And THAT is disrespectful, to apply such a pejorative term, rather than discuss the issue.
I'm calling attention to the fact--not "conspiracy theory," but cold, hard FACT-- that the diagnostic criteria for paralytic polio changed, and that therefore there was no accurate disease surveillance, and no accurate way to measure the effect of the polio vaccine.
Let's get something clear here, please: saying, "That is a conspiracy theory" is not a valid argument against anything. For that matter, neither is saying, "that is propaganda." Both statements are pejorative and dismissive; neither statement actually proves or disproves the accuracy of the line in question.
There is a lab test that can distinguish between polio related afp and non polio afp, by the way. I learned that when I was doing some reading as a result of the thread about India.
But, isn't herd immunity itself debated? I recognize that methods of transmission vary, but if the common cold, for example, were on the doorknob, and I touched it, and then shook hands with you, and then you ate something...but then I went and washed my hands...isn't it true that you would quite likely come down with a cold, but I would not?
"If you keep doing the same things you've always done, you'll keep getting the same results you've always gotten."
It depends on what you mean by debated. Herd immunity is not disputed by scientists or doctors, no, although there's some question how high vaccination rates need to be for various things for here immunity to take hold. To disregard herd immunity you basically have to think vaccines have little to know impact on diseases. But some people believe that, I guess.
. Herd immunity is not disputed by scientists or doctors, no, although there's some question how high vaccination rates need to be for various things for here immunity to take hold. To disregard herd immunity you basically have to think vaccines have little to know impact on diseases. But some people believe that, I guess.
The measles thing from 1967 puts the level at 55%. When 55% of the population was immune from measles by previous natural infection, outbreaks would not occur. It's pretty interesting. I wonder if they were just completely wrong about what they were seeing then, or what #s in the 90%+ vax rate we need for measles herd immunity are involved with vax failure or wear off.
You know what... there have been a lot of conspiracy theorist comments in threads lately where all that was linked were primarily studies in medical journals, or medical opinion of phds, mds, etc. so
And on polio getting called other things... yeah, GBS or "french polio"
It's funny how the names or diagnostic criteria for certain illnesses/disorders gets changed when convenient, we see it happening even today.
prior to 1955: Polio, Aseptic Meningitis and Coxsackle virus infections are recorded as "Polio"
after 1955: Polio, Aseptic Meningitis and Coxsackle virus infections are recorded as separate diseases.
Add in some GBS misdiagnosis.
I don't know what you are referring to. I just wanted to point out that FDR was most likely GBS, since that is the most commonly talked about polio case in US history.
and also that the way the "polio" was recorded changed at an interesting time.
Except that the population did not increase 4 fold between 1920 and 1950, it went from 100 million to 150 million.
Yeah, I don't know about that. Post polio. I was just interested in the numbers of incidence instead a chart showing deaths.
I don't know why the increase, for sure, but I think it's not reasonable to think the vaccine had nothing to do with the sudden decrease, and more importantly with the fact that we have no polio in this country today.
The thing is they did a randomized controlled double blind while nine yards study of the polio vaccine and it worked!
I have a hard time with things that deny the whole germ theory of illness and substitute it with toxins and nutrition. I think toxins and nutrition are important, but I just don't think we've had the science that wrong all these years.