Paul G King PhD rebuttal to Dr Gregory Poland's "Answer" “Foregoing immunizations puts child and... - Page 2

[Marnica]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 

Yeah you're right. I misread 

"the study should be published by researchers who have no direct or indirect conflicts of interest from their ties to [] entities, academic, commercial or governmental, who directly or indirectly, actively promote vaccines, the development of vaccines, and/or inoculation programs using vaccines. "

to mean: 

"the study should be published by researchers who [do not] directly or indirectly, actively promote vaccines, the development of vaccines, and/or inoculation programs using vaccines. "

My mistake. 

Still think it exclude any studies by any professional scientists though. If you want you can try to prove me wrong and find me an "academic or governmental entity" which employs scientists researching vaccines and their safety which does not at least indirectly promote vaccines in some way. 

That will be your homework - mine will be to read more of the article. I have some comments on the length at which immunity lasts (from vaccines cf infection) which I just need to search out the references for. But it's Friday night here and I'm going to eat Chinese takeaway and watch TV. Interpret that as a diversion technique if you like. :) 

Not at all. I enjoy chinese and tv too. I have no interest in proving you wrong PSM as that would be a huge waste of my energy. I have 2 happy, health kiddos that are waiting for me on this Friday night so I have way better things to do than try and prove you wrong. I was just trying to see if there was an actual quote from the article that made the statement that you said it did. There wasn't. That's all I wanted to know  Enjoy your Chinese!

[prosciencemum]

Hope you had a nice Friday.

In the absence of counter examples ill continue to assume all professional scientists working in vaccines will be ignored by the clause your person included. Good to know he's open to real fact checks. (That was sarcasm).

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 

Hope you had a nice Friday.

In the absence of counter examples ill continue to assume all professional scientists working in vaccines will be ignored by the clause your person included. Good to know he's open to real fact checks. (That was sarcasm).

Still using excuses, I am sure Dr King would have clarified his conditions if you asked him, he even provided his phone number. 

[prosciencemum]

I read more of it this morning. It's a real interesting summary of the many misconceptions used in the antivax community. A lot of it sounds like science, but just isn't frankly. Still reads like a rant to me. I begin to wonder what personal issues Mr King has against Dr Poland.

Now you're going to jump on me for a lack of sources for that statement - well a lot of it I've already tried to debunk multiple times on this board. Try a search on something.

Also I don't expect many of the people posting will listen to anything I say (and will probably now try to derail the thread into personal attacks on me including insinuations I'm a pharma shill). I've heard it all before, and I will work through the debunking again on this thread for the benefit of linkers and google searchers who are still researching the issues.

Hey it might be "fun" to collect it all together. Must be some reason I keep trying to do this!

Will take a bit of time though, so stay tuned.

[prosciencemum]

OK, so I'll start with the "rebuttal" to the statement that: 

Quote (Dr.Poland from here: http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/sns-201209271830--tms--mayoclnctnmc-a20120927-20120927,0,4773252.story) :

 If these diseases seem uncommon, it simply means that vaccines are doing their job.

Mr. King responds (starting on pg 35 of his document) with just over a page of comments which imply that he thinks all vaccine preventable diseases were in decline from improved sanitation before vaccinations were introduced. This is a pretty common statement to find on anti-vaccination biased websites. 

I don't think anyone denies that improved sanitation contributed to the decline of many diseases. Also it's undeniable that the death rate following infection has declined due to improvements in how diseases could be treated (notably the discovery of antibiotics) which also happened around the same time as many common immunizations (or vaccines, since as I proved above the words are interchangeable in common use) were developed.

There's a great discussion of how this played out with measles death rates and incidence rates I've posted before on these threads. Sadly I failed to save the link offline. I need to stop now for lunch, but I'll come back with more on this (and hopefully find that link). :)

Also I have some lots more proof that sanitation cannot entirely explain the declines in all VPDs which I will share. 

[serenbat]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 
 I need to stop now for lunch, but I'll come back with more on this (and hopefully find that link). :)

Also I have some lots more proof that sanitation cannot entirely explain the declines in all VPDs which I will share. 

oh, we are all waiting for you to copy and paste from Pro-vac sites (they have tons of things you can use) to explain sanitation didn't do it!! and if you stay out to lunch, I don't think anyone will miss you. Having pears or dried shitake mushrooms? 

[chickabiddy]

Originally Posted by serenbat and if you stay out to lunch, I don't think anyone will miss you.

Such elevated discourse.  You should be proud of your eloquence.

[serenbat]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 

Also I have some lots more proof that sanitation cannot entirely explain the declines in all VPDs which I will share. 

 Still waiting to hear how sanitation didn't do it----by the way, don't look to the CDC or WHO - because they both think "sanitation" was (and guess what? STILL IS!!)  super important!

[prosciencemum]

Sanitation is super important. So are vaccines.

I have a job - bit too busy today. I'll get back to it. Don't worry. 

[serenbat]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 

Also I have some lots more proof that sanitation cannot entirely explain the declines in all VPDs which I will share. 

and please post how all of us believe that sanitation did it entirely alone 

[Marnica]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 

Hope you had a nice Friday.

In the absence of counter examples ill continue to assume all professional scientists working in vaccines will be ignored by the clause your person included. Good to know he's open to real fact checks. (That was sarcasm).

well you know what they say about assuming..................

[serenbat]

Originally Posted by Marnica 

well you know what they say about assuming..................

I do!

.......and I am breathless waiting  maybe we will also hear about declines in NonVPD (that also happened)

[prosciencemum]

OK, back to the topic at hand, which is debunking just over a page of the original document (starting on pg 35) in which it is claimed vaccinations have not contributed to the decline of VPDs, but it's all down to sanitation and antibiotics 

Quote:

In every case, improved sanitation, clean drinking water, hygiene, nutrition, living conditions, and, to a lesser extent, the introduction of antimicrobial drugs in the 1940s and 1950s were the chief factors causing this reduction in notifiable disease reports 

(I have no idea what "everyone believes", but Mr. King wrote that). 

I found some nice (well references) visualisations which make this really easy for me. I'll just start with a couple of them, which most directly address the questions about what happens if there is no significant change in sanitation practices. 

[serenbat]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 

OK, back to the topic at hand, which is debunking just over a page of the original document (starting on pg 35) in which it is claimed vaccinations have not contributed to the decline of VPDs, but it's all down to sanitation and antibiotics 

(I have no idea what "everyone believes", but Mr. King wrote that). 

I found some nice (well references) visualisations which make this really easy for me. I'll just start with a couple of them, which most directly address the questions about what happens if there is no significant change in sanitation practices. 

You claim not to be a vaccine shill - guess your just a PROsciencemum PROpagandist for your FB memes!!!!!!!!!!!!! just as I said, copy & paste right from their page!

[Rrrrrachel]

Klassy, serenbat.

[serenbat]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 

OK, back to the topic at hand, which is debunking just over a page of the original document (starting on pg 35) in which it is claimed vaccinations have not contributed to the decline of VPDs, but it's all down to sanitation and antibiotics 

Well it's quite apparent you are far from professional/creditable and care far more about pushing a Facebook meme agenda - unlike addressing the topic in any real way you chose this and other threads to insult most of us with your cartoons.

It must be hard to face that VPD and nonVPD (because both are tied together) are based on sanitation, HYGINE, access to medical care (and this also means the use of antibiotics) and they still are! 

As the CDC says - http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4829a1.htm

The 19th century shift in population from country to city that accompanied industrialization and immigration led to overcrowding in poor housing served by inadequate or nonexistent public water supplies and waste-disposal systems. These conditions resulted in repeated outbreaks of cholera, dysentery, TB, typhoid fever, influenza, yellow fever, and malaria.

By 1900, however, the incidence of many of these diseases had begun to decline because of public health improvements, implementation of which continued into the 20th century.

and we have to look at what is happening today as well...... there are many countries that still have not been able to vaccinate their way out of VPD or nonVPD and that big reason is sanitation! The CDC, WHO and many many large and smaller organizations and charities and various countries are pouring tons of dollars into this because they know this is the key to all of it

http://new.paho.org/hq/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8337&Itemid=1926

http://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/global/programs/

http://www.irinnews.org/Report/84386/GLOBAL-Sanitation-vs-vaccination-in-cholera-control  (and guess what they don't have a horse in the anti-vaccine movement!)

http://www.publichealth.go.ke/sanitation-and-hygiene-promotion

there are many real ways to talk about this and other threads

It's hard to have any critical thinking or a rational discussion when you think that people want to be insulted by your memes! You know who really likes them? Your fellow non informed meme friends who think people who are questioning and delaying/not vaccinating are stupid. One only has to look at your source and see what you think of others here who don't tow your agenda. Spin this anyway you want, you took several memes off a FB page that views anyone who does not vac on schedule as dumb, stupid and a thread to society! That's not a rational person to have a conversation with-IMO

It must be hard to come to terms with this thread and the fact that in general those questioning vaccines is GROWING. Big Pharma is not just vaccines, it's medication in the minds of many, and with that, reactions are happening, recalls are happening and it's all tied together. In the mind of ordinary people, the questioning is growing. Growing mistrust is getting larger (you know it's true and each time there is a survey it shows it too) and I'm sure this must scare you and you fellow memes and make you think that you have to resort to low level cartoons. They look foolish and so do you Karen.

[Rrrrrachel]

Meme or not, those are some sharp graphs.

Improved sanitation obviously has a huge impact on health. However for many specific diseases it doesn't have a large impact. Sanitation doesn't so much for you when a disease is spread through the air, for example.

Certainly it's not all or nothing, though, and living conditions absolutely have an impact on how diseases spread.

I don't want to speak for psm, but personally I definitely don't think people who decline vaccines are stupid. If I did I wouldn't bother to engage at all.

[serenbat]

IMO when you align yourself with a group and promote their propaganda (5+ memes) directly taken from their site, that really shows where your true motives are and I don't view them as wanting/desiring true discussions.

[prosciencemum]

If you prefer the graphs from a different source here there are:

Rotavirus rates: 

https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2012/197/8/changes-hospitalisations-acute-gastroenteritis-australia-after-national-rotavirus

Here's the image from that source. The caption to the below is "Number of hospitalisations (by month of admission) coded as rotavirus gastroenteritus (all ages) and infant rotavirus vaccine coverage (Coverage was calculated using data from the Australian Childhood Immunisation Register by 3-month birth cohorts born between 1 July 2007 and 31 March 2009, and the coverage assessment date was 12 months after the last birth date of each cohort.) Australia July 2001 to June 2010). 

HiB rates in Canada (from the Public Healthy Agency of Canada): 

http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/im/vpd-mev/hib-eng.php

Image from there (with this note "*Case data obtained from the Canadian Notifiable Disease Surveillance System. Population data obtained from Statistics Canada July 1st annual estimates. Data for 2009 to 2011 are preliminary. Only Hib meningitis was reportable from 1979 to 1985. After this, all invasive disease caused by Hib became reportable.

‡PRP-D represent Hib conjugate vaccine containing purified polyribosylribitol phosphate capsular polysaccharide of Hib covalently bound to diphtheria protein."): 

And finally (for now) HiB rates in the USA from the CDC pink book:

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/hib.html 

Can we debate the content now rather than complain about the source? These do all to me show that in these diseases (HiB and rotavirus) it was vaccines which reduce the incidence dramatically. So Dr. King's statement that it's always sanitation, hygiene or anti-biotics I consider to have been proven wrong. 

Although I do agree those things help a lot too. Of course they do. Let's just take the benefit of improvements in those things along with vaccines.

[serenbat]

Did anyone bother to look at all these pretty graphs? 

Found right inside Dr. King's work from his sourced linked at the bottom of his pages?

such as this little bit of info.......

http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/media/Obamsawin_Vaccination_Tables.pdf        You click on the graph (s) you can go directly to the source for many of them, some you can not - 

as in the ones from Canada, etc  http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/publicat/cig-gci/p04-meas-roug-eng.php

there are a lot and it does take time and to some, well worth it