Mothering › Forums › Health › Vaccinations › los angeles radio station discuss chicken pox parties...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

los angeles radio station discuss chicken pox parties...  

post #1 of 38
Thread Starter 
Kennedy and Suites...Kennedy is pregnant and Bryan Suites is an expectant Father...

http://www.kfi640.com/pages/podcasting/

The February 3, 2009, Tuesday, 8:00 pm hour.

They are making fun of chicken pox parties in particular and nonvaxers in general.

You may enjoy the discussion or you may get really mad.
post #2 of 38
my thoughts on the CDC on chickenpox

calling it varicella: sometimes I think they used words people never heard before to make is sound scarier. Like calling whooping cough "pertussis". when I was growing up, it was chicken pox.

"about 8 to 9 of every 10 people who are vaccinated are completely protected from chickenpox."

its "effective" rate 80-90%
Someone once explained it to me this way.
If you flip a coin and get heads 8 times out of 10, that is 80%. what is the chance you will get heads the next time you flip the coin? 50/50. This is the whole herd immunity thing. 90% of people may gain immunity, but it's still only a 50/50 chance for my child personally.
If you have 5 children, and 4 are boys, and 1 is a girl, what are the chances your next child will be a boy? 50/50. Statistically, moms with 4 boys and 1 girl may usually have a specific gender next, but for the individual in question, its still a 50/50.

"Prior to the licensing of the chickenpox vaccine in 1995, almost all persons in the United States had suffered from chickenpox by adulthood. Each year, the virus caused an estimated 4 million cases of chickenpox, 11,000 hospitalizations, and 100-150 deaths."

how many of those "hospitilizations" were ER check ins because parents didnt have insurance and wanted their child to see a dr? or didnt know it was chicken pox? or had children who lived in poverty, were malnourished, or who were immune compromised? when will the information be broken down this way? why is it not currently? same goes for the deaths.and what other health conditions at the time of death for those 100-150. Where do they come up with 100-150? when taking about small numbers like these there is a big jump from 100-150 (50% additional). Which was it? 100 or 150? perhaps it was 110, and that is between 100 and 150.

why are they making the chicken pox so scary? I guess everyone I grew up with had aprents who didnt care about us or were really awesome at hiding their fear because they acted as though it wasn't a big deal to have the chicken pox - not like it was deadly. by the way, anyone know what perfecnt 100 is of 4 million? 100 deaths out of 4 million effected.

And for the sake of what? that these peopls immunity will wane, it is unlikely they will get booseters (and if they do as we've seen that doesn't insure immunity either - what are the statistics that those who responded to the childhood vaccine will respond to the adult booster?) it just seems to me we are leaving our society at increased risk for shingles. It's worse for adults then for children.

just my thoughts
post #3 of 38
Quote:
"Prior to the licensing of the chickenpox vaccine in 1995, almost all persons in the United States had suffered from chickenpox by adulthood. Each year, the virus caused an estimated 4 million cases of chickenpox, 11,000 hospitalizations, and 100-150 deaths."
post #4 of 38
Quote:
why are they making the chicken pox so scary? I guess everyone i grew up with had aprents who didnt care about us or were really awesome at hiding their fear because they acted as though it wasn't a big deal to have the chicken pox - not like it was deadly. By the way, anyone know what percent 100 is of 4 million? 100 deaths out of 4 million effected.
0.000025%
post #5 of 38
thanks kiara - it was too early in the morning for me to do math when I posted that hahaha
post #6 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiara7 View Post
0.000025%
and I wonder what that percent would be if they only counted those who were healthy, non immune compromised, well nourished people who were receiving proper attention and care for the diseases, and had no other existing medical conditions?
post #7 of 38
And how many of those 100-150 were adults? Because we all know it's worse for adults than for children. And since we are vaxxing children now, their immunity will wear off, and they'll be susceptible as adults. I'm guessing we'll see adults getting chicken pox by the time our kids are grown, and it won't be pretty.

I'm a dummy and had my son vaxxed for "varicella" when he was a year old. I did all the vaxxes then, and I just went with it, even though I had no CLUE that varicella was just plain ol' chicken pox. (Yes, kick me for being dumb.) However, that was what pushed me pretty much over the edge to not vaxxing, because why is CHICKEN POX all of a sudden so terrifying?

I agree with the pp that they call it varicella to make it sound scarier, and they tell people that it's worse now than when we were kids. x infinity Because without those scare tactics, I bet most people would wise up when they heard that we were now vaxxing for chicken pox.
post #8 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by PenelopeJune View Post
And how many of those 100-150 were adults?
Of 100 deaths a year prior to the vaccine 30-40 were in children I believe.
post #9 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Glue Mommy View Post

its "effective" rate 80-90%
Someone once explained it to me this way.
If you flip a coin and get heads 8 times out of 10, that is 80%. what is the chance you will get heads the next time you flip the coin? 50/50. This is the whole herd immunity thing. 90% of people may gain immunity, but it's still only a 50/50 chance for my child personally.
If you have 5 children, and 4 are boys, and 1 is a girl, what are the chances your next child will be a boy? 50/50. Statistically, moms with 4 boys and 1 girl may usually have a specific gender next, but for the individual in question, its still a 50/50.
Your math here is not correct. The coin thing by itself is correct, but it does not necessarily apply to the herd immunity thing. Permutations are confusing.

For instance:

what is the probability that you'll have five girls? 1 in 32

(1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2)

If you already have four girls, what is the probability that your next will be a girl? 1 in 2

With births, this is only the case because roughly half of all births are girls. I think it's actually slightly more than half, but easier to see it with a simple fraction.

If 90% of people pick up an immunity from a vaccine, it wouldn't be a 1 in 2 chance as a base. It would be a 9 in 10 chance.

So. Assume 90% get immunity. If you have five children, what is the probability that all will get an immunity from the vaccine?

9/10 x 9/10 x 9/10 x 9/10 x 9/10 = .59409

So about 60% for all five children. For each individual child it would be 90%, not 50% as you suggested.
post #10 of 38
no, its still a 50/50 chance that your child will fall into the overall 80%-90% of society as whole. you cant base an individual occurance on the statistics of a populace whole. thats like saying that if there are 4 people in aroom, 1 of them will have herpes simplex. no, 1 of them MIGHT have herpes simplex, but jsut simply because 1 in 4 peopel do, doesnt mean when 4 people are in a room that one of them will.
post #11 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sileree View Post
Of 100 deaths a year prior to the vaccine 30-40 were in children I believe.
where is kiara to redo the math for us. one factor down!
post #12 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Glue Mommy View Post
no, its still a 50/50 chance that your child will fall into the overall 80%-90% of society as whole. you cant base an individual occurance on the statistics of a populace whole. thats like saying that if there are 4 people in aroom, 1 of them will have herpes simplex. no, 1 of them MIGHT have herpes simplex, but jsut simply because 1 in 4 peopel do, doesnt mean when 4 people are in a room that one of them will.
You are taking many concepts and smooshing them together indisciminately. Your math was not correct.
post #13 of 38
no, I am not. I am simply stating the facts. you are using the populace as a whole to determine the effect something will have on an individual. that is incorrect. STATISTICALLY they have a 90% chance. however, PERSONALLY they still only have a 50/50 chance that they will fall into that 90% of the whole population.
post #14 of 38
No, Super Glue, you are not stating facts.

It is impossible for something to occur in 90% of a population if each individual has a 50% personal chance of getting it. Well, not impossible. But certainly not statistically likely.

I admit that my math may be slightly incorrect. But yours is completely off base, with no proper reasoning behind it. I can only guess that you're thinking that because a vaccine either works or it doesn't, that it has a 50% chance for an individual. If it is much more likely that it works (shown by 90% effectiveness), this probability would not be 50% for an individual.

This is high school math.
post #15 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by super glue mommy View Post
where is kiara to redo the math for us. One factor down!
0.00001% :d
post #16 of 38
you are still going on statistics. I agree with you that STATISTICALLY they have a 80-90% chance. that still does not mean anthing INDIVIDUALLY. If it is high school math to you, then it is gradeschool math to me, I learned about statistics and probability in elementary school. I was in advanced math and every morning me and several students were transferred to middle school for math. in middle school we did high school math. I graduated highschool early (age 16), thanks mostly to extra curricular math credits. this is very basic, but don't feel bad, a lot of people don't get it. usually the same people who try to tell me that there are 10 months to a pregnancy.


THANK YOU KIARA! we still have to factor in those other things, though im sure that is confidential information only the CDC is allowed to have...
post #17 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by plunky View Post
No, Super Glue, you are not stating facts.

It is impossible for something to occur in 90% of a population if each individual has a 50% personal chance of getting it. Well, not impossible. But certainly not statistically likely.

I admit that my math may be slightly incorrect. But yours is completely off base, with no proper reasoning behind it. I can only guess that you're thinking that because a vaccine either works or it doesn't, that it has a 50% chance for an individual. If it is much more likely that it works (shown by 90% effectiveness), this probability would not be 50% for an individual.

This is high school math.
Someone did correct me in a PM, and I admit again that I am not a math guy. But it turns out that my math is lower than it should be. I urge that person to explain it to us, since I am a layman. But I think what they were saying was that where my equation was

9/10 x 9/10 x 9/10 x 9/10 x 9/10 = .6

that if 90% of a population was effected it would instead be

(something unknown) = .9

And that something unknown would have to very close to 1 for each individual.

I'd love to see the math for this correctly, but all I'm saying is that it doesn't pass the smell test to say that a large portion of a population is effected by something where an individual has a small chance of having it effect them.
post #18 of 38
It is not high school math to me. For most, this is common sense. Statistics and Probability is something you begin to learn in grade school regardless of whether of not you are advanced in math as I was.

You are still applying statistics. I agree with you statistically they have an 80-90% chance. But PERSONALLY they only have a 50/50 chance of falling into that catagory.

I took jr high math in elementary school, high school math in jr high. I graduated at 16 due primarily to extra courses I took in math giving me enough credits to graduate early, and because I was in a program at which I could work at my own pace and test at my own pace instead of at a teacher directed pace. I was in college at age 16, though I had been doing college level math prior to that. Math is not my weakness. This reminds me much of the people who would argue with me that there are 10 months in a pregnancy. some people just dont get it.

kiara- too bad we cant find out info on the other factors - the CDC would never release that kind of information...
post #19 of 38
Theoretically, I dont know the actual numbers:

Let say for every 10 vaccinated children and 10 non vaccinated children, that 3 vaccinated had autism, but only 1 non vaccinated child had autism. So vaccinated children are 3x more likely to have autism. So, yes, my child is more likely to have autism if I vaccinate them. However, if I choose to vaccinate them anyway, its still only a 50/50 chance that THEY will be the child that falls into that 30%.

My network keeps timing out I'm trying to get some information for you.
post #20 of 38
odds: An odds of an event is the ratio of the probability that the event will not occur to the probability that the event will occur .

First, think of some event where the outcome is uncertain. Examples of such outcomes would be the roll of a die, the amount of rain that we get tomorrow, the state of the economy in one month, or who will be the President of the United States in the year 2001. In each case, we don't know for sure what will happen. For example, we don't know exactly how much rain we will get tomorrow.

A probability is a numerical measure of the likelihood of the event. It is a number that we attach to an event, say the event that we'll get over an inch of rain tomorrow, which reflects the likelihood that we will get this much rain.

rolling dice:
http://www-math.bgsu.edu/~albert/m11...y/relfreq.html

I am trying to find something a little more simple for this concept, bear with me
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations
This thread is locked  
Mothering › Forums › Health › Vaccinations › los angeles radio station discuss chicken pox parties...