Originally Posted by applejuice
+/- 33-1/3% of the afflicted are fully immunized against the disease,
+/- 33-1/3% of the afflicted are partially immunized against the disease,
+/- 33-1/3% of the afflicted are not immunized against the disease at all.
This seems to imply that there is something else that determines who will develop disease and who does not, besides vaccination condition.
but this statistic is extremely misleading b/c it doesn't tell you the total number of people who were vaccinated who didn't get the disease.
suppose you have a population of 10,000. suppose 99.9% of them are vaccinated. that means 10 people are not vaccinated. now suppose 20 people get the measels, and 10 of them are the people who are unvaccinated, and 10 of them are vaccinated. from this i could report, "in the latest measels outbreak, 50% of people who got the disease were vaccinated."
so, you see why the above statistic actually says nothing about the effectiveness of vaccines?
on a different note, i was thinking some more about polio. in the developed world, improved hygeine conditions did a lot to help eradicate polio. many anti-vax folks like to use this fact to argue that the vax was unnecessary, and we should switch our focus to improving hygeine conditions around the world. ideally, that would be wonderful. but in the "third world" the fact that polio has nearly been eradicated is almost entirely due to the vaccine. hygeine conditions remain deplorable.
sigh. it's a complicated issue. i'm so lucky that my kids are strong and healthy, and have clean water and sanitation, so i don't have to vax them to protect them. i have a choice. it isn't clear to me that people in undeveloped countries have this choice.