Re: Obama Climbs On The Vaccine Bandwagon

On Apr 23, 6:28=A0pm, Jeff <kidsdoc2...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> PeterB wrote:
> > On Apr 22, 8:09 pm, Jeff <kidsdoc2...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> PeterB wrote:
> >>> Vaccine is certainly implicated in autism even if it's not
> >>> likely to be the sole trigger. =A0What's tragic is that vaccine
> >>> is so completely unncessary and without scientific basis.

> >> Really? Ever notice all those kids coming down with polio?
> >> Staying home from school from measles? Having birth defects
> >> from rubella?  Not anymore.
>
> > Timeline data for all of these proves conclusively that vaccine
> > had nothing to do with such declines. =A0 Look it up.
>
> Really? Until the measles vaccine came out, most children got
> measles. Now, in the US and other countries where the vast
> majority of kids do, almost no kids get measles. Polio was wiped
> out of the western hemisphere by vaccines.

And I colonized Pluto once with a brew of ferrets.  You can't see them
from here, but I promise, it's true.  Here's the kicker.  Despite
ferrets now living on Pluto, I can't prove that I put them there
myself.  Remind you of anything?

> Get a clue, man.

We don't need "clues," dude, we need facts.  Got any?

> > When a child contracts a case
> > of measles these days, it's almost certain that it won't be
> > re****ted due to vaccine bias based on a child's vaccine status,
> > but the best vaccine does is to limit or reduce the severity of
> > a viral infection (and sometimes it produces symptoms not unlike
> > the disease itself.)
>
> Bull. Already this year, cases of measles have been re****ted in
> California and the New York City Area. These cases were from people
> outside the country.

You aren't paying attention. I said children *already* vaccinated
would be unlikely to receive virus-specific IgM evaluation because of
their vaccination status.  No one said measles no longer exists, and
no one said it can't be detected.

> Measles is re****ted.
>
> > Since parents nowadays don't suspect a communicable disease, a
> > child is rarely presented to a doctor for evaluation. =A0 He or
> > she stays out of school for a day or two with a "flu bug." =A0Even
> > if the child is presented for evaluation, a doctor rarely orders
> > blood work. =A0Again, that is based on vaccine bias. =A0You probably
> > don't know that measles mortality had already declined by 95%
> > before the vaccine was even introduced, and for that to happen,
> > severe morbidity had to be declining, as well.
>
> Will you please provide evidence to back your claims?

Refer to the chart in Myrl's post about measles earlier.  You can also
find scientific reviews of these data in many published books on the
subject.  If you need some relevant titles, I'll be happy to supply
them.

> You seem to be totally ignorant.

I will ignore your ad hominems for now.

> >> Vaccines completely eliminated polio in the Western hemisphrere,
> >> nearly completely stopped measles (with all cases from sources
> >> outside the US), decreased invasive Hib disease, nearly
> >> eliminated rubella-related birth defects, decrease the
> >> incidence and severity of chicken pox, decreased the rates of
> >> diptheria, tetanus and purtussis.
>
> > One of my cousins died at age 3 within an hour of receiving her
> > pertussis vaccine. =A0This was before I was born and people rarely
> > sought legal remedy against medical providers in those days.
> > Both her mother and my mother (who had not yet had children of
> > her own)were devastated by this loss. =A0It's true that such
> > diseases today are not the problem they once were, but vaccine
> > was far too late in the game to explain those declines. =A0
> > Nowadays, we chalk most of our "mystery" bugs up to that "weird
> > flu" going around, but you don't really know.
>
> Get a clue man. The vaccines wiped out the diseases.

Have you seen one of my Plutonian ferrets by chance?

> >> If you want to decrease the chances of your kid from getting
> >> sick or dying, then vaccines are necessary.
>
> > Care to back that up with risk-adjusted scientific evidence from
> > a published source?
>
> I suggest you look at the evidence at www.cdc.gov.

Gee, that's a problem.  CDC's governance is largely comprised of
former pharmaceutical executives, and for my money, that's not an
unbiased source or information.  Got anybody remotely independent?