Interesting Article

[treemom2]

Just received my new online e-magazine update and saw an article of vaccinations--ugh. Take a look

http://www.emagazine.com/view/?3792

I apologize if this is the wrong place to post this article. If it needs to go elsewhere please let me know

[Deborah]

“It’s all about trust,” Cooper says. He admits physicians are too hurried, pushing parents out the door before they have a chance to ask questions. “We need to create a climate of candor, transparency and openness,” he says.

When Cooper helps parents decide about vaccinations, he does risk analysis. For example, he says, studies show the MMR vaccine is safe. On the other hand, if you do nothing, your child is 35 times more likely to contract measles. And each year, 300,000 kids die of measles in the U.S.

Amazing level of misinformation in this article. Earlier, the author says that the MMR used to contain mercury. My goodness, whatever happened to fact checking?

[Plummeting]

300,000 kids die of measles in the US? Uh, no. In fact, that was NEVER the case, even before the vaccine was created. Why do they never give us the mortality rate for cases in the US? Oh, wait, because it's not that friggin scary. I forgot. <rolls eyes> And a doctor claiming a vaccine "is safe" is supposed to count as research? They use that claim as the other side of the coin for 300,000 American kids die of measles every year? How about what percentage of American kids have measles complications vs. what percentage of American kids have adverse reactions to the MMR. That might actually mean something. Of course, it would seem that many Americans (including journalists) are uninterested in learning anything.

[gradstudentmommy]

I have no idea where that doctor got the "300,000 kids die from measles in the U.S. every year" statistic but it can't be right. I'm looking right at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Child Health statistics (as cited by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) for 2004 and it says they had "23 cases reported of measles in children under 5). Note: they didn't DIE, they just reported that they had it. This is a huge discrepancy!

And FYI, that same year there were 0 cases of diptheria, 0 cases of polio, 0 cases of rubella, 0 cases of tetanus, 10 cases of Hep B, 44 cases of mumps, 291 cases of hep A, 331 cases of H. Influenzae and 5,795 cases of pertussis in children under age 5.

[mamakay]

MELISSA KNOPPER is a Colorado-based medical science writer.

Whenever you hear "science people" whining about how bad "science journalism" is...THIS is the kind of thing they're talking about.

News articles about science are almost always grossly inaccurate.

[JoJo4780]

And since when has there been a polio outbreak in the US? My dr. who is pro vax even admitted that polio DOESN'T EXIST in the Western Hemisphere and it won't be long until it doesn't exist anywhere. It sucks that someone who obviously doesn't know the facts can write an article like that and then most people will accept it as gospel without checking it out; it just makes those of us who don't accept the vaccines look even worse.:

[EVC]

And since when has there been a polio outbreak in the US? My dr. who is pro vax even admitted that polio DOESN'T EXIST in the Western Hemisphere and it won't be long until it doesn't exist anywhere. It sucks that someone who obviously doesn't know the facts can write an article like that and then most people will accept it as gospel without checking it out; it just makes those of us who don't accept the vaccines look even worse.

Maybe referring to the cases where some Amish tested positive for polio? (Although I believe that was the vaccine strain so they had beeen exposed to someone who had been givent he OPV, not wild polio).

[Science Mom]

First, I would like to point out some erroneous interpretations of that article:

Many parents are still under the impression that the MMR vaccine (measles, mumps, rubella) has mercury in it and causes autism.

The author does not say that thimerosal was in the MMR vaccine, she has conveyed the thoughts of some parents that believe that mercury was in the MMR vaccine.

The current generation of parents making the decisions about vaccines doesn’t remember polio and whooping cough outbreaks.

She is referring to previous generations.

The bit about 300K measles mortalities in the U.S.? As someone that is very pro-science, that is downright embarrassing when I see things like that which leads me to my next point. If you recognise that as the rubbish that it is or at least recognising that that is the measles morbidity in Africa then why are some of you so quick to believe some of the extraordinary claims made by some vaccine critics without any scientific basis?

SM

[mamakay]

Originally Posted by SM

If you recognise that as the rubbish that it is or at least recognising that that is the measles morbidity in Africa then why are some of you so quick to believe some of the extraordinary claims made by some vaccine critics without any scientific basis?

I think if you pay close attention, you'll find that most of the members here are skeptical of the extreme claims coming from both sides.
The weird stuff just leaves more of an impression.

Also, about the article, the wording a train of thought strongly implies that the author believes mercury was at one time in the MMR, and was taken out, and that the MMR/Wakefield thing was a mercury issue:

Many parents are still under the impression that the MMR vaccine (measles, mumps, rubella) has mercury in it and causes autism. Concerns over autism and vaccines peaked with Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s study in the late 1990s. While Wakefield raised important issues, his research wasn’t very credible. “A study of 12 people is not a good study,” Goussetis explains.

Since then, companies have taken the mercury out of vaccines. Over the past eight years, a series of studies have found no proof that mercury causes autism.

[Science Mom]

Originally Posted by mamakay

I think if you pay close attention, you'll find that most of the members here are skeptical of the extreme claims coming from both sides.
The weird stuff just leaves more of an impression.

To a great extent I agree with you although Wakefield, Walker, Yazbak and some rather implausible immunological/physiological concepts come to mind.

Also, about the article, the wording a train of thought strongly implies that the author believes mercury was at one time in the MMR, and was taken out, and that the MMR/Wakefield thing was a mercury issue:

Perhaps we will receive some clarification of the matter; I emailed the editor. Would the original poster be so kind as to post a response if it appears in the publication? Otherwise, I will post an email response if received.

SM

[mamakay]

Perhaps we will receive some clarification of the matter; I emailed the editor.

Ha!
Cool...definitely keep us updated.

ETA:

To a great extent I agree with you although Wakefield, Walker, Yazbak and some rather implausible immunological/physiological concepts come to mind.

Most people here don't even know who Walker and Yazbak even are, I don't think.

The Wakefield thing is, at the least, complicated.

[mamakay]

Totally and completely off topic (hopefully the OP wouldn't mind a derail)
Sort of speaking of Yazbak...
...but does this sound right to you?


http://www.*********/a/yazflu.html

In its July-August (2004) issue, the American College of Physicians’ Observer carried the following statement: “Influenza is the sixth leading cause of death for older Americans and infects 5% to 10% of elderly Americans every year. The flu leads to 300,000 hospitalizations and kills 30,000 to 40,000 Americans every year.”

Now..if we go with the 10% figure...that would be catching the flu once every 10 years, right?
And if the flu vaccine is 30% effective in the years when the strains match...and the strains only match about half the time (and I think even that's being liberal...seems like it's more like one out of three years)...that gives you about a 15% chance of the flu vax working should you catch the flu.

How many years does someone need to get the flu vax before there's a liklihood that it'll be of benefit?

I'm horrible with math, but it seems like if you get the flu vax every year starting at birth and live to be 100, ONE of those years the flu vax might actually do something for you.

Is my math terribly off there?