or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › herd immunity - science and philosophy of.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

herd immunity - science and philosophy of. - Page 2

post #21 of 77

.  


Edited by member234098 - 6/2/12 at 1:04pm
post #22 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by miriam View Post

No, I think a lot of doctors misdiagnose measles the way the intern diagnosed my niece and son. How often does that happen, do you think? I never said infants are sick to DEAD from measles.  The drug companies would not miss that opportunity to use vaccine scare tactics.

 

 

No,  you never said infants were dead from measles.  That was mamakay's point, not yours.  If measles were still going around within our population, more than the small-ish outbreaks that we hear about in the news, then some infants and kids would still be dying of it, just as France has had six measles deaths this year.  A mild case of measles being missed by doctors (or no seen by doctors) is one thing and is entirely possible, but for your scenario to be true, they'd have to be missing actual measles deaths, which is harder to believe.  

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by miriam View Post

Yes, I am old enough to have had measles and known of contemporaries who had complications. I repeat:  "The CDC claims that there were 118 reported cases of measles in the first four months of this year most of them fully vaccinated and no deaths or serious complications, yet there were 3000+ reactions to the MMR reported to VAERS, that is 25x as many complications as confirmed illnesses.  Is that progress?   It is still safer  to get the disease and have lifelong immunity.  Why bother with possible complications that can be debilitating when a course of the disease in an otherwise healthy person ?  Why are vaccine complications preferable socially?  

 

I repeat: THIS IS NOT TRUE.  Well, yes there were 118 cases of measles with no deaths or complications in the first four months of this year, but only 13 of them were vaccinated.  The other 105 - which would be most of them - had not had even one measles vaccine.  My apologies for the bold, but I'm afraid my inability to be concise occasionally leads to my points being missed, and I wanted to make sure you saw it this time since you missed the correction in my last post.  Please see my last post to the handy link to the actual CDC page  on the subject.  

 

Also, as I said in my last post, you are not comparing the wrong numbers.  Comparing vaccine risks in a highly vaccinated country to measles risk in a highly vaccinated country does not show the progress.  To see the progress, you need to compare vaccine risks in our highly vaccinated country to what the measles risks would be in our country if we did not have vaccines protecting most of us.  Of course we can only estimate what that would be, but again, the situation in France, where rates are lower than in the US, serves as a example and warning with their thousands of cases, hundreds of serious complications, and 6 measles deaths so far this year.  

 

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by miriam View Post

My son and niece were diagnosed by the older doctor, clinically and by laboratory diagnosis.  Why are you picking at that? The intern would not even order a test.   I was there. I cared for my son.  Yes, my children are grown, and they survived measles. Something wrong with that?

 

Shedding is theoretical?  Why did the oncologists tell the family to keep recently vaccinated children away from the dying person?  Was that a mass hallucination?  What is it about recently vaccinated children that is a danger to immuno-compromised persons?  What drug company is ever going to fund a study to dis/prove that?

 

 

My point in mentioning that your kids were grown is that measles was only declared eliminated from the United States in 2000 - eleven years ago.  Before that, it was not by any means common, but it was still around, and in particular there were some relatively large outbreaks in the late 80's/early 90's which lead to them adding the second shot to the schedule.  Since the children mentioned had measles before being old enough to have the vaccine and are now grown, then obviously they had well before measles was declared eliminated just eleven years ago, so most likely they got it from another person with wild measles, not from a vaccine. 

 

Shedding for measles could happen in theory because they have found measles RNA in the urine of some recently vaccinated children and measles virus (vaccine strain) in some throat swabs of recently vaccinated children, so in theory others could be infected.  However, there are no known cases of this actually happening, so if it ever does happen, it is an extremely rare event.  How unlikely that it would happen to both your son and niece a few years apart?

 

Did the oncologist say to specifically to keep kids vaccinated with the MMR away, or just recently vaccinated kids in general.  Keeping kids with MMR away may be a good idea because of better safe than sorry and if anyone was going to be the first to get it from a vaccinated child, a cancer patient is a good candidate for being the victim.  On the other hand, flumist, chickenpox, and oral polio virus all have documented cases of being transmitted from someone recently vaccinated, so it may have been more those vaccines that the oncologist was thinking of.   Kids wouldn't be getting the smallpox vaccine, but any military members who did should also stay away as that one can transmit vaccinia (not smallpox).  

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by miriam View Post

When traveling, why can not a person depend on herd immunity? Why is it only in the US that the herd immunity works?  If the recommended vaccines do not work for a certain person, where is the herd immunity to protect that person?  When  a person travels to Mexico, why cannot that person depend on the herd immunity to the turista to keep him/her healthy?  

 

My husband was given vaccines against tb and malaria, and he came back with tb and malaria. Not a vaccine success story.

 

I'm confused.  I know you read my last post because I'm the one who mentioned that your kids were grown, used the words "in theory" to getting vaccine strain measles from a recently vaccinated child, and pointed out that the Amish did vaccinate (and where is your evidence that they don't, aside from a claim that misinformed people apparently like to scapegoat them for outbreaks?), but you are basically repeating your question without any acknowledgement of my answers, even to disagree with them?  I guess you must have missed that part?  Please go back and read it. 

 

As for Mexico, vaccination rates are actually better than here for some diseases.  Like the US, Mexico has had a few imported outbreaks of measles, but measles is no longer endemic there either, and right now a traveler is probably at less risk for measles there than at at home.  Also, as much as some people would like to blame Mexican immigrants for the pertussis outbreak in California, Mexico has not actually had a recent pertussis outbreak, perhaps in part because until recently they were using he whole cell vaccine, which may be more effective. Mexico doesn't have polio, and rubella is rare. Conclusion: herd immunity works in Mexico too!

 

Still the CDC recommends that people be caught up on the routine vaccines they should have had anyway because they especially don't want travelers bringing the disease home with them should they, for instance, stop and chat a bit with another traveler who happens to be from France and is contagious for measles prior to having symptoms.  

 

Travelers to Mexico also may be advised to get the hepatitis A vaccine (which now is recommended for all kids anyway, but older teens and adults may not have had) and maybe the typphoid  vaccine depending on their destination/plans in Mexico.  Hepatitis A is not on the regular vaccine schedule in Mexico, though it is available through some private clinics, so immunization rates are too low for herd immunity.  See my previous post for discussion of typhoid.  

 

There is currently no vaccine for Malaria (though they are working on one).   Your husband would have been given pills that are actually treatment for Malaria.   Sort of like how people at high risk of infection due to a dirty wound or medical condition may be given antibiotics as a preventative measure; to treat any infections that may begin right from the start before they can get bad.  I'm sorry it didn't work for your husband - malaria is awful.  The TB vaccine provides some protection, but is also not very reliable.  Wow, both malaria and TB at the same time - that must have been one unlucky trip :(

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by miriam View Post

I did answer it.  Most doctors, like the young intern who misdiagnosed my family members, do not know what measles looks like and do not test for it nor report it.  So, if measles is not tested for nor reported, it does not happen?  I suspect if there is a political reason for reporting disease, it will happen.

 

You seem to want to have it both ways.  Either measles is still common (just not diagnosed) so you don't have to to explain why it decreased, or measles is so rare that younger doctors today don't know how to spot it any more.  

 

So if measles is still a common disease that nearly everyone gets in childhood, then why did doctors and mothers and everyone stop recognizing it?  If not, then what changed to make it so uncommon, if it wasn't vaccination/herd immunity?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by miriam View Post

Pers:

 

The yellow fever vaccine is not recommended.  It is REQUIRED, according to the www.who.int.  

 

I thought we were talking about CDC recommended vaccines for US travelers.  CDC recommends yellow fever for many destinations, but has no requirements either for leaving the US or returning.  Mosquitoes that can transmit yellow fever only exist in very small numbers in very small regions of the US, so even if someone brought back yellow fever with them, the chance of passing it on to anyone else is very low.  Vaccination is for the protection of the individual traveler, not our society or herd immunity at home, in the case of yellow fever from a US perspective.  

 

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the WHO requirements are actually set by the countries that they are for.  As I said in my previous post, some countries require proof of yellow fever vaccination for travelers coming from or passing through areas where there is a risk of yellow fever to help keep yellow fever from being imported.  The WHO also recommends vaccination for several areas where yellow fever is a problem that don't require vaccination for entry, but like I said, those are only recommendations, and I'm pretty sure it is individual countries which set their own entrance requirements.  

post #23 of 77
 

Edited by member234098 - 6/2/12 at 1:06pm
post #24 of 77
Thread Starter 

 

 

Measles is very contagious.  No vax is 100%.  It might be pompous to think we can eradicate a disease such as measles through vaxxing. 

 

In any event, this discussion has taken a turn to debating herd immunity and measles.  That is fine - debate away.

 

For myself, though, when a person says "you should vax for herd immunity" - I think I can very legitimately come back with "philosophy aside, herd immunity may work for certain disease, but is hardly a good argument when applied across the board."

 

 


Edited by purslaine - 7/4/11 at 2:53pm
post #25 of 77

.


Edited by member234098 - 6/2/12 at 1:06pm
post #26 of 77
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by miriam View Post

I had made the point before that the only time I have heard the herd theory of immunity invoked against me is when the disease scare tactics do not change my mind. I only mentioned measles because it is an obvious one for me.  Sorry.  But where is the herd immunity in Long Island, NY for pertussis? Or in Mexico for turista?


Bolding mine.  Yes, I heard you.  smile.gif

 

It is interesting you think measles is an obvious one for you - it is the least obvious for me.  I am way more firm on my stance wrt other diseases (tetanus and herd immunity?  Useless.)

 

I do not mind if people hash out measles and herd immunity - I might learn something - and it is one of the few vaxxes I lack clarity on.

 

 

 

post #27 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by miriam View Post

 But where is the herd immunity in Long Island, NY for pertussis?


Only 40 reported cases in a county with a population density of over 1600 people per square mile... sounds like herd immunity is working quite well, actually.

 

 

post #28 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by miriam View Post

I had made the point before that the only time I have heard the herd theory of immunity invoked against me is when the disease scare tactics do not change my mind. I only mentioned measles because it is an obvious one for me.  Sorry.  But where is the herd immunity in Long Island, NY for pertussis? Or in Mexico for turista?



By turista, I assume you mean traveler's diarrhea.

 

I think you might not be understanding the pathogenesis of E. coli.  You can't get herd immunity for it.  In a nutshell, all people's GI tract is colonized with E. coli.  There are lots of different types of E. coli.  Some are pathogenic, some are not.  Mexican children will get colonized with E. coli and will get diarrhea.  They are repeatedly exposed to it and then are colonized with it and it is no longer pathogenic to them (they have not developed "immunity" to it- there's a big difference).  However, their fecal material contaminates the water supply in Mexico.  When tourists go to Mexico, if they drink the water, they get the infection.

post #29 of 77

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by pers View Post
No,  you never said infants were dead from measles.  That was mamakay's point, not yours.  If measles were still going around within our population, more than the small-ish outbreaks that we hear about in the news, then some infants and kids would still be dying of it, just as France has had six measles deaths this year.  A mild case of measles being missed by doctors (or no seen by doctors) is one thing and is entirely possible, but for your scenario to be true, they'd have to be missing actual measles deaths, which is harder to believe.  

 

 

Exactly. Prevaccine we had 300-500 measles deaths a year. There is NO WAY we have endemic measles now, and there are either

1) no deaths, or

2) ALL the deaths being misdiagnosed.


Edited by mamakay - 7/5/11 at 5:22pm
post #30 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by miriam View Post

I had made the point before that the only time I have heard the herd theory of immunity invoked against me is when the disease scare tactics do not change my mind. I only mentioned measles because it is an obvious one for me.  Sorry.  But where is the herd immunity in Long Island, NY for pertussis? Or in Mexico for turista?



The pertussis vaccine doesn't create herd immunity.

 

http://insidevaccines.com/wordpress/vaccine-efficacy-how-often-do-vaccines-work/dtap/pertussis-vaccine-and-transmission/

 

The measles vaccine does.

 

http://insidevaccines.com/wordpress/2010/02/11/vaccine-myths-round-two/

 

Mystery solved!

post #31 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by WildKingdom View Post





By turista, I assume you mean traveler's diarrhea.

 

I think you might not be understanding the pathogenesis of E. coli.  You can't get herd immunity for it.  In a nutshell, all people's GI tract is colonized with E. coli.  There are lots of different types of E. coli.  Some are pathogenic, some are not.  Mexican children will get colonized with E. coli and will get diarrhea.  They are repeatedly exposed to it and then are colonized with it and it is no longer pathogenic to them (they have not developed "immunity" to it- there's a big difference).  However, their fecal material contaminates the water supply in Mexico.  When tourists go to Mexico, if they drink the water, they get the infection.


I'd say being immune to "pathogenic" disease is still a type of immunity - it's just not a bactericidal immunity.

 

post #32 of 77

 

Quote:
The Amish?  When an Amish person posts on here, I will trust that person's perspective

Totally OT, I know, but I wouldn't tend to trust someone claiming to be Amish on an internet forum. :p

 

Interesting discussion!

post #33 of 77

 

Quote:
 Hepatitis A is not on the regular vaccine schedule in Mexico, though it is available through some private clinics, so immunization rates are too low for herd immunity.

Hep A is usually food born or fecally transmitted.  It is therefore yet another disease for which the concept of herd immunity doesn't apply.

post #34 of 77

If we are going on the basis of herd immunity, and studies have shown immunity from vaccines only lasts about 3 to 10 years (some even shorter), how many adults have been walking around for many years without any immunity to the diseases they were vaccinated against as children?  That basically means the vast majority of the nation has not been immune to these diseases for many, many years.  I don't know many adults who go get their boosters, actually I know of none.  With this in mind, this means far below 80% is protected from these diseases currently.  It seems for the past 30 years or so we have been living without the protection of herd immunity and still, although there are outbreaks here and there, if herd immunity was so important, wouldn't there be more?

 

post #35 of 77

Are we really being protected from so-called vaccine-induced herd immunity regarding measles right now, or are we really being protected moreso from the natural immunity of the baby boomers who acquired measles (and those born shortly thereafter before the MMR vaccine)?  I wonder what will happen when the baby boomers generation disappears and there is close to zero natural immunity around protecting us from the measles.  Since the vaccine doesn't confer lifelong immunity, that will most likely mean boosters throughout a person's entire lifetime to keep the vaccine-induced herd immunity going. I'm curious what others thought are on this and the natural immunity of those who have acquired measles and how much that plays into protecting us right now versus the vaccine.  It seems that generation still makes up a pretty good portion of our population and most people I have talked to in that generation has had either the measles or the mumps.

 


Edited by SilverMoon010 - 7/5/11 at 12:08pm
post #36 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverMoon010 View Post

Are we really being protected from so-called vaccine-induced herd immunity regarding measles right now, or are we really being protected moreso from the natural immunity of the baby boomers who acquired measles (and those born shortly thereafter before the MMR vaccine)?  I wonder what will happen when the baby boomers generation disappears and there is close to zero natural immunity around protecting us from the measles.  Since the vaccine doesn't confer lifelong immunity, that will most likely mean boosters throughout a person's entire lifetime to keep the vaccine-induced herd immunity going. I'm curious what others thought are on this and the natural immunity of those who have acquired measles and how much that plays into protecting us right now versus the vaccine.  It seems that generation still makes up a pretty good portion of our population and most people I have talked to in that generation has had either the measles or the mumps.

 


 

Yeah, a lifetime of MMR boosters is not unlikely:

 

http://www.medbroadcast.com/health_news_details_pf.asp?news_id=15245&news_channel_id=1000

 

 

Quote:

But now that these diseases seldom circulate in countries that immunize against them and immune protection is rarely being naturally refreshed or "boosted" by sporadic exposure, is there a risk that in the future, older adults may find themselves unexpectedly vulnerable to these disease pests from their past?

 

 

 

Quote:
...can science be sure that immunity generated by infection - thought for many diseases to be lifelong - will actually hold true in the vaccine age? "I don't think we know much at all," acknowledges Dr. Samuel Katz, co-inventor of the measles vaccine...

 

 

 

Quote:
The end result of the investigation into the durability of immunity in the vaccine age could be a recognition that adults need booster shots to prevent outbreaks of what we now consider childhood diseases. Osterholm, for one, thinks that's likely.

 

 

 

 

 

post #37 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverMoon010 View Post

If we are going on the basis of herd immunity, and studies have shown immunity from vaccines only lasts about 3 to 10 years (some even shorter),

 



It's not really that simple. You have to look at it one vaccine/disease at a time to say what's likely, and under what conditions. For example, in Japan, studies showed that one shot of CP vax was effective for decades. But, that's not what happened here in the US. Can you guess why?

post #38 of 77

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by mamakay View Post





It's not really that simple. You have to look at it one vaccine/disease at a time to say what's likely, and under what conditions. For example, in Japan, studies showed that one shot of CP vax was effective for decades. But, that's not what happened here in the US. Can you guess why?


idea.gifSo they have a reason to push more CP boosters and Shingles vax? 

 

Joking aside, I'm not sure.  Why?

post #39 of 77


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverMoon010 View Post

 



idea.gifSo they have a reason to push more CP boosters and Shingles vax? 

 

Joking aside, I'm not sure.  Why?



It was only used selectively, so the vaccinated were still exposed to other people with CP regularly, which served as free vax boosters.

post #40 of 77


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverMoon010 View Post

Are we really being protected from so-called vaccine-induced herd immunity regarding measles right now, or are we really being protected moreso from the natural immunity of the baby boomers who acquired measles (and those born shortly thereafter before the MMR vaccine)?  I wonder what will happen when the baby boomers generation disappears and there is close to zero natural immunity around protecting us from the measles.  Since the vaccine doesn't confer lifelong immunity, that will most likely mean boosters throughout a person's entire lifetime to keep the vaccine-induced herd immunity going. I'm curious what others thought are on this and the natural immunity of those who have acquired measles and how much that plays into protecting us right now versus the vaccine.  It seems that generation still makes up a pretty good portion of our population and most people I have talked to in that generation has had either the measles or the mumps.

 


But the parents and grandparents of baby boomers had pretty much all had measles too, and that didn't prevent the baby boomers from passing the disease around in their childhood.  Obviously baby boomers natural immunity would stop some lines of transmission as if they were exposed to measles it would stop there instead of them catching it and passing it to someone else who was vulnerable.  But the younger generations are just too large, there have always been plenty of opportunities to pass measles around among ourselves, without any baby boomer involvement, and yet we and our children don't.   My generation managed to pass chicken pox around just fine despite our parents being immune.  

 

All vaccines give different lengths of immunity, and lumping them together under the leas of three year is ridiculous.  That the mumps portion of the vaccine is less effective than others plus the waning immunity reported in the article Mamakay linked to probably is the explanation as to why mumps is still circulating (if rare) while measles was eliminated and the larger outbreaks that have been happening among university student.  I wouldn't be surprised if they added at least one more booster around university age for that one, and it could be another mmr.  But given how rare measles has been the last couple decades, how small the recent outbreaks have been to how they could have been, and how few vaccinated people have gotten it, measles immunity appears to be holding up pretty well.  

 

And also from Mamakays article, don't forget, tests have shown that people vaccinated with smallpox vaccine many decades ago - half a century for some - still likely retain enough immunity to protect them.  That is really surprising, given that that one was only thought to last a short time. 

 

I do think you are right and we are likely to see boosters added to the adult schedule for some diseases, though I don't think the situation as dire as you paint it.  More boosters would be unfortunate and a pain, but I don't see it as a horrible, horrible thing and it is still better than the actual disease.  

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › herd immunity - science and philosophy of.