Mothering Forum banner

1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
429 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi All,<br><br>
I am a bit confused about herd immunity, so here goes.<br><br>
I was brainwashed in nursing school, as well as NOT taught some information (Gee, like vaccines are FULL if chemicals that is a hazardous waste if spilled, but are safe to inject into our kids? <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/headscratch.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="headscratch"> ) so I am struggling against little bit of the medicalized programming. Since coming to the forums and doing even more reading, I have since decided not to vax my kids- er at least anymore. Both my 4 yo DD and 3yo DS is fully vaxed to 18 months. My 8 month old had 1 set of vaxes against my better judgement. Anyway, I am still learning and growing and can't take back the past no matter how much I wish to.<br><br>
So about the herd immunity thing, I think my mommy mush brain is missing some piece of logic here. Say vaxes work 80% of the time (yes, I know this is generous) then 80% of the population who received the vaccine is considered "immune" (also up for debate). It creates less "fertile soil" for the disease to survive, how does that not benefit others.<br><br>
On the other hand, keeping your immune system up and running the best you can also makes it difficult for any disease to blossom and grow, thereby just being exposed to an illness does not mean you are going to "get it".<br><br>
I feel like the information is staring at me right in the face, however I am somehow missing the big picture.<br><br>
Sorry for rambling. Thanks for any info!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42,824 Posts
Two big points on so called herd immunity for me:<br><br>
1. My ethical responsibility is to MY child. Not to the herd. Therefore I must make the best decision for MY child.<br><br>
2. The herd is looking pretty sickly these days with asthma, autism, auto-immune disorders, brain damage, etc....<br><br>
-Angela
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,101 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>alegna</strong></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">Two big points on so called herd immunity for me:<br><br>
1. My ethical responsibility is to MY child. Not to the herd. Therefore I must make the best decision for MY child.<br><br>
2. The herd is looking pretty sickly these days with asthma, autism, auto-immune disorders, brain damage, etc....<br><br>
-Angela</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
I couldn't possibly sum it up any better than that!! <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/thumb.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="thumbs up">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,813 Posts
Angela -<br><br><img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/thumb.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="thumbs up"><img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/thumb.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="thumbs up"><img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/thumb.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="thumbs up"><img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/thumb.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="thumbs up"><img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/thumb.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="thumbs up"><img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/thumb.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="thumbs up"><img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/thumb.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="thumbs up"><img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/thumb.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="thumbs up">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,367 Posts
This is what's been on my mind a lot, too. And I have pg brain on top of mommy brain so I haven't had the energy to do any real research these days. It just keeps coming up in conversations IRL. So the rest is purely my opinion...<br><br>
Anyway, I do feel some responsibility to the "herd," or to my immediate community. I care A LOT about the health and well-being of the children around me. And I don't believe that vaccines really provide the immunity we all wish was available, at least not at the cost we're paying. I see that we're trading some questionable herd immunity for treatable diseases for other diseases--no, syndromes, which are harder to deal with-- that are, to me, more incidious because they are so hard to diagnose and treat effectively.<br><br>
I also am reading now about how we've made it very hard to get real chicken pox. This means all of us adults who had the real thing are missing out on our natural "boosters" because our kids aren't getting it. And this means as adults lose their immunity we'll be at risk for shingles, which is more serious than childhood chicken pox. Thus, we've created a new, more serious threat by immunizing for a pretty benign illness. And thus, the introduction of shingles vaccines and CP boosters, and the increased risk of bad reactions or unforseen long-term effects. And I really believe money was behind all of this. The notion that fewer moms would take time off to care for kids with CP, and the opportunity to sell a series of new vaxes.<br><br>
I think vaccines were a great idea. And I don't think they've worked out the way the original scientists hoped they would.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,488 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Kelleybug</strong></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">Say vaxes work 80% of the time (yes, I know this is generous) then 80% of the population who received the vaccine is considered "immune" (also up for debate).</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Say 80% are vaccinated. And 75% - 78% have immunity for 5-8 years from whatever vaccine.<br>
What happens in the consequent years?<br>
Or, let's say they get boosters after 7 years and then have immunity for a total of 14 years.<br><br>
What about the remaining 70 some years of not getting boosters?<br><br>
When did you get your last MMR vaccine? If not within the last 5-7 years, you are not a part of 'herd immunity'. And I feel that most people are not up to date on their vaccines.<br><br>
So in my opinion, 'herd immunity' is only propaganda to sell vaccines. It is an illusion.<br><br>
The real reason why we don't see the diseases is because:<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">.. keeping your immune system up and running the best you can also makes it difficult for any disease to blossom and grow, thereby just being exposed to an illness does not mean you are going to "get it".</td>
</tr></table></div>
Exactly!<br>
Clean water, more and better nutrition, SANITATION, SEWER SYSTEM, less stress for children (child labor laws)...<br><br>
There is no such thing as 'herd immunity'!<br><br>
Not unless at least 90% OF THE POPULATION IS CURRENT WITH THEIR VACCINES AT ALL TIMES. And that is something that will never be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,476 Posts
I haven't read others replies as I have book brain right now, and that's painful.
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Kelleybug</strong></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">Hi All,<br><br>
I am a bit confused about herd immunity, so here goes.<br><br>
I was brainwashed in nursing school, as well as NOT taught some information (Gee, like vaccines are FULL if chemicals that is a hazardous waste if spilled, but are safe to inject into our kids? <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/headscratch.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="headscratch"> ) so I am struggling against little bit of the medicalized programming. Since coming to the forums and doing even more reading, I have since decided not to vax my kids- er at least anymore. Both my 4 yo DD and 3yo DS is fully vaxed to 18 months. My 8 month old had 1 set of vaxes against my better judgement. Anyway, I am still learning and growing and can't take back the past no matter how much I wish to.<br><br>
So about the herd immunity thing, I think my mommy mush brain is missing some piece of logic here. Say vaxes work 80% of the time (yes, I know this is generous) then 80% of the population who received the vaccine is considered "immune" (also up for debate). It creates less "fertile soil" for the disease to survive, how does that not benefit others.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
This is where the theory comes in. The theory was that "herd immunity" would provide a barrier, and stop infection coming to unvaccinated children.<br><br>
But it's never worked that way, and that is something they have consistently been quiet about.<br><br>
I'm not going to put up references, because I'm knackered, but here are some accurate comments.<br><br>
1) In the early trials in diphtheria vaccine they found that people could have no immunity aka the schick test, carry diphtheria, and yet NOT GET clinical diphtheria.<br><br>
2) They also found that people could supposedly have immunity to diptheria, carry diphtheria and still GET diphtheria (don't ask me why. If they couldn't figure it out, I sure can't)<br><br>
Now, logic would say, that no matter whether a person GETS clinical diphtheria, if they carry it, they can pass it.<br><br>
Okay? With me so far?<br><br>
3) We know no, from medical literature, that people carry what are called "commensal bacteria" in their noses and throats. If they did a swab in your hospital all you staff would be carry a variety of supposed pathogens including some, or all of the following bacteria: MRSA, haemophilus, pneumococcus, strep, diphtheroids... and whatever they specifically culture for, and get.<br><br>
You may not get disease yourself, BUT you can pass it on.<br><br>
As a nurse, you will have been taught (Well actually you might, and if not, you have to wonder why) that all of us carry strains of Neisseria meningitides AT LEAST 6 times a year, of many different types. That is why you and I are still alive today, yet have immunity.<br><br>
HOWEVER, and here is where they hoodwink you. Should there be a CLINICAL CASE of, say, Meningitis C in your hospital, you will all be offered antibiotics and the Men C vaccine ON THE BASIS that you haven't had the disease therefore IPSO FACTO <b>you aren't immune</b>. But are you not immune? Might it not be that, just as you got immunity to at least 24 other types of meningitis by carrying, processing, having no symptoms etc, that YOU MIGHT be immune, but that they don't know that? So why don't they test for it, instead of slamming needles into you nurses, and the patients contacts, as if you are all virgin ripe-for-the-killing grounds.<br><br>
Does this ONLY apply to chickenpox?<br><br><a href="http://id.medscape.com/reuters/prof/2001/12/12.17/20011214clin008.html" target="_blank">http://id.medscape.com/reuters/prof/...14clin008.html</a><br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">Most Children With a Negative or Unknown Varicella History Are Immune.<br><br>
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) Dec 14 - Contrary to widely held beliefs, most 10-year-old children with negative or unknown chickenpox histories are actually immune to varicella, according to a report by Canadian investigators.<br><br>
Dr. Bernard Duval, from Laval University in Quebec, and colleagues assessed the age-specific incidence of varicella among 2227 fourth grade students. A subset of children with negative or unknown chickenpox histories were tested for anti-varicella antibodies.<br><br>
The study was performed to determine the proportion of children that would need to be vaccinated in a catch-up program, the researchers state in the NOVEMBER issue of the <b>Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal</b><br><br>
The reported cumulative incidence of chickenpox at 10 years of age was 92% the authors note. Furthermore, about half of the children developed chickenpox before entering kindergarten.<br><br>
Of the childen with negative or unknown varicella histories 63% had antibodies against the virus. Children with an unknown history were significantly more likely than those with a negative history to harbor anti-varicella antibodies (p = 0.002). In addition, children whose history was obtained by self-administered questionnaire rather than by a study nurse were more likely to demonstrate such antibodies (p = 0.023).<br><br>
If vaccination was based on the absence of a positive history of varicella, 8.4% of 10-year old children would require vaccination, the researchers note. However, the current findings indicate that nearly two thirds of children without a positive history are actually immune.<br><br>
Prevaccination testing could identify children who are immune, but such testing could be difficult to implement and might reduce vaccine coverage. Follow-up telephone interview with parents who report negative or unknown histories for their children may help identify children who are actually immune.</td>
</tr></table></div>
<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11734718&dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract</a><br><br>
So, you may not have had chickenpox clinically, but does that mean you are NOT immune? Doesn't that apply to other diseases?<br><br>
Yes:<br><br><a href="http://www2.unescobkk.org/eubios/HGR/HGRCG.htm" target="_blank">http://www2.unescobkk.org/eubios/HGR/HGRCG.htm</a><br><br>
pp. 205-210 in Human Genome Research and Society<br>
Proceedings of the Second International Bioethics Seminar in Fukui, 20-21 March, 1992.<br>
Editors: Norio Fujiki, M.D. & Darryl R.J. Macer, Ph.D.<br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">In most infections only a rare individual becomes ill or suffers rare complications, and that individual may be genetically predetermined, it usually is. For example, HTLV-1 infects 1-2 million Japanese, but only one in over a thousand gets adult advanced T cell leukemia after 40 years, and fortunately only about one in a thousand gets HAM, HTLV-1 associated myolopophy. Those unfortunate rare individuals are the problem, not the problem of the innocuous, or carriers, the other one thousand who die without ever knowing that they had it, and having no ill effect. The same can be said for poliomyelitis, where it takes 1,000 infected cases in order to induce a paralysis, <b><span style="text-decoration:underline;">the others don't know they were infected.</span></b></td>
</tr></table></div>
With polio before the vaccine came along, they did serological surveys, and found that 98.2% of people carried antibodies. Well, why didn't that create herd immunity all the time? Why wasn't that immunity a barrier?<br><br>
They didn't think that through at all. THIS is why we have polio cases in Africa right now. A lot of the people in Africa have been vaccinated over 30 (THIRTY - that was not a spelling mistake) times. BUT even though they have been vaccinated, they can still pick up, and pass on, polio virus. The only reason they keep doing OPV campaigns is to <b>try to interrupt transmission</b>, to fill up the ecological space right then, and stop people passing it on.<br><br>
If the POLIO vaccine created a barrier called <b>herd immunity</b> then they wouldn't have to do serial vaccination campaigns in Africa, because once immune, you were part of the barrier, right? WRONG, it doesn't work that way.<br><br>
But either they were faced with a dilemma, or they hadn't worked it out. The dilemma could have been that they weren't sure what the story was, but I don't believe that, because they KNEW that in the USA before the vaccine, that 98.2% of the population were immune. So why did they vaccinate everyone? To make you scared, and make you think that if you'd not had the clinical disease you must be susceptible?<br><br>
I think, like Gadjusek said, they KNEW all right, but they couldn't afford to tell you, because if they told you, you wouldn't JUST go and have the vaccine, or automatically take up the vaccine.<br><br>
You would ask the logical question which was <b>Am I immune? If I am, why should I have this vaccine?</b><br><br>
I know that intellectually you KNOW that we are all a walking bacteriological and viral cesspool. The medical profession relies on the FACT that most people don't understand that what they see as clean skin, or a healthy throat, is a walking laboratory carrying and passing on, all manner of pathogens.<br><br>
I mean... do you "see" yourself carry all these bacteria? Do you think about that, every day... "Oh, I wonder what species of meningitis I've just passed to my daughter today?" Because you have. We all do.<br><br>
It's the wonder of the immune system that, as Gadjusek says, most of us process these things and <b>NEVER EVEN KNOW</b> they were there, let alone that we processed them....<br><br>
BUT.... Even though you have antibodies to all these bacteria and viruses, you can still carry them. That is how your body boosts your natural immunity. And you can still pass them on, just as you had them passed on to you in the first place.<br><br>
Okay? With me so far?<br><br>
4) Now, lets look at chickenpox. You catch it, and you get it right? Just because you have got it, does that mean you won't CARRY it again? No. And they know that, because they say that the increase in SHINGLES is because chickenpox isn't going around so much, therefore people aren't getting carriage, which would remind the immune system to keep on its toes. I'm not sure that that's the case actually. Perhaps its because the virus that is being shed is mainly vaccine virus, which the body doesn't quite recognise the same way as the original one? I'm just speculating, because no-one has done the research to see if this is the case...<br><br>
However, this theory that there isn't as much chickenpox circulating (which I've not see an epidemiological article on to state that as proven fact by the way)... is why they are bringing out a SHINGLES vaccine, which, by the way is 14 times more potent than a chickenpox vaccine.<br><br>
So, the primary reason that people don't get shingles normally, is that they regularly come in contact with, carry, and possible pass on to others, just as they got it in the first place, the varicella virus which in the past was the same as the wild one they got in the first place. What it is now, goodness only knows.<br><br>
5) The SAME principle applies to ALL bacteria and ALL viruses. No matter whether you have HAD, or HAVE NOT HAD clinical disease, you will pick up, process and pass on to others whatever viruses you come in contact with.<br><br>
6) You have whooping cough in USA at the moment. Who are the primary spreaders of whooping cough? The "unseen" people who are either vaccinated, naturally immune, or not immune but just passing it along.<br><br>
Where the Herd Immunity theory falls down, is that the medical people have reductionist thinking just like flat earthers did. They assumed that if they didn't think it was there, or it didn't leap up and smack them around the face, it wasn't there.<br><br>
BUT THEN.... they might have gone... "ooops... we got that wrong..." Next question.<br><br><b><span style="text-decoration:underline;">SHOULD WE TELL ANYONE?</span></b><br><br>
Tell me, what would then happen if they told everyone that ooops... the herd immunity (antibodies creates a barrier against spread) is... um... not working out in practice?<br><br>
You know, logically that it doesn't provide a barrier. HOW CAN IT?<br><br>
They THOUGHT in the beginning that immunity would mean barrier,on the basis that they thought one attack meant life long immunity, therefore immunity would mean <b>being incapable of passing anything on</b> . Trouble is, further down the line they discovered that just wasn't true. What were they supposed to do then? Admit they'd been fooled by their own assumptions? That immunity long term was dependant upon regular exposure, and like Bill Gates likes doing so much, regularly updating the software NATURALLY? They were just plain wrong about that, WITH THE EXCEPTION of tetanus, because the principle doesn't even apply since its not infectious, and therefore herd immunity isn't even relevant, but they've never bothered to honestly come out and say it, because it would remove the emotional blackmail message that everyone who <b>hasn't had the disease</b> should have the vaccine.<br><br>
When you know that's rubbish. You might not have had the disease, you might have antibodies, but by the same token, you can and will pass all bacteria that are circulating around to others without getting sick yourself.<br><br>
Okay?<br><br>
Now, if you know your diseases well enough, and have, for instance, followed the polio in Minnesota, you will see that the CDC said that the oral polio viruses had circulated at least 2 years before the isolates were picked up in unimmunised kids who never had clinical illness..<br><br>
Amongst who had the polio viruses circulated?<br><br>
Yes, amongst the vaccinated.<br><br>
So tell me. How did herd immunity "help" the unvaccinated Amish children?<br><br>
It didn't.<br><br>
Mind you, they didn't get the disease, so remember this. It's only an accident we know about the polio virus isolates in Minnesota, so right there you have proof that the theory of "herd immunity" is an edwardian monkey. Or is that an insult to an Edwardian Monkey?<br><br>
So they will then SAY that vaccines reduce the spread of viruses, as in the example above of chickenpox. But I'm not sure that that is the case.That is a hypothesis. Vaccination certainly hasn't stopped the spread of meningitis, pertussis or diphtheria. Vaccination against HIB has stopped the spread of CAPSULAR Hib, not not non-capsular, or other strains of Hib... and the hole that was made by the removal of HIB was immediately filled when Pneumococcus stepped in and took its place.<br><br>
So the other thing that herd immunity can do, is cause holes, which are simply filled by yet another pathogen, which preys on the same immunological "breaches in defences" that the previous pathogen preyed on.<br><br>
What you lose on the swings you gain on the roundabouts. That's why the death rate to infections never drops. Something else, just takes its place.<br><br>
Oh and by the way, diphtheria is not a disease caused by a bacteria. We all carry the bacteria; it is ubiquitous, they just don't tell you that. But if they swabbed a hospital and cultured everyone with a specific culture to diphtheroid, we would all come up positive. That's why they stopped doing it. You only get diphtheria when a cyclical virus called a bacteriophage, hops into the drivers seat of the diphtheria bacteria and uses the lounge settee and internal computer of the diphtheria to make its own products (toxin) and cause what is then seen as toxigenic disease in whatever form that arises.<br><br>
Got that?<br><br>
Are you starting to see that a myth was perpetrated, by simply not telling you enough? And I suppose if you didn't think to think that they had not told you something, you might not put the illogic together of what they have said to you.<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">On the other hand, keeping your immune system up and running the best you can also makes it difficult for any disease to blossom and grow, thereby just being exposed to an illness does not mean you are going to "get it".</td>
</tr></table></div>
No, but as a nurse, you can still carry it and pass it on to someone else.<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">I feel like the information is staring at me right in the face, however I am somehow missing the big picture.<br><br>
Sorry for rambling. Thanks for any info!</td>
</tr></table></div>
This is part of the big picture, and it makes sense to me, but I'm very tired, so might not have explained it properly. If you don't understand something I've said, just ask, but if you start researching diseases, how natural immunity is gained, you will see that I am right.<br><br>
And you've been cleverly hoodwinked.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,343 Posts
I totally agree, MT.<br><br>
Although, I do think "herd immunity" kinda works a little.<br><br>
When you "get" some disease subclinically, without "getting it"...say it's a virus...your overall viral load, and what you thusly shed, is lower.<br>
So, in kid populations, vaxed kids aren't going to "shed" the virus the way unvaxed, sick kids will.<br>
Sometimes humoral immunity will "shut down" an infection before it ever really takes hold. Then again, sometimes the cellular immunity will, too.<br><br>
Either way, there's something to vax induced herd immunity. It's not all it's cracked up to be, but it's still there, however weak.<br><br>
JMO. I could be wrong.<br>
Come to think of it, where are all the unvaxed 20 yo's catching measles for the first time?<img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/headscratch.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="headscratch"><br>
The "antivax" thing started in the 70's, right?<br>
I know there weren't a lot of us back then, but shouldn't we be seeing/have been seeing for a while, the serious repercussions for the unvaxed regarding herd immunity?<br><br>
Am I making any sense here?<img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/lol.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="lol">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,476 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>mamakay</strong></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">I totally agree, MT.<br><br>
Although, I do think "herd immunity" kinda works a little.<br><br>
When you "get" some disease subclinically, without "getting it"...say it's a virus...your overall viral load, and what you thusly shed, is lower.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
How do you know? Got a study to prove it? After all, all these subclinically chickenpox infected kids, when on to infect others. So they must have had enough to receive and pass on.<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">So, in kid populations, vaxed kids aren't going to "shed" the virus the way unvaxed, sick kids will.</td>
</tr></table></div>
Why so? If they can do it with polio, why not with others?<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">Sometimes humoral immunity will "shut down" an infection before it ever really takes hold. Then again, sometimes the cellular immunity will, too.</td>
</tr></table></div>
I disagree. You have your immunology wrong. Cellular immunity is always the first port of call, whether you have agammaglobulinemia or not. Humoral immunity is never the first alert in any disease, or reinfection. The antigen presenting cells still have to do a job....<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">Either way, there's something to vax induced herd immunity. It's not all it's cracked up to be, but it's still there, however weak.<br><br>
JMO. I could be wrong.</td>
</tr></table></div>
I think you are. I don't think you've thought it through enough.<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">Come to think of it, where are all the unvaxed 20 yo's catching measles for the first time?<img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/headscratch.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="headscratch"></td>
</tr></table></div>
Are they catching it for the first time? How do you know?<br><br>
My husband had mumps at the age of 63, ten years ago. After going through childhood, teaching all his life, and two families.<br><br>
Why? Mumps vaccine wasn't in this country when he got it. Your assumptions are assumptions. Where is your proof?<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">The "antivax" thing started in the 70's, right?</td>
</tr></table></div>
What has that got to do with either epidemiology or virus circulation? Do you think that just because vaccination started, viruses suddenly stopped spreading?<br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">I know there weren't a lot of us back then, but shouldn't we be seeing/have been seeing for a while, the serious repercussions for the unvaxed regarding herd immunity?<br><br>
Am I making any sense here?<img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/lol.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="lol"></td>
</tr></table></div>
No. In the seventies the vaccination rates of the USA were in the 90%'s for a few diseases maybe, like pertussi... but less than 50% age figures other vaccines, so there was ample opportunity for the dirty unwashed to spread things around mightily.<br><br>
I still have newspaper clippings from 1993, which said the nationwide vaccination rates for two year olds in the whole of the USA at that time was about 54%<br><br>
Are you thinking from a conformed mindset?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,009 Posts
Edited because I made a stupid mistake about types of bacteria. If smilies were working right now, I'd be using the blushing one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,343 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">Are you thinking from a conformed mindset?</td>
</tr></table></div>
Quite possibly.<br>
But why don't we have more moms here who's kids have had measles?<br>
Lots of us have dealt with pertussis, which isn't surprising, since the pertussis vax is basically snake oil. (Even according to studies, not just the obvious fact that pertussis never "went away".)<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">Why so? If they can do it with polio, why not with others?</td>
</tr></table></div>
How, exactly, IPV "works" is a mystery to me.<br>
During the MN fiasco I tried to figure it out, but I think it might be one of those immunological unknows, as all I found was a brick wall.<br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">How do you know? Got a study to prove it? After all, all these subclinically chickenpox infected kids, when on to infect others. So they must have had enough to receive and pass on.</td>
</tr></table></div>
Right, but why is that the exception and not the norm?<br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">Why? Mumps vaccine wasn't in this country when he got it. Your assumptions are assumptions. Where is your proof?</td>
</tr></table></div>
Point taken.<br>
I'm still trying to work this all out in my head.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,758 Posts
It is my belief that vaccinated individuals don't have immunity..but a chronic form of the disease floating around in their system all the time.<br><br>
The unvaccinated individual may get the disease , but then get over it , leaving them with life long immunity (in some cases).<br><br>
It is also my deep belief that vaccinated individuals are the ones spreading the disease.<br><br>
Herd Immunity is supposed to , in theory, protect the nonvaccinated...so tell me...why do officials freak out when you say "my child isn't vaccinated" ? By their own logic , an unvaxed child should be considered "safe" because everyone around them is vaccinated. Yet no...somehow the unvaxed child is seen as a dirty disease carrying sick child. And the vaxed kids should stay away from him.<br><br>
Our society has been brainwashed into believing that injecting disease and carciongens and other toxic sludge into infants is "healthy" and to allow the child's immune system to function properly without vaccines is considered "dirty".<br><br><br><br>
I found this quote and I like it:<br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">Vaccinations do not create 'herd immunity because health does not come from its opposite, disease or injections of diseased matter.</td>
</tr></table></div>
<a href="http://www.vaclib.org/intro/debate5.htm" target="_blank">http://www.vaclib.org/intro/debate5.htm</a>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,476 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>mamakay</strong></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">Quite possibly.<br>
But why don't we have more moms here who's kids have had measles?</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Has anyone in the medical profession ever bothered to do a study, like the one on chickenpox, to see if people get immunity but never know it. I never had measles as a child. I had one shot as an adult with rubella, which I reacted to. I've no idea if I have their version of immunity, since I've never had titres done.<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">Lots of us have dealt with pertussis, which isn't surprising, since the pertussis vax is basically snake oil. (Even according to studies, not just the obvious fact that pertussis never "went away".)</td>
</tr></table></div>
<img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/lol.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="lol"> :shhhh <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/disappointed.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="disappointed"><img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/disappointed.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="disappointed"> You aren't supposed to say that. It's the best thing since sliced bread in the 1940's and that's why adults are going to get regular boosters soon too.<br><br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">How, exactly, IPV "works" is a mystery to me.<br>
During the MN fiasco I tried to figure it out, but I think it might be one of those immunological unknows, as all I found was a brick wall.</td>
</tr></table></div>
supposedly humoral immunity (antibodies) at the expense of cellular (gut) immunity. But given that only 1 per 1,000 people will ever get polio under the worst circumstances, why wouldn't the vaccine have a 99.9% "success" rate?<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">Right, but why is that (chickenpox study) the exception and not the norm?</td>
</tr></table></div>
Is it the only one that's ever been done to find something out? I've never seen one done on anything other than polio. Have you?<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">Point taken.<br>
I'm still trying to work this all out in my head.</td>
</tr></table></div>
Don't worry... so am I. With something as blatantly logical as this one, you'd have thought someone had some concrete answers. After all, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that there is a rat in the sewer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,476 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Plummeting</strong></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">This is not really related to the herd immunity question, and I don't have a whole lot to add, but I just wanted to mention that if you look carefully (and I mean VEEEERRRRRY carefully) you will often see the medical establishment admit little things here and there. For example, several months ago in one of those stupid mainstream magazines that you magically start getting when you're pregnant and that won't ever stop coming had an article in it about why it was important to wash hands, etc. In the article, they had a pathologist or immunologist or something analyze the swabs they took in different places, like a book at the ped's office, a shopping cart handle, a public toilet seat, a public doorknob, etc. One of the only types of bacteria they found on almost <i>every single surface</i> they tested was "diptheroids".</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Very interesting... remember the name of the magazine? Did they also mention that clostridium tetani is also everywhere you look? Apparently, some of the highest concentrations of CT are in the corners of hospital theatres <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/orngbiggrin.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="orange big grin"><br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">So, they admitted that the bacteria that cause diptheria are ubiquitous, but all our unvaccinated newborns aren't dead.</td>
</tr></table></div>
To explain that would be to have to tell us a whole lot more than they've ventured in the past.<br><br>
They would have to be exact, and that can't be done in a 10-second soundbite..<br><br>
People here might get grumpy about my waffling on, I've never mastered the art of advertising.<br><br>
Concision is only for those purveying conventional messages. Once you stray out of the mindset (Diphtheria is caused by a bacteria and was eliminated by a vaccine) how many words do you need to explain the anomalies?<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">Then they went even further, by breaking the bacteria down into categories based on how dangerous they were. Diptheroids were listed as "harmless", without any mention of vaccines. They didn't say, "Thanks to vaccination, diptheroids are now incapable of causing disease, but beware for your unvaccinated babies. Diptheria is lurking on every surface." They simply said diptheroids were harmless.</td>
</tr></table></div>
Well, its true. They generally are harmless. Having said that, lately there have been some cases of very serious disease where people have had diphtheroids that laboratories said did not have a phage in them. (Could have contained a new phage or parasitic pathogen that they can't detect yet though, but never considered that as an option)<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">Honestly, that article was kind of eye-opening for me.</td>
</tr></table></div>
Which is why the medical profession doesn't like to educate for higher knowledge.<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">Prior to that, I had thought the reason diptheria was so rare was because it had been eradicated due to mass vaccination. But, um, if that were the case, there wouldn't be diptheroid bacteria hanging out on my shopping cart, the pay phone and the toilet seat, because they would be nearly extinct. It's not like they can live forever on a doorknob - they need a host. That means Americans are passing diptheroids around like candy,</td>
</tr></table></div>
Yes, they have. If you research when there are cases of diphtheria in America, you come up with other wonderful gems, like the fact that there appear to be phages, UNIQUE to America, and that whenever they swab and test the community where the so-called index cases were, and type the bacteria, they find that the PCR 'bar-code" has shape-shifted, which indicates, like the polio, that there has been substantial transmission, and genetic change. But again, you never hear about that, and they only bother to do it when they actually have a case which they can see (membrane) and smeel (mousey breath). It's a classic case of what you don't see, doesn't worry you.<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">and whether you believe in herd immunity or not (I'm not personally well-versed on the subject), according to what "the establishment" tells us about diptheria, that should also mean all our planned c-section, formula fed American babies are dying of diptheria - but it doesn't. So WHY? (Mentioned c-sections and formula feeding because they *both* leave a baby's immune system robbed of necessary maternal antibodies. Some people think only formula feeding does that, but a planned c-section is just as bad.)</td>
</tr></table></div>
Agreed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,633 Posts
<img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/img/vbsmilies/smilies/notes.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="notes">:<br><br>
This topic is what I have been thinking about for months.... Off to do my research. Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,476 Posts
It's a topic everyone should seriously think about, and open their eyes and ears and look around them....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
429 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
It's all starting to come together now.... (as best as it can after a sleepless night with a vomiting infant<img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/greensad.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="greensad"> )<br><br>
Thanks for all of your replies Mamas! <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/orngbiggrin.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="orange big grin"><br><br>
MT- I usually have to read your posts then let them percolate for a little while...<br><br>
Gitti- your numbers make complete sense<img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/smile.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="smile"><br><br>
So here is where my brain is at now.<br><br>
I have worked with many MRSA and C. Diff patients and have learned that they are opportunistic little buggers in people who are immunocompromised (ie. not the right gut flora, because that is where they usually live anyway in a healthy person). Since we are all walking cess pools, it would make sense that any other disease we carry or run into is going to be opportunistic.<br><br>
The supposed difference (under the false assumption that vaccines worked) I guess would be the vaccinated folks would not get sick with the disease, however they would still have it around just like unvaccinated folks to be able to share with others... However because vaccination injures the immune system, and the cocktail of chemicals + antigens are not effective, the people vaccinated are still at just about the same risk for the disease.<br><br>
A healthy immune system is able to fight off the diseases, which it why most people aren't sick all the time, and people get sick when their natural flora is off or they are encountering something new that is making it's way through immune defenses. Would/could that disease then possibly become part of the normal flora?<br><br>
So, that being said, when an "outbreak" occurs I would assume that many more people have been exposed to the germ then those that show full blown symptoms of the diease, however their immune defenses are such that they don't show signs of infection or they already carry it as natural flora.<br><br>
Could this be how smallpox travelled across the Atlantic and killed so many Native Americans in the 16 & 1700s? Because the disease by then was a natural part of the colonists flora? (I'm just thinking out loud) Thoughts?<br><br>
This would be why there is no such thing as herd immunity.<br><br>
I know it is a simplistic description, but please correct me if I am wrong, or at least headed in the wrong direction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
429 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
However, when vaccination rates drop, why do disease rates increase if there is little or no benefit to vaccines?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,755 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Kelleybug</strong></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">I have worked with many MRSA and C. Diff patients and have learned that they are opportunistic little buggers in people who are immunocompromised (ie. not the right gut flora, because that is where they usually live anyway in a healthy person). Since we are all walking cess pools, it would make sense that any other disease we carry or run into is going to be opportunistic.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
I came across an item about the C. Dificile (it causes a bowel disease and has lately become more common). A researcher at McGill figured out that people who have been taking stomach acid suppressing drugs (those purple pills, etc) are very likely to come down with this. It turns out that we actually need stomach acid! Who would have thunk?!!? This one may be an iatrogenic disease in many folks.<br><br>
Deborah
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,488 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Kelleybug</strong></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">Since we are all walking cess pools, it would make sense that any other disease we carry or run into is going to be opportunistic.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Actually IMO all of these 'cesspool' components are a part of the healthy living body. We need those components as much as they need us. We live in a symbiotic relationship with germs. They only become a nuisance when there is in imbalance or our immune system is weakened due to medicine, lousy nutrition, environmental poisons, vaccines, stress....<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">The supposed difference (under the false assumption that vaccines worked) I guess would be the vaccinated folks would not get sick with the disease, however they would still have it around just like unvaccinated folks to be able to share with others...</td>
</tr></table></div>
Well, the reason why vaccinated folks don't get sick is the same as why unvaccinated folks don't get sick. Example: all our unvaccinated kids. And I have not had any boosters for over 45 years.<br>
And yes, we can all be carriers and we can all come down with the disease or simply pass it on.<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">However because vaccination injures the immune system, and the cocktail of chemicals + antigens are not effective, the people vaccinated are still at just about the same risk for the disease.</td>
</tr></table></div>
Of course. But they now carry this 'chemical cesspool' in their system and who knows what or when that will show its effects.<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">A healthy immune system is able to fight off the diseases, which it why most people aren't sick all the time, and people get sick when their natural flora is off or they are encountering something new that is making it's way through immune defenses. Would/could that disease then possibly become part of the normal flora?</td>
</tr></table></div>
Yes, IMO that is exactly what happens. And that is why some people don't 'show' immunity. We test the blood but the immunity is in the gut flora. That is why when they get infected they have the same chance as the person who does 'show' immunity.<br>
I believe that immunity in the blood shows recent contact with the pathogen. But why would we carry that immunity in the blood continuously? Why not just have it become a normal component of our flora gut? I believe that is what happens.<br>
This is the main reason why I actually don't give much credence to the titre test and would not subject my children, grandchildren to it.<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">So, that being said, when an "outbreak" occurs I would assume that many more people have been exposed to the germ then those that show full blown symptoms of the disease, however their immune defenses are such that they don't show signs of infection or they already carry it as natural flora.</td>
</tr></table></div>
Right, that is what I believe, too.<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">Could this be how smallpox travelled across the Atlantic and killed so many Native Americans in the 16 & 1700s? Because the disease by then was a natural part of the colonists flora?</td>
</tr></table></div>
That was one way. The other way was that they carried it across the Atlantic via orphans who were infected.<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">However, when vaccination rates drop, why do disease rates increase if there is little or no benefit to vaccines?</td>
</tr></table></div>
Where? Most measles, cp, whooping cough epidemics occur in fully or almost fully vaccinated kids.<br>
The USSR was one of the most vaccinated countries. Yet when it fell apart, all the stress of being jobless, no food, no heat, etc. created repeated diphtheria outbreaks. How can that be?<br><br>
Disease rates increase mostly because of politics.
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top