Mothering Forum banner

1 - 20 of 45 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,487 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The hate campaign blaming "anti-vaxxers" for pertussis outbreaks is looking increasingly foolish. https://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the...eness-of-TDAP-Vaccine-Drops-After-a-Year.aspx

Good thing that California seventh graders will lose access to public or private education unless they comply with this piece-o-sh$t shot requirement. :thumb Everything will will be back to status quo by the time they start high school. Unless....here come yearly booster$!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,075 Posts
Beat me to it ;)

I was just about to post this and a forbes article discussing the same issue as a response to the claim that vaccine issues are ignored by pro-vaccine scientists/doctors.

This is also further reassuring evidence that poor results are not covered up in vaccine studies :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,565 Posts
Beat me to it ;)

I was just about to post this and a forbes article discussing the same issue as a response to the claim that vaccine issues are ignored by pro-vaccine scientists/doctors.

This is also further reassuring evidence that poor results are not covered up in vaccine studies :)
Funny, I dont see the CNN/ABC/FOX "just in!!" 8pm news on how the vaccine is garbage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
416 Posts
Just further evidence we need to go back to the older, more effective vaccine. The less effective one that they put in place because pertussis infections were so low is just not cutting it anymore.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,628 Posts
Forbes' articles on whooping cough through the years:

The rapid spike in whooping cough cases also shows up in this chart of pertussis incidence in California — a staggering rebound given that the disease had been nearly eliminated.
my bold
http://www.forbes.com/sites/dandiam...h-outbreaks-are-on-the-rise-too/#2bcd902123c8

Anti-Vaccine Movement Causes The Worst Whooping Cough Epidemic In 70 Years
http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevens...ping-cough-epidemic-in-70-years/#d13939134fdb

Whooping Cough Epidemic: Blame The Anti-Vaccination Movement
http://www.forbes.com/sites/science...e-the-anti-vaccination-movement/#cb604511d471

Unfortunately, the answer seems to be that these outbreaks are spreading as a result of falling vaccine rates, for which we can thank the anti-vaccine movement, which has been very effective at getting their message out through mainsteam media, including the Larry King show, Oprah, and The Huffington Post. 
http://www.forbes.com/sites/science...eed-to-recontrol-whooping-cough/#24d73c253642

The incidence of whooping cough was relatively low in the U.S. – around 5,000 cases annually – when vaccination was the unchallenged standard of care. But the impact of the anti-vaccine rhetoric and associated fear has contributed to several outbreaks across the United States and Europe, resulting in multiple infant deaths.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertp...-on-the-anti-vaccine-movement/2/#3edb131f4f64

And just three years ago, California had the worst whooping cough epidemic in 70 years, thanks to the anti-vaccine movement.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevens...-children-win-anti-vaxxers-lose/#7b4c726f4596


Sorry no pats on the back for vaccine injury deniers/supporters of mandatory vaccinations when they are forced to read the writing already on the wall about low efficacy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,487 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
It only took them umpteen years to figure it out.
That's just it. Scientists have known about this since Fritz Mooi's earliest studies in the late 1990s. Meanwhile, Californians, Mississippians, and West Virginians still have to miss work and pay for doctors office visits for an anti-science vaccine requirement. (Because science and policy always coincide, right? :rolleyes) Or parents in other states just don't bother and file non-medical exemptions, leading to "news" outlets and uneducated legislators screaming about "unvaccinated children."

The point is that recommendations and policies were pushed through in boldface defiance of science. Or it can be argued that THIS linked study is THE conclusive one. So policy-makers and public health officials pushed pushed pushed the TDaP on an experimental impulse without enough science to back the recommendation. Then THIS study comes out, and they get to say, "Oooooops. Sorry. Our bad." It's a pretty easy cycle to maintain with an indemnified, legally required pharmaceutical product with "post-marketing surveillance" instead of solid science compiled in advance. This sort of incompetence certainly makes a solid argument for philosophical exemptions, which absolutely everyone here supports. :wink

Fortunately, I'm sure legislators are jumping RIGHT on with removing the seventh grade TDaP requirement. :wink (I need to post that still-waiting skeleton meme).

And they wonder why the public is losing trust. How the vax-compliance camp sees this matter as a win is beyond me.

By the way, do you think that Washington, Oregon, and Michigan, with their Bad Mommy laws, will update their educational information to include this study? :bigeyes
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,831 Posts
Just further evidence we need to go back to the older, more effective vaccine. The less effective one that they put in place because pertussis infections were so low is just not cutting it anymore.
If you search in PubMed you can find pertussis outbreaks in highly vaxed populations that were using the "older" vaccine. It was a tad more effective than the current one, but not so effective as to make it worthwhile to go back to it.

Curiously, in Japan, which switched to the new vaccine many years before the rest of the world, outbreaks were about the same with the new as with the old for a number of years. Then the vaccine began failing in Japan too.

Some sound, objective science on the problems with the vaccine and pertussis would be good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,565 Posts
Just further evidence we need to go back to the older, more effective vaccine. The less effective one that they put in place because pertussis infections were so low is just not cutting it anymore.
Didn't the old one have very bad side effects? I think the provax folks should just get the WC vax annually.
They are not complaining about the sub-par flu vax, so why would they complain about an annual WC vax?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,851 Posts
I
Beat me to it ;)

I was just about to post this and a Forbes article discussing the same issue as a response to the claim that vaccine issues are ignored by pro-vaccine scientists/doctors.

This is also further reassuring evidence that poor results are not covered up in vaccine studies :)
I was the one who made the claim, and I stand by it.

I did not mention pro-vaccine scientists and doctors, however, I simply said "pro-vaxxers" Indeed, I was thinking of the pro-vaxxers on MDC when I said it, as this is where I have spent the most time. I suspect it largely holds elsewhere, though. As per MDC, one only has to read who started what thread to determine that it is very rare for a pro-vaxxers to start a post that is critical of vaccines. Indeed, you even tried, with your last line (bolded) to turn pertussis immunity issues into some sort of win for the vaccine side.

ETA: I have not read the Forbes article. My money is that it still defends the vaccine and suggests everyone get it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,418 Posts
That's just it. Scientists have known about this since Fritz Mooi's earliest studies in the late 1990s. Meanwhile, Californians, Mississippians, and West Virginians still have to miss work and pay for doctors office visits for an anti-science vaccine requirement. (Because science and policy always coincide, right? :rolleyes) Or parents in other states just don't bother and file non-medical exemptions, leading to "news" outlets and uneducated legislators screaming about "unvaccinated children."

The point is that recommendations and policies were pushed through in boldface defiance of science. Or it can be argued that THIS linked study is THE conclusive one. So policy-makers and public health officials pushed pushed pushed the TDaP on an experimental impulse without enough science to back the recommendation. Then THIS study comes out, and they get to say, "Oooooops. Sorry. Our bad." It's a pretty easy cycle to maintain with an indemnified, legally required pharmaceutical product with "post-marketing surveillance" instead of solid science compiled in advance. This sort of incompetence certainly makes a solid argument for philosophical exemptions, which absolutely everyone here supports. :wink

Fortunately, I'm sure legislators are jumping RIGHT on with removing the seventh grade TDaP requirement. :wink (I need to post that still-waiting skeleton meme).

And they wonder why the public is losing trust. How the vax-compliance camp sees this matter as a win is beyond me.

By the way, do you think that Washington, Oregon, and Michigan, with their Bad Mommy laws, will update their educational information to include this study? :bigeyes
By the time they draft a new policy for 'educating' parents, it's possible the yearly pertussis vaccine will be out, and of course, no new info will be conveyed to these parents during their mandated 'education' by health depts or drs. Or, it will be whitewashed --'They' found out it's not working like it should, so we're going with yearly boosters now', will be all that needs to be said to most, and they swallow it hook, line and sinker.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,851 Posts
Didn't the old one have very bad side effects? I think the provax folks should just get the WC vax annually.
They are not complaining about the sub-par flu vax, so why would they complain about an annual WC vax?
I agree. Vaccines are perfectly safe and hunky-dorry...what is the problem?

No shaming those who opt out of this highly imperefect, does-not-prevent transmission, vaccine, though. :shake

You roll the dice on pertussis your way and I will roll it mine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,418 Posts
One possibility could be to give children Tdap only if a pertussis outbreak is on the horizon, which would require local health departments and medical centers to do regular surveillance, she added. Another possibility could be to administer Tdap to adolescents of all ages every three or four years, as outbreaks generally occur at this frequency.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/health/tdap-whooping-cough-vaccination/

which will undoubtedly, turn into yearly, or biyearly
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,851 Posts
Read the Forbes article.

It looks like something vaccine critics have long suspected - that the vaccine does not automatically give the patient a milder case - has some evidence to it:

"Klein’s team calculated that adolescents’ risk of pertussis increases by 35% each year after getting the booster. Further, contrary to previous evidence showing cases to be milder in vaccinated individuals, the severity of cases among those vaccinated and unvaccinated did not appear to differ. Similar proportions of antibiotic prescriptions and emergency room visits existed among both groups."

http://www.forbes.com/sites/tarahae...ly-recommended-teen-vaccination/#2660129a6b7c
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,831 Posts
Read the Forbes article.

It looks like something vaccine critics have long suspected - that the vaccine does not automatically give the patient a milder case - has some evidence to it:

"Klein’s team calculated that adolescents’ risk of pertussis increases by 35% each year after getting the booster. Further, contrary to previous evidence showing cases to be milder in vaccinated individuals, the severity of cases among those vaccinated and unvaccinated did not appear to differ. Similar proportions of antibiotic prescriptions and emergency room visits existed among both groups."

http://www.forbes.com/sites/tarahae...ly-recommended-teen-vaccination/#2660129a6b7c
Now that pertussis is being regularly diagnosed in the vaccinated more accurate and extensive data may also be collected on severity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
408 Posts
Yes, they changed the vaccine due to the severity of issues with it (after a very long time and many complaints, adverse effects, deaths, etc.) Studies support the danger of its use. But sure, bring it back! Encephalitis is a better risk than whooping cough!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,487 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
When issues like this emerge, this is the conversation I hear.

Pro-Vax Schedule: "The vaccine schedule is based on tried, true, and well-tested science! Anybody who thinks otherwise believes in conspiracies and not science."
Vax Critic: "Um, here are some ground-breaking studies against using this vaccine as it appears in the schedule."
PVS: "See? Isn't science great? It caught this boo-boo! It goes to show that you can trust scientists!" (Note the usual equivocation between science and scientists).

Actually, it confirms what I suspected: The vaccine schedule impulsively pieced together, and often stubbornly defended for years, without adequate science to justify the initial policies and recommendations.

But who needs real science when doctors and policy-makers can instead resort to coercion? :shrug
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,487 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Yes, they changed the vaccine due to the severity of issues with it (after a very long time and many complaints, adverse effects, deaths, etc.) Studies support the danger of its use. But sure, bring it back! Encephalitis is a better risk than whooping cough!
All of those "fears' were "unfounded" and "debunked," m'dear. Just ask any of the "skeptic" bloggers.
 
1 - 20 of 45 Posts
Top