or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › Fun thread for a change! Anyone up for a meme-off?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Fun thread for a change! Anyone up for a meme-off? - Page 3

post #41 of 79

Here are her words, from 

 

http://tenpennyimc.com/2011/12/24/why-do-doctors-push-vaccines/

 

"Thank you so much for your comment and I agree with you completely. As a child, I wasn’t vaccinated. I grew up in a chiropractic family and vaccines were not even considered. I had all the “normal” childhood diseases too, missed a lot of the 3rd grade!"

 

A lot of the 3rd grade is not *all* of the first grade.  I will take her written words on a non-vax friendly site over the quick bit on the video.  Either way, she does not seem overly upset by it, nor the worse for wear (indeed, she is a D.O, so her missed school did not affect her academcially,  and says she is rarely sick as an adult)

post #42 of 79
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

I added an edit to the post you quoted.  We must have cross posted.  

 

Yeah we must have. But come on, even you have to admit that was ironic. She stated that missed school means you are less healthy (and I am sure she was not just talking about VPDs when she said that because vaccinated children are not likely going to miss much school from diseases they are vaccinated against) and then had to acknowledge that she nearly missed the entire third grade from illness!  But when it's *her* that misses school it's somehow all of a sudden a good thing. It doesn't mean she's unhealthier.... of course not! *rolls eyes* 

post #43 of 79
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

Here are her words, from 

 

http://tenpennyimc.com/2011/12/24/why-do-doctors-push-vaccines/

 

"Thank you so much for your comment and I agree with you completely. As a child, I wasn’t vaccinated. I grew up in a chiropractic family and vaccines were not even considered. I had all the “normal” childhood diseases too, missed a lot of the 3rd grade!"

 

A lot of the 3rd grade is not *all* of the first grade.  I will take her written words on a non-vax friendly site over the quick bit on the video.  Either way, she does not seem overly upset by it, nor the worse for wear (indeed, she is a D.O, so her missed school did not affect her academcially,  and says she is rarely sick as

an adult)

 

As I stated, there is a video with her entire interview posted in the comments. It was not a sound bite. She said she got most of the childhood diseases  (listed them out) and then said she nearly missed the entire third grade due to illness.  

 

It was not a good interview for her. 

post #44 of 79
.Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

Yeah we must have. But come on, even you have to admit that was ironic. 

Yeah, it was ironic.

 

It also proves nothing -as she is one person.

 

It might be interesting to see who missed more school for illness- vaxxed or non-vaxxed. The study could not be done in the USA, though, as the states have Draconian laws on attendance.

 

Pick somewhere with a lot of vaccines, but where truancy and "excused absences" are not a huge issue (i.e kids are allowed to be sick and miss school)  and compare absenteesim in vaxxed versus unvaxxed.  It still might get tricky, though, if one group is more likely to let their kids out of school even when they are not ill. 

 

More useful, would be to compare doctor and hospital visits in vaxxed veruss unvaxxed - oh, wait, they have:

 

"Results Of 323 247 children born between 2004 and 2008…. In a matched cohort analysis, undervaccinated children had lower outpatient visit rates compared with children who were age-appropriately vaccinated ... In contrast, undervaccinated children had increased inpatient admission rates compared with age-appropriately vaccinated children ... In a second matched cohort analysis, children who were undervaccinated because of parental choice had lower rates of outpatient visits and emergency department encounters than age-appropriately vaccinated children."

 

edited to keep it under 100 words

Italics mine

 

http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleID=1558057#qundefined

post #45 of 79
A game involves taking turns . . .
post #46 of 79
Thread Starter 
Quote:
 

More useful, would be to compare doctor and hospital visits in vaxxed veruss unvaxxed - oh, wait, they have:

 

"Results Of 323 247 children born between 2004 and 2008…. In a matched cohort analysis, undervaccinated children had lower outpatient visit rates compared with children who were age-appropriately vaccinated ... In contrast, undervaccinated children had increased inpatient admission rates compared with age-appropriately vaccinated children ... In a second matched cohort analysis, children who were undervaccinated because of parental choice had lower rates of outpatient visits and emergency department encounters than age-appropriately vaccinated children."

 

edited to keep it under 100 words

Italics mine

 

http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleID=1558057#qundefined

 

Kathy, this is the problem with just reading the abstracts or the interpretation from anti vax sites. If you put that study in google you'll find it actually shows the opposite of what you were intending it to show.  This is from the co author of the study "Children who had delayed vaccinations had fewer outpatient clinic visits but 20 to 30 percent more hospitalizations than did kids who were vaccinated on time, Glanz says. Kids whose parents delayed their vaccination intentionally were less likely to make outpatient visits to clinics or go to an emergency department than those vaccinated on time. "  https://www.sciencenews.org/article/half-us-babies-may-miss-time-vaccinations

 

Outpatient included well baby check ups so it makes sense that kids that got all their vaccines on time had more outpatient visits. More vaccines=more visits to the doctor. 

 

"For all undervaccinated children, the general pattern was a slightly reduced use of outpatient services, whether for well-child or sick visits. Children in the 10th decile (those with the highest average number of days undervaccinated) had an incident rate ratio for outpatient visits of 0.63, meaning that they were one third less likely to have any outpatient visit compared with the control children. Unvaccinated children in all deciles generally had slightly increased incidence rate ratios for visiting the emergency department, but none of these incident rate ratios was higher than 1.05. Hospitalization was more common among unvaccinated children, and the hospitalization incidence rate ratio did not seem to vary by the decile of undervaccination. The incidence rate ratio for inpatient hospitalization in unvaccinated children was approximately 1.2, and the association was significant for all but 1 of the 10 deciles." 

post #47 of 79
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinahx View Post

A game involves taking turns . . .

 

Ok.. so post a meme!  

post #48 of 79
I don't really have image capacity like that. Also, maybe on a new thread, that didn't already feel very one sided. <3
post #49 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

Kathy, this is the problem with just reading the abstracts or the interpretation from anti vax sites.

Did I use a non-vax site or mention a non-vax site interpretation?  No, I did not. Not sure what you are on about there. 

 

People should post to the study, as I did, and not use AoA or Skeptical raptor if they can help it.  

 

I disagree with your interpretation on the study. Not surprising.  You cherry picked one quote, I cherry picked another…so, yes people should read the study to see what they get from it.  I would urge people to look at the the unvaxxed by parental choice versus undervaxxed because their parents were late, lacked resources to get them vaccines in a timely manner - as they are two very different demographics.  

post #50 of 79

Got the full study - this is what they said on those undervaccinated by choice/parental refusal:

 

"Children who were undervaccinated because of paren- tal choice had significantly lower utilization rates of the ED and outpatient settings—both overall and for spe- cific acute illnesses—than children who were vacci- nated on time (Table 5). The IRRs for these associa- tions ranged from 0.88 to 0.94 and were statistically significant (P 􏰀 .001). The IRR for inpatient admission rates was not statistically significant (IRR = 0.98; P = .50)."

 

http://www.commed.vcu.edu/IntroPH/Communicable_Disease/2013/undervaccn_USA.pdf

 

ED - emergency department

 

 

post #51 of 79
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

Did I use a non-vax site or mention a non-vax site interpretation?  No, I did not. Not sure what you are on about there. 

 

People should post to the study, as I did, and not use AoA or Skeptical raptor if they can help it.  

 

I disagree with your interpretation on the study. Not surprising.  You cherry picked one quote, I cherry picked another…so, yes people should read the study to see what they get from it.  I would urge people to look at the the unvaxxed by parental choice versus undervaxxed because their parents were late, lacked resources to get them vaccines in a timely manner - as they are two very different demographics.  

 

Call my crazy, but I think that the co author of the study who also happens to be an epidemiologist at the Institute for Health Research probably has a better understanding of the study than anyone here does.  

 

" I would urge people to look at the the unvaxxed by parental choice versus undervaxxed because their parents were late, lacked resources to get them vaccines in a timely manner - as they are two very different demographics." 

 

Glanz also addressed this. Parents who purposefully choose not to vaccinate are probably less likely to seek standard medical care. Which makes sense doesn't it?  Also, the fact that children who were undervaccinated due to parental choice vs ones who were undervaccinated due to lack of resources were also less likely to go to the hospital/use out patient services actually demonstrates that the lack of vaccines themselves have nothing to do with it.  It has to do with other socioeconomic/cultural factors.  Which is why the intention of the study wasn't to determine which children were healthier between fully vaccinated and partially vaccinated kids. The only thing they controlled for was age and sex.  Clearly you can't determine that with such limitations. 

post #52 of 79
Dinahx- I understand your sentiment, it is how I feel whenever I come here to learn more (which is only partly the point of this thread, I thinki the goal was to lighten things up a bit?)

So here's one to make you feel better, there were a bunch of other ones that were funnier but since I disagree it felt dishonest to post it, at least this one only bothers me in a public health way but I believe in autonomy and shared decision making etc so I don't totally object-

post #53 of 79
Use of the ED is associated with a lot of things, but only minimally so with health status, to be honest.
post #54 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratchet View Post

Kathymuggles- Off topic- and maybe everyone already knows this- but the delay with Tylenol warning labels and dosing changes etc was similarly shockingly slow, making me think it is either universal, or only that slow for really dangerous meds? Anyways, I love This American Life and they did a great piece on it

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/505/use-only-as-directed
 

 It took me a bit of time to get around to reading the link (and the links contained within the links) but it covered some info I did not know.  Very good read - thanks.

post #55 of 79
Thread Starter 

Just saw this and couldn't resist. 

 

post #56 of 79

 

 

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 95

post #57 of 79

 not a meme, but a blog post:

 

http://blog.cholesterol-and-health.com/2011/01/lack-of-correlation-does-not-show-lack.html

 

Correlation is not causation…but it is not necessarily nothing, either.  

 

"... In academia's greatest charade, every Stats 101 class or Epidemiology 101 class or heck even a Psych 101 class will emphatically declare that correlation does not imply causation.  Then most people graduate and spend their entire lives reading causation into correlations.  Especially if they become epidemiologists.

 
Observational studies are entirely legitimate forms of evidence, and correlations are entirely useful statistics.  No one can question this.  However, these correlations simply show arelationship and tell us nothing about the explanation of that relationship.  
 
This doesn't change just because an explanation is biologically plausible.  Nothing ever changes it.  A correlation raises the possibility of a cause-and-effect relationship, but no more or less than it raises the possibility of a non-causal relationship.  "
post #58 of 79
Thread Starter 


Edited by teacozy - 10/29/13 at 11:27am
post #59 of 79

 

A significant correlation

post #60 of 79

 

Does this prove small class size causes better reading scores?  No,it does not.

 

Does it show that perhaps we should look into the possible relationship between class size and mean reading score?  Yes it does.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations Debate
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › Fun thread for a change! Anyone up for a meme-off?