Pro-Vaxxers, Talk to Me About Conflicts of Interest - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 86 Old 10-28-2013, 09:03 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,047
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 164 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pattimomma View Post
 

 

 

kathy - Certain diseases are essentially eradicated in the US but we live in a global society so parents should be aware of the risks when traveling abroad or if you live in a community with a large migrant population.

 

Sorry to be so off topic - COI

Sure.  Of course parents should know the prevalence rate of  diseases in the area they live in or intend to visit.  They should  know other demographics of who the disease hits  (Hep B being a case in point) They should also know how effective the vaccine is.  

 

But yes - back to COI

BeckyBird likes this.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is online now  
#62 of 86 Old 10-28-2013, 10:29 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,133
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

 

That argument always baffles me. So what exactly is the ideal plan? Should doctors say "look, there have only been 30 cases of measles so far in the US this year. It's very rare, and you are unlikely to get measles, so I don't recommend the vaccine"  Then what? In 3 years you will have  12 million US and children that have no immunity to measles and an epidemic will eventually break out, because of how contagious measles is. You will have thousands of children that are dead and then vaccines will be necessary again. Then let's say 5 years later, measles is once again a very rare disease.  So the doctors once again say that vaccines are unnecessary and another outbreak will occur in 3 years killing another several thousand children.   So what exactly has been accomplished? Other than thousands of children dying from a preventable disease? This cycle of whack a mole is illogical. It has been shown time and time again in other countries that had a drop in vaccination rates. Diseases would start disappearing and people would stop vaccinating and the diseases would return a few years later when immunity got low enough. Then mandatory vaccinations would start up again.  This is a vicious cycle that kills children.

 

If you're going to raise the excellent question of "what exactly is the ideal plan," we need to consider many facts and many questions.

 

Fact 1:  Vaccination, whether mandatory or not, is resulting in SOME children dying, and SOME children having a lifetime of serious problems.  In other words, vaccination is a vicious cycle that kills children.

 

Fact 2:  For the vast majority of children, measles is not deadly disease.

 

Fact 3: There are methods other than vaccination to reduce the chance of severe complication from measles (pre-screening and treating for vitamin A deficiency, for example).

 

Fact 4/Questions 1 and 2:  Since pneumonia is one of the more severe possible complications for measles, and since children with asthma are more prone to develop pneumonia, that needs to be looked into as well.  Vaccination can trigger asthma in people who never had asthma before.  To what extent are OTHER vaccines predisposing children to asthma, and to what extent is the entire vaccine schedule making children vulnerable to pneumonia?

 

Fact 5:  We need to stop fear-mongering where measles is concerned.  It was not considered a killer disease in the 1950's. There is no reason for it to be considered so now.  If anything, we should be able to manage both measles and most resulting complications better today.  We should also be able to pre-screen children for likelihood of complications from both measles and vaccines, and decide accordingly.

 

Fact 5:  We also need to stop looking at the situation as though the only two possible choices are 

"Vaccines!!" or "Death from Vaccine-Preventable Diseases!!"  This is not a realistic portrayal of the situation.

 

It does need to be admitted that the cost of the current vaccination program, in terms of severe adverse reactions to vaccines, is simply too high, even assuming that the vaccines are as effective as they are marketed to be (which they aren't, we all know that).

 

So either the severe adverse effects need to be admitted and completely addressed (publicized, admitted, compensated, and most importantly, prevented in the future), or the scientists need to look at other ways of preventing or ameliorating most of the vaccine-available diseases, saving vaccines for only the most deadly diseases,  tweaking the vaccine schedule to minimize the risk of severe adverse reaction, and pre-screening for likelihood of severe adverse reaction (family history of autoimmune disease, seizure disorders, neurological disorders, learning disabilities, allergies, etc.).

BeckyBird likes this.
Taximom5 is online now  
#63 of 86 Old 10-28-2013, 10:31 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,133
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)

Kudos to kathymuggle for the term, "vaccine-available disease!"  That is SO much more realistic than, "vaccine-preventable disease!"

Taximom5 is online now  
#64 of 86 Old 10-28-2013, 10:41 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,047
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 164 Post(s)

Thanks.  I am sure I stole it off someone in the past - but I cannot remember who.


There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is online now  
#65 of 86 Old 10-28-2013, 10:52 AM
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,345
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

 

"For the male partner in the equation, the consideration of risks and benefits is complicated by the fact that men don’t get pregnant. As such, any potential harms that come from a male contraceptive would count against the ethical use of that contraceptive, since there is no impact on a man’s health….In short, unless the male contraceptive provides some clear health benefit to the male taking it, researchers will judge that the possible harms outweigh the possible benefits."

But a male contraceptive provides a direct benefit to the man even if it is not specifically to his physical health--keeping his partner from getting pregnant when he doesn't want that outcome improves his quality of life by enabling him to be sexually active without worrying about fatherhood. Footloose guys can avoid worrying about being tied down when they're not ready; guys in committed relationships can give their partner a health benefit (if she had health problems with contraceptives, now she doesn't need to take them, and also reducing the risk of pregnancy is a benefit to her health since pregnancy is never good for somebody's health) and probably give her a quality-of-life benefit (assuming she doesn't want to be pregnant either), which is good for their relationship overall and thus again improves his quality of life. 

 

As for rubella, vaccinating people other than young women reduces the rubella circulating in the community and decreases the risk that someone will contract rubella, either because she missed getting the vaccine or because she's in that small percentage for whom the vaccine didn't work. The benefit to an individual may not be so direct as in the above example, but children's mothers not having to worry about having a kid with rubella-related birth defects is a boost for the family unit. And when those children grow up and start having families, not having to worry about that issue in their own child is a positive as well. 

 

So the ethical argument isn't as clear as you make it out to be. 

teacozy likes this.
erigeron is offline  
#66 of 86 Old 10-28-2013, 11:10 AM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,441
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 311 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 

 

If you're going to raise the excellent question of "what exactly is the ideal plan," we need to consider many facts and many questions.

 

Fact 1:  Vaccination, whether mandatory or not, is resulting in SOME children dying, and SOME children having a lifetime of serious problems.  In other words, vaccination is a vicious cycle that kills children. 

 

Dying from a vaccine is EXTREMELY rare. A lot of vaccines have never had a reported death. A lot more children would die if vaccines ceased to exist. Vaccines have saved millions of lives. No one is going to buy the argument that vaccines kill more people than they save. 

 

Fact 2:  For the vast majority of children, measles is not deadly disease.

 

Agreed. But a child is still thousands of times more likely to die from measles than the MMR.  Even if you took a *very* conservative estimate that 1 in 3,000 died from measles and you looked at just three years of children not being vaccinated in the US that would be 12 million children without a measles immunity in an outbreak.  That would mean 4,000 dead children from one outbreak of one disease in one country.  If you include SSPE, which occurs in 1 in 10,000 cases of measles, that's an additional 1,200 people that will die from measles from one outbreak. Clearly the benefits outweigh the risks. 

 

Fact 3: There are methods other than vaccination to reduce the chance of severe complication from measles (pre-screening and treating for vitamin A deficiency, for example).

 

That may be helpful in developing countries, but not very helpful in the US. " Approximately 250,000-500,000 children in developing countries become blind each year owing to vitamin A deficiency, with the highest prevalence in Southeast Asia and Africa. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), vitamin A deficiency is under control in the United States, but in developing countries vitamin A deficiency is a significant " http://www.news-medical.net/health/Vitamin-A-Deficiency.aspx

 

Fact 4/Questions 1 and 2:  Since pneumonia is one of the more severe possible complications for measles, and since children with asthma are more prone to develop pneumonia, that needs to be looked into as well.  Vaccination can trigger asthma in people who never had asthma before.  To what extent are OTHER vaccines predisposing children to asthma, and to what extent is the entire vaccine schedule making children vulnerable to pneumonia?

 

Vaccines don't cause asthma. 

 

Fact 5:  We need to stop fear-mongering where measles is concerned.  It was not considered a killer disease in the 1950's. There is no reason for it to be considered so now.  If anything, we should be able to manage both measles and most resulting complications better today.  We should also be able to pre-screen children for likelihood of complications from both measles and vaccines, and decide accordingly.

 

See my numbers above. 

 

Fact 5:  We also need to stop looking at the situation as though the only two possible choices are 

"Vaccines!!" or "Death from Vaccine-Preventable Diseases!!"  This is not a realistic portrayal of the situation. 

 

It's a balance of risk. You aren't guaranteed to die if you don't vaccinate, obviously. But the chance is much much higher that you will die from a VPD than from a vaccine. 

 

 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#67 of 86 Old 10-28-2013, 11:29 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,047
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 164 Post(s)

I find it somewhat mind boggling that people can admit COI's exist but still insist it is not an issue in vaccines. 

Turquesa likes this.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is online now  
#68 of 86 Old 10-28-2013, 11:42 AM
 
chickabiddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,487
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)

COIs exist on both sides.  As always, it comes down to what you find more believable.  The sheer weight of the evidence, both in quantity and quality, convinces me that vaccines are much safer than diseases even if a full 25% is discounted.

pattimomma likes this.

Carseat-checking (CPST) and WAH mama to a twelve-year-old girl.
chickabiddy is online now  
#69 of 86 Old 10-28-2013, 12:12 PM
 
pattimomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The Dirty South
Posts: 1,176
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

I find it somewhat mind boggling that people can admit COI's exist but still insist it is not an issue in vaccines. 


Here is the real conundrum - Correlation does not equal causation. A great example is a study from a coal mining rural town. There was a significant difference (increase) in childhood tooth decay in Buchanan County VA compared with the rest of the state. At first it was hypothesized that it was due to mining activity but eventually it was linked to and proven that it was a result of the high consumption of Mountain Dew by children.  Another amazing study found that poverty and exposure to violence, not in utero crack exposure (as hypothesized), was the cause of decreased IQ scores and lower academic achievement in a sample of low-socioeconomic children that were followed from birth to age 30 yrs.

 

While I acknowledge COI do exist and may influence some portion of the data regarding vaccine research, I also think they are minimal. Science does not understand all the mechanisms involved so at this point it is impossible to state as a fact all the risks involved. That is why under "DTap Deaths" it doesn't say none, it says "none proven". Without understanding the mechanisms with which something occurs, as scientists, we cannot say that one thing caused another just because they occur at the same time. Some COI are very real but some issues that may appear as COI are really just scientists being unable to say with scientific integrity that X was caused by Y because there are too many variables.

 

Vaccines usually prevent the diseases that they were designed to prevent. We understand the mechanisms and in this case statistics were correct, more vaccines = less of the disease they were designed to prevent. All anyone can do is look at the available data and decide if it is adequate for them to make a decision.

 

I will go on record as pro vax. I delay / selective vax in my family. My husband works in medicine with a high risk population so we don't only vaccinate our children, we vaccinate ourselves and stay current on all boosters for the biological agents he is likely to come in contact with and possibly bring home.

 

Tea - IMO If a doc is going to say there were only 30 cases of measles in the US this year then he/she should also say, before the vaccine there were XXX number of cases per year. It would be misleading to not give the whole story.

chickabiddy likes this.

~Patti~ rainbow1284.gifMomma to three girls and three boys chicken3.gif, First mother to one girl triadadopt.jpg

Certified, card carrying member of the IEP Binder Clubkid.gif  

pattimomma is offline  
#70 of 86 Old 10-28-2013, 12:42 PM - Thread Starter
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,060
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

A couple relevant memes. This point has been brought up multiple times and I don't think I've really seen it addressed. If it has been, I missed it.  Pharma would make *more* money if they stopped producing vaccines. Treating the complications from diseases would give them many many many many times more profit..  This is not to say that making vaccines produce NO profit, that's clearly not true. It's just not much profit.  This is a big part of why the vaccine court was introduced. A few lawsuits made most companies just stop producing vaccines. It just wasn't worth it for them.  I just don't see a lot of evidence or validity in the idea that pharma companies are paying millions and millions of dollars controlling the media, paying of researchers, fabricating tons of data and research, infiltrating all reputable medical journals and peer reviewers for a product that just isn't that profitable for them.

 

 

Actually, in the context of these thread, these memes are not at all relevant. The first meme deals with the accusation that physicians are making money each time they administer a vaccine in their practice.  That is not the subject of this thread and not even close to the point that I’m making. 

 

There are plenty of COIs involving physicians, but I’m much more concerned about the ones who earn things like speaking and consulting fees for drug companies.  Slightly off-topic, but my U.S. cohorts can look up their doctors here: http://projects.propublica.org/docdollars/  This is a handy site, anyway, for those who are curious about COIs with universities and study authors who are also MDs.

 

As for the second meme, vaccine manufacturers rarely make money from ER visits or hospitalization.  They may make a scant amount from vaccines administered while in the hospital, but it’s nothing compared to what they can make from mandates on an entire country’s population.  Is there proof that drug companies make more by spot-treating rare, vaccine-targeted conditions than they do on mass vaccination of entire populations?  I posted a CNN article elsewhere that they don’t, (:duh it got buried somewhere in these recent threads), but I’d love to see some raw figures from Teacozy or anyone else making this assertion. 

 

By the way, vaccines don’t always cost $20.  Have you looked up the price of Guardasil?  :wink

 

Overall, I agree with Kathymuggle in that I have a hard time shrugging my shoulders and accepting the attitude, “Well, everything has a COI, and there’s nothing we can do about it.  So let’s all go ahead and get our recommended and mandated vaccines.”  Not so fast. As Kathy established in another thread, most studies linked to COIs report positive results for a product.  Much of the pro-compliance sentiment is necessarily based on a statement of faith, faith based on reading abstracts, (only of a fraction of full studies are freely available to the public), and trusting them to be free from spin, COIs, and data manipulation.  When unelected officials are mandating liability-free pharmacologic products on my children, (and in some cases, on me), it is not unreasonable to demand independent research and democratic, COI-free policy-making.     

 

On a final off-topic note, it really is time to let go of these admonitions for “attacks” and “picking fights.” Months ago, the mods made it clear that participants should come here wearing their big girl panties.  This is a forum entitled Vaccination Debate, so I started a debate.  If you feel that there are *personal* attacks, just click on the little flag button to notify a mod.  Carry on, debaters.    

Dot-to-Dot likes this.

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is online now  
#71 of 86 Old 10-28-2013, 01:26 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,133
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 

 

If you're going to raise the excellent question of "what exactly is the ideal plan," we need to consider many facts and many questions.

 

Fact 1:  Vaccination, whether mandatory or not, is resulting in SOME children dying, and SOME children having a lifetime of serious problems.  In other words, vaccination is a vicious cycle that kills children. 

 

Dying from a vaccine is EXTREMELY rare. A lot of vaccines have never had a reported death. A lot more children would die if vaccines ceased to exist. Vaccines have saved millions of lives. No one is going to buy the argument that vaccines kill more people than they save. 

 

Dying from measles is also EXTREMELY RARE. It doesn't matter if 1 or 10 or 100 more people die from measles than from vaccines; an invasive procedure that can also cause death is unethical if the true risks of the invasive procedure are not admitted, and if the true risks of the disease itself are exaggerated.

 

Fact 2:  For the vast majority of children, measles is not deadly disease.

 

Agreed. But a child is still thousands of times more likely to die from measles than the MMR.  Even if you took a *very* conservative estimate that 1 in 3,000 died from measles and you looked at just three years of children not being vaccinated in the US that would be 12 million children without a measles immunity in an outbreak.  That would mean 4,000 dead children from one outbreak of one disease in one country.  If you include SSPE, which occurs in 1 in 10,000 cases of measles, that's an additional 1,200 people that will die from measles from one outbreak. Clearly the benefits outweigh the risks. 

 

Your numbers are completely invented.  We don't know how many children have died from the MMR, nor do we know how many children have suffered permanent brain damage from the MMR, because most of those cases went unrecognized and unreported.

 

Fact 3: There are methods other than vaccination to reduce the chance of severe complication from measles (pre-screening and treating for vitamin A deficiency, for example).

 

That may be helpful in developing countries, but not very helpful in the US. " Approximately 250,000-500,000 children in developing countries become blind each year owing to vitamin A deficiency, with the highest prevalence in Southeast Asia and Africa. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), vitamin A deficiency is under control in the United States, but in developing countries vitamin A deficiency is a significant " http://www.news-medical.net/health/Vitamin-A-Deficiency.aspx

 

Measles complications in the US are EXTREMELY rare, remember?  Measles complications in developing countries seem to be more linked with malnutrition and poor sanitation, rather than having a vaccine deficiency.

 

Fact 4/Questions 1 and 2:  Since pneumonia is one of the more severe possible complications for measles, and since children with asthma are more prone to develop pneumonia, that needs to be looked into as well.  Vaccination can trigger asthma in people who never had asthma before.  To what extent are OTHER vaccines predisposing children to asthma, and to what extent is the entire vaccine schedule making children vulnerable to pneumonia?

 

Vaccines don't cause asthma. 

 

Several studies indicate that they do:

http://umanitoba.ca/faculties/medicine/units/immunology/media/WFP_Asthma_and_vaccines_Jan_2008.pdf 

http://www.smartvax.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=69

http://www.ageofautism.com/2008/07/earlier-vaccina.html#more

 

A very well-referenced summary of published medical research linking vaccination and atopic effect, such as asthma: http://www.blackherbals.com/culprit_behind_asthma_and_allergies_vaccination.htm

 

Discussion by a pharmacist: http://www.remedyspot.com/showthread.php/2244510-Can-Hib-Vaccine-Cause-Asthma

 

Fact 5:  We need to stop fear-mongering where measles is concerned.  It was not considered a killer disease in the 1950's. There is no reason for it to be considered so now.  If anything, we should be able to manage both measles and most resulting complications better today.  We should also be able to pre-screen children for likelihood of complications from both measles and vaccines, and decide accordingly.

 

See my numbers above. 

 

No need; they had nothing to do with reality.  Remember?  They failed to account for unrecognized and unreported adverse effects.  

 

Fact 5:  We also need to stop looking at the situation as though the only two possible choices are 

"Vaccines!!" or "Death from Vaccine-Preventable Diseases!!"  This is not a realistic portrayal of the situation. 

 

It's a balance of risk. You aren't guaranteed to die if you don't vaccinate, obviously. But the chance is much much higher that you will die from a VPD than from a vac

 

We actually have no idea what the balance of risk is, because the industry has engaged in large-scale fraud with vaccines, just like the tobacco industry did with cigarettes.  The vaccine/pharmaceutical industry, however, learned from Big Tobacco's mistakes, and has made sure to place insiders in the government agencies that are meant to prevent such fraud.

 
BeckyBird likes this.
Taximom5 is online now  
#72 of 86 Old 10-28-2013, 01:47 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,047
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 164 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pattimomma View Post
 

 

 

Tea - IMO If a doc is going to say there were only 30 cases of measles in the US this year then he/she should also say, before the vaccine there were XXX number of cases per year. It would be misleading to not give the whole story.

Sure, but they should also say why they think the numbers have gone done.

 

Look at tetanus for example  - the pre-vaccine numbers I have show an incidence of 1/250 000.  It was in the 1930's, IIRC, and many, many more people lived on farms, where the risk from tetanus is greater.  The rate very likely would not be 1/250 000 even if nobody vaxxed for it (indeed, about 1/2 the adult population is roaming around without a tetanus booster in the USA, and the rate is 1/ 12 000 000)    Diphtheria, a disease primarily of overcrowding and poor sanitation, it probably would not be widespread now even if we did not vaccinate for it.  Measle, OTOH, might come back.  It is very disease specific.  


There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is online now  
#73 of 86 Old 10-28-2013, 01:51 PM
 
pattimomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The Dirty South
Posts: 1,176
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

 

Fact 4/Questions 1 and 2:  Since pneumonia is one of the more severe possible complications for measles, and since children with asthma are more prone to develop pneumonia, that needs to be looked into as well.  Vaccination can trigger asthma in people who never had asthma before.  To what extent are OTHER vaccines predisposing children to asthma, and to what extent is the entire vaccine schedule making children vulnerable to pneumonia?

 

Vaccines don't cause asthma. 

 

Several studies indicate that they do:

http://umanitoba.ca/faculties/medicine/units/immunology/media/WFP_Asthma_and_vaccines_Jan_2008.pdf 

http://www.smartvax.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=69

http://www.ageofautism.com/2008/07/earlier-vaccina.html#more

 

To be accurate these studies do not prove or indicate that vaccines cause asthma. They only indicate a correlation. They do not determine causation. The researchers are very clear that they are not saying that vaccines cause asthma:

 

"Researchers are speculating whether children’s immune systems are better able to handle the vaccine’s side-effects when they’re older"
“We’re thinking that maybe if you delay this allergic response until a bit later, the child’s immune system is more developed and maybe you’re not seeing this effect,” Kozyrskyj said.
 
The researchers found a correlation and have indicated that further study is needed to determine the significance of their findings.

~Patti~ rainbow1284.gifMomma to three girls and three boys chicken3.gif, First mother to one girl triadadopt.jpg

Certified, card carrying member of the IEP Binder Clubkid.gif  

pattimomma is offline  
#74 of 86 Old 10-28-2013, 01:54 PM
 
pattimomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The Dirty South
Posts: 1,176
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

Sure, but they should also say why they think the numbers have gone done.

 

 It is very disease specific.  


Of course, as it's part of the whole story.


~Patti~ rainbow1284.gifMomma to three girls and three boys chicken3.gif, First mother to one girl triadadopt.jpg

Certified, card carrying member of the IEP Binder Clubkid.gif  

pattimomma is offline  
#75 of 86 Old 10-28-2013, 03:58 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,441
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 311 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

Sure, but they should also say why they think the numbers have gone done.

 

Look at tetanus for example  - the pre-vaccine numbers I have show an incidence of 1/250 000.  It was in the 1930's, IIRC, and many, many more people lived on farms, where the risk from tetanus is greater.  The rate very likely would not be 1/250 000 even if nobody vaxxed for it (indeed, about 1/2 the adult population is roaming around without a tetanus booster in the USA, and the rate is 1/ 12 000 000)    Diphtheria, a disease primarily of overcrowding and poor sanitation, it probably would not be widespread now even if we did not vaccinate for it.  Measle, OTOH, might come back.  It is very disease specific.  

 

I agree with you about tetanus. It's not contagious, I don't think there is ever going to be a "tetanus epidemic", it doesn't spread from person to person and the vaccine doesn't contribute to herd immunity. I don't feel very strongly about this one. I think the vaccine is a very safe one and tetanus is fatal in a pretty big percentage of cases so I still think the benefits outweigh the risks. 

 

If you look at how diphtheria is spread and how the flu is spread, they are nearly identical.

 

The Flu :  Most experts think that flu viruses are spread mainly by droplets made when people with flu cough, sneeze or talk.  http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/disease/spread.htm

 

Diphtheria: Diphtheria spreads through respiratory droplets (such as from a cough or sneeze) of an infected person or someone who carries the bacteria but has no symptoms. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001608.htm

 

Sure, being a crowded unsanitary environment makes it spread more easily, but that's true for the flu as well.  Diphtheria is considered a very contagious disease and is fatal in up to 10 percent of cases.  It's worth keeping herd immunity for this one, for sure. 

 

Polio could easily come back. About 95% of cases are asymptomatic so it's really hard to keep it from spreading. You have no idea you have it. 

 

Measles is a no brainer. Extremely contagious. Nowhere near being eradicated. 

 

Pertussis: Obviously still around. 

 

Chickenpox is rarely fatal. Still more likely to die from chickenpox than from the vaccine, though. 

 

Rubella I think is important because of how devastating it can be for pregnant women. 

 

Hib has obviously not decreased from better sanitation. It's because of the vaccine, no doubt about it. If we stopped vaccinating, it would come back. 

 

Hep B- Don't feel super strongly about this one, either.

 

Flu- Ditto ^ 

 

So in summary:  The vaccines I feel are important to maintain a high uptake in are Diphtheria, Polio, Measles, Pertussis, Rubella and Hib. 

 

Ones I don't feel as strongly about : Mumps (I know it's a combo), Flu, Hep b, Tetanus, Chickenpox 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#76 of 86 Old 10-29-2013, 11:12 AM - Thread Starter
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,060
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Out of curiosity, has anyone taken the time to read this salient paper? http://www.rescuepost.com/files/conflicts_of_interest_in_vaccine_safety_research_gayle_delong1.pdf

Here is just one highlight:

"Few consequences seem to be in place for authors who do not declare COls,and at least one major medical journal, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), has modified its policy to make the investigation of COls less transparent (DeAngelis and Fontanarosa, 2009). Besides receiving research funds from industry, researchers are sometimes paid to put their names on articles they did not write. The true industry-sponsored author is not revealed, so the reader is often not aware of the industry influence on these ghost-written articles (Ngai et al., 2005)"

I'm not sure how to respond to the meh-whatever-COIs-are-everywhere attitude reflected in much of this thread, except to say that given that these COIs are present, maybe vaccine-related messaging shouldn't be so black and white. The resounding public health message we hear is, "Safe and effective! Safe and effective! Safe and effective! Shut up! Stop asking questions! Safe and effective!"

Maybe we need to hear more of, "Well, they're safe overall, but here are some gaps in our knowledge." Or how about, "As a full disclosure, much of the data we have has ties to drug companies, but we believe that it's accurate data." But then, if you stop talking down to the public, you don't get a compliant public, do you?

I agree wholeheartedly with the last sentence of the above article's abstract: "Minimizing COIs in vaccine safety research could reduce research bias and restore greater trust in the vaccine program." Is it too much to ask for common ground on that statement?
BeckyBird likes this.

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is online now  
#77 of 86 Old 10-29-2013, 03:34 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,133
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pattimomma View Post
 

 

To be accurate these studies do not prove or indicate that vaccines cause asthma. They only indicate a correlation. They do not determine causation. The researchers are very clear that they are not saying that vaccines cause asthma:

 

"Researchers are speculating whether children’s immune systems are better able to handle the vaccine’s side-effects when they’re older"
“We’re thinking that maybe if you delay this allergic response until a bit later, the child’s immune system is more developed and maybe you’re not seeing this effect,” Kozyrskyj said.
 
The researchers found a correlation and have indicated that further study is needed to determine the significance of their findings.

Then perhaps you'd like to edit your claim, "vaccines don't cause asthma."  Because, clearly, there is a correlation, and more studies are needed, which means your claim is both unscientific and invalid.

Dot-to-Dot likes this.
Taximom5 is online now  
#78 of 86 Old 10-29-2013, 05:20 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,441
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 311 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 

Then perhaps you'd like to edit your claim, "vaccines don't cause asthma."  Because, clearly, there is a correlation, and more studies are needed, which means your claim is both unscientific and invalid.

It has been looked into. There is no evidence of any link. 

 

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/120/5/e1269.full

 

"METHODS. The major medical electronic databases (Medline, National Library of Medicine Gateway, and Cochrane Library) were searched, and reference lists of the relevant publications were reviewed for relevant birth-cohort studies and randomized, controlled trials from 1966 to March 2006. Only studies that directly compared vaccinated and unvaccinated children, validated vaccination status by medical charts, and used preset criteria to define asthma were included.

 

Seven studies of pertussis vaccination (with a total of 186663 patients) and 5 studies of BCG vaccination (with a total of 41479 patients) met our inclusion criteria. No statistically significant association was detected between either whole-cell pertussis or BCG vaccination and incidence rates of asthma during childhood and adolescence." 

 

This one too 

 

"Cohort study involving 167,240 children who were enrolled in 4 large health maintenance organizations during 1991 to 1997, with follow-up from birth until at least 18 months to a maximum of 6 years of age. Vaccinations were ascertained through computerized immunization tracking systems, and onset of asthma was identified through computerized data on medical care encounters and medication dispensings.

 

There is no association between diphtheria, tetanus and whole cell pertussis vaccine, oral polio vaccine or measles, mumps and rubella vaccine and the risk of asthma. The weak associations for Hib and hepatitis B vaccines seem to be at least partially accounted for by health care utilization or information bias." 

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12182372


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#79 of 86 Old 10-30-2013, 05:25 AM
 
pattimomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The Dirty South
Posts: 1,176
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 

Then perhaps you'd like to edit your claim, "vaccines don't cause asthma."  Because, clearly, there is a correlation, and more studies are needed, which means your claim is both unscientific and invalid.


Perhaps you would like to learn how to read. I never said that vaccines don't cause asthma.


~Patti~ rainbow1284.gifMomma to three girls and three boys chicken3.gif, First mother to one girl triadadopt.jpg

Certified, card carrying member of the IEP Binder Clubkid.gif  

pattimomma is offline  
#80 of 86 Old 10-30-2013, 12:52 PM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pattimomma View Post
 


Perhaps you would like to learn how to read. I never said that vaccines don't cause asthma.

Wow....You don't have to be so nasty. I went back and throughly inspected the thread and Taxi made a mistake. It happens when people use the quote feature and respond to points in a different color type and then someone else quotes that. It APPEARS as if you did say that at first glance, but after taking a closer look, it was actually Teacozy who makes this claim. Information that could have been conveyed without the TUDE. This forum stresses me out. So much hostility :meditate .


If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

Marnica is offline  
#81 of 86 Old 10-30-2013, 02:26 PM
 
pattimomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The Dirty South
Posts: 1,176
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Marnica - You are correct. I overreacted to a misunderstanding and I should have left off the first sentence in my reply. Taxi - I apologize for the personal attack.

 

Here is what confuses me - Why is it not enough to say that "as long as the jury is out", meaning that we still do not know if vaccines cause XYZ, "then I am not vaccinating"? I think that it is perfectly valid to take the stand of "there are some interesting correlations between vaccines and X so at this point I prefer not to vaccinate and would like to wait for further study". I understand being a skeptic but I don't understand citing publications as evidence when in fact the publication makes no such conclusion.   


~Patti~ rainbow1284.gifMomma to three girls and three boys chicken3.gif, First mother to one girl triadadopt.jpg

Certified, card carrying member of the IEP Binder Clubkid.gif  

pattimomma is offline  
#82 of 86 Old 10-31-2013, 07:44 AM
Administrator
 
cynthia mosher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Arabia!
Posts: 38,849
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 98 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratchet View Post

Ooh is this poor form? Can I infect this thread with a meme?


Because, really, I think many of us do or want to live like this but I feel VPDs are too risky to do it.

And because right now I am at a hotel for a conference, without DD, sitting in a wasteful tub of hit water, binging on mothering.com on my electronic devise, having eaten a burger that i dont know the source of, and justifying it all as luxurious, thoughtful and therapeutic. Although I will say that none of this was paid for by Big Pharma, at least.

 

Yes it is in poor form to use memes. Please don't. I have removed your post that did so. It is also not a wise thing to quote it, which reposts what was offensive. I have removed the post that did that as well. 


cynthia mosher is offline  
#83 of 86 Old 11-01-2013, 02:44 PM - Thread Starter
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,060
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynthia Mosher View Post

 

Yes it is in poor form to use memes. Please don't. I have removed your post that did so. It is also not a wise thing to quote it, which reposts what was offensive. I have removed the post that did that as well. 

 



At any time? I was going to contribute some more memes to the meme-off thread, but should we not be having that discussion? Ratchet directed the meme at me, and I didn't find it at all offensive, for whatever it's worth.

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is online now  
#84 of 86 Old 11-02-2013, 01:29 AM
Administrator
 
cynthia mosher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Arabia!
Posts: 38,849
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 98 Post(s)

Because of the offensiveness of the memes we've seen posted in the past that created considerable animosity between different groups of vaccinating/non-vaccinating parents, and because levels of offense run the gamut, it is much easier for us in moderating to say no to memes. If you truly feel a meme is informative and beneficial and not at al taking a stab at a group of people, send it to me, AdinaL or one of the mods for review and we'll let you know if it is okay to post.


cynthia mosher is offline  
#85 of 86 Old 11-02-2013, 01:33 AM
Administrator
 
cynthia mosher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Arabia!
Posts: 38,849
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 98 Post(s)

As for the discussion, state your opinion or the opinion of interest and discuss it. This is the debate forum so topics of discussion that touch on the different beliefs regarding vaccinations are certainly fine. But respect and upholding a comfortable atmosphere so that everyone will feel welcome to post and share their opinion should still be upheld. Things can be discussed objectively without making jokes,  sarcastic humor, or belittling (which memes often do).


cynthia mosher is offline  
#86 of 86 Old 11-02-2013, 04:39 PM
 
japonica's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Canada-->Australia
Posts: 979
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)

This happened to be on TV here this week. Not just vaccines that generate the COI discussion of course:

 

http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/3881441.htm

 

(transcript of the show)

 

Probably more interesting was the censorship debate surrounding airing the episode. 


Mother to DD#1  s/b @40w 2003 for unknown reasons; DD#2   9.5 years old; DS  6 years old 
  Why are daughters protected but not sons?
 
 
 
  
japonica is online now  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off