Vaccine/autism CT discussion

[Arisia]

Not even herd immunity can save you from that.

Which reminds me, where were we on the subject?

A cutesy way to put it: "Vaccines cause immunity, not autism."

 

[Mudcat]

A cutesy way to put it: "Vaccines cause immunity, not autism."

Brilliant!

 

[dafydd]

Not even herd immunity can save you from that.

Which reminds me, where were we on the subject?

Diseases are wonderful, vaccines are bad.

 

[Clayton Moore]

It's a percentage game; those diseases are milder if you have them young, but they can still be deadly or very serious in their effects, but rarely enough that it's quite possible not to personally know anyone so affected. For example, Roald Dahl lost his daughter to measles because vaccination wasn't available. Vaccination is also not totally risk-free, but the numbers are whole lot more favourable than having children catch the diseases when young.

I wasn't aware of parties to spread diseases when I was young, and was fairly shocked when I heard of the idea much more recently. One of things I must remember to ask my mum about. On the other hand, my sister and I seemed to pick up all the common diseases without trying too hard.

50 years ago? It is more likely that today's medical technology would have saved his daughter.

Think about this. If bed rest and a dark room were pretty much the remedy for measles in 1960 don't you think science could head off complications after 50 years?

How many trillions of dollars has the American public spent on measles vaccines?

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post
It's more like not rocking the boat or not shaking the money tree when the non elites are looking.

A million or so laid out for research with a desired result is less than a butterfly wing in the animal world. About 100 million flu shots a year at $60 a pop + $60 a visit to the doctor.

$360,000,000,000


That's one vaccine.

Obama's budget total a record $3.8 trillion

$360,000,000,000 = $.36 trillion.


I think it's safe to say that every year vaccines cost Americans way more than the yearly national budget.


Vaccine money should be spent toward curing diseases rather than haphazardly trying to prevent them.

 

[Arisia]

Diseases are wonderful, vaccines are bad.

Pretty good... still like mine better, of course.




It doesn't take much for me to regain my strength for this particular battle. I just think about my mom, 82 years old, and her stories about the scourge diseases like polio were during her childhood in the 1930s and 40s, and the fact I don't have similar stories to tell my daughter about my childhood in the 1970s and 80s.

 

[Straw Man]

50 years ago? It is more likely that today's medical technology would have saved his daughter.

Think about this. If bed rest and a dark room were pretty much the remedy for measles in 1960 don't you think science could head off complications after 50 years?

Pray tell, Mr Moore, what wonderful piece of modern medical technology could have saved her? Is there a Measles zapping laser? Perhaps there's an anti-measles app for doctor's iPhones?

Do doctors today fight viruses with hardware?

How many trillions of dollars has the American public spent on measles vaccines?



Obama's budget total a record $3.8 trillion

$360,000,000,000 = $.36 trillion.


I think it's safe to say that every year vaccines cost Americans way more than the yearly national budget.

Some official figures would be good, instead of woo.

Vaccine money should be spent toward curing diseases rather than haphazardly trying to prevent them.

Haphazardly? Smallpox is gone. Polio has vanished from most of the world, and if the backward thinking regions of the world are overcome, and vaccination takes place, it will be gone.

The greatest danger is the anti-vax crowd.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Vaccine money should be spent toward curing diseases rather than haphazardly trying to prevent them.

"The best offense is a good defense."
"An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."

 

[Giordano]

50 years ago? It is more likely that today's medical technology would have saved his daughter.

Think about this. If bed rest and a dark room were pretty much the remedy for measles in 1960 don't you think science could head off complications after 50 years?

How many trillions of dollars has the American public spent on measles vaccines?



Obama's budget total a record $3.8 trillion

$360,000,000,000 = $.36 trillion.


I think it's safe to say that every year vaccines cost Americans way more than the yearly national budget.


Vaccine money should be spent toward curing diseases rather than haphazardly trying to prevent them.

Total number of births per year in USA = approximately 4,000,000
http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2011/08/us-births-decline-in-2010.html

Cost of all recommended vaccinations per year = approximately $1,170
http://children.costhelper.com/baby-immunization.html

Total cost of vaccines in USA per year (the first multiplied by the second) = $4,880,000,000 (that is 2.88 billion, or .288 trillion, or less than one thousandth the USA annual budget).

Clayton, you seem to have made an error of nearly 100-fold in your calculations.

And in comparison, value of being alive and healthy: priceless.

 

[Giordano]

Vaccine money should be spent toward curing diseases rather than haphazardly trying to prevent them.

Sure, because who would want to never have a disease if the opportunity of becoming sick, but eventually recovering, is offered to them? Which diseases do you like to acquire and be cured of, Clayton?

By the way, why do you trust big pharma to discover and offer these cures when they are too immoral to tell "the truth" about vaccines? Why do you think these cures will be safer than vaccines, when typically the drugs already used to cure diseases have significantly more side effects than vaccines?

Also, so finally you admit that you think all vaccines are bad! Okay, thanks- that helps me understand you better in the future of this thread. So its not, as you have claimed at different times, that too many vaccines are injected at one time, or that the MMR vaccine is bad, or the anthrax vaccine is bad, or aluminum, or formalin, or whatever! You believe all vaccines are bad or wastes of money and the money spent should go into cures after one acquires a disease. It took a long time for you to be willing to state that.

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

50 years ago? It is more likely that today's medical technology would have saved his daughter.

Think about this. If bed rest and a dark room were pretty much the remedy for measles in 1960 don't you think science could head off complications after 50 years?

Yes, because nowadays we give a vaccine, which would have prevented the deadly form of the disease, thus saving her life, at the same time preventing a large hospital bill.

 

[Clayton Moore]

Total number of births per year in USA = approximately 4,000,000
http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2011/08/us-births-decline-in-2010.html

Cost of all recommended vaccinations per year = approximately $1,170
http://children.costhelper.com/baby-immunization.html

Total cost of vaccines in USA per year (the first multiplied by the second) = $4,880,000,000 (that is 2.88 billion, or .288 trillion, or less than one thousandth the USA annual budget).

Clayton, you seem to have made an error of nearly 100-fold in your calculations.

And in comparison, value of being alive and healthy: priceless.

That would seem to be the total for babies in their first year.

4,000,000 x 1170 = 4,680,000,000

You forgot 4 million babies a year add up via adolescence to about 72 non-adults getting vaccines. For balance I used only 52 million or so.

12 x 4,680,000,000 + 4,680,000,000 $60,840,000,000

360,000,000,000 is the cost of flu vaccine for 100 million people.

 

[zooterkin]

That would seem to be the total for babies in their first year.

4,000,000 x 1170 = 4,680,000,000

You forgot 4 million babies a year add up via adolescence to about 72 non-adults getting vaccines. For balance I used only 52 million or so.

12 x 4,680,000,000 + 4,680,000,000 $60,840,000,000

360,000,000,000 is the cost of flu vaccine for 100 million people.

No, it isn't, even using your own figures.

100 million flu shots a year at $60 a pop + $60 a visit to the doctor.

is $120 * 100 million

== $12,000,000,000

Twelve billion, not .36 trillion.

ETA: And are you sure you're not doubling up? Does the $60 cost of the vaccine not include giving it? Here supermarket pharmacies and other places will administer it, you don't need to go to the doctor for it (and I got it free from my employer).

 

[Matthew Ellard]

The Role of Cost-Effectiveness in U.S. Vaccination Policy

Today, the schedule of recommended routine child and adolescent vaccines includes more than 30 doses against 16 diseases — more than double the number in 1980. The public-sector cost of fully vaccinating one person as recommended through adulthood (not including annual influenza vaccines) is roughly $1,450 for males and $1,800 for females, of which the HPV and meningococcal vaccinations alone account for more than 25% at current prices.

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1110539

This article, from 2011, may provide some insight into the public sector cost.

 

[zooterkin]

50 years ago? It is more likely that today's medical technology would have saved his daughter.

Think about this. If bed rest and a dark room were pretty much the remedy for measles in 1960 don't you think science could head off complications after 50 years?

Do you actually read responses to your posts? The answer remains the same as it was the last time you exposed your incredulity.

It's 2012. Why should anyone die of measles in the USA in the same numbers as they did in the 1950s?

There is no treatment for measles once a child has it. Fewer children die of it now because most are vaccinated against it and therefore do not catch the disease.

How many trillions of dollars has the American public spent on measles vaccines?

None, probably.

Obama's budget total a record $3.8 trillion

$360,000,000,000 = $.36 trillion.


I think it's safe to say that every year vaccines cost Americans way more than the yearly national budget.

I think it's safe to say you need to work on your simple arithmetic.

Vaccine money should be spent toward curing diseases rather than haphazardly trying to prevent them.

Well, I might agree with you if that's what was going on.

To be clear, are you claiming that vaccination never works in preventing any disease?

 

[Robert Prey]

I find it interesting that you only cited a definition after I cited one that contradicted you.

http://www.nhs.uk/Planners/vaccinations/Pages/sciencevaccinations.aspx

If enough people in a community are vaccinated, it’s harder for a disease to pass between those who are not. This is called herd immunity.

Herd immunity is particularly important in protecting people who can't get vaccinated because they're too ill or they're having treatment that damages their immune system.​

http://www.niaid.nih.gov/topics/pages/communityimmunity.aspx

When a critical portion of a community is immunized against a contagious disease, most members of the community are protected against that disease because there is little opportunity for an outbreak. Even those who are not eligible for certain vaccines—such as infants, pregnant women, or immunocompromised individuals—get some protection because the spread of contagious disease is contained. This is known as "community immunity."​

Please provide evidence for your claim that polio was in decline when mass vaccs started. I want actual evidence, not your claims. Please also provide evidence that the decline after mass vaccs started was due to herd immunity. And don't even bother with "look for yourself" or any other attempt to shift the burden of proof, or I will call you a sophist.

And, just like I said, you avoided proving that "the statistical numbers are often cooked", despite quoting me predicting you would backpedal.

 

[Tomtomkent]

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=808&pictureid=6647[/qimg]

And if we extend that graph to the present, how many upwards trends do we see after vaccinations are introduced? You know like the ones we can see BEFORE vaccination?

If we extend that chart backwards, we see a number of peaks and troughs, that we can all a Frequency of Events. What has the Frequency become?

See. Statistics are fun.

 

[Robert Prey]

Why are there no cases of smallpox today?

Smallpox vaccine was a good idea when there was a smallpox epidemic, but today, it is a very bad idea.

 

[Robert Prey]

And they don't get polio because they have been vaccinated. Why are you a fan of these horrid diseases?

Not at all. But there is a lot of brainwash out there concerning vaccinations. Just seeking to impart some balance with uncensored facts.

 

[Robert Prey]

Then why do you continue to lie?



Again, since you didn't address the question, do you find that really preferable that thousands of people die horribly from disease that might otherwise be saved? If so, why so?

No. That's why when considering whether to vaccinate, it is always wise to think twice.

 

[Tomtomkent]

:

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=694&pictureid=6639[/qimg]

Ah look, my question is already answered: Zero. The frequency of events is zero since we started vaccinating. No sudden spikes, no gradual climbs, vaccination has had the effect of preventing further outbreaks, just like we expected.

In the case of polio we can be more specific. We not only know there was a downwards trend in cases, we know WHY: We know that the cause of polio had been identified and that people were taking preventative measures to avoid exposure. We also know the effect this had on the quality of life.

We could even be very clever and look at the decreased incident rate of Polio with the exposures to what would have been considered Risk Factors before vaccination. We could for example ask if those people who are not being infected because of vaccination have been exposed to swimming pools and the "clean water curse".

Or we could have some common sense and ask when the vaccine will be most effective at illiminating the bug. If introduced on an upwards or downwards trend? A downwards trend is the obvious choice for obvious reasons. Pretending that the vaccines have zero effect and the downwards trend would have ended in a plateau, despite the peaks and troughs visible before vaccination, is unfounded.