Assumptions and contradictions in measles and measles immunization research: Is measles good for...

[ema-adama]

Furthermore, measles is particularly severe if contracted from someone of the opposite sex. Hence, transmission factors, in particularly intensity of exposure and cross-sex transmission, may be more important determinants of measles mortality than the host factors usually emphasized.

Does this explain intensity of measles exposure?

Contrary to current assumptions, children who survive the acute phase of measles infection may have a survival advantage compared with unimmunized, uninfected children. Hence, both disease and immunization may be associated with non-specific beneficial effects, presumably due to some form of immunostimulation.

Interesting.

Should these observations be reproducable, they question the culture of ‘eradication’ and have major implications for future immunization policies.

Hmmmmm

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...83632fdca0083b

Underlining mine

[shuttlt]

Originally Posted by ema-adama

Does this explain intensity of measles exposure?


Interesting.


Hmmmmm

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...83632fdca0083b

Underlining mine

The paper seemed to be from 1995. Have the results been repeated? I don't have access to the full article, so I don't have much of an idea how large these speculated effects might be.

[ema-adama]

The paper is from 1995. I do not have access to the article either. It looks very interesting. I too am curious and want more information about various issues raised in this article. Just this article deserves some very careful scrutiny I think. It is not all straight forward - obviously. Articles citing this paper do not deal with eradication of measles from what I can see - but there is an interesting paper on the problems of over prescribing of antibiotics and use of pesticides.... (for those who are interested