• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Vaccine/autism CT discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Clayton Moore said:
You didn't go to the doctors so you wouldn't spread the disease to already ill children....
Click to expand...
False.

Clayton Moore said:
Wow. Can you believe mothers would endanger their children by exposing them to deadly diseases?
Click to expand...

I've heard stories as well. Thing is, kids have better immune systems than adults. There is a provable medical benefit in exposing them to illnesses so they can develop an immunity. Of course, now even major illnesses can be effectively vaccinated against, so there's no need.

abaddon said:
It is quite common for measles parties and chickenpox parties to occur. How did you not know this?
Click to expand...

The same way he doesn't know anything else, one assumes.

Clayton Moore said:
One in a hundred become autistic.
Click to expand...

Dodge. Even assuming that statistic is true, there's no change in autism rate between vacced and non-vacced kids.

Clayton Moore said:
The article goes on to say that the poor are less likely to become autistic.

Translated to common sense it means that poor parents are less likely to keep pace with the insane vaccine schedule.
Click to expand...

Lol no. The article says that in one of the poorest states, Alabama, the rate was lower and had dropped. It also said they only had limited statistics, and there is margin of error.

That's not "common sense", you just jumped to conclusions. If it was richer states, you'd say that rich people secretly know better than to get vaccines.
 
Clayton Moore said:
Exactomundo. I'm sure I've posted that at least 50 times.
Click to expand...

Did you also post that not inoculating the children could led to a sweeping epidemic among the ADULT population? You know, the ones who can die from these innocuous diseases?
 
Clayton Moore said:
The article goes on to say that the poor are less likely to become autistic.

Translated to common sense it means that poor parents are less likely to keep pace with the insane vaccine schedule.
Click to expand...

False, true common sense would dictate further research and what do we find? As linked to by others in this forum, older fathers contributes to greater incidence of autism, and the reason for both older mothers and fathers is that having children later in life is a consequence of people focusing on career and education. Those are not considerations among the poor and in fact one factor among young parents that is fairly common is low income.
Another factor, cited in the article Clayton posted, that increased diagnoses is partially due to better methods of making the diagnoses. Clayton correctly points out that the poor (in countries without social medical plans) are less likely to have their kids vaccinated yet by the same measure they are also a lot less likely to visit a specialist therefore less likely to get a diagnoses period.
 
Last edited:
Clayton Moore said:
One in a hundred become autistic.
Click to expand...

From the measles vaccine.

Got any of that, you know, evidence to support this?

And one notes that you neglected to answer the other part: how many children died or were permanently disfigured by the measles?
 
Last edited:
TSR said:
From the measles vaccine.

Got any of that, you know, evidence to support this?

And one notes that you neglected to answer the other part: how many children died or were permanently disfigured by the measles?
Click to expand...

Information about measles morbidity and mortality were previously provided to Clayton a few months ago. I think it was in this thread, but it may have been in one of Clayton's related threads. He can just look it up if he's forgotten.
 
Last edited:
Clayton, given you will not tell use which vaccines you consider safe, or how many should be given at one time, let me narrow my question:

Do you think the smallpox vaccine was a good idea or not?
 
jdc324 said:
Well, nobody you know died...

Measles and whooping cough can be deadly diseases though. In England, there were 85 deaths per year from measles in the 60s (up to 1968 when the vaccine was introduced) and 140 per year in the 50s. And in the United States, measles caused 450 reported deaths and 4,000 cases of encephalitis annually before measles vaccine became available in the mid-1960s.

.
Click to expand...

How old were the people who died? When I was a child the general opinion was that the five children's diseases weren't so bad if you got them when you were young. I know of nobody who died. I had German measles when I was five, and my main memory of that is my mother teaching me how to knit .
 
Last edited:
dafydd said:
How old were the people who died? When I was a child the general opinion was that the five children's diseases weren't so bad if you got them when you were young. I know of nobody who died. I had German measles when I was five, and my main memory of that is my mother teaching me how to knit .
Click to expand...

I knew a kid who died of the measles. 18 months old, so more a baby than a child.

I remember the parties too, and what kid didn't like a party?

The parties that were held weren't always a great success. I got mumps as a kid, and did lose hearing, so much so, it nearly cost me getting into HMAF, and with age, it has got worse. I don't think the vaccine was available when I was a kid, and, of course, Mumps is far worse, like most things, as an adult.

And, to further address CM's point that children were not taken to the doctor's if they had a childhood disease, I will quote directly from an email in reply to answering the question.

Did we go to the docs as kids? Sure we did. Any sort of fever or rash mom would be dragging us down to Dr Collins office.
Click to expand...

When asked why I wanted to know, and giving them the reason:

Does this man think that there was some sort of label came with every rash or temperature? Your child was sick then you had your child looked at by your physician.
Click to expand...
 
jdc324 said:
Well, nobody you know died...

Measles and whooping cough can be deadly diseases though. In England, there were 85 deaths per year from measles in the 60s (up to 1968 when the vaccine was introduced) and 140 per year in the 50s. And in the United States, measles caused 450 reported deaths and 4,000 cases of encephalitis annually before measles vaccine became available in the mid-1960s.

We had an unfounded whooping cough vaccine scare in England in the late 70s - immunisation coverage dropped to 30% in 1975 resulting in major epidemics in 1977/79 and 1981/83. From 1978 to 1982 there were 44 deaths from pertussis.
Click to expand...

dafydd said:
How old were the people who died? When I was a child the general opinion was that the five children's diseases weren't so bad if you got them when you were young. I know of nobody who died. I had German measles when I was five, and my main memory of that is my mother teaching me how to knit .
Click to expand...
I have figures for measles mortality by age (England and Wales) from 1980 onwards: http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAweb&HPAwebStandard/HPAweb_C/1195733811885 and the age group with most deaths in the 80s for 8 out of 10 years is 1-4 years old. The 15+ age group tends to be second - but then, that is by far the largest group.

If you want to look at what happened in relatively recent outbreaks...

"Three children (aged 6 months, 4 years, and 10 years, respectively) died. The remaining 125 (21%) cases of identified measles-associated hospitalizations occurred among persons aged >15 years, including three additional cases of encephalitis and one measles-associated death attributed to respiratory failure in a person aged 29 years." http://www.cdc.gov/mmwR/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5243a4.htm

"The case-fatality rate for children aged 5 to 19 years (0.1%) was five to six times lower than that for preschool-age children and adults." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1022280/pdf/westjmed00074-0031.pdf The case fatality rate of 1 in 1000 in children aged 5 to 19 is actually higher than I'd expected; that the rate in preschool-age children and adults is reported as being around 1 in 200 is pretty shocking.

In the absence of a vaccine against measles, I don't think measles parties for schoolchildren were necessarily a bad idea given the lower fatality rate. Although, of course, and child who caught the disease at a measles party would have been at risk of passing it on to younger siblings or adults. (A measles party now, in an era when we have a safe and effective vaccine, would of course be a monstrously stupid idea. Measles parties may have been a pragmatic way of protecting school-age children at the possible expense of others but vaccination is win-win: you protect yourselves and others.)

As far as I know, infants are most at risk when it comes to pertussis. This supports my recollection: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5128a2.htm "A total of 17 deaths of persons having pertussis symptom onset in 2000 were reported to CDC by 12 states. All deaths occurred among infants born in the United States, with onset of pertussis symptoms at age <4 months."

I note that you refer to German measles, something that I haven't claimed to be a deadly disease. Rubella is quite different to measles and tends to be a mild, self-limiting disease. The big problem with rubella is the risk it poses to pregnant women.
 
zooterkin said:
Well, in one way you may be right, because when I was young it was common for GPs to make house calls.
Click to expand...

Speaking with Americans, it seems to vary from doctor to doctor whether or not they made house calls, and how much they charged extra for the privilege. It still does not take away from the fact that parents did take their kids to the quack if they had a childhood disease.

I know that in the UK, a few decades ago, your parents could have the GP pop around and have a look at you. Always a good way to see if you were swinging the lead, as those doctors had no time for time wasting.
 
abaddon said:
What, really? I recall that from decades ago here, but do they still do it in Belgium? Srsly, not extracting the you know what.
Click to expand...

Yes, seriously. Because of the Belgian health system , the GP's are in direct competition with each other. There are about twenty doctors in my area and I can choose which one I use as my ''house doctor'', as they say here. If a GP here did not do daily house calls then they would have no patients. Weekends and after six pm if you call your doctor about something urgent then you are referred to the doctor who is on call-up. They all take turns being the ''doctor van wacht'', the waiting doctor.
 
dafydd said:
Yes, seriously. Because of the Belgian health system , the GP's are in direct competition with each other. There are about twenty doctors in my area and I can choose which one I use as my ''house doctor'', as they say here. If a GP here did not do daily house calls then they would have no patients. Weekends and after six pm if you call your doctor about something urgent then you are referred to the doctor who is on call-up. They all take turns being the ''doctor van wacht'', the waiting doctor.
Click to expand...

Wow. Here we visit our G.P. for whatever ails you and sit in the waiting room and take your turn. If you have something more urgent, then you call the D-doc., a public service GP on wheels, blue lights, sirens, the whole nine yards. If it is yet more urgent then ambulance and ER are the order of the day. House calls? Disappeared years ago.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom