or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › Empirical Data Confirm Autism Symptoms Related to Aluminum and Acetaminophen Exposure
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Empirical Data Confirm Autism Symptoms Related to Aluminum and Acetaminophen Exposure - Page 3

post #41 of 83
treehugger.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

. They found a temporal correlation using unreliable data.

Aren't the claims that vaccines are the cause of decline in certain diseases the same -- temporal correlation using unreliable data (I.e., incidents and/ or deaths are down from the 1950s so therefore vaccines were the cause?) TB is on the decline but we don't mandate the BCG vaccine. However, if we did, I wonder if we would look at that same graph that shows a decline since whenever and then conclude it was definitely the vaccine? Pertussis is historically all over the place but we won't admit it doesn't work...we just keep saying "add a booster!"
post #42 of 83
TB is not declining on its own. In the US, it is declining due to screening and treatment of latent TB infections with antibiotics. Unfortunately, among immigrant populations in the US, there is no decline.
post #43 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suvroc View Post

treehugger.gif
Aren't the claims that vaccines are the cause of decline in certain diseases the same -- temporal correlation using unreliable data (I.e., incidents and/ or deaths are down from the 1950s so therefore vaccines were the cause?) TB is on the decline but we don't mandate the BCG vaccine. However, if we did, I wonder if we would look at that same graph that shows a decline since whenever and then conclude it was definitely the vaccine? Pertussis is historically all over the place but we won't admit it doesn't work...we just keep saying "add a booster!"

Uh, no.
post #44 of 83
Can you explain? I have a genuine interest.
post #45 of 83
Diseases dropped off sharply when vaccines were introduced. Including pertussis. Pertussis is up recently for a lot of reasons, but it's not true that "it doesn't work." I lowers your risk of catching pertussis several times over,
post #46 of 83
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Diseases dropped off sharply when vaccines were introduced. Including pertussis. Pertussis is up recently for a lot of reasons, but it's not true that "it doesn't work." I lowers your risk of catching pertussis several times over,

 

Comment removed, as per moderators request.


Edited by Mirzam - 11/27/12 at 8:26pm
post #47 of 83
I know there's no convincing you, but for the purposes of letting others decide for themselves I'll post some links to the contrary.

http://www.vaccines.gov/basics/effectiveness/index.html

http://www.immunizationinfo.org/parents/why-immunize

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/6mishome.htm

Nothing you haven't seen before, I'm sure, you have our own reasons for disagreeing.
post #48 of 83

Suvroc,

 

Welcome to MDC!

 

Have you seen these figures from:

Trends in Infectious Disease Mortality in the United States During the 20th Century
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=768249


 

1000

 

 

Tuberculosis
- 1927 - BCG vax

Diphteria
- 1893 - City and state public health departments began mass production of diphtheria antitoxin
- 1923 - Diphtheria toxoid licenced
- 1947 - Combination diphtheria and tetanus toxoids for pediatric use was first licensed in the U.S.
- 1949 - DTP licensed
- 1953 - Tetanus and diphtheria toxoids (adult formulation)

Pertussis
- 1915 - Pertussis vaccine
- 1947 - Combination diphtheria and tetanus toxoids for pediatric use was first licensed in the U.S.
- 1949 - Diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and pertussis (DTP) was licensed.

Measles
- 1963 - Rubeovax licensed
- 1965 - Live, further attenuated measles virus vaccine (Lirugen by Pitman Moore-Dow based on the Schwarz strain, derived from the Edmonston strain) was licensed in the U.S
- 1966 - CDC measles eradication campaign
- 1968 - Attenuvax
- 1971 - MMR and M-R-Vax licensed
- 1973 - M-M-Vax licensed

Polio
- 1955 - IPV
- 1955 - The Polio Vaccination Assistance Act
- 1961 - Oral polio vaccine types 1 and 2,
- 1962 - Oral polio vaccine type 3 was licensed in the U.S
- 1963 - Trivalent oral polio vaccine was licensed

 

 

The above dates based on:

Historic Dates and Events Related to Vaccines and Immunization

http://www.immunize.org/timeline/

post #49 of 83
You have to be careful about using mortality data solely. Mortality is heavily influenced by things like development of supportive care. Mortality and morbidity does a better job of tracking the progress of actually eliminating the disease.
post #50 of 83

It's amazing how clear it is when you see it on the graph like that. Corporate greed prompted the government to lie about the facts.

 

Here is another source: http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/graphs/

Vaccines did not save us.

 

Oh, and speaking of corporate greed: 

VACCINE EPIDEMIC

How Corporate Greed, Biased Science, and Coercive Government Threaten Our Human Rights, Our Health, and Our Children

 

http://vaccineepidemic.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=6&Itemid=9

(an excellent chapter by chapter summary on that page)
post #51 of 83

I just wanted to chime in that I read, and thoroughly enjoyed Vaccine Epidemic

post #52 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Diseases dropped off sharply when vaccines were introduced. Including pertussis. Pertussis is up recently for a lot of reasons, but it's not true that "it doesn't work." I lowers your risk of catching pertussis several times over,

 

You have to be careful about using morbidity solely. 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

You have to be careful about using mortality data solely. Mortality is heavily influenced by things like development of supportive care. Mortality and morbidity does a better job of tracking the progress of actually eliminating the disease.

 

As you said yourself ... Mortality and morbidity does a better job of tracking the progress of actually eliminating the disease.

post #53 of 83
Right, but if you track "number of disease cases" that generally includes "number of cases that resulted in death."
post #54 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Right, but if you track "number of disease cases" that generally includes "number of cases that resulted in death."

 

No one claims otherwise - as you said yourself, both mortality and morbidity rates matter.

post #55 of 83

Then I guess I'm confused what your point is?

post #56 of 83

nm ...

post #57 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

I know there's no convincing you, but for the purposes of letting others decide for themselves I'll post some links to the contrary.
http://www.vaccines.gov/basics/effectiveness/index.html
http://www.immunizationinfo.org/parents/why-immunize
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/6mishome.htm
Nothing you haven't seen before, I'm sure, you have our own reasons for disagreeing.

Your first link is not particularly helpful for me because the graph, with accompanying text, is incredibly misleading. For example, the text that corresponds states, “…Measles vaccine was licensed in 1962, and as you can see, that’s when the number of cases started to decline.” However, if you look carefully at the graph, you’ll see that the drop wasn’t until 1967. According to the CDC, there were 204,136 cases in 1966 and 62,705 in 1967 so why is this government site misrepresenting the data? Also, if you look at the graph, you’ll see in 1950 that the number of cases was lower than in 1962, 1963, and 1964. I’ve been looking for data before 1950 but haven’t found anything. If anyone has links, they would be much appreciated.

At the same link, they reference three other graphs
Quote:
but do not show them. Do you know where to find them? I’ve looked. Maybe I’m supposed to take their word for it since they were so honest in their previous statement? I was able to find a graph for polio on the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia History of Vaccines website but again it’s set up in a way to be misleading. It starts with the highest recorded year of polio (1952 at over 57,000) but fails to show the readily available data for 1950 and 1951 which were in the 30,000/year range. I haven’t seen the Hib graph but from what I can find from the CDC they didn’t track Haemophilus until 1991, and it looks like they track all serotypes. In 1991, 2,764 cases were reported and then in 2011 it was up to 3,184, with the lowest reported year (1997) of 1,162. I can’t find the data on pneumococcal.

If the drop in disease were due to hygiene and sanitation, you would expect all diseases to start going away at about the same time. But if you were to look at the graph for polio, for example, you would see the number of cases start to drop around 1955 – the year the first polio vaccine was licensed. If you look at the graph for Hib, the number drops around 1990, for pneumococcal disease around 2000 — corresponding to the introduction of vaccines for those diseases.”

I’ve only looked at the first link which didn’t really help me understand why with vaccines correlation equals causation. I will look at the other links and respond separately. Again, I genuinely want to understand the risks vs. benefits of all of the vaccines so if you (or anyone) have those numbers or graphs, it will help me tremendously.
post #58 of 83

Data on disease incidence isn't enough on it's own.  Experimental data and clinical trials are part of the picture, too, and necessary for establishing causation.

 

In the first graph, I think you're getting to caught up in the details instead of the overall trend.  Some variation from year to year doesn't mean the overall trend isn't decreasing.  But, like i said, that's why it's there for people to see for themselves.

post #59 of 83

Here's another well referenced site.

 

http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/86/2/07-040089/en/

post #60 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Data on disease incidence isn't enough on it's own.  Experimental data and clinical trials are part of the picture, too, and necessary for establishing causation.

In the first graph, I think you're getting to caught up in the details instead of the overall trend.  Some variation from year to year doesn't mean the overall trend isn't decreasing.  But, like i said, that's why it's there for people to see for themselves.

I understand what you're saying about an overall trend but the original question I had was why "correlation equals causation." For example, TB is on the decline in the U.S. and I'm sure if I poked around I could find other diseases that have declined or disappeared over time.

I've been doing my best to look at experimental data, also. For example, when the CDC reported the switch to the acellular pertussis vaccine, they reference studies that indicate increased efficacy of the acellular version compared to the older whole cell vaccine but now I'm reading that the outbreaks may be due to the decreased efficacy of the newer version. Which is it? If you'd like to point me to studies or clinical trials that you think are relevant, I will look at them. I want to understand and it's nice to have both sides.

In the interim, here is only the first bullet from the second link you posted because that's all I've had time to look at.

“Before 1985, Haemophilus Influenzae type b (Hib) caused serious infections in 20,000 children each year, including meningitis (12,000 cases) and pneumonia (7,500 cases). In 2002, there were 34 cases of Hib disease.”

I followed the reference to the CDC website and found an incredible amount of information abount Hib (so thank you). I learned that that first bullet on the second link you sent me is misleading. Here are some of the things I learned:

Haemophilus influenza did not become nationally reportable until 1991 so the number above (20,000/yr) is an estimate only and is an estimate of ALL H. influenza – not just type b which is what the vaccine targets. As stated in my previous post, the numbers for all types once they began reporting in 1991 ranges between 1,000-3,000 with last year being the highest yet at 3,184. This makes me wonder why we aren’t hearing all over the news about the H. influenza outbreak of 2011.

They say that between 1996-2000, they could identify 76% of the serotypes that occurred but then in 2009, the wording is different so it’s not clear but it looks like there are now higher number of serotypes that are unknown, which would lead me to believe they are mutating? Here is the wording: “35 cases of invasive disease due to Hib were reported…In addition, another 178 cases caused by unknown H. influenza serotypes.

They also note that between 1996-2000, “32% of children aged 6-59 months with confirmed type b disease had received three of more doses of Hib vaccine, including 22 who had received a booster dose 14 or more days before onset of their illness. The cause of Hib failure in these children is unknown.” On the same CDC page, it says, “Invasive Hib in a completely vaccinated infant is uncommon.” So, 32% is uncommon?

Other quotes about H. influenza that I found interesting: “The primary mode of Hib transmission is presumably by respiratory droplet spread, although firm evidence for this mechanism is lacking.” And “The contagious potential of invasive Hib disease is considered to be limited.”

“Efficacy studies have not been performed in populations with increased risk of invasive disease.” This is absurd to me because shouldn’t the vaccines be targeting high-risk populations?

Another note, the original vaccine “…was not effective in children younger than 18 months of age. Estimates of efficacy in older children varied widely, from 88% to -69% (a negative efficacy implies greater disease risk for vaccinees than nonvaccinees). HbPV was used until 1988…” In fact, it looks like there were a few vaccines with low efficacy. Note --- according to what I've read, this would have only passed FDA approval with rigorous clinical trials and studies. How then is there such a discrepancy in effectiveness?

I only had time to explore the first bullet of the second link so this will obviously keep me busy for a while. I’m going to peek at the third link you sent.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations Debate
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › Empirical Data Confirm Autism Symptoms Related to Aluminum and Acetaminophen Exposure