Slashdot Mirror


US Is Slipping Toward Measles Being Endemic Once Again, Says Study (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: With firm vaccination campaigns, the US eliminated measles in 2000. The highly infectious virus was no longer constantly present in the country -- no longer endemic. Since then, measles has only popped up when travelers carried it in, spurring mostly small outbreaks -- ranging from a few dozen to a few hundred cases each year -- that then fizzle out. But all that may be about to change. With the rise of non-medical vaccine exemptions and delays, the country is backsliding toward endemic measles, Stanford and Baylor College of Medicine researchers warn this week. With extensive disease modeling, the researchers make clear just how close we are to seeing explosive, perhaps unshakeable, outbreaks. According to results the researchers published in JAMA Pediatrics, a mere five-percent slip in measles-mumps-and-rubella (MMR) vaccination rates among kids aged two to 11 would triple measles cases in this age group and cost $2.1 million in public healthcare costs. And that's just a small slice of the disease transmission outlook. Kids two to 11 years old only make up about 30 percent of the measles cases in current outbreaks. The number of cases would be much larger if the researchers had sufficient data to model the social mixing and immunization status of adults, teens, and infants under two.

335 comments

  1. Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Medically - politically - I have to look at the calendar everyday because it feels like I'm in a time warp and it's really 1917.

    We, the USA, are getting dumber.

    1. Re:Looking at calendar. by barrywalker · · Score: 1

      Medically - politically - I have to look at the calendar everyday because it feels like I'm in a time warp and it's really 1917.

      We, the USA, are getting dumber.

      And just think, we haven't even hit peak stupidity yet.

    2. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Peak stupidity is a myth, there is more than enough stupidity to last forever.

    3. Re:Looking at calendar. by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 2

      Peak stupidity is a myth, there is more than enough stupidity to last forever.

      Peak stupidity doesn't imply that there will be no more stupidity after we hit the peak. That is an incorrect understanding. The theory of peak stupidity implies stupidity will be harder to find and more expensive to maintain after that point.

      There will always be some stupidity expressed by society, it will just necessarily be less once we pass peak stupidity.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    4. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      (Different AC)
      I thought Peak Stupidity was the point where the stupidity becomes too much and triggers the beginning of the extinction of all humans?

    5. Re:Looking at calendar. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      We're overdue for a pandemic that wipes out 50M to 100M people.

    6. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Like obesity ;)

    7. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are thinking small there, soooo 18th century

      The next pandemic would need to take about 3 billion people to be remotely comparable to what the black death did to Europe in the middle-ages

    8. Re:Looking at calendar. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2

      You are thinking small there, soooo 18th century

      The 1918 Spanish flu killed 50M to 100M people.

    9. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be so pessimistic. Unlike Moore's law which keeps hitting walls, the capacity for human stupidity is truly infinite.

      In fact, measles becoming endemic is natures way of trying to limit stupidity by killing off the stupid, but humans have already found ways around that limitation and few of the stupid will actually die of measles.

    10. Re: Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Yet a different AC)
      Peak stupidity is often misunderstood. It's a symptom of a fixed amount of intelligence in the universe being distributed among an ever growing population on our planet.

    11. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      did you forget your affiliate link you fat fuck

    12. Re:Looking at calendar. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      did you forget your affiliate link [amazon.com] you fat fuck

      Nope. Made my numbers for today shortly after midnight. I'm good.

    13. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly, and the Spanish flu barely competed with the number of dead from WW1 and WW2, which in turn did not come even close to wiping out the population on even one continent.

      The Black Death on the other hand "reduced world population from an estimated 450 million to between 350 and 375 million. It took 80 and in some areas more than 150 years for Europe's population to recover." - Wikipedia

      So, to see a similar effect to the Black Death, a modern plague would have to wipe out about 1/4 of all living humans and take over a 100 years for full recovery. That means BILLIONS dead, not hundreds of millions

    14. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GP: "The next pandemic would have to wipe out billions to be comparable to the black death."
      Creimer: "Well, you know, the spanish flu killed about 3% of that number."
      GP: "... *crickets*"

      Do you just blurt out the first thing that pops into your fat head at any given moment, creimer?

    15. Re:Looking at calendar. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      So, to see a similar effect to the Black Death, a modern plague would have to wipe out about 1/4 of all living humans and take over a 100 years for full recovery. That means BILLIONS dead, not hundreds of millions

      I guess you haven't read about the population trends for this century: population will peak to 10B by 2050 and decline to 6B by 2100. About 4B people will die from old age in the latter half of this century.

    16. Re:Looking at calendar. by MiniMike · · Score: 2

      Don't worry about Peak Stupidity, the government is busily working on renewable sources of Stupid.

    17. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sure dude made enough money today let's go dick fishing

    18. Re:Looking at calendar. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Do you just blurt out the first thing that pops into your fat head at any given moment, creimer?

      Have some Teriyaki Spam with your whine.

    19. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you just blurt out the first thing that pops into your fat head at any given moment, creimer?

      Creimer: "..........I like fish!"

    20. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol-k, so you are willing to change the conversation to prevent looking like you were wrong

      We are certainly NOT talking about people dying from old age, this thread is particularly aimed at spread of disease due to non-use of vaccines

      YOU attempted to claim that losing 50 to a 100 million people

      I corrected you by stating that losing that many people would be insignificant in comparison to the Black Death which killed about 1/4 of the human population

      YOU went amok at that point and tried to drag in people dying of old age...

      So Sad, maybe you can work on your logic by working through some puzzles that do not allow you to cheat and claim to have solved them

    21. Re:Looking at calendar. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      lol-k, so you are willing to change the conversation to prevent looking like you were wrong

      You thought I was paying attention to you? Awkward...

    22. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. As Einstein pointed out, stupidity is infinite. There is no "peak" as stupidity can never "run out".

      "Peak stupidity" is therefore the point at which human stupidity renders humans extinct. So there is not "less" stupidity expressed by society after "peak stupidity"; there is "none" as there is no humanity to express anything.

    23. Re: Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL post those affiliate numbers then. Because I know for a fact Amazon doesn't pay well. You shilling on slashdot probably nets you maybe $10 a week. And that is a stretch. It doesn't matter tho. As long as everyone sees you for who you really are. A fake wannabe APK troll.

    24. Re: Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, to recap. You started this convo, got called out on what you posted. Then moved the goalposts and changed up. NOW you are saying you aren't paying attention to the person you directly replied to? Jesus Christ man, you live in a fucking phantasy world. Seriously, grow up. APK jr. Admit you were wrong and move on.

      You are a 50 year old child. Seriously.

    25. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not so much, I THINK that you are somebody who THINKS that they are much smarter than they really are.

      You have only confirmed my initial assumption.

      In fact you have gone one step further and revealed that you are also unable to recognize your own errors

      I THINK that is "So Sad"

    26. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Taking refuge in nonsense is the last recourse of the the idiot. Thanks for being big enough (ba-dum-tiss) to admit you're an idiot, creimer.

    27. Re: Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And here we have another example of creimer being a man child. Posting affiliate spam when he gets called out on his bullshit.

    28. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    29. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When asked "Do you just blurt out the first thing that pops into your fat head at any given moment?", creimer responds with the first thing that pops into his fat head.

    30. Re: Looking at calendar. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      You shilling on slashdot probably nets you maybe $10 a week.

      I make coffee money. Daily.

    31. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fact.

      + let the non vaccers die. Darwinism bi***...

    32. Re:Looking at calendar. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Taking refuge in nonsense is the last recourse of the the idiot.

      Uh, no. Everything I do on Slashdot is a marketing experiment. Amazon doesn't provide granular data on what links are being clicked from where on Slashdot. I already know that some Slashdot readers will click on any old link. So I changed the tag in the Spam links that I use for "spamming" my critics. I'm curious to know how many people are curious that Spam comes in different flavors, as most grocery stores have one or two other flavors in stock..

    33. Re:Looking at calendar. by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      We've always been stupid, collectively speaking. It's that you're just now getting access to information that confirms it.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    34. Re:Looking at calendar. by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Too slow.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    35. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the virus were expunged, then why is it back?

    36. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your entire life is an experiment, and we're all enjoying it. Mostly because we're glad we're not you.

    37. Re: Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You claim you drink a skinny vanilla latte every day. At Starbucks, one of the priciest places you can buy coffee, a venti skinny vanilla latte costs $4.65.

      365 x 4.65 = $1697.25 per year.

      Now, let's assume you spend 2 hours a week drumming up this revenue - again, a generous estimate, since you've claimed publicly here that you spend evenings after your "day job" working on these side businesses of yours, which easily easily totals out to 30-40 hours a week, based on your own claims.

      That means you pull down a cool 32.64 every week of the year, netting you a gross hourly rate of $16.32 per hour for the 2 hours a week you spend on this shit. You and I both know you spend far more time than that, given the sheer volume of posts you spam Slashdot with on a daily basis, but I'm being as generous as I can towards you in all of these estimates.

      So once again, we come back to you proudly boasting about the income you make, when it turns out that you're scarcely making minimum wage, and probably are, in fact, earning below minimum wage for all this work.

      We're not impressed, bro. We're saddened by this. The rest of us are heading home after work and doing rewarding, gratifying, fulfilling things with our friends and family. You're scrabbling for pennies. I pity you, and I still cannot fathom why you make these boasts as if they're something to be proud of.

    38. Re: Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look out Warren Buffett!

    39. Re: Looking at calendar. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      365 x 4.65 = $1697.25 per year.

      You're making the assumptions that coffee money represents only one cup of coffee per day (some people drink two cups per day), and that the potential income is a flat line instead of a curve.

      You're scrabbling for pennies.

      Keep telling yourself that.

    40. Re: Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should provide facts. You come off as self-deceptive in other matters, for instance when you claim not to be fat.

    41. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dunno. Nov 8th, 2016 has got to be some kind of a record for peak stupidity.

    42. Re: Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to creimer, he should be more muscular than Dorian Yates in his prime. Yates was 5'10" about 300 pounds. He looked like this:

      http://cdn.images.express.co.u...

      creimer looks at that picture and thinks to himself "yeah, I look like that, I do some sitting rows, I'm about the same as a competitive bodybuilder that lives in the gym"

    43. Re: Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "You're making the assumptions [sic] that coffee money represents only one cup of coffee per day"

      (There's only one assumption, so why the plural, Chris?) We're not assuming; we're going off the facts that you provided. These facts are all being collated in a CSV file.

      "some people drink two cups per day"

      Some drink four. What does that have to do with you?

      "Keep telling yourself that."

      You keep deluding yourself. For example:

      "instead of a curve"

      Some curves go down, Chris.

    44. Re: Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But drinking 2 venti skinny vanilla lattes wouldn't comport with your claimed 1500 calorie a day diet, champ, seeing as a single venti skinny vanilla latte packs 160 calories.

      So which is the lie - that you drink two cups of coffee per day, or that you're consuming only 1500 calories per day?

      and that the potential income is a flat line instead of a curve.

      The potential income is a curve with a negative slope - if spamming links on Slashdot were *really* a money-maker, other people would be doing it at commercial scale. But no, it requires you to sit there, read through all the comments, think of some way to jam an affiliate link into your response, write your response, and post it. That technique and approach does not scale in any way that is profitable.

      Keep telling yourself that.

      I will. You see, I'm a truthful sort - I always tell myself things that are true.

    45. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      creimer is pretty much an open loop idiot. Unable to recognize his own errors, and persists in believing delusions, unable to apply corrections.

      He's phenomenal in the amount of energy he can pour into nonsense.

    46. Re: Looking at calendar. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      You should provide facts.

      This is Slashdot. Facts are mocked. Figures are low balled. Success is scorned. Suicide is the answer for everyone else's problems. Nihilism at its best.

    47. Re: Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, that was a completely sane, rational, and level-headed response when asked how many coffees you drink.

    48. Re: Looking at calendar. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      [...] if spamming links on Slashdot were *really* a money-maker, other people would be doing it at commercial scale.

      It helps to have a 10+ year old account with excellent karma and get more up votes than down votes by the mods. A brand new account would get modded to obivilion in short order.

      But no, it requires you to sit there, read through all the comments [...]

      Which is what I've already been doing for years. That task has gotten easier as the jocks run off the nerds, and most comments lack intellectual heft.

      think of some way to jam an affiliate link into your response, write your response, and post it.

      That's the easy part. The hard part is analyzing the sales data. I want to go after the people who drop $1K in a single purchase (7 to 10 cups of coffee). I had three in the last three months.

    49. Re: Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " most comments lack intellectual heft."

      How would you know? The only heft you've seen is your garbage bags.

      "I want to go after the people who drop $1K in a single purchase (7 to 10 cups of coffee)"

      Is this an example of what you consider intellectual heft? A nonsense statement, completely undecipherable?

    50. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry about Peak Stupidity, the government is busily working on renewable sources of Stupid.

      You jest, but IMO the whole government baaaad meme is just another example of endemic stupidity in the US.

    51. Re: Looking at calendar. by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      We know about your government job that barely covers coffee, he's asking about the Amazon money.

    52. Re:Looking at calendar. by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Medically - politically - I have to look at the calendar everyday because it feels like I'm in a time warp and it's really 1917.

      Not quite,

      In 1917, the medical profession was quite well respected. Few people would believe some publication printed by a discredited quack (Wakefield) or some snake oil salesman (David "Avocado" Wolfe) that is very light on fact and mainly uses fear and thought terminating cliches over the reviewed publications of medical professionals. No reputable publisher would touch it. People would take the advice of their doctors, or at least seek out another medical professional to help them over healing crystals and herbal remedies.

      Now whilst the medical professionals of the US haven't done themselves any favours in recent decades by becoming drug salesmen, they are not really to blame here. As much as I hate saying this, the Internet is to blame. Now I think the internet is the most important development since the steam engine, it has had the unfortunate side effect of giving charlatans a lot of influence over the stupid. A comfortable life free of debilitating disease, the decline of public education and a culture that glorifies stupidity has made the internet the perfect hunting ground for fraudsters and snake oil merchants like David "Avocado" Wolfe and Belle Gibson to gather small hordes of blindly aggressive, unthinking followers.

      To fix this, I would not propose in any way to change the internet, what we need to do is stop glorifying stupidity, we need to stop accepting and even tolerating it. One of the greatest tragedies of the modern age is that someone thinks their ignorance is worth as much as a professionals knowledge. This means that we'll need to insult a few snowflakes, point out that they're not smart enough to be contradicting medical and/or scientific professionals and uniformly ignore their opinions. We've seen the fad of fat shaming, why aren't we dumb shaming?

      Yes, the Internet has given Anti-Vaxxers and their ilk a powerful platform. But it has given us so many other benefits so it's a case of society needing to change to accommodate the internet, not the internet changing to accommodate the stupid of our society. The internet has given us near unlimited access to information, not all of it accurate and true information so people need to change to become more critical of information and the only way we can do this is by better education.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    53. Re:Looking at calendar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Peak stupidity is a myth, there is more than enough stupidity to last forever.

      Peak stupidity doesn't imply that there will be no more stupidity after we hit the peak. That is an incorrect understanding. The theory of peak stupidity implies stupidity will be harder to find and more expensive to maintain after that point.

      There will always be some stupidity expressed by society, it will just necessarily be less once we pass peak stupidity.

      Yeah, what are ya? Stupid?

  2. Want to hear something funny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Pay phone.

    1. Re:Want to hear something funny? by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      Pay phone. I actually saw one of those yesterday. I don't know if it was functional, but it's been so long since I saw one that it surprised me a little.

    2. Re:Want to hear something funny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not exactly a pay phone, but I saw a suicide hotline phone in the middle of the Golden Gate Bridge. Unfortunately, it had an "out of order" sign on it... ouch.

    3. Re:Want to hear something funny? by RatherBeAnonymous · · Score: 1


      Pay phone.

      Think that's funny? Go ask the Golgafrincams what happens when you rid your society of telephone sanitizers.

    4. Re:Want to hear something funny? by slew · · Score: 1

      Not exactly a pay phone, but I saw a suicide hotline phone in the middle of the Golden Gate Bridge. Unfortunately, it had an "out of order" sign on it... ouch.

      Apparently for the youngin's, they can text 'GGB' to 741741 after they take their selfie and be connected to a suicide prevention councilor. For the oldies with no phone, well, gotta save money somewhere to build the $211M suicide net...

  3. People Don't Remember by Luthair · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think the issue is that most people alive today of childbearing age have no experience with how awful the diseases that plagued our ancestors were which leaves them with wiggle room to accept doubt from dumbass celebrities.

    1. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just make sure *your* children have their vaccinations. The kids of all the dumbasses will be weeded out due to genetic stupidity. It is as it always was... thank you Mr. Darwin.

    2. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just make sure *your* children have their vaccinations. The kids of all the dumbasses will be weeded out due to genetic stupidity. It is as it always was... thank you Mr. Darwin.

      Nope. Social governments have effectively thwarted Mr. Darwin.

    3. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is unfortunately, possibly not enough to stop them getting measles, or even dying from it :(

      Herd immunity also protects a small proportion of the vaccinated who for various reasons can still catch the disease; it's not abnormal for some vaccinated people to be part of an outbreak.

    4. Re:People Don't Remember by rhsanborn · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This isn't good enough for children with rare diseases and childhood cancers that don't allow them to get vaccination. Vaccination isn't just about my kid, it's a social policy designed to protect others as well.

    5. Re:People Don't Remember by MightyYar · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It would be great if libertarian principles applied to vaccines (my base ideology is libertarian), but:
      1. Vaccines are not anywhere near 100% effective, so even a fully vaccinated person may be relying on herd immunity.
      2. You can't vaccinate a newborn, so everyone relies on herd immunity for the first 6 months or so of their life.
      3. Some people can't be vaccinated at all.

      So we're left with a social solution, which is vaccinating everyone who can be vaccinated, whether they like it or not.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    6. Re:People Don't Remember by hyades1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm sorry, but you're probably mistaken. Thanks mainly to hospitals, where heroic measures can be taken to save the offspring of anti-vaxxer morons, the little ones won't die. They'll spread disease amongst people who cannot be vaccinated due to age or other factors, then be dragged by their idiot parents to the nearest emergency ward when they get really sick. Once there, it might cost many thousands of dollars to save each of the little darlings. For the most part, though, they'll avoid paying the price for their parents' bad decisions.

      We will do that, with our tax dollars.

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    7. Re:People Don't Remember by SomeoneFromBelgium · · Score: 3, Informative

      You are mostly right. Except the hospital thing. As far as I know these deseases are so contageous because they have an incubation period. The simptoms only appear after a certain time but it is contagous before. So the most victims have already been made by the time the first patients arrive in hospital.
      Then they have to track down who was in contact with these childeren (family, school, hobby's...) in the last X hours...

      Cheers!

    8. Re:People Don't Remember by Maritz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Essentially, that's it. Add to that a population dumb enough to take medical advice from Jenny McCarthy.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    9. Re:People Don't Remember by Maritz · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "Social governments"? lol. Putting a seed in the ground thwarted Darwin. Technology thwarted Darwin.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    10. Re:People Don't Remember by judoguy · · Score: 3, Informative

      It would be great if libertarian principles applied to vaccines (my base ideology is libertarian), but: 1. Vaccines are not anywhere near 100% effective, so even a fully vaccinated person may be relying on herd immunity. 2. You can't vaccinate a newborn, so everyone relies on herd immunity for the first 6 months or so of their life. 3. Some people can't be vaccinated at all.

      So we're left with a social solution, which is vaccinating everyone who can be vaccinated, whether they like it or not.

      Not in MN where I live. Here are the vaccinations a child must have at 2 months, more at 4 months and yet more at 6 months:

      Rotavirus (oral), Haemophilus Influenzae Type B (HIB), Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine (PCV13), Diphtheria, Tetanus, Pertussis, Inactivated Polio Virus (IPV) and Hepatitis B (HBV).

      They might all be needed for the survival of the race, but that's a lot of vaccinations.

      --
      Peace is easy to achieve, just surrender. Liberty is much harder get/keep.
    11. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a libertarian solution available, still.

      For private spaces, convince everyone who is immunized that being around the unimmunized can make them sick. They will demand that anywhere they visit deny access to the unimmunized. They will also vote locally for laws restricting unimmunized's access to non-necessary public spaces (eg: Parks). Libertarians are also typically in favour of school vouchers. Choose a school that refuses access to the unimmunized.

      This will limit exposure to the unimmunized and thus solve the herd immunity issue, while still allowing essential liberty (on their own private property, and on necessary public rights of way, such as roads, courtrooms [not as a spectator], etc).

    12. Re:People Don't Remember by MightyYar · · Score: 2

      I think your numbers square with mine - until 6 months a baby is not fully vaccinated.

      There's a lot of vaccinations because there's a lot of diseases.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    13. Re:People Don't Remember by MightyYar · · Score: 2

      convince everyone

      I think I spotted the flaw in your plan. I can, at times, be convincing. But I'm no Jenny McCarthy.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    14. Re:People Don't Remember by mrun4982 · · Score: 1

      That attitude's not good enough. It's possible for children to either not respond to the vaccine or not be able to get it due to other conditions.

    15. Re:People Don't Remember by Kokuyo · · Score: 1

      Not that I like mentioning this but perhaps it's a good think if the kids with these diseases don't get a chance to reproduce, at least from a species-wide point of view.

      Then again, we'd certainly win more if the stupidity were curbed...

    16. Re: People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they are creating incubators where the virus mutates. Eventually the vaccines become ineffective. Hence the warning in the article.

    17. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not possible if your child is one of the few who can't get vaccinated due to medical reasons and have no choice. Those children rely on the herd immunity provided by everyone else being vaccinated. These anti-vax folks are ruining that for them and putting other children who have no choice at risk.

    18. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "that's a lot of vaccinations"

      I had to laugh a bit at that.
      I grew up in the 50s and 60s, as a kid to a dad in the Foreign Service. Talk about feeling like a pincushion! I'd fill up a shot card every couple of years. My most hated shot was Gamma Globulin, especially in the 50s, when it was dosed by your weight, at one cc per 10 lbs of body weight. My sister had to get TWO shots of that, one in each cheek, and the stuff was thick as pancake syrup, so it hurt like hell, going in, and for a while after.
      Good times! (NOT!)

    19. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they should still have a choice of shots: vaccine or unleaded buckshot.

    20. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in MN too and we've had consistent news stories about small scale outbreaks of things like Measles and Mumps. So far this entire discussion is about anti-vaxxers, but that's a small number of goofballs, likely no larger than the group of people that are immune to vaccination. Herd immunity should cover them well enough.

      So what's the source of these outbreaks? It says it right there in the summary: "when travelers carried it in". The last couple of decades has seen a large number of immigrants to Minnesota, from from countries like Somalia, who've never even heard of a vaccine. Short-sighted feel-good immigration policies should really be the focus of discussion surrounding this.

    21. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In a perfect libritarian world their are no public parks. Just private parks that screen every aspect of your life before allowing entry.

    22. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First kill all personal injury lawyers then remove all warning labels and force vaccinate the masses.
      Better to have twits who can speak English than to import human trash who are illiterate in their own language.
      The best and brightest left the middle east decades ago came west assimilated and are not thrilled to have the very reason they left follow them here.

    23. Re:People Don't Remember by h4ck7h3p14n37 · · Score: 2

      When is the MMR vaccine administered? There have been several recent Measles outbreaks in Minnesota's Somali communities due to anti-vaxers targeting them with misinformation campaigns.

    24. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Year. Just FYI. MMR is the latest of the typical "early childhood" vaccines and it's administered at 1 year.

    25. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Poor idea and an example of why "absolutist" Libertarian policies will not work (not that I am implying you are a fanatic or absolutist/anarchist or Ayn Rand worshipper). The concern about vaccination would not be the primary concern when choosing a school and would likely fall away and yield to more highly rated concerns (e.g. specific good teachers, academics, reputation of students from the school).

      That is why there are governments which say "this law states the minimum compliance required from everybody (except for specific exemptions)." and "just do it".

    26. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's keep things in perspective here. We're talking about the measles. Sure, it's not a pleasant thing to have, but the disease can only hit you once in your life, and has mortality rates of somewhere between 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 300,000. In most cases, 2-3 weeks off school and you're as good new.

      I'm all for vaccines for serious diseases (especially in places where they are needed): Polio, malaria, and things like Ebola and AIDs if they're ever developed, but I think it is a worthwhile discussion to have is at what point are vaccinations unnecessary? Should a vaccination for the common cold, if it's ever invented, be mandated? What if the vaccination has only a 50% effectiveness? What if the vaccination can lead to complications which cause a 1 in 250,000 mortality rate? More importantly, what makes anyone think they should be making this decision for someone else?

    27. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well if you're going to go that far, why bother having a medical profession at all? I mean, those who survive injury and sickness are the more fit and should receive the breeding opportunities after all.

    28. Re:People Don't Remember by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Nothing thwarts Darwin. In other words, change in allele frequency is happening in human populations all the time. There are still a few "Social Darwinists", who don't understand the first thing about evolutionary biology, who imagine certain types of medical intervention somehow magically defy nature, but these people are simply morons, and should be ignored, or treated with the contempt that vile halfwits earn.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    29. Re:People Don't Remember by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      So being an infant is now a genetic defect?

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    30. Re:People Don't Remember by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Ayn Rand devotees are "Objectivists". There is a lot of cross-pollination, but one can certainly be Libertarian and think she was a crackpot. You don't even need to necessarily support strong property rights, though again the vast majority of Libertarians consider property a "right". Personally I think it's a stretch to call it a natural right.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    31. Re:People Don't Remember by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      Good point!

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    32. Re:People Don't Remember by cryptizard · · Score: 2

      I mean it's not like there are any people born with physical handicaps that go on to do important things for society /s

    33. Re:People Don't Remember by Jason+Levine · · Score: 2

      Exactly this. Vaccines have been TOO successful. I'm the parent of two boys (13 and 10). Both are vaccinated. However, I've educated myself about what life was like before vaccines. I'll never know first hand the horrors of not knowing if today was the day your child would get sick with Polio, Measles, Mumps, etc. For that I'm grateful. However, it means that it can be easy to wrongfully minimize the risks of the diseases ("Who gets measles today? It's just like chicken pox - you get lumps for a few days and then they go away.") and then maximize the risks of the vaccines ("Vaccines contain FORMALDEHYDE and MERCURY!!!! Those are toxic in high enough doses, therefore vaccines must be toxic.").

      In the early days of the anti-vax movement, the anti-vaxxers were protected by herd immunity. Unfortunately, this helped their cause since they could point to their healthy, unvaccinated kids and get more parents to skip the "unneeded" vaccines. As more people joined the movement, though, herd immunity broke down and we got outbreaks. Hopefully, those will be enough to correct the risk analysis that parents perform and show them that the tiny risks that vaccines pose are far outweighed* by the benefits.

      * The only exception is if you have a medical condition that precludes vaccination. Then, you're relying on everyone else to do the right thing and vaccinate so that herd immunity can protect you.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    34. Re:People Don't Remember by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      The problem is that kids need to reach a certain age before they get vaccinations. An infant will be susceptible to viruses that non-vaccinated kids spread and can die before they are old enough to get the vaccine.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    35. Re:People Don't Remember by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      Not to mention the people who can't be vaccinated due to valid medical conditions (allergies, immune system disorders, etc).

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    36. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be great if libertarian principles applied to vaccines (my base ideology is libertarian), but:
      1. Vaccines are not anywhere near 100% effective, so even a fully vaccinated person may be relying on herd immunity.
      2. You can't vaccinate a newborn, so everyone relies on herd immunity for the first 6 months or so of their life.
      3. Some people can't be vaccinated at all.

      So we're left with a social solution, which is vaccinating everyone who can be vaccinated, whether they like it or not.

      Alternatively we can educate people about the utility of vaccines so they will choose to get them.

      The main problem is that vaccines work well enough that we're now in a generation where parents have no personal experience with diseases worse than the flu and the vaccine they're most familiar with is the yearly flu vaccine which due to the mutation rate of influenza is not a very effective vaccine (the virus mutates faster than doses can be produced so you're getting protected from one old possibly no longer dominate strain among many which drastically lowers the practical effectiveness).

      That leads to a distorted risk benefit assessment because the parent is under estimating the risk and the effectiveness of the vaccines so even an accurate assessment of the risks of the vaccine (it probably doesn't cause autism but why take the chance?), and the general approach to a parent who doesn't want to vaccinate is to merely assert that they're an idiot rather than educate them on why these specific vaccines are so important, and emphasizes that it's the vaccines that are responsible for the parent not having personal experience with them. Stop vaccinating and that safety goes away.

      Even vaccines for lower impact diseases like HPV are desirable once you consider that you have to get it before you're exposed for it to work and if you get the disease you're stuck with it.

    37. Re:People Don't Remember by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      When is the MMR vaccine administered?

      I think MMR is from 6 months through several years, but all vaccines can be taken at any time, so lapses are easy to cure.

      Vaccinations are also damn cheap to administer and from a purely monetary POV, have some of the largest ROI around - the cost is very low (we mass produce vaccines nowadays, so the vaccine itself only costs a few pennies per shot), and yet, keeping such virulent diseases at bay means less lost productivity - parents don't have to care after sick kids, quarantines don't need to be established, general treatment of disease costs, etc., so overall a vaccinated population is more productive. Plus, the risk of complications from disease is so much lower - measles may seem like a minor thing, but it is a deadly disease. It's just we've been able to treat it.

      It won't be long until companies realize that mandatory vaccinations of their employee's kids might be increasingly common - a vaccine is cheap, and unless there are medication reasons against it, not losing days of work having to deal with sick kids, health care costs over preventable diseases , etc. would make sense on the bottom line.

      Heck, at least the excuses for not getting the HPV (Human Papiloma Virus) vaccine are interesting. For those not in the know, HPV is a STD that has been implicated in several forms of cancer. The excuses against vaccination against HPV has generally been "but kids will have more sex!" (usually administered in your teens, though). As if other STDs don't exist to begin with (we can't vaccinate against HIV, yet), or that being protected against HPV is an excuse to be promiscuous. There's also a religious excuse - namely because sex outside of marriage is bad. But HPV vaccinations are offered and most teenage girls can get it for free in places with decent health care, while boys typically have to pay, but even that's changing. Like I said, HPV is implicated as the source of several cancers so it just makes sense to get a jab now than have to undergo much more invasive cancer treatment.

    38. Re:People Don't Remember by sheramil · · Score: 1

      I mean it's not like there are any people born with physical handicaps that go on to do important things for society /s

      Pretty sure Robert Anton Wilson would disagree with you. He had polio.

    39. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That whooshing is the sound of sarcasm flying far above your head.

    40. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > at least from a species-wide point of view.

      That seems the obvious thing to assume, but there is a good chance it is not true.
      Diversity generally works as a insurance against particularly disastrous events, for example the absolutely deadly sickle cell disease (genetic) that however protects against malaria.
      That of course is besides all the other reasons like ethics (that we developed for good reasons, too, and are unlikely to be well served as a species to throw out) that speak against it.

    41. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > so the vaccine itself only costs a few pennies per shot

      A few dollars per shot actually.
      Which makes me kind of pissed off that here in Sweden getting the vaccination (unless you are a child) costs you $50!
      Plus, good luck if you try to get any advice from a doctor about it, they maybe know about the travel vaccines, but they barely have a clue about the standard vaccinations (like asking: if I got one shot as a child and had been taking immune suppressants before, should I get another shot or not? Results in something like "probably" as answer).
      I mean, if the doctors specializing in it barely give a shit about the standard stuff (except as said for children), why are you surprised if people aren't properly vaccinated?

    42. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not so simple.
      Measles vaccine after 2 shots is about 97% effective. A lot of older people only got one shot as a child. So even if everyone is vaccinated you are dangerously close to the minimum immunity level of 92%-95% for herd immunity for measles.
      For measles, that "small number of goofballs" can totally break herd immunity all by themselves, especially if they are not evenly distributed across the country.
      Without the disease being brought in by people, the result would likely be a slow and unnoticed degradation which the would REALLY blow up in everyone's face when the big outbreak comes.
      Isolating yourself does NOT work, at least against diseases like measles.
      There are 2 methods that work:
      - An extremely high vaccination rate (and then it is rather good to get the disease imported - it provides testing of your defenses and reminders to people that vaccination is necessary)
      - Global eradication of the disease

      If you want fewer vaccinations, ask your politicians to make the same efforts as against smallpox once more.

    43. Re:People Don't Remember by sexconker · · Score: 1

      Everybody dies. Some people get dealt a shitty hand. If you can't run with the pack, too bad.
      We can't drag the rest of society down for a handful of unfit (or stupid) people. Cold and heartless? Sure.

      Can we force people who don't want to get vaccinated in order to indirectly protect the people who can't get vaccinated?
      I say hell fucking no. If people has baseless fears about vaccines, a general distrust of the government and corporations pushing them, or just plain don't want to, that's their fucking right. If other people are so infirm that the existence of unvaccinated people poses a threat to them, too bad.

      Disease and death are the natural state of things, and we will never win that war. The majority of society needs to progress forward without being anchored by either group, but also without violating their rights (forced vaccines or euthanasia).

      For every disease we eradicate, a new one will fill the void anyway. Nature abhors a vacuum, after all.

    44. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Alternatively we can educate people about the utility of vaccines so they will choose to get them.

      Education only works when you can afford to give up on those unwilling or unable to let themselves be educated.
      Measles is so infectious, and the vaccine a bit off from 100% effective that it's very questionable we can afford that.

    45. Re:People Don't Remember by tquasar · · Score: 1

      I have a scar on my arm from a vaccination I got when I was 5 years old. The procedure scared the shit out of me. And yes, no one remembers the horrible diseases that killed so many.

    46. Re:People Don't Remember by slew · · Score: 1

      Nothing thwarts Darwin. In other words, change in allele frequency is happening in human populations all the time. There are still a few "Social Darwinists", who don't understand the first thing about evolutionary biology, who imagine certain types of medical intervention somehow magically defy nature, but these people are simply morons, and should be ignored, or treated with the contempt that vile halfwits earn.

      Although normally, I'm quite the Luddite, we *have* changed evolution with technology and defied nature. Even mundane technologies like "soap" and "spectacles/glasses" have helped our species avoid certain evolutionary paths... You can argue what the limit of "certain types" of intervention might be or if such intervention is actually beneficial (or moral), but to claim that we should ignore it, is equivalently half-witted...

    47. Re:People Don't Remember by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Alternatively we can educate people about the utility of vaccines so they will choose to get them.

      That's just as un-Libertarian. The only difference is that you added a step (compulsory education). Either way, we as a society need to force/compel people to do something that they aren't currently doing. I like the Libertarian ideology as a general way to understand people and set up our society to take advantage of our strengths and minimize our weaknesses. Germs are not people, and they do not adhere to Libertarian notions of right and wrong. As such, we need to be pragmatic, step away from our ideology, and deal with reality.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    48. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They might all be needed for the survival of the race, but that's a lot of vaccinations.

      Children are exposed to hundreds of new types of bacteria/viruses every day. You have listed 8 spread out over 4 months. I don't think the vaccines are really adding a significant challenge to their immune systems.

    49. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually do remember measles, growing up in Europe and I am definitely not a "dumbass celebrity".

      When my younger brother got infected, the rest of the siblings, including myself stayed close, for the doctor's order, to make sure that we all get infected as well - and get immunity for the rest of our life.

      While measles was inconvenient, it was not such a big deal, as you also clearly only imagine, without any experience.
      When properly monitored it came and went, without any drama at young age, the doctors main concern was not to get infected at old age, when it was considered more dangerous.

    50. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Can we force people who don't want to get vaccinated in order to indirectly protect the people who can't get vaccinated?

      Yes. We can and should. The only exemption that should be allowed is medical: that is, you die if you take MMR.

      >but also without violating their rights (forced vaccines or euthanasia)

      Nope. People who refuse the vaccine should be forced to take it, or put outside the borders of the US. The pacific ocean will do nicely.

      To clarify: yes, we should kill people who refuse to take MMR.

    51. Re:People Don't Remember by Solandri · · Score: 1
      The problem is how responsibility is perceived.
      • If vaccinations are not required, and your child dies of measles, then the parents blame bad luck. End of story.
      • If vaccinations are required, and your child dies of complications from the vaccine, then the parents don't blame bad luck. They blame the vaccine and the government for requiring the vaccine. Even if the child's odds of dying from measles without the vaccine were much higher than from complications due to the vaccine.

      Somehow, we have to teach people that when it comes to probability-based policies (i.e. ones whose outcome cannot be predicted on an individual basis), the average result for the entire population is more important than a single result for an individual. Unfortunately, the way our news media works, an individual story is much more presentable and catchy (more likely to go viral) than statistics for the overall population. So individual outcomes have a disproportionate effect on what people think policy should be.

      I'm reminded of Jan Lohr from United flight 232. She was a flight attendant, and when they were preparing for the crash landing, the parents of a lap child (a child who didn't have to pay for a ticket, and hence had no seat) asked her what to do. She quoted them airline policy - place the child underneath the seat in front like a carry-on bag. The parents survived, the child did not. Jan then started a decades-long quest to eliminate lap children from flights. Eventually (last year) the FAA turned her down. You see, as heartbreaking as the story of that one individual lap child is, statistically far more children die in car accidents than in plane crashes. So if the lap child policy convinces parents with young children to fly instead of drive, it actually saves more lives than that individual loss.

      Put another way, our legal system allows parents of a child who dies from vaccine complications to directly pin the blame on the vaccine and sue them. Parents of a child who dies from a measles outbreak cannot directly pin the blame on Jenny McCarthy and sue her, even though she is just as culpable as the vaccine complication death. Our legal system views direct cause as more important than overall statistical effect.

    52. Re:People Don't Remember by hey! · · Score: 2

      It involves you even if you got your kids vaccinated.

      No medication is 100% effective. About 2% of recipients fail to develop resistance -- more for patients using "alternative" vaccination schedules. Also for a significant number (about 5%) of patients immunity wanes after about ten years.

      What this means is that everybody depends on herd immunity. Unless you've had wild measles, that includes you as an adult who received the vaccination decades ago.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    53. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 2

      Disease and death are the natural state of things, and we will never win that war.

      We already beat smallpox. We will probably never really beat death, but there are quite a few diseases - at least contagious ones - that we could beat like we beat smallpox. Nothing has stepped in to replace it. New infections arise, and we get better and better about dealing with them.

      I think it's reasonable to say you can't do some things if you haven't been vaccinated. You shouldn't be strapped down to a table and given the shot, but maybe you pay higher health insurance premiums and can't work in jobs where you're in contact with children on a regular basis. Maybe children who aren't vaccinated shouldn't be in some schools.

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
    54. Re:People Don't Remember by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Agreed, but the other part is that suing a big company is easy - there is no problem finding a lawyer to work on contingency and discovery will be pretty easy as they no doubt keep good records. It's also a single entity to deal with. If your kid dies in a measles outbreak, you could theoretically sue every other person who was infected during the outbreak who was negligent in getting vaccinated. This would be a massive undertaking. First you'd need to pay a lawyer out of pocket because only a lunatic would work on contingency. Second, you'd need to somehow obtain a list of measles patients. Then you'd need to sue each in turn so that you could discover whether or not they were vaccinated. Maybe someday a billionaire will do this, but it just doesn't seem realistic and even if it were feasible seems like a crazy way to run a system. We just need to accept that diseases do not fit neatly into the "personal responsibility" ideal that I think works well in most other human endeavors.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    55. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not 100% effective but so effective that 100% is a very reasonable approximation. Source Cellular and Molecular Immunology -- Abul K. Abbas MBBS (Author), Andrew H. H. Lichtman MD PhD (Author), Shiv Pillai MBBS PhD (Author) . They are in fact the greatest medicine ever invented. No other drugs even come close to the effectiveness of the vaccine.

      If you don"t vaccinate without a very good reason, you are a murderer by proxy plain and simple.

    56. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what the heck are you talking about? Basic sanitation eliminated and reduced most diseases. (Although big pharma would naturally prefer you give credit to drugs.) This wasn't even controversial forty years ago.

      Now they're talking like a "return" of measles is the end of the world. WTF

    57. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That might have been intended as sarcasm but 51% of the electorate agree with you on this.

    58. Re:People Don't Remember by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      If you don"t vaccinate without a very good reason, you are a murderer by proxy plain and simple.

      I wouldn't go that far, as the intent is important. But I would support making it a crime for a person to deliberately avoid vaccination and then transmit a disease.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    59. Re:People Don't Remember by Luthair · · Score: 1

      If you lookup statistics, 0.3% of patients die from measles, others experience hearing & vision loss. Patients with auto-immune die around 30% of the time. If someone is skipping one vaccine they're usually skipping a bunch.

    60. Re:People Don't Remember by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      convince everyone

      I think I spotted the flaw in your plan. I can, at times, be convincing. But I'm no Jenny McCarthy.

      You would be much more convincing if you had breast implants. Big ones.

    61. Re: People Don't Remember by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I am kinda bothered by that story. I am no hero, but I'd have given my seat to the child. How could I not?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    62. Re:People Don't Remember by bazorg · · Score: 1

      And when these people arrived from Somalia, who did they encounter?

      Good old Andrew Wakefield, a walking argument for supporting the death penalty.

      Let me quote from the nice article above:

      The graph above shows what can only be described as a catastrophic plunge over the course of just one decade in MMR uptake among American-born children of Somali descent, from 92% to 42%. There is, for all intents and purposes, no herd immunity in this community. The interesting thing here, though, is that this plunge is very specific. It’s noted in the story that there is not a fear of vaccination in general among the Somali immigrant population. Rather, it’s fear of just one shot: the MMR.

      It’s not clear exactly when Andrew Wakefield first made contact with the Minnesota Somali community, but I do know that Age of Autism was on the case as early as August 2008 and that the founder of the antivaccine group Generation Rescue J.B. Handley published “An Open Letter to the Somali Parents of Minnesota” in which he told them it was the vaccines and that they can’t trust the local health authorities. He even went so far as to urge them to declare a “state of emergency within your community and create a new vaccine schedule for your kids.” Meanwhile, also as early as August 2008, David Kirby had been writing stories like ‘Is Autism an “American Disease?” Somali Immigrants Reportedly Have High Rates.’

    63. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What does "not anywhere near 100% effective" mean? Most vaccines are quite effective. Far more effective that treatment after infection occurs.
      Seriously, do some research that doesn't involve visiting crackpot lunatic fringe web sites and back it up with an understanding of the mathematics behind epidemiology. Check the (no doubt surprisingly inaccurate and completely unreliable) Wikipedia entry on herd immunity, which is actually quite accessible and explains the processes involved quite well using reasonably simple language: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity#Mechanism

      Any effectiveness less than the 92% - 95% figure for measles would mean the earlier elimination could not physically be possible. That doesn't seem "not anywhere near 100% effective". It looks pretty good.

      Since this won't be believable, due to the surprisingly inaccurate and completely unreliable of Wikipedia, find some medical or statistical journals and read up on the subject. Albeit in far less accessible language.

      Growing up with the very real threat of smallpox and polio seems to make one appreciate vaccines more. Seeing the outcome of these two very nasty diseases first hand more so.

    64. Re:People Don't Remember by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      Let us know how your master race works out Adolf.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    65. Re:People Don't Remember by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      I'm hoping that was /sarcasm. But several immediately come to mind...Hawking, FDR, Temple Grandin. The list is actually huge.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    66. Re:People Don't Remember by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      You are the absolute worst form of shit to ever walk the earth. I hope you die from a vaccine.

    67. Re:People Don't Remember by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      That is quite possibly the dumbest response I have ever seen. You are responding to the person saying that government does not have the right to force medicine on its citizens and calling that person Hitler. What the fuck is wrong with you?

    68. Re: People Don't Remember by rpstrong · · Score: 1

      Without a child seat? The child was small enough to fit under the seat. It is very possible that that location is theoretically safer for an infant than being strapped into an adult sized seat with no means of supporting the upper body.

    69. Re:People Don't Remember by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      And how many of those died from it?
      Come on, I'm waiting.

    70. Re:People Don't Remember by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      I don't think you should have the choice. Only the administration of lead buckshot.

    71. Re:People Don't Remember by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      Vaccine manufacturers have absolutely no liability for death or damage from their vaccine products, at least in the US which requires the most vaccines of any country in the world.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    72. Re:People Don't Remember by Bengie · · Score: 1

      Vaccines don't stop people from getting sick, they statistically stop the sickness from spreading. If the vaccination rates get too low, the sickness will spread and even vaccinated people will get sick.

    73. Re:People Don't Remember by Bengie · · Score: 1

      In my location of the USA, the shots are cheap, just not the nurses. About $10 to get a shot from a non-profit in a neighboring city, about $20 to get from a local clinic, about $50 to get from the hospital, but my insurance covers it 100% no matter where I get it. I just go to whomever excepts my insurance, is relatively close, and as cheap as possible.

      Luckily my employer typically brings the yearly shots to us. On-site nurses for a few days out of the year, free, and not considered a break so hourly temp workers still get paid.

    74. Re:People Don't Remember by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      Everybody dies. Some people get dealt a shitty hand. If you can't run with the pack, too bad.
      We can't drag the rest of society down for a handful of unfit (or stupid) people. Cold and heartless? Sure.

      So, you agree with this? If so, you're as stupid as he is. Everyone who gets dealt that "shitty hand" should just go die suck it up because the other dumb fucks won't get vaccinated, and we shouldn't require it? That IS quite literally one of the dumbest responses I've seen.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    75. Re:People Don't Remember by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      If it takes forcing a medical procedure on everyone else to save those very few, absolutely yes.
      You should also look into the safety of vaccines beyond the sound bytes given by the CDC and other government agencies. They have an extremely large vested interest in promoting all vaccines they can. It is also their policy to deny all evidence that shines a bad light on vaccines, wether or not well substantiated.
      It should also concern you that vaccine manufacturers are the only group that are completely immune to lawsuits over damage and death from proper use of their products. Keep in mind that these are the same corporations that have been found criminally liable many times over the last several decades for their other products which they do have liability for. What makes you think they will do better on the products which they have absolutely zero liability for and can convince to government to force you to take it?

    76. Re: People Don't Remember by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Even if it made not statistical sense.

      To be clear, I don't know who you are - but there's a good chance I've exemplified my willingness to die on your behalf. No, it doesn't mean you're special. It just means I was ready to do my job. There's not a heroic bone in my body.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    77. Re:People Don't Remember by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Sure, but we were kind of musing on how you might apply libertarian principles to the problems of vaccination. I don't think anyone would claim that health care currently meets that definition :)

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    78. Re:People Don't Remember by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      What does "not anywhere near 100% effective" mean?

      As in, some years only 20-ish% effective (flu) - this year flu was 50% effective. But for most vaccines, without the numbers in front of me I think they run in the 85-99% range. The important number is what is necessary to make sure that the vaccine works - add the effectiveness to the can't-or-won't be vaccinated number and if that number is too big we are sunk. For the most part, everyone who can be vaccinated should be.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    79. Re:People Don't Remember by cryptizard · · Score: 1

      I'm hoping that was /sarcasm

      You must not reddit.

    80. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how many of those died from it?

      Come on, I'm waiting.

      Well that's stupid.
      Asking about measles deaths is asking about the wrong number. It's logically the same as looking at the death rate for erectile dysfunction.
      However, since you asked, the death rate in western countries is only about 1-2 deaths per thousand cases. Given that number you would not expect any deaths in the Minnesota outbreak. In Minnesota, about 21 were hospitalized for 79 infections in 2017. None died.

      Death isn't the reason we try to eliminate measles. When I was a kid, measles was the number one cause of blindness in the USA.
      Measles does many bad things to people from permanent brain damage, lung damage, blindness, and even odd things like destroying the enamel on teeth.
      One of the most insidious things is that measles erases your immune system's memory of previous infections, thus making you vulnerable again to diseases you had before.
      For that matter, death isn't the reason we're trying to eliminate guinea worm disease, river blindness, or even polio.
      Somehow people (other than you) understand why it's stupid to complain "but how many people died from river blindness", nor do they raise objections that relate to the death rate of measles.

    81. Re:People Don't Remember by mjwx · · Score: 1

      It would be great if libertarian principles applied to vaccines (my base ideology is libertarian), but:

      If we applied Liberatarian principles to vaccination, we'd be handing the Anti-Vaxxers the argument on a silver platter... because unlike Libertarian principles... vaccines work in the real world.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    82. Re:People Don't Remember by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Wow, not an AC comment - just good ol' fashioned flamebait!

      The US Constitution is indeed not going to last more that 10 or 20 years, tops. Libertarian ideals just can't work in the real world.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    83. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      our legal system allows parents of a child who dies from vaccine complications to directly pin the blame on the vaccine and sue them.

      No. It does not. The victims' only recourse in the US is the Vaccine Injury Compensation Board.

    84. Re:People Don't Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      /s means he was being sarcastic...

  4. Decimated America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With all these fools and Trumpian healthcare I predict a swift reduction among the American population.

    1. Re:Decimated America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF?

      So Obamacare was an improvement on what was before? Have we seen a population explosion as a result of Obamacare?

    2. Re:Decimated America by ranton · · Score: 2

      So Obamacare was an improvement on what was before? Have we seen a population explosion as a result of Obamacare?

      Infant mortality rates have dropped 15% in the past 10 years. That adds about 4000 children per year who would have died in infancy. Obviously not all of these saved lives are because of Obamacare, but the industry certainly cites increased access to healthcare over the past decade as a major driver of this trend.

      Certainly not a population explosion, but then again you were probably merely mirroring the same level of hyperbole as the AC you were replying to.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
  5. Re:Vaccination Rates *and* Autism Rates are slippi by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 3, Insightful

    [Citation Needed]

    It falls on you to back up your claim, first.

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  6. haha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So what?
    Stupid people clip themselves from the gene pool, sounds like a great idea.
    Smart people will not be threatened by this, they may have to re-up their shots, but so what???

    You cannot fix stupid, don't waste money trying....you can lead a horse to water you cannot make it drink....let them go.

    1. Re:haha by ealbers · · Score: 1

      True.

    2. Re:haha by SirSlud · · Score: 2

      That's not how any of this works.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    3. Re:haha by Maritz · · Score: 1

      The reason you think this is all so simple, is (a) you haven't understood it at all and (b) you're a fucking simpleton.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  7. Re:Illegal Immigration? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Vaccines should be free to anyone who wants them, no questions asked.

  8. Re:Vaccination Rates *and* Autism Rates are slippi by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Autism rates have been on the decline, and this decline started when vaccination rates began their decline.

    It has? Can you please give a citation or two? From what I understand autism rates have been steadily increasing for a while now. Though I've read a few sources that state it may be about to plateau.

    Granted, part of the increase has to be from prior misdiagnosis and things like Asperger now considered autism. Black and Hispanics are also seeing increases. But some of that can be attributed to a lack of medical care in the past too. Regardless, it's still on the rise

    It's my understanding that there are some special cases where vaccines may be harmful to a very small percentage of children, but it's nothing compared to how harmful hepatitis, tetanus, polio, etc can be if you contract those and are not one of those cases.

  9. Evolution by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Evolution. All the idiots who won't get their kids vaccinated will see their genetic line die off. Those with vaccinations will be OK.

    Eventually we'll only have sensible people left, the kind that vaccinate their kids.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    1. Re:Evolution by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      >All the idiots who won't get their kids vaccinated will see their genetic line die off. Those with vaccinations will be OK.

      You need to read up on herd immunity. Vaccines aren't 100% effective (and some people simply can't have them for medical reasons), so just having your shot isn't enough, you need to have everyone else have their shots so it's unlikely an infected person will even come into contact with a vulnerable person.

    2. Re:Evolution by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      >All the idiots who won't get their kids vaccinated will see their genetic line die off. Those with vaccinations will be OK.

      You need to read up on herd immunity. Vaccines aren't 100% effective (and some people simply can't have them for medical reasons), so just having your shot isn't enough, you need to have everyone else have their shots so it's unlikely an infected person will even come into contact with a vulnerable person.

      Yeah, I know. I also know that the kids aren't responsible for the decisions that their parents foolishly make- nor should they suffer for the mistakes of their parents. My post was perhaps too flippant. It was more a raised middle finger at the numpties who won't vaccinate their kids than my real point of view.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    3. Re:Evolution by neo-mkrey · · Score: 1

      Not sure why the OP is modded as Flamebait. They speak the truth. If I had mod points today, I would +1 Insightful this post.

    4. Re:Evolution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He is modded flamebait because people generally look down upon genocide. Notice the GENO in genocide.

      Is there a gene that increases tendency to get vaccinated? If there is not one, how long before one emerges? If (or when) there is one, would it have any negative side effects (like say tendency for intravenous drug use).

      People say natural selection will fix it. I think it is a stretch to expect there to be a gene that has a strong influence on a social problem.

      Even if there is a gene that selects for it, is the death of most people who don't have the gene really the solution we want?

      Diseases can have a generation every 20 minutes, compared to humans having a generation typically every 20 years. Is out-evolving disease really a viable solution at all (note that gene therapy is not evolution, well at least strictly speaking. Even then there are militaries interested in biological weapons).

      Finally I would remind you there are plenty of species were evolution did not save them, and they are now extinct. Evolution doesn't care if a species continues or not. It is simply the observation that the species that continued are here with us (for) now.

  10. and under the GOP plan it will get on to the PRE E by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    and under the GOP plan it will get on to the PRE EX pool plan. If there is an opening / you have the funds for it and it's does not run out of fed / sate funds. But there is plan B ER (they will not fully cover you and will sue to get paid) plan C is jail / prison fully covered and in TX max cost $100/year.

  11. America is Great Again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks to the policies of the Trumptonians the US is well on its way to becoming Great Again. The vaccine fear campaign is well established now and is seeing definite effects in the general population. Soon a devastated fearful populace will be full under control of the administration.

  12. Epic fail - USA 92%, Mexico 99% by dbIII · · Score: 4, Informative

    Nice try at stirring up some hate there but it's not the Mexicans who are the slackers.
    http://theweek.com/articles/53...

    So what was the point?

    1. Re:Epic fail - USA 92%, Mexico 99% by dwillden · · Score: 1

      Who said Mexicans? The GP post said illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrant does not equate with Mexican. Not even in Texas. Yes Mexican nationals make up a sizeable portion of illegals sneaking across the border, but the Hispanic illegals come from all across central and south America and there are many illegals from other parts of the world that also come up through the southern border.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    2. Re:Epic fail - USA 92%, Mexico 99% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I hadn't thought about it before, but I just saw another comment here that's currently wrongly modded down to -1 that points out that the countries of Central America are now being used as a transit route by Africans who are trying to illegally enter the U.S. Even if the citizens of Central American countries are vaccinated, their countries are still being used as a conduit for Africans who haven't been vaccinated. This shouldn't just worry people in the U.S., but it should also worry the people of those Central American countries, too. They're also being exposed to the diseases carried by unvaccinated foreigners who are entering these Central American countries illegally.

    3. Re:Epic fail - USA 92%, Mexico 99% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrongly modded? Because the what, twelve people that have come to the US from Africa by way of Mexico didn't let you know about their vaccine schedules?

    4. Re:Epic fail - USA 92%, Mexico 99% by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Indeed, they can move from many places to get to that goalpost.
      Don't you feel ashamed of yourself in going that low just to feed a two minute hate?

  13. Re:Illegal Immigration? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mexico had a vaccination for chicken pox probably 15-20 years before the US, and avoiding vaccination there isn't a "fad". Sometimes the US is the problem, not the cure.

  14. Re:Illegal Immigration? by Nidi62 · · Score: 4, Informative

    While its extremely non-PC to suggest this, but illegal immigration has a role here. The study was done in Texas (a border state). While parents should vaccinate their children, herd immunity should prevent any large-scale outbreaks unless there is an injection of sick people who are acting as carriers.

    A lot of outbreaks are also happening in West Coast states (where you have enclaves of non-immunized children due parents' belief in misinformation) where non-immunized foreigners are visiting and spread diseases that are otherwise no longer endemic in the US. Oregon is a good example.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  15. Re:Illegal Immigration? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not "non-PC", it's completely non-sense. This study has nothing to do with "Texas" other than one of the authors is at Baylor Medical - the other is at Standford.
      The point on "herd immunity" is that you need a large enough vaccinated population to provide that and the point of this study is because of people "opting" out for non-medical reasons we are getting near or below rates needed. The study was a disease modeling of the entire country - not anything the is currently happening in Texas.

  16. Re:Vaccination Rates *and* Autism Rates are slippi by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 5, Informative

    Autism rates have been on the decline, and this decline started when vaccination rates began their decline.

    1) Not a decline, more like a plateau. It's also very recent, and doesn't correspond with the rise of the anti-vax campaigns, which happened years earlier.
    2) Autism rates did not increase when vaccinations were introduced; again, the rise in autism only happened later--in this case, decades later.
    3) Correlation is not causation.

    Not that you will read any of this. You've reached your conclusion, and evidence that doesn't fit it will be ignored.

  17. A more likely explanation... by PortHaven · · Score: 1

    The MMR vaccine has not been updated to keep up with the evolution of the measles virus.

    The claims for non-vaccinated is often merely, no proof of vaccination. However, most public schools require it. A few states allow for a religious exemption, which must be filed and recorded with the school.

    The fact parents do not have records of vaccinations does not mean these children were not vaccinated. Most of the time they have been if they're of school age.

    1. Re:A more likely explanation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Most", as you say, public schools may requires vaccinations but what about private schools or home schooling? Everyone counts when it comes to vaccination.

      For California here's one place to view vaccination rates among schools. Some schools have >20% non-vaccination rates due to belief. https://edsource.org/2017/vaccination-rates-by-school-in-california/580981

    2. Re:A more likely explanation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can say that in these studies I'd probably be marked as unvaccinated even though I know for fact that I was. It's just that when I went back for my masters they required proof, and I didn't have the slightest clue where to start on that. So since they had an option to mark "unvaccinated for personal reasons", I marked that. I'd filled out a lot of paperwork at that point and had hit burn out, and didn't want to try to figure it out.

      These sorts of studies always need to take "lying on paperwork because of lazy" in to account.

    3. Re:A more likely explanation... by PortHaven · · Score: 1

      How about you stop being as stupid as an anti-vaxxer, and be a bit more scientific and open-minded. I am not saying vaccines are bad. Just that, well maybe we need to look at new formulations of our vaccines for greater efficacy.

      http://www.thv11.com/news/loca...

      http://www.sciencedirect.com/s...

      https://www.scientificamerican...

      https://www.sciencedaily.com/r...

      http://www.pbs.org/newshour/up...
      "Among the 51 measles cases linked directly to Disneyland, six of the people had received their measles, mumps and rubella vaccine, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention" (honestly, since schools mandate this, do you really think less than 12% of people were vaccinated? Or is it more likely they simply couldn't provide proof of vaccination. Can you? Can you provide proof of your own vaccination or your children's? Most folks cannot.

    4. Re:A more likely explanation... by PortHaven · · Score: 1

      Pretty much all the private schools do to. In fact, even here is Pennsyltucky, most religious schools will not accept children without their vaccinations. Almost ALL schools follow the state policies. It may be slightly easier to get a state waiver and have a religious school accept it. But an interesting aspect is that while a public school MUST accept such waivers, private schools do not. And often will still refuse entry of a child without immunizations.

    5. Re:A more likely explanation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure Disneyland had more than 51 visitors that day.
      Based on a 97% average effectiveness of the vaccine, 6 vaccinated people infected suggests that 180 vaccinated people coming into contact with the virus would explain the 6 infected people.
      However the numbers are a bit suspicious:
      The 45:6 ratio suggests the number of non-vaccinated people is about 8x higher than the number of people for which the vaccine did not work.
      I think that leaves the following options:
      - There were far more people among those infected that were vaccinated (so what you say is possible, but the reasoning did not make sense)
      - There is a vast number (about 24% of people) that are not vaccinated
      - Among the general population able to visit Disneyland, immunity is far more common than the official vaccine effectiveness numbers suggest - either because measles is actually still around so people are getting immunity from that, or the vaccine is around 99% effective. As these are mostly fit people, that is quite possible, if not the most likely explanation, and also consistent with that you'd expect maybe 1000 or more people to come into contact with the virus in such a crowded place.

    6. Re:A more likely explanation... by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      Then why do we not see massive outbreaks at private schools?

  18. Stupidity costs money and lives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Stop coddling these people who are willing to put their children and the rest of society at risk for the sake of their pseudoscientific BS. It's been very well studied, and the time has ended for putting up with this stuff. I'm not saying force needles into their or their children's arms against their permission, because it's still their own body and their choice to make, but make the consequences of their (stupid and selfish) choices real. There are people who can not be safely vaccinated for medical reasons, and herd immunity is their only option. Protect them and the rest of the public.

    Example: without legitimate medical reasons: 1) don't allow unvaccinated children in public school; 2) don't allow unvaccinated travel to countries where contageous diseases are endemic without putting people in relevant quarantine periods upon their return, at their expense. If people wont accept modern medical preventative measures then they should be subject to 19th-century-style ones until they are proven not to be carriers; and 3) up-to-date vaccination should be a qualification of employment at any health care facility, and probably for admission into any health care training program. No exceptions.

  19. The answer is straightforward by DrXym · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Mandate which vaccinations children are required to have to avail of private / public daycare and schools. And make the parents criminally liable if the child or someone he/she comes into contact with contracts a preventable disease because of their negligence.

    1. Re:The answer is straightforward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what do we do in the cases where the child is killed by the vaccine? Who is criminally liable?

    2. Re:The answer is straightforward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Like every anti vaxxer you miss the target completely. Without immunizations more children would die.

      I'll take one kid dead over thousands more dead any day, even if it's my own. It would be criminal to not do so.

    3. Re:The answer is straightforward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do we do in cases where the child is killed by not being vaccinated?

    4. Re:The answer is straightforward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you prove who contracted a disease from whom? If that were easy and reliable wouldn't we just be using that method to find source vectors quickly and quarantining them?

    5. Re:The answer is straightforward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am not an "anti-vaxxer". My question is legitimate and still stands.

      I am a hard scientist. (Biology and medicine does not fall under the category of hard science.)

      I am all for dead pathogens and neutralised viruses in isotonic saline. The problem is when hocus-pocus and money grabbing comes into it.

      So, who is criminally responsible when a vaccine kills a child? You may not care, but their parents certainly will.

    6. Re:The answer is straightforward by eth1 · · Score: 1

      Mandate which vaccinations children are required to have to avail of private / public daycare and schools. And make the parents criminally liable if the child or someone he/she comes into contact with contracts a preventable disease because of their negligence.

      Might not even need that. We just need to get anyone properly vaccinated (or medically unable to be vaccinated) that gets sick to start suing the hell out of the parents of voluntarily unvaccinated children if there's even a shred of evidence to suggest their child might be the source. If there gets to be a significant enough financial risk of not vaccinating, stupidity might take a back seat to the pocketbook. Since civil juries don't don't have to be unanimous, the small percentage of anti-vaxxers would be at a severe disadvantage in a civil trial.

    7. Re:The answer is straightforward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The answer is that some must die so all can live.

      You apparently think that's not a contradiction.

      So, who should make the decision who lives or dies?

      captcha: honest

    8. Re:The answer is straightforward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am totally fine with "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few".

      But my original question remains unanswered. It is a tough question.

    9. Re:The answer is straightforward by houghi · · Score: 1

      But the school is not enough. Some might even use it as an excuse to not have their kids go to school.
      The question is if they still will go to Disneyland and Disney World. And I am sure people are not that munch interested in some lawsuit as they are interested that three month old does not die.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    10. Re:The answer is straightforward by notea42 · · Score: 2

      An alternate strategy - if you choose to opt out, you are then financially liable for all measles cases in your state. Take the costs from all those cases, divide by the # of children on your "Idiot Parents" list, and send each parent a bill. Do this every year until they wise up. This prevents people from externalizing the costs of their poor decisions on everyone else.

    11. Re:The answer is straightforward by DrXym · · Score: 1

      That's for a prosecutor to do and in some cases I expect the answer is very clear cut.

    12. Re:The answer is straightforward by DrXym · · Score: 1

      The same way you do when a car air bag kills somebody, or somebody gets entangled in their parachute, or slips out of their life jacket and drowns. By examining the circumstances of the case and apportioning blame according to its findings. What you don't do is ask questions that somehow implies air bags, parachutes and life jackets are unnecessary because occasionally they might cause harm instead of prevent it.

    13. Re:The answer is straightforward by DrXym · · Score: 1

      It isn't. It's called a court. Most countries have coroners and inquests where the causes of death can be established and findings made.

    14. Re:The answer is straightforward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This still does not answer the question: who is criminally responsible when a child dies as a result of a vaccination?

    15. Re:The answer is straightforward by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      How do you prove who contracted a disease from whom? If that were easy and reliable wouldn't we just be using that method to find source vectors quickly and quarantining them?

      They do this all the time. It's just that once you realize you have an outbreak and not just isolated cases, the disease has spread far enough/killed enough people that quarantining people will not work or the original source vector may already be dead/over the disease. Finding the patient zero or the initial infection vector can't be done in real time. It can only be done at the earliest once you actually realize you have an outbreak, and may not be finished until the outbreak is already over or contained.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    16. Re:The answer is straightforward by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

      If the parents cannot prove that the child was vaccinated, or could not be vaccinated due to a health condition, charge them with manslaughter.

      Because that's *exactly* what they did.

    17. Re:The answer is straightforward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what do we do in the cases where the child is killed by the vaccine? Who is criminally liable?

      Pretty sure that's a malpractice suit.

    18. Re:The answer is straightforward by DrXym · · Score: 1

      It does answer the question. The court does. And why is it criminal responsibility?

    19. Re:The answer is straightforward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would probably depend on the exact cause of death. Can you list any cases where a child was actually killed by a modern vaccine when used as intended? A quick search turned up cases where vaccines were improperly administered (i.e. not stored properly, dirty needles used, etc.) but those are clearly cases of malpractice and not arguments against vaccines. I'm assuming you brought up the possibility because it has actually happened, please provide a link to evidence.

    20. Re:The answer is straightforward by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      Because you are the one who invoked criminal responsibility with your post. Now answer the damn question. Who is criminally liable when the vaccine kills a child?

    21. Re:The answer is straightforward by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      That is illegal in the case of vaccines. By federal law no manufacturer of any vaccine has any liability for death or damage caused by the product.
      https://www.congress.gov/bill/...

    22. Re:The answer is straightforward by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      Nope, the doctor, the practice, and the manufacturer have complete immunity to lawsuits.
      https://www.congress.gov/bill/...

    23. Re:The answer is straightforward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      stupid whore thinks the system works for the little guy. what a dumb fucking slave pushing poison on other people's kids to enrich big pharma and the revolving door whores in the fda and cdc.

    24. Re:The answer is straightforward by DrXym · · Score: 1

      Well that's a really wonderful question. Please replace "vaccine" with "seat belt". Demand who is criminally liable when a seat belt kills a child. And by extension imply that since a seat belt killed a child in your hypothetical argument that nobody should wear a seat belt. Well done you've graduated Cretin 101 argumentation.

    25. Re:The answer is straightforward by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      Depends, if it was used properly the manufacturer is liable, otherwise the person who buckled the seatbelt. Now again, you answer the damn question.

  20. Travelers huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You'd think illegal immigrants would be more of an issue.

  21. We might have to stop flights from the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's time for the EU to start issuing advisories against traveling to the US, and maybe even requiring americans to undergo medical screening before being allowed in.

  22. Re:Vaccination Rates *and* Autism Rates are slippi by Maritz · · Score: 2

    Autism rates have been on the decline, and this decline started when vaccination rates began their decline.

    Explain that, poison advocates.

    Has to be a troll, too lucid. Most anti-vaxxers wouldn't be able to write two sentences without quite a few embarrassing mistakes.

    On the off chance you are really an anti-vax dickhead, give my commiserations to your children. Their mother/father is a stupid prick.

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  23. Re:Unvaccinated third-world illegal aliens by Maritz · · Score: 1

    The political left doesn't like to admit it, but the real problem here

    Just like every problem, eh? Stay stupid.

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  24. Re:Illegal Immigration? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    10+ "white" "men" tripping over themselves to correct you. This is how you know it's true.

  25. Free birth control is a better idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Instead of giving second-worlders and third-worlders free vaccines, it would be better to give them free birth control medication and devices.

    The first-world is already voluntarily doing its part, as birth rates are now at or below replacement levels in nearly all civilized nations.

    But it's in second-world countries like India and those of South America, and especially the third-world countries of Africa, where birth rates are out of control.

    Giving free vaccinations may help avoid disease outbreaks, but it does nothing to combat the numerous other problems of overpopulation, such as a lack of fresh water, a lack of food, a lack of proper housing, a lack of proper sanitation facilities, and the numerous problems that occur when third-worlders try to illegally enter civilized nations.

    Free birth control helps prevent the overpopulation problem in the first place. Depending on the type of birth control, it can also help avoid some disease transmission.

    Free vaccines stop one problem, but enable many other problems. Free birth control, on the other hand, prevents numerous problems.

    1. Re:Free birth control is a better idea. by amalcolm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      First you have to stop certain religious groups in the first world telling people in the second and third worlds that birth control is a sin.

      --
      Time for bed, said Zebedee - boing
    2. Re:Free birth control is a better idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, the billions of Hindus, Confucians, and Muslims are taking procreation advice from the Catholic pope. Go grind your axe somewhere else.

    3. Re:Free birth control is a better idea. by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      First you have to stop certain religious groups in the first world telling people in the first world that birth control is a sin.

      FTFY.

    4. Re:Free birth control is a better idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First you have to stop certain religious groups in the third world telling people everywhere that birth control is a sin.

      FTFY.

      FTFTFYFY.

      The Holy See isn't first world. "First world" doesn't mean "rich", it means "allied with the USA", and more specifically, "a NATO member" (or SEATO or CENTO when those were still in force). Switzerland, for example, is not "first world" because they've never joined NATO. They are "third world" by definition. And since "second world" means "allied with the USSR", nobody qualifies for that label anymore. The USSR and the Warsaw Pact no longer exist, and all former members of the second world became either first or third world in 1991.

    5. Re:Free birth control is a better idea. by mjwx · · Score: 1

      First you have to stop certain religious groups in the first world telling people in the second and third worlds that birth control is a sin.

      First off, I agree.

      Secondly... It won't help nearly as much. The impetus to have a lot of children in developing and undeveloped nations is that children take care of the elders when they cant work any more. So more children == a better retirement. This is why many non-christian/muslim developing nations have high birth rates. The Thai govt in the 70's handed out free condoms, combined with sexual education it cut disease rates (in the 1970's Thailand was tipped to have an AIDS epidemic... this never happened) but didn't affect family sizes that much.

      Thirdly, 1st, 2nd and 3rd world monikers don't actually reflect economic conditions. For example, Switzerland and Sweden are third world countries whilst Thailand and the Dominican Republic are first world. This is because 1st, 2nd and 3rd world defined what side the nation was on in the cold war.
      1st world == Aligned with the US and NATO.
      2nd world == Aligned with the Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc (note: this does not exist any more).
      3rd world == Unaligned.
      My big issue with using them to describe whether a country is rich or poor is that "3rd world" does not differentiate between a developing nation like India and an undeveloped one like Sudan. Now of course I know what you meant because I speak English to such a degree that I understand colloquial definitions. But if you're making a report to the UN Security Council, you'd do well to use "developed", "developing" and "undeveloped" instead of first or third world.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  26. Autism Rates are not slipping, and not correlated by XXongo · · Score: 4, Informative

    [Citation Needed]

    It falls on you to back up your claim, first.

    Uh, that post is almost certainly trolling, in the original internet sense of the word: somebody who is posting for no other reason than to get a reaction. Responding to him in any way does nothing other than feed the troll; the correct reaction was to ignore him and wait for him to be moderated "troll".

    It's too late for that now, though. To deal with facts: the actual response is that autism rates are not declining: http://blogs.discovermagazine....

    Here's a good correlation graph, if you're looking for correlation: https://www.sciencebasedmedici...

  27. Re:Illegal Immigration? by Maritz · · Score: 1

    Yeah but it's a problem, and therefore has to be blamed on immigrants. You not been getting the memo?

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  28. Re:Unvaccinated third-world illegal aliens by Nidi62 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The problem isn't unvaccinated illegal aliens. The issue is a lot of parents in the US aren't vaccinating their kids because Jenny McCarthy and people like her scare them into thinking vaccines are evil. So, when people visit to/from places where diseases such as measels are still endemic they bring the diseases with them and spread them among the unvaccinated population here (a lot of whom tend to be clustered together since people with anti-vaccination beliefs tend to have certain other political or religious beliefs and live in communities with others who share those beliefs). Illegal immigration is a very small factor, if at all. And if the US and Europe would put in a proper refugee system, a lot of those people you mentioned would have proper medical screenings and be provided food, housing, and education/employment; allowing them to become productive members of a society they literally risked their lives for to join.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  29. Re: Unvaccinated third-world illegal aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lol! Your comment proves what the GP claimed!

  30. Re:1971 by Maritz · · Score: 2

    We're blaming anti-vaxxers because it's the fucking anti-vaxxers' fault. How fast does the measles virus mutate? Go ahead and link your research showing that the modern vaccine is no longer effective. I'm supposed to be impressed by the four digits 1971? On it's own that's fucking meaningless mate.

    You're just another "big pharma is evil" clown, and safe to ignore.

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  31. Re:Unvaccinated third-world illegal aliens by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 1

    Bravo. Your PhD thesis in trolling has been accepted and forwarded to the accreditation committee.

  32. Bring back polio by Blinkin1200 · · Score: 1

    If they are not getting the measles vaccine, they are probably not getting the polio vaccine. The better we can identify anti-vax areas, the better we can target locations for the polio virus. There is a lot of money to be made in care for polio patients.

    1. Re:Bring back polio by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      Polio has been eradicated everywhere except for a few small areas of two countries. Thus it is no longer in the normal vaccine schedule.

      So no, anti-vaxxers are not getting the polio vaccine. Neither are people who get all their vaccines.

    2. Re:Bring back polio by green1 · · Score: 1

      The USA really doesn't vaccinate against Polio any more? wow...

      My daughter has been vaccinated against Polio as part of our normal vaccine schedule. Her most recent Polio vaccine was only a couple of months ago.

    3. Re:Bring back polio by careysub · · Score: 2

      Polio is still on the vaccine schedule everywhere in the U.S. because - you know - it hasn't been eradicated from the entire world.

      You may be thinking of small pox which does not exist outside of the freezers in two high security labs. We do not vaccinate against that.

      Think about it. If we stopped vaccinating for polio because it "has been eradicated everywhere except for a few small areas of two countries" then we get an entire generation of people with no immunity. One of those people is eventually going to travel to on of those "few small areas" some day (even if no one from those areas ever comes here), and then will come back. BAM! It is like the Salk vaccine was never invented as a wave of polio cases sweeps an entire generation, all at once.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    4. Re:Bring back polio by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      You need to look at the schedule again, it appears you are a few decades behind.

  33. Not so simple by sjbe · · Score: 4, Informative

    Just make sure *your* children have their vaccinations. The kids of all the dumbasses will be weeded out due to genetic stupidity. It is as it always was... thank you Mr. Darwin.

    If only it were that simple. Problem is that the asshats who don't vaccinate by choice cause illness in those who cannot get vaccinated for valid medical reasons. If it was simply people competing for darwin awards along with their spawn I could almost not give a damn. But unfortunately I do actually care about the kids of these dumbass parents. You don't get to pick your parents and just because they are idiots doesn't mean the kid necessarily is.

    Personally I think anyone who doesn't vaccinate without a valid medical excuse should have to live in quarantine.

    1. Re:Not so simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think they should have to live in quarantine, but I do think they should be barred from any healthcare-related jobs, from public education, and if they travel internationally they should be put in temporary quarantine until they are shown to be safe to return to the regular population.

    2. Re: Not so simple by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      Disease doesn't just spread in health care facilities. Are you simple?

  34. Re:Vaccination Rates *and* Autism Rates are slippi by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 3

    Easy, dead kids never get autism.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  35. Re:1971 by Gilgaron · · Score: 4, Informative

    The reason you can get lifelong immunity (10 or 20 years, anyhow, since that is how long your B cells live) from the vaccine is that these viruses don't mutate much and with attenuated live virus you're getting the whole organism. So all of its proteins would have to mutate enough to evade the immune system at once. Like with us, many proteins will be highly conserved. With fast mutating, killed virus or antigen only vaccines you might need to get one every year like flu. Comparing efficacy across lots is probably done by ELISA and would be very easy. I don't have firsthand knowledge with MMR testing but each manufacturer would be required to run a QA lab that would routinely check the lots being manufactured. No one made a giant vat in the 70s that we are still consuming.

  36. You can thank a Progressive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For opening the immigration floodgates that results in a higher percentage of unvaccinated people.
    For stupid progressive celebrities that advise against vaccinations.
    And finally for the radical environmentalists that want us to die anyways to save mother gaia.

  37. Re:Vaccination Rates *and* Autism Rates are slippi by Evtim · · Score: 2

    https://slashdot.org/comments....

    So, the whole planet Earth was populated by stupid fucks back then, eh? All those common people and dignitaries who hailed Jenner as the Savior - everyone basically - they were all crazy! Or maybe, just maybe those people lived daily with diseases and dead toll that we can hardly imagine today...oh, why don't we have a time-machine to send you, AC, back in time to tell them all how EVIL vaccination really is....I wonder what Napoleon would do to you....

  38. Re:and under the GOP plan it will get on to the PR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny how you cite a plan when there is not one that has passed. Nice try.

  39. What about Illegals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess the twenty million or so illegals and legal immigrants who are not vaccinated doesn't count. Another bullshit story posted on Slashdot.

  40. Re:Illegal Immigration? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You not been getting the memo?

    An Australian probably stole it. They have a fondness for Post-It notes which remind them of Vegemite jars.

  41. So you thanked a rightwinger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for the catastrophes at columbine, et al?

    1. Re:So you thanked a rightwinger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would anyone be thankful of those tragedies. Perhaps you are a projecting Progressive. You're probably happy Republican congressmen were shot up by a Progressive a few weeks ago.

  42. illegal aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Illegal aliens are not immigrants.

    Real immigrants are vetted through the immigration process, have immigrant visas, who eventually get a green card.

    Real immigrants are like guests you invite to stay in your house.
    Illegal aliens are squatters that break into your house and live in it without your permission, using your utilities and eating your food, again without permission.

  43. Re:1971 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not to back up what that person said, but big pharma IS evil. You should still get vaccinated anyway, though.

  44. Re:Unvaccinated third-world illegal aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >"The problem isn't unvaccinated illegal aliens."
    That's right. The problem is aliens in general, plus a little bit of residents traveling. It doesn't matter whether travelers are legal citizens, tourists, migrants, or merchants. As stated, measles was declared eradicated in the US, and now has been re-introduced. It is coming from outside, not inside.

    People who advocate forced vaccination should give some thought to what they are promoting. They are stating that they want a government that forces them to do things whether they are opposed to them or not. That might be justified with smallpox or polio, but measles and chickenpox are not so devastating as to call for fascism. If you are not able to convince people that Jenny McCarthy is wrong, then you have failed. Resorting to force is wrong.

  45. Easy Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stop giving free medical care to people who didn't get vaccinated. Quarantine them and their family while they're contagious and make them pay for the costs of monitoring them. Don't allow immigrants to receive work permits, green cards, visas, or any other permission to be in the country until they've been vaccinated.

  46. Re:and under the GOP plan it will get on to the PR by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    well not passing can end up with a defended ACA that give people 0 planes to pick from.

  47. Re:Illegal Immigration? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not to rain on your anti-immigrant parade, but the west-coast states also have a lot of hippy dippy anti-vaxxers. Immigrants might have some responsibility for the increase; however, I'd guess that the anti-vax movement probably has more to do with it.

  48. Re: Vaccination Rates *and* Autism Rates are slipp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, they have indeed. I have witnessed this in education in a hreat many cities in a gariety of states over a period of years. I don't care what a report says, it's getting worse, not better. Ask any non-private school teacher. I don't think it had anything to do with vaccination to begin with, personally.

  49. Re:Vaccination Rates *and* Autism Rates are slippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i dont know who you're talking to, but *without citations* both of you will be ignored. plus, while i'll think of the op as ill-informed, i'll think of you as grandstanding. go fix that guys!

  50. A political issue by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Medically - politically - I have to look at the calendar everyday because it feels like I'm in a time warp and it's really 1917.

    We, the USA, are getting dumber.

    One thing you have to realize is that political issues are never black-and-white, but there are shades of grey. Issues have both positive *and* negative aspects, and it is up to us to assign an inherent value to the plusses and minuses in each case.

    Vaccination in the US is all tangled up with immigration and foreign culture.

    Measles is brought in by travellers from foreign countries and spurred mostly by immigration - going to visit relatives back in the home country, or having relatives come to visit. Neither of which is a problem, but it adds a small negative value to unrestricted immigration.

    A couple of years ago I read about some Islamic groups in Pakistan who intentionally avoided the (freely offered) polio vaccine, and also avoided having polio-laden children *treated*, thinking that if they could somehow get the children into the US they could attack us that way(*).

    A few years earlier I read about a California school system with 7,000 students and only enough money for 5,000 vaccinations, but of those 7,000 students 1,500 were illegals. The controversy was about "who gets the vaccinations", and whether we should put tax-paying citizens at a disadvantage by vaccinating foreign nationals for free.

    You could definitely say that people are stupid for not getting vaccinated, but you could also say that curbing immigration would help, immigration adds a burden of cost to our society, and that sometimes other cultures and practices will get in the way.

    The stupid answer is to have unlimited immigration and also insufficient funds for vaccination. If we have unlimited immigration, we should absolutely be willing to bear the increased medical costs simply for the protection of our own people.

    Whether unlimited immigration is worth the increased costs is now a political issue that you can judge for yourself, and perhaps we should poll the population for consensus. Take all the positives and their inherent value, and compare to the negatives and *those* values.

    Vaccination is the correct choice, but it's become partly a political issue.

    (*) And it didn't help that the CIA used foreign vaxxing programs as a way to locate and register persons of interest.

    1. Re:A political issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No.

      Unless you want to seal the US borders disease will always get in just through travel.

      The problem is all the people who have succumbed to fake science and other idiocy and thus refuse to get there child(ren) vaccinated because its "dangerous". Thus as the vaccination rate drops, the ability for the virus to survive in the US increases.

      (if it truly was immigration based then the other western countries would be having the same problem, but as they for the most part don't have the anti-science / anti-government stupidity they aren't having the same problem.

    2. Re:A political issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The above post is astroturfing bullshit.

      Public health policy is a human matter.

      Disease doesn't care about politics, so let's not distract ourselves from our goal -- defeat of a disease which has killed humans, was responsible for a much higher rate of children not living to adulthood.

      Public health policy is a matter for every person, regardless of race, colour, or creed.

      It's an objective-health concern. Herd immunity has specific properties, and we need those properties to survive.

      There is NO politics here, except by 1) the ignorant, 2) the wilfully stupid, 3) the paid shills.

    3. Re:A political issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A few years earlier I read about a California school system with 7,000 students and only enough money for 5,000 vaccinations, but of those 7,000 students 1,500 were illegals. The controversy was about "who gets the vaccinations", and whether we should put tax-paying citizens at a disadvantage by vaccinating foreign nationals for free.

      I would love to see a reference for this one. Vaccinations are not given by schools, but by medical providers. Granted you can walk into almost any walgreens, walmart, etc. and get a flu shot - but for MMR it is a trip to the doctor to see the vaccination nurse. Heck my daughter's school wouldn't even issue an over the counter pain killer if she got a headache (in fact if she brought her own it was suspension under the zero tolerance for drugs policy).

      So yes you may have read something in an an unvetted webpage - heck it may have even been the Onion for all we know without the citation.

    4. Re:A political issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I call BULLSHIT

      Mexico and most of Central America have HIGHER vaccination rates than the US:

      http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/immigration-border-crisis/vectors-or-victims-docs-slam-rumors-migrants-carry-disease-n152216

      The real problem is that Americans think their shit does not stink and just want to blame their problems on others

    5. Re:A political issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Measles is brought in by travellers from foreign countries and spurred mostly by immigration

      It has to be *brought* here? It isn't here already? Why is that?

      I'll tell you why.

      Vaccinations.

      Go back to wherever you oozed out of, Okian. The world was better when people like you were rightfully shunned for being glib racists.

      By the way, why can't you write more than a couple sentences without a line break?

    6. Re:A political issue by sexconker · · Score: 1

      PresidentMadagascar.jpg

    7. Re:A political issue by sexconker · · Score: 1

      As a Californian, I read the same thing. As someone who went through the California public school system decades ago, I can tell you that schools funded this shit. They had "medical providers" do the doing, but it was on the school's dime. And in the case of shit like scoliosis checks, the "medical providers" were the lunch ladies who received 4 minutes of training.

    8. Re:A political issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a political issue, though, you're still misframing it. I don't give a rat's ass if your precious snowflake gets measles and dies because you opted not to vaccinate. What I care about is those that CANNOT vaccinate due to being too young or having a medical condition- their protection comes through herd immunity, which everyone who opts out has a hand in destroying. Asking "whether we should put tax-paying citizens at a disadvantage by vaccinating foreign nationals" is not at all relevant: we lose the herd immunity if a sufficient number of *any* population is not immunized. We're protecting US citizens' babies and immunologically-compromised US citizens when we vaccinate 5000 people, and it doesn't fucking matter who they are.

      I know you think you're being reasonable, but your negative views of immigrants have led you to a stupid idea, namely, that there's some justification for not vaccinating otherwise eligible people because fundamentally it's immigrants' fault. The article discusses how vaccine hesitancy is likely to lead to the 5% drop in vaccination rates that could re-establish measles, not how a bunch of Latino or Muslim people are going to cause it.

    9. Re:A political issue by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      The real problem is that the media has become a left-wing partisan force that will deliberately slant their coverage to achieve the desired political result. You simply can't trust them. If this had appeared in the alternative media, it might be worth a look, but even then only with additional vetting. The mainstream media are open borders supporters and will hardly carry a story that does not support their side of the argument.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    10. Re:A political issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Breitbart news today, Down is Up and Up is Yes.... every thing else is a LIE!!!

      And you would suck it up because... well. you are an idiot

      What a special (short bus wise) snowflake you are, and of your own choosing because you would rather believe lies that support your world view than learn something that causes you to questions your wrong-headed prejudices

    11. Re:A political issue by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Do you ever get bored, trolling Slashdot at Score: 0? So few people click through to read anon posts. Seems like a lot of work for little reward.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    12. Re:A political issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I went AC when /. was purchased for political astro-turfing purposes

      The fact that I can draw more attention than you with my AC 0 score is just a cherry on top of this big old pile-o-shit that used to be something fantastic nearly 20 years ago when I first joined

    13. Re:A political issue by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      As if MSNBC isn't just as bad. True journalism left the room with Cronkite and Reasoner.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    14. Re:A political issue by necro81 · · Score: 1

      Public health policy is a human matter.

      I wholeheartedly agree. Public health workers agree, emphatically. Unfortunately, they are rarely the ones calling the shots on the policy level and, even when they directing policy, are susceptible to public pressure like most everyone else.

      To whit: the nominee to be the next surgeon general, among other things, instituted a needle exchange program in Indiana as a way of combating a spreading HIV epidemic there. That's public health policy. On the other hand, it ruffled a lot of feathers, including Indiana's then-governor, now Vice President Mike Pence, who is part of federal policy efforts that will have devastating effects on public health. Also: the nomination for the chief public health officer in the United States wasn't made until six months into the new administration!

  51. New kannada songs download by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    www.newkannada.com

  52. Re:Unvaccinated third-world illegal aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is this modded down? These outbreaks aren't happening in the suburbs, they're happening in the migrant ghettos. It says right in the summary: "when travelers carried it in". I know bashing anti-vaxxers is an easy and fun way to boost your ego, but their numbers are insignificant and they aren't causing this problem (exacerbating it, though).

    I guess correctly identifying the problem is racist or something? Perhaps it is because he said something nice about Trump?

  53. Not an evolutionary pressure by sjbe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Evolution. All the idiots who won't get their kids vaccinated will see their genetic line die off. Those with vaccinations will be OK.

    Might work if these diseases were always fatal. Problem is that they aren't. They are only sometimes fatal. Sometimes carriers aren't even symptomatic. And they also can infect people who cannot get vaccinated for valid medical reasons.

    I wouldn't have a philosophical problem with parents of children who choose not to vaccinate without a valid medical reason to have to live in quarantine. Separate them from the rest of the herd. Basically they are deciding to join a voluntary leper colony. This would keep them and their DNA from infecting the rest of us.

    1. Re:Not an evolutionary pressure by iridium_ionizer · · Score: 1

      We should just pick one state in the U.S.A. where everyone who is not fully vaccinated has to live (with only medical exceptions made). I say New Jersey. And if an epidemic hits, you close the bridges and all roads leaving.

  54. Sue them all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My son has an auto-immune disorder. Vaccines don't work on him. If he ever contracts this terrible disease, I fully intend to identify and sue a large swath of parents who elect not to vaccinate their child. Others should do the same. If common sense and compassion for fellow humans isn't enough for them, maybe taking their money will.

  55. Fallout from poor choices by Spazmania · · Score: 1

    This is fallout from overly aggressive vaccination efforts. When we mandate vaccination for things that don't have a high death rate and aren't contagious through air and touch, we lose the moral authority to resist the bajillion claims for exemption.

    Measles is deadly and highly contagious. The measles vaccine should be mandatory barring medical exemption. But because we also screw around with trying to make STD vaccines (like HPV) mandatory we open the door to refusal of all vaccines on the flimsiest of excuses.

    --
    Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
    1. Re:Fallout from poor choices by MightyMartian · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. This is fallout from a scam artist who managed to get a considerable following among idiots.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:Fallout from poor choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but Ted Kennedy is dead now.

    3. Re:Fallout from poor choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vaccines are for things that can be made non-endemic. 80% of women will contract HPV by age 50, its so common. How is that something endemic you work to eliminate if you can? It leads to cervical cancer.

    4. Re:Fallout from poor choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because cervical cancer isn't deadly? Because you know that all 4000 of the expected deaths from cancer of the larynx were absolutely not caused by throat HPV infection?

      ANY safe, effective, and economically-efficacious vaccine should be mandatory. The moral authority is clear: if you want to live in a society, do the fucking bare minimum for your neighbors by reducing the likelihood of disease spreading.

    5. Re:Fallout from poor choices by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      Measles is deadly and highly contagious.

      In fact, measles is pretty much THE most contagious disease we know of.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    6. Re:Fallout from poor choices by Spazmania · · Score: 1

      Well, that's a difference between you and I. I believe in liberty, which means I disagree with using compulsion for the sake of your, or my or anybody else's notion of the greater good.

      Where failure to take a vaccine makes you a bio weapon complicit in mass murder, I'm okay with restricting your choice. Everywhere else, it is and should be your choice. Just as it's your choice to engage or not in sexual activity without checking your partner's medical situation.

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
    7. Re:Fallout from poor choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fascist.

    8. Re:Fallout from poor choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Measles isn't just deadly, it maims people. The common side effects can be eye damage, sterility and deafness. I'm a bit older, and I have no peripheral vision and I'm sterile, thanks to measles as a kid. My mother was a registered nurse, so I got good treatment. Almost all of the blind people I worked with over the decades were the result measles as a child.

    9. Re:Fallout from poor choices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and dirty vaccines and irresponsible schedules and shooting up babies with shit they don't even need, never mind not deadly. fuck doctors and the drug companies and all the sycophants who think they are making things better by shilling for big pharma.

    10. Re: Fallout from poor choices by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      Another "you deserve it" asshole.

    11. Re: Fallout from poor choices by Spazmania · · Score: 1

      Trade liberty for security then you deserve neither? If that makes me an asshole, I embrace it.

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
  56. vaccination needs to be like Mississippi's by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    Miss. is the ONLY state that requires vaccination for ALL kids attending school, EXCEPT for true medical exceptions.
    So, one of the most backwards states, is actually the most forward thinking when it comes to that.
    Sad that ANY of the states allows otherwise,

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:vaccination needs to be like Mississippi's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well Miss got lucky and the flavor of christianity they like to enforce is one that doesn't have any issues with medicine.

      The usual rout to dodging the mandatory vaccinations is to claim your religion forbids it, which only works if the state is too polite to ask the follow up questions and declare your claim invalid if the answers don't pan out (which religion is that exactly? I called the minister of the church you attend and they said that's not true, etc.) As most religions do not forbid vaccines, and most people claiming to be anti-vaxers do not belong to one of the few that actually do.

    2. Re:vaccination needs to be like Mississippi's by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      You forgot California and West Virginia.

    3. Re:vaccination needs to be like Mississippi's by WindBourne · · Score: 1
      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  57. Anti-vaccination is just like IT. by CptLoRes · · Score: 1

    When IT is doing a proper job, the users rarely experience any problems. And consequently them assume IT is not needed.

    1. Re:Anti-vaccination is just like IT. by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      Very good analogy. "Why do I need a firewall and anti-virus software? It just slows my system down and annoys me. I'll just turn it off and I'll be fine." Perhaps this user will be fine. Or, maybe, they'll open an e-mail from "TheIRS@GonnaScamU.com" and be infected without ever really knowing. (Comparable to passing on measles to everyone while not knowing you're coming down with it.)

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  58. Re:1971 by PortHaven · · Score: 1

    Actually, it's not so much a giant vat made in the 70's as much as the select genepool continuously (in)bred for generations.

  59. Re:1971 by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

    "Inbred" isn't really a thing with viruses, but I digress. While you're correct that drift could occur, it is easy to test in an ELISA if the antigens are still equivalent to the wild type strain as far as the immune system is concerned.

  60. Re:Unvaccinated third-world illegal aliens by RatherBeAnonymous · · Score: 3, Informative

    Where is the line when it becomes justified? I don't advocating for forced vaccinations, but a little coercion is certainly in order. I do not see religious or philosophical objections as legitimate excuses for allowing unvaccinated children to attend public school.

    Chickenpox kills about 0.003% of victims and hospitalizes about 0.26%. The overall death rate is low, but one quarter of a percent for hospitalizations makes for a lot of unnecessary strain on healthcare systems, especially for a disease that will infect around 95% of unvaccinated individuals.

    Measles, besides the immediate death rate (about 0.15% in the US), Encephalitis (0.1% in the US), and hospitalization rate (about 25% in the US) brings a potential for a delayed neurological disease that is 100% fatal for those stricken with it. Around 1.7% of infants who get measles and 0.07% of children under 5 who contract measles will later develop this neurological disease. The mortality rate for subacute sclerosing panencephalitis is 100%. The mortality risk for individuals who contract measles as infants is the most concerning for me because it can happen before they are old enough to get the vaccine.

  61. Re:Vaccination Rates *and* Autism Rates are slippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Spoken like a true spineless coward

    I can't wait until I can force a vaccine on you, fuckface

  62. Re:Illegal Immigration? by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

    Not to rain on your anti-immigrant parade, but the west-coast states also have a lot of hippy dippy anti-vaxxers. Immigrants might have some responsibility for the increase; however, I'd guess that the anti-vax movement probably has more to do with it.

    How was my post an anti-immigrant parade? I specifically mentioned the idiocacy of the parents belief and that the infections come from non-immunized foreign visitors. But the blame lies fully on the parents for not vaccinating their children, not the foreigners who may not have the money for/availability of vaccinations in their home countries.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  63. Re:Autism Rates are not slipping, and not correlat by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

    Uh, that post is almost certainly trolling...

    Well, yeah. And I called him out on it.

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  64. Re:Autism Rates are not slipping, and not correlat by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    Bookmarked! :D

  65. Re:Unvaccinated third-world illegal aliens by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

    People who advocate forced vaccination should give some thought to what they are promoting. They are stating that they want a government that forces them to do things whether they are opposed to them or not. That might be justified with smallpox or polio, but measles and chickenpox are not so devastating as to call for fascism.

    It's not fascism. The government (as an agent of society) has a duty to protect those citizens that are unable to do so themselves. In this case it is people who rely on herd immunity due to an inability to receive vaccinations. Because the government cannot realistically or ethically force those people into social and physical isolation for the rest of their lives, the only other alternative is to ensure they are in an environment safe enough for them (please do not try to construe this into a "safe space" argument). Anti-vaxxers aren't abstaining from vaccinations for legitimate health reasons, they are doing based on religious/political/misinformed (all so one guy could make money off some treatments) beliefs. If they don't want to vaccinate their kids and choose to forgo public schools, day care, or anything else, that is their choice. But that is better than giving the middle finger and saying "sucks to be you" to the people who have no choice.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  66. Re:Unvaccinated third-world illegal aliens by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

    These outbreaks aren't happening in the suburbs, they're happening in the migrant ghettos.

    Disneyland is a "migrant ghetto" now?

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  67. Bona fide religious exemptions should be allowed by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Our nation values freedom of religion very highly. That would have to change before bona fide religious exemptions will be disallowed. The key words being "bona fide" - claiming a religious exemption on Monday then going to a church on Sunday that doesn't have any credible "vaccinations are verboten" rule is not a "bona fide claim".

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  68. Send ALL un-protected kids home during outbreaks by davidwr · · Score: 1

    It is right for public schools to make kids who are not known to be vaccinated to stay home when measles is present in the area and that presence creates a public health threat (one case may not do it, 30 in a county might).

    It's also the same school's responsibility to provide for either a tutor or remote-education (telephone, internet, etc.) for the duration of the local outbreak. It is NOT the school's responsibility to arrange child care during the outbreak - that's the parent's job.

    The same goes for other diseases with vaccinations that are widely known to be generally effective and generally cost-effective that they are required by law.
    ---

    As for places where there are large gatherings that include children, such as movie theaters, theme parks, swimming pools, etc., the local public health authority is probably best equipped to issue guidance or, in extreme cases, orders, to parents of non-vaccinated children that will help - or order - them to not expose their kids or the general public to unnecessary risks. Realistically though, how many places in the country have a local measles-or-other-widely-vaccinated-for-disease outbreak that last more than a few months, and how many have more than 2 or 3 such outbreaks in a 10 year period? Not many.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  69. Re:Unvaccinated third-world illegal aliens by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

    Or better yet, label not vaccinating your child as equal child abuse. Because in some sense it actually is.

  70. Re:Vaccination Rates *and* Autism Rates are slippi by bobbied · · Score: 2

    Autism rates have been on the decline, and this decline started when vaccination rates began their decline.

    Explain that, poison advocates.

    Correlation does not imply causation.

    The supposed "link" from vaccinations to autism is easily studied so it's actually been thoroughly studied multiple times by looking at medical records. No obvious link exists in the available data. I'd call this whole idea that there is a link a lie..

    There is just about as much "proof" of the link between vaccines and autism as there is to unleaded gasoline to autism, if you follow the logic used in the first argument.

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  71. Thank you president Obama by WCMI92 · · Score: 1

    This is his legacy. No more, no less.

    --
    Corporatism != Free Market
  72. Re:Unvaccinated third-world illegal aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem isn't unvaccinated illegal aliens. The issue is a lot of parents in the US aren't vaccinating their kids because Jenny McCarthy and people like her scare them into thinking vaccines are evil.

    The problem is both of these groups, except one of them gets a free pass for PC reasons. Newsflash: measles virus doesn't suffer from white guilt and doesn't avoid ethnic people.

  73. Ah, right, so there aren't any Catholics. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because there's only hindus, confucians and muslims.

    Hey, if you can be an ignorant asshat and pretend there are words there not said, so can I.

  74. Parents who don't get their kids immunized by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    should be arrested.

  75. 300 additional cases per year != "endemic" by SlaveToTheGrind · · Score: 1

    The tipoff was the estimate of a whopping $2.1 meeeeeleeon increase in public health costs. FTFS:

    We found that a 5% decline in MMR vaccine coverage in US children would result in a 3-fold increase in national measles cases in this age group, for a total of 150 cases

    Elsewhere the study says that age group comprises about 30% of total measles cases. So in theory we'd see about 300 more cases per year.

    Sorry, but that's not deserving of words like "explosive" or "unshakeable."

    And even that would require a drop in coverage TFA dismissively couches as a "mere" 5%, but which would in reality be an enormous move for a statistic that is now only about 1% off its one-time peak and is running right around its mean over the last couple of decades.

    Before you go there, my children are vaccinated. But this sort of sensationalism is not helpful.

    1. Re:300 additional cases per year != "endemic" by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      At that rate it would take more than a decade before you would statistically have a single death.

  76. Re:Illegal Immigration? by hey! · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The numbers really don't support the idea that illegal immigration is a significant driver here. While it's always *possible* for someone to bring in measles, measles has an incubation period of about 10-12 days, so you only have to worry about the number of people who crossed the border illegally in the last week or so.

    The total number of undocumented in the US is estimated to be around 11 million (useful fact to keep in mind in the immigration debate), two thirds of whom have lived here for a decade or more. By DHS's internal estimates, about 170,000 - 200,000 people annually cross the border illegally who are not caught.

    Compare that to the number of Americans who travel abroad. Last year, that hit a record sixty-six million, twenty five million to Mexico alone. Since the vaccine has about a 2% failure rate, that means about 1.3 million non-immune Americans cross the US border legally every year, almost 10x the number of illegal immigrants. What's more Americans overwhelmingly fly in, which is significant given the incubation time of the virus. About 40% of illegal immigrants arrive by air, and these are overwhelmingly "overstays", people who enter the US illegally but overstay their visa. They are not "illegals" during the period they would be contagious.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  77. Vaccination incentive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Currently there is no string attached to the $1000 per child tax credit. Let's require people to provide the health insurance policy number that covers the child (and it might only cover the child, not the parent) AND mandate that the child's shot record be up to date.

    If anyone wants to skip the vaccination of their child or use the tax credit to buy a bigger SUV, too bad but they aren't holding up their end of a societal obligation so put their own money where there mouth is, not mine.

  78. Re:Vaccination Rates *and* Autism Rates are slippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Claims of a plateau are supported by a 2016 report from the CDC.

  79. Re:Unvaccinated third-world illegal aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chickenpox kills about 0.003% of victims and hospitalizes about 0.26%. The overall death rate is low, but one quarter of a percent for hospitalizations makes for a lot of unnecessary strain on healthcare systems...

    Just want to remind readers that chicken pox are actually much worse a thing than was once commonly thought. Back when I was a kid, when another kid in the neighborhood got chicken pox during the summer, everyone's mothers would send them over for a play day to get the chicken pox thing out of the way while no school would be missed.

    Now we know that chicken pox virus lays dormant forever in a person's body, often resurfacing when they get shingles later, which hurts worse than anyone who's never had it can ever understand.

    And now more good news... there's an apparent link between shingles and heart disease.

    So the REAL statistics? They need some work.

  80. The social mixing of a two year old... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rolling around on the floor and putting random crap in their mouths pretty much covers it. I guess the gov went through their demographics and didn't have enough invasive info on toddlers. Get them while they're young. Idiot parents getting newborns a Facefarm account, finger prints, and DNA screening not enough?

  81. Re:Unvaccinated third-world illegal aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, but it is a place where people from all over the world congregate....like migrant ghettos.

  82. Re: Autism Rates are not slipping, and not correla by Brockmire · · Score: 1

    Can't wait to see the facial expression on my organic nut sister-in-law when I show her that. Also, to my brother, who thinks a vaccination is the reason his teenage son acts like a typical teenager.

  83. Re:Unvaccinated third-world illegal aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First, you need to learn what fascism is so that you stop labeling things that are not fascist as being so. Second you need to learn the de facto purpose of ANY government is to force people to do things they don't want to do.

  84. Was it a Good Study? by dcw3 · · Score: 1

    What was the p-value? Note the other /. story on this... https://science.slashdot.org/s...

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
  85. Re:Autism Rates are not slipping, and not correlat by dcw3 · · Score: 1

    Drawing more attention to the troll. Your post is currently at Score 2. Many of us would have never seen his (as it should be) because we browse above that level

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
  86. Re:Autism Rates are not slipping, and not correlat by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

    [Citation Needed]

    It falls on you to back up your claim, first.

    Uh, that post is almost certainly trolling, in the original internet sense of the word: somebody who is posting for no other reason than to get a reaction. Responding to him in any way does nothing other than feed the troll; the correct reaction was to ignore him and wait for him to be moderated "troll".

    It's too late for that now, though. To deal with facts: the actual response is that autism rates are not declining: http://blogs.discovermagazine....

    Here's a good correlation graph, if you're looking for correlation: https://www.sciencebasedmedici...

    Here is the deal for my jurisdiction -- Québec Canada
    No vaccination, homeschooling. No vaccination--no public schooling access. No college or university access (which all are greatly funded by the government) and its likely your child won't have a playmate, unless the other is also home schooled.

    --
    Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  87. Re:Vaccination Rates *and* Autism Rates are slippi by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

    Autism rates have been on the decline, and this decline started when vaccination rates began their decline.

    1) Not a decline, more like a plateau. It's also very recent, and doesn't correspond with the rise of the anti-vax campaigns, which happened years earlier.
    2) Autism rates did not increase when vaccinations were introduced; again, the rise in autism only happened later--in this case, decades later.
    3) Correlation is not causation.

    Not that you will read any of this. You've reached your conclusion, and evidence that doesn't fit it will be ignored.

    My daughter teaches autistic grade-school children. They are for the main part, very smart, gifted in certain skills. As far as my daughter believes, autism is a genetic defect.
    Her biggest successes are taking a child that is deep into his ownself, and bringing him/her out of it, to a more normal life. She says, every child has a passion. Some for toys, some for sports, etc. She uses the child's passion to bring the child to be attentive. It works. Passion is their addiction drug.

    --
    Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  88. Re:1971 by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

    It is official policy to always deny that a vaccine was involved with any death or medical condition. It is also policy to always deny when a vaccine is ineffective. Ensuring that a vaccine is widely distributed is top priority. It doesn't matter how many children are harmed or killed by a vaccine the government cannot allow any doubt about the safety or effectiveness of a vaccine.

  89. Re:Vaccination Rates *and* Autism Rates are slippi by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

    I'll believe that when you can show me multiple double blind, placebo test studies that show what you claim. At this point not a single placebo test has ever been done to test the safety or efficacy of a vaccine, not one in history.

    If you would like to dispute this fact, please show me the study.

  90. Re:Vaccination Rates *and* Autism Rates are slippi by bobbied · · Score: 1

    Right, as if that's the ONLY valid way to perform a study.

    Polio killed thousands and scared tens of thousands back in the 1960's here in the USA. I will point out that one strain of Polio has been eradicated from the world's population and the other two have been largely relegated to "in the wild" infection rates of under 100 per year. I will ALSO point out that an "in the wild" infection of Polio in the USA HAS NOT HAPPENED in over a decade.

    I'm pretty sure it's easy to prove that this is largely due to the vaccination rates for Polio since the 60's, but be my guest if you want to argue otherwise. The same is true for other viral infections which used to kill and scar a percentage of the population, BEFORE vaccines became the norm.

    Now I'm not going to sit here and tell you that the number and frequency of vaccinations suggested by the CDC is a good idea and that vaccine makers are not out on a money grab by pushing as many as they do... But I AM saying that vaccines are safe and effective for most people and it is good government policy to encourage their use (in most cases) for public health. You do what you want, but if your kid dies from the measles (yes it can and does happen) that could have been prevented by a vaccine what will you say then? Personally, I recommend finding a doctor you trust to take care of your kids, and take their advice, which likely means you vaccinate your kids along with mine.

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  91. Re:Vaccination Rates *and* Autism Rates are slippi by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    At this point not a single placebo test has ever been done to test the safety or efficacy of a vaccine, not one in history.

    Are you a liar or a troll? Liar, I suspect. Whatever. By the time that Salk and Sabin were developing polio vaccines in the 1950s, blinded testing of polio vaccines was a 20-year old subject (without success, it must be said). Dozens of trials on different strains were carried out in the development of the vaccine though the 1950s.

    Through the 1980s (and 1990s and 2000s, and most of the 2010s), I've been watching reports of the start of blinded trials of (candidate AIDS vaccine of the year) in the science press. Normally followed by a report of the trial being stopped weeks or months later due to side effects, ineffectiveness, or interfering fuckwit politicians. Though it must be said that there is some progress after 30-odd years of work.

    I can only assume that you're a deliberate liar, though I cannot for one second conceive of what your motivation is. Plain evil malice, I guess. Please have a shitty day, then crawl away and die somewhere.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  92. Re:Vaccination Rates *and* Autism Rates are slippi by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

    It is in fact the only valid type of study accepted by the FDA for any medicine other than vaccines. Why do you think that they have such a lower bar for safety and efficacy testing for vaccines than other medicines?

    Polio was the most misdiagnosed disease in history. There were several factors contributing to the prevalence of its diagnosis at that time. The primary two factors were DDT and the vaccine itself. It was not understood for several years afterward, but DDT toxicity causes guillain barre syndrome, which has symptom identical to paralytic polio. It was also being used everywhere, even put on food and sprayed directly on children. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
    The polio vaccine itself also caused guillain barre syndrome as well as spreading actual polio infection. Polio was "eradicated" by defining it almost completely out of existence. For instance, if a child who had gotten the polio vaccine showed signs of polio it was defined as non-polio paralysis. The criteria for diagnosing paralytic polio was changed from around a day of weakness or paralysis of a limb to a minimum of a week of weakness or paralysis.

    As far as measles goes it was almost entirely eradicated before the vaccine was ever invented for it. Also in the decades leading up to the introduction of the vaccine less than 0.01% of cases resulted in death, less than the CDC claims the death rate is for flu. It was considered a trivial disease and parents would host measles parties so they could get it over with while their children were young. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    Now, can you show me a double-blind placebo test for the efficacy or safety of a vaccine?

  93. Re:Vaccination Rates *and* Autism Rates are slippi by beastofburdon · · Score: 1
    I an neither a liar or a troll, unless we are talking about religion, then I will troll you mercilessly.

    By the time that Salk and Sabin were developing polio vaccines in the 1950s, blinded testing of polio vaccines was a 20-year old subject (without success, it must be said). Dozens of trials on different strains were carried out in the development of the vaccine though the 1950s.

    Show me the studies.

    Through the 1980s (and 1990s and 2000s, and most of the 2010s), I've been watching reports of the start of blinded trials of (candidate AIDS vaccine of the year) in the science press. Normally followed by a report of the trial being stopped weeks or months later due to side effects, ineffectiveness, or interfering fuckwit politicians. Though it must be said that there is some progress after 30-odd years of work.

    Again, show me the studies.

    You assume because you are a nothing more than a blind sheep believing whatever the government tells you. You know as damn well as I do that our government is corrupt to its core, but you somehow believe that they would never ever lie to you about something related to medicine. And if you somehow believe that the government isn't completely corrupt you really need to brush up on your history.