my wife mysteriously got measles (in Italy). She hadn't been vaccinated because when we were young the vaccine was not available. BUT our youngest child got it, too, because he was at the time younger than the age at which you get the shot.

I don't tell you the trouble of having a diagnosis, since the disease is so uncommon today, that after two visits, my wife finally diagnosed it herself on wikipedia (sic). And the trouble of telling all the authorities, which needed to find the lost protocols for such an infection.

To sum it up: the studies linking the shot with autism were done by an UK professor, who has been on trial for telling false results to help his own company [bbc.co.uk] .
When you don't get the shot and you are healthy, you're just selfishly exploiting the fact that most of "other people" will get the shot and you will be protected. BUT measles IS dangerous, and some people won't have your choice, because they are too young or too unhealthy to get that shot. They will risk severe damages by the disease, so PLEASE don't be a wimp and kindly get vaccinated.

Re:Please, please, get that shot! (1)

jittles (1613415) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263412)

All I can say is this. 1) I am sorry about your wife and child and I hope they have recovered well. 2) I am glad that I got an MMR booster in college. I was going to go to Venezuela to do volunteer work and the CDC had a whole list of shots they required. They recommended (as optional) an MMR booster. My doctor was going to pass on it, but I gave him a bad time. Turns out, the Venezuelans were having a bit of a problem with the measels at the time. So I got it, and I Am glad. I would hate to get something like that as an adult!

Re:Please, please, get that shot! (1)

Metiu (14532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263452)

Thank you, they recovered quite well, but only them can tell how they felt for almost a week, and I suspect also a reduction in the immune response for some time in the child (he was a little more than 1 year old at the time). Actually, the child couldn't tell how he felt, but you could see it in his face.
Luckily the haven't developed any side effect, which as was told are not so uncommon.

ACTUALLY DUE TO VIRUS !! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263332)

Measles does not from fear spawn !!

An episode of Penn & Teller's Bullshit says it (5, Insightful)

lattyware (934246) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263338)

An episode of Penn & Teller's Bullshit says it, and says it well. Even presuming the cases of vacination causing autism were not bullshit, it'd still be worse to not vaccinate all our kids - more would end up dead than would end up autistic.

Of course, people don't see it that way, they just like their knee-jerk responses. I literally can not believe that people actually still refer to something so discredited. People need to spend 5 seconds doing some goddamn research on an issue - and not just looking for things to confirm what they think.

I blame the rise of the schooling system going all 'no opinion can be wrong' - it's such obvious crap, and yet people seem to believe it. I can say it's my opinion the sky is blue all day long, it doesn't make it true. Sure, some opinions - ones of taste, can not be wrong, as they are something inherant to you, but too many parents, when you try and explain that there is no reason to fear vaccinations, will just refuse to listen, tell you to stop 'telling them what to do with their children' and it's 'their opinion' that the vaccines are bad. It's such rubbish. Not only that, but people have somehow managed to grow up seeing all discussion as someone else trying to force you onto their side. The point of discussion is to try and see where the differences in your opinion are - if the other person can convince you that you are wrong, that's excellent - you have just gained something. Likewise if you can show them. Instead, people just refuse to listen to the other side of an argument.

People need to learn that being wrong isn't something bad - and that you sure as hell do not have a right to never be wrong. I get it, these parents want to look after their kids - and who can blame them for that? What I can blame them for is not actually caring enough to check what is actually good for them.

Re:An episode of Penn & Teller's Bullshit says (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263364)

Penn and Teller? Are you serious?

Re:An episode of Penn & Teller's Bullshit says (2)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263496)

When the champions of anarcho-capitalism say to STFU and get your kids vaccinated, it really does say something. Unlike the OP though, I'm not sure the blame is to placed on the school system. The places I've seen anti-vaccine hysteria promoted was on the TeeVee by Responsible People like Jenny McCarthy (and by proxy Oprah).

Re:An episode of Penn & Teller's Bullshit says (2)

lattyware (934246) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263630)

I'm by no means saying schools promote an anit-vaccination agenda (at least, here in the UK, while I was at school - albiet it was a little back, I never saw that). My point was more that they are teaching people to believe that their 'opinions' can transcend reason and fact, and be right regardless.

Re:An episode of Penn & Teller's Bullshit says (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263456)

And they stole that from Pink Floyd's lyrics.

Re:An episode of Penn & Teller's Bullshit says (3, Insightful)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263468)

People need to spend 5 seconds doing some goddamn research on an issue

You're asking too much here.

A lot of people just can't understand the result of their search, or won't realize they should do such a search, or cannot sort through the quantity of information available (lots of dross, even in good science). They need to be told, clearly and unequivocally, what's the recommended thing to do in issues involving science/medicine/etc. Any imbecile who publicly tells them to do demonstrably harmful things should be taken to task, and held culpable to the extent which can be justified.

Re:An episode of Penn & Teller's Bullshit says (1)

lattyware (934246) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263530)

No - I'm sorry, but you can't just write it off like that. I'm not saying they should look into every little thing in depth - what they should do is know who to listen to, and when they truly can't decide - then do some research. Everyone should be capable of this - if not, then they should learn. Yes, I know it's wrong to actually expect something of people, but come on..

Re:An episode of Penn & Teller's Bullshit says (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263558)

An episode of Penn & Teller's Bullshit says it, and says it well. Even presuming the cases of vacination causing autism were not bullshit, it'd still be worse to not vaccinate all our kids - more would end up dead than would end up autistic.

What this comes down to is selfish people realising that if they avoid vaccination, they will avoid whatever the imagined risk is and also avoid measles because the vast majority of people still get vaccinated so herd immunity is in play. What they failed to anticipate was just how many other selfish people had exactly the same idea. It only works if nobody else is doing it.

Why should I care? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263454)

If people want to read something on the internet and choose not to vaccinate their kids against a very real disease, why should I care? My kids are vaccinated, so they can't get sick.

Re:Why should I care? (1)

digitrev (989335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263548)

But what if the immunity didn't take?

It's like a religion (4, Insightful)

Constantin (765902) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263462)

.... there are risks associated with any medical procedure, including vaccinations. But vaccinations are among the safest things one can do for oneself and the community. The benefits far outweigh the risks, the science is clear on that. Most of the folk that oppose vaccinations do so out of unfounded fears, i.e. gut reactions, not rational reflection of the facts. Instead, they are swayed by the likes of Ms. McCarthy or Mr. Wakefield that there is some sort of giant medical conspiracy. It is precisely this sort of ignorance why more diseases like polio have not gone the way of smallpox, i.e. been eradicated in the wild. In the case of polio, it's thanks to nutty preachers in the affected remaining hotspots making similarly dreary claims re: the polio vaccine.

I attribute the willingness of parents to take a chance with herd immunity to the fact that they haven't themselves seen the effects of polio, whooping cough, etc. in the community around them. There is a reason that in years past people gladly lined up for polio vaccinations - they'd seen the impact, could better trade off the miniscule risk (especially with the post-Cutter-incident monitoring) with the benefits of not having dead, disfigured, or severely disabled children. Indeed, one of the biggest impacts of vaccination programs is the serious reduction in schools for the deaf, dumb, and blind.

Ironically, having rejected comparatively perfectly safe vaccination options, parents seem to have no issues with then putting all the interventionist methods to use to save their children if they do fall sick. I.e. take them to the hospital, operate, perform lots of heroic work to save the child... all of which would not have been necessary if they hadn't blindly followed quacks advice re: vaccinations. And that's what amazes me, the quacks of the world who promote anti-vaccination messages have yet to prove any causal link between MMR and/or thimerosal with autism, yet they stick to this piece of faith, not unlike the folk who will follow cult religions. It's pity for the kids, they have no one looking out for their interests.

Last but not least, what bothers me most about refusing vaccinations is that there will always be some members of the community that have to rely on herd immunity because their own immune systems are not fully functional, they are undergoing immuno-suppressing therapy, or they are allergic to some of the proteins inherent in the current manufacturing processes for most vaccines. Additionally, no vaccine is 100% effective - so depending on the ability of the virus or bacteria to spread through the community, a very high immunization rate is required to protect everyone in the herd, immunized or not.

I hope that some day the likes of Ms. McCarthy or Mr. Wakefield will own up to their hubris, character assassination, innuendo, etc. and apologize to the world not only for disrupting one of the most successful medical programs of our times, but also for killing, disfiguring, and traumatizing gaggles of children needlessly with their panic-mongering. This is not unlike shouting "Fire" in a crowded theatre - especially in the case of Mr. Wakefield where key aspects of his 'research' were later found to be faked, massive conflicts of interest were not disclosed, and interpretations were drawn without the benefit of facts.

For anyone interested in the subject, I highly recommend the books written by Dr. Offit on the matter, especially "Autisms False Prophets", and "Deadly Choices". He details the characters of the anti-vaccination movements quite nicely and shows in reference after reference what the real impacts of vaccine refusal are.

Gonna get flamed (-1, Troll)

miketheanimal (914328) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263476)

OK, I'm going to get flamed for this by a bunch of knee-jerk vaccination good people, but WTF. First strawman argument: which did not find convincing support for the idea that MMR shots caused autism . OK, so a load of people latch onto autism as a reason against vaccination, but its not the only concern. A lot of people are more concerned about lower-level negative immune system responses, such as increased allergy rates. Note that allergy rates have risen roughly in line with increasing hygiene and health-care in general (eg., hay fever was virtually unknown before the mid-1800s). Hygiene and health-care - vaccines included - affect the immune system, and its quite plausible that there is a balance point (between killing all but the healthiest or luckiest and weakened immune or damaged systems) which may have been passed. I'm old enough to remember measle parties, clearly people in the 50s and 60s (in the West anyway) were not very worried about it. It was something your kids got, and the sooner the better. Why is measles becoming more serious? Natural immunity to measles (ie., getting the real thing) likely results in greater protection passed to the kids from the mother (can't give exact details but the wife is a biologist who's been involved in immune research in the past). Then there's the multiple vaccination issue. The ability to survive an infection is a neccessary survival trait and would be selected for. The ability to survive multiple simultaneous infections much less so. Anyone see an issue here? I'm not anti-vaccination per-se. I am against the knee-jerk vaccinate against everything policy that governments and pharma push. MMR. How many people get bad affects from Rubella - none, only the foetus, so test girls before puberty and vaccinate those who are antibody-negative. Similarly for boys and Mumps. And I have a particular downer on the majority unthinking reactions that seem common on Slashdot whenever this topic comes up.

Re:Gonna get flamed (1)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263510)

The 'knee-jerk' reaction people aren't the ones that promote vaccines...

Re:Gonna get flamed (5, Insightful)

Metiu (14532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263544)

Maybe you remember measles parties, but not the measles wards in hospitals, where people with their brain smashed by encephalitis were kept. In that case, maybe you would have gotten a better picture. Kids also were dying more frequently in the past, and that was not as big an issue as today, because it was not avoidable at best and anyway there were many more kids per family than today.

I was vaccinated (my choice at 18) and survived an infection. I lived with people with measles and was ok all the time. I don't see having the virus spreading to my lungs, eyes, skin and brain as a better option. And I've seen the effects, you don't want to try them.

Re:Gonna get flamed (3, Interesting)

royallthefourth (1564389) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263556)

so a load of people latch onto autism as a reason against vaccination, but its not the only concern. A lot of people are more concerned about lower-level negative immune system responses, such as increased allergy rates.

I'm so concerned about allergies that I'm willing to risk the death or serious illness of my child and many of the vulnerable children around him; I'm a fuckshit!!

Re:Gonna get flamed (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263576)

Yea, you're really an animal. My dog at least can be trained.

Re:Gonna get flamed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263608)

supposing that the increased allergy rates are a direct consequence of vaccines, the cost benefit is still in favour of NOT DYING and getting the MMR vaccine.

you are just talking out your ass. your wife isn't a biologist, i doubt she even exists.

If only those parents... (4, Funny)

Denogh (2024280) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263502)

would take their children to get Chiropractic. Big pharma wants you all to get vaccinated with their live specimens of the Measles, Mumps and Rubella viruses so your body can learn to deal with these diseases, but it already knows how. It's just being prevented from doing so by poor alignment, non-organic foods, subluxation, voodoo, bad mojo and pesticides.

Chiropractic can save lives, just like homeopathy, acupuncture and faith-healing.

Re:If only those parents... (1)

digitrev (989335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263566)

I'm really hoping that you're joking here. But since this is the Internet, Poe's law is in full force, so you could just as easily be a lunatic promoting complete garbage. But I'll be generous, and assume that you're parodying the kind of lunatics who believe that stuff.

Re:If only those parents... (1)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263592)

You know what's sad? There are so many idiots in this thread that I'm honestly not sure if you are joking around, or just another one of the morons.

Avoiding the MMR can boost immunities (1)

Rilian (137677) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263508)

The comments here are perpetrating a myth that those who avoid the MMR vaccine for their children are therefore not vaccinating them. This is very far from the truth. At the height of the scare we decided to avoid the MMR for our two children, arranging instead for them to have three single vaccines, given a little time apart.

When they were due for their booster shots, the doctor tested them and said their immunity levels were way higher then he expected and they didn't need the normal booster. We mentioned that we'd skipped MMR and the doctor confirmed that the single vaccines give a higher level of protection.

In summary, I was suspicious about the science behind the MMR scare but decided not to chance it - all I risked was a little money, by skipping the free government MMR and paying myself for the three singles. Even though the MMR risk seemed very low, it wasn't zero.

Avoiding the MMR was a prudent, sensible choice. The hysteria that skipping MMR must inevitably lead to unprotected children is itself scaremongering. If measles is rising it's simple parental negligence and nothing to do with MMR.

Re:Avoiding the MMR can boost immunities (2)

digitrev (989335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263594)

But the thing is, you're an outlier. Most parents who refuse the MMR vaccine refuse all forms of vaccines. Thus giving their children no immunity. I applaud you for taking the time to investigate the issue, and make an informed decision. This article isn't about people like you, it's about people who leave their kids with no immunity whatsoever. You, at least, made sure they were vaccinated against all three diseases, even if you didn't take the government standard MMR vaccine.

Thank you for getting your children vaccinated.

Symptom of a larger problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263534)

In my opinion, this just speaks to a problem that is rampant in the health care industry: no one REALLY trusts doctors. I mean, they are smart and all, but there's stories I hear all the time of someone being misdiagnosed by a doctor, or being told it's nothing, or the doctors just plain not knowing what's wrong. Add on that the countless number of therapies and drugs that cause problems that are hidden from the public or where the effects weren't fully understood for 10 years and it breeds a definite level of uncertainty when a doctor says something.

For me, when I hear "Don't worry, vaccinations are 100% safe", I'm wondering if I will hear about the real effects of these vaccinations 10 years down the road when we realize we messed up and they actually cause cancer or autism. I'm already thinking about my kids and whether I really should vaccinate them.

Risk (2)

ciderbrew (1860166) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263578)

This isn't helped by the media playing people fear of risk. You all remember the type of stats they gave out during the Fukushima nuclear power plant break down. Radiation levels are 500% above normal. People watch that sensationalism and panic. At no point did they demand to know a comparative. "Oh, the same as smoking 50 packs of high tar over a year" or something similar. You get the point.

In the UK a few years back. They put out a story telling women that a type of birth control pill increased their risk of getting cancer. Many women came off the pill immediately and fell pregnant as a result. A few months later they had a follow up story with a Doctor. They asked him about the risk of the drug and what was being done. They then asked his reaction to the pregnancies (which i don't think he was aware of) by the presenter. His reaction was classic a mix of amused bewilderment and a condescending - You do realise that pregnancy is incredibly more dangerous than any risk of cancer this drug ever posed. . ..
I think what he wanted to say was "Are you all fucking idiots?"

are you sure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263598)

The way the Media twists the truth, can we be sure its not the people that got Vaccines that also got the Measles?, this totally sounds like a "False Flag"

amusing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37263618)

I find it quite morbidly amusing that everyone is jumping on this bandwagon on the presumption that "inadequate evidence to accept or reject a casual relationship" is taken to mean that the link is disproven. Just as Paul Offitt states in the Nature summarization that he is "'uncomfortable as a scientist' with the committee's methodology", I am uncomfortable with people interested in science who refuse to distinguish Can't Prove and DisProven.

Jenny McCarthy kills babies (1)

qwertyatwork (668720) | more than 2 years ago | (#37263626)

Why listen to medical science? Jenny McCarthy kills babies. Jenny McCarthy kills babies [jennymccar...ycount.com]
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>