How come in all these articles about non-vax...

[vegasgrl]

...they mention these HORRIFIC outbreaks of measles and pertussis, but they never talk about the outcomes?

On Thursday, government health officials reported that the number of measles cases in the U.S. has reached its highest level in over a decade, with nearly half the cases involving children whose parents object to immunizations.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26291109//

It goes on and on to talk about all these cases and who got them and why, but it never really answers the question of what happened to the people involved in the outbreak, except to say:

Three of the youngsters were hospitalized and the cost to contain the outbreak was estimated at nearly $168,000.

Ummmmmmm...three kids were hospitalized? What happened then? Was it worth spending all that money to "contain" something that, while surely worrisome for the families involved, didn't really have that much of an effect to begin with?

I just don't understand why none of the articles, none of the CDC or doctor-approved literature, nothing I've ever read with an "OMG YOU HAVE TO VAX YOUR CHILD!!!!!" slant, mentions the outcomes. It's just implied that an "outbreak" is the worst thing that can happen, with zero proof of why it's bad.

Has anyone ever encountered non-biased literature? Media accounts? And I mean non-biased in both senses, I suppose. Like laying out the pros and cons?

I think I'd vax if someone could show me why I should. But I can't find that information?

[Marnica]

Originally Posted by vegasgrl

...they mention these HORRIFIC outbreaks of measles and pertussis, but they never talk about the outcomes?



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26291109//

It goes on and on to talk about all these cases and who got them and why, but it never really answers the question of what happened to the people involved in the outbreak, except to say:



Ummmmmmm...three kids were hospitalized? What happened then? Was it worth spending all that money to "contain" something that, while surely worrisome for the families involved, didn't really have that much of an effect to begin with?

I just don't understand why none of the articles, none of the CDC or doctor-approved literature, nothing I've ever read with an "OMG YOU HAVE TO VAX YOUR CHILD!!!!!" slant, mentions the outcomes. It's just implied that an "outbreak" is the worst thing that can happen, with zero proof of why it's bad.

Has anyone ever encountered non-biased literature? Media accounts? And I mean non-biased in both senses, I suppose. Like laying out the pros and cons?

I think I'd vax if someone could show me why I should. But I can't find that information?

There is nothing out there that proves vaccines are safe and effective...nobody can show you that because it doesn't exsist. On both sides you could say there is no "proof" just causal evidence. So until the government and big Pharma can PROVE that vaccines are safe and effective, Ill pass thanks

[emma1325]

Marnica,

my thoughts exactly.

[miriam]

To the OP: I do not know, but I know that many times there is a reported outbreak of polio; later it as it turns out, these are subclinical cases, coincidentally diagnosed after tests in which another disease was being analyzed.

[Scattershoot]

Ummmmmmm...three kids were hospitalized? What happened then? Was it worth spending all that money to "contain" something that, while surely worrisome for the families involved, didn't really have that much of an effect to begin with?

I think it is also important to keep in mind that the word "hospitalized" is used to create fear. There is a wide range of "hospitalized." Maybe the mom called the doctor and explained the symptoms. The nurse said go to the ER because she has been conditioned to fear these symptoms. The parent did as told even though there was really no big issue at all. That gets chalked up to "hospitalized."

Some parents freak out because of the symptoms. The doctor's office is closed. The go to the ER just in case. Again, no big deal and chalked up to "hospitalized."

My only trip to the ER during my entire childhood was when I broke my leg. I had chicken pox, measles and mumps for sure. Maybe a couple others and definitely the flu. Doctors didn't freak out back then. Parents weren't afraid of fevers. Ask any ER doc if he/she doesn't get a little annoyed with all the people who come in for nothing.

Trust me, if there was any negative outcome at all, especially if they found out a child was unvaccinated, they'd have every news crew in town there.

[lilbsmama]

[On Thursday, government health officials reported that the number of measles cases in the U.S. has reached its highest level in over a decade, with nearly half the cases involving children whose parents object to immunizations.]

What kills me is how they have to mention that nearly half of the outbreaks come from unvaxed kids. ha! Where do the rest of them come from then? Answer that government officials!

[PaigeC]

Originally Posted by lilbsmama

[On Thursday, government health officials reported that the number of measles cases in the U.S. has reached its highest level in over a decade, with nearly half the cases involving children whose parents object to immunizations.]

What kills me is how they have to mention that nearly half of the outbreaks come from unvaxed kids. ha! Where do the rest of them come from then? Answer that government officials!

Not to mention that when you find out the actual numbers behind the "outbreak" it is like 5! or OMG 12!!!!

[vegasgrl]

Well I actually found the Jenny McCarthy death toll that someone posted in another thread interesting (though unnecessarily named):

http://www.jennymccarthybodycount.co...ount/Home.html

I thought "wow, here's finally a pro-vax answer to my eternal question of why I should vax my child, other than that IF YOU DON'T YOU'LL KILL MY KID YOU SELFISH B&T(*!!!!!

Except when you click on the links, for the 1 death that occurred the week of Apr 25th for example, it goes to this mile-long CDC report that totally doesn't even show what they're talking about. :

I really, truly am interested. Attention pro-vaxers (not that there are many on MDC ): I will vax my kid if you can show me why I should without just telling me I should. Seriously. I will. I can tell you right off the bat that any "disease" I had as a kid and lived through just fine, like chicken pox, you're at a distinct disadvantage going in to your spiel. But seriously, if 163 people are dead because of non-vaxers, for real, and you can prove it to me, LET'S TALK!

I seriously am having huge problems with this being the big "public health crisis" - I mean, I'm sure those 163 families are devastated, make no mistake. But over 2 years, that's like 81.5 people per year. And that's even *if*, which I sincerely doubt, all 163 deaths were because of non-vax. Really.

869,700 people died from cardiovascular disease in 2004. http://www.americanheart.org/downloa...2008.final.pdf It's on page 2 - don't want you to have to hunt down the deaths like on the jennyistheantichrist site. 869,700 people. That's ONE THOUSAND TIMES MORE than those who supposedly died due to non-vax.

Where is our McDonald's body count? Oh that's right - they have enough shush money to keep that from being labeled a public health crisis. (And hey, I know not all of those deaths are because of fast food. But like I said, I'm pretty sure the 163 weren't all because of non-vax...)

[carriebft]

Originally Posted by lilbsmama

What kills me is how they have to mention that nearly half of the outbreaks come from unvaxed kids. ha! Where do the rest of them come from then? Answer that government officials!

any proof on that?

[Marnica]

Originally Posted by carriebft

any proof on that?

Any proof of what?? If they are mentioning almost half of children are unvaccinated, then it is fairly safe to assume that the other half (or more than half) were partially or fully vaccinated.

[carriebft]

the poster said that half of all outbreaks are caused by vaccinated kids. where is the proof of that?

in addition, people are constantly getting the figures from the cdc on last year's measles numbers incorrect. Although I do not think this was what the poster was talking about, I will address it yet again:


131 cases
6 vaccinated completely
5 vaccinated partially
63 unvaccinated for rel/philo reasons
17 unvaccinated for age reasons
40 of undetermined status

[an_domhan]

Originally Posted by vegasgrl

I just don't understand why none of the articles, none of the CDC or doctor-approved literature, nothing I've ever read with an "OMG YOU HAVE TO VAX YOUR CHILD!!!!!" slant, mentions the outcomes. It's just implied that an "outbreak" is the worst thing that can happen, with zero proof of why it's bad.

Because it's only bad when the person is not vaccinated or they die because of a person that wasn't vaccinated (by epidemiological magic). Vaccinated people on the other hand, they've performed due diligence by accepting the jab so we overlook any mayhem that might cause to compromised persons. /sarcasm