Vaccines overload immune system? - Yet another negative study

[Deetee]

We seem to keep reinventing the wheel as far as vaccine research is concerned, merely to placate rabid antivaccine campaigners. If its not autism, its the suggestion that the infant immune system gets "overloaded" by vaccines, making it less responsive to other infections.

Now we have another vast study that refutes this concept (well it shows absolutely no supporting evidence for the hypothesis)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4134546.stm

850 000 children were studied in this particular project.
What do the antivaxers say?
Yup, .......you guessed it, they call for more research.

 

[Mojo]

I see we have the usual clutching at straws, in the form of an alleged sub-group who are susceptible:

But Jackie Fletcher of Jabs, which believes 1,000 children in Britain have been damaged by the MMR jab, said: "I believe there is a susceptible group of children who have vulnerable immune systems, and could be identified before vaccinations were given."

That is, she believe vaccines damage children in some way, therefore if an epidemiological study shows no damage, it must be because it's damaging a small sub-group not easily detectable by epidemiology. As usual, vaccine damage as a premise rather than a conclusion.

 

[geni]

well sort of they habve used highly complex lines af argument ot dissmiss it

So, do you think Offit will volunteer to have his children have 1,000 vaccines on the same day?

AHhhhhhh, but did they find any evidence of a rise in chronic illnesses? (Oh, I guess they'd have to look at the kiddos for more than 5 years, huh?)

So all they really concluded is that vaxed kids weren't HOSPITALIZED for INFECTIOUS diseases more often. Suffering long term doesn't matter, I guess.

When I heard the clip on the news last night saying it was safe for my child to get multiple shots at once I immediately thought "Thank Goodness, I can now go out and get dd updated for the past 3 years all in one sitting"

Oh wait...she's not Danish

Where did the saying come from: Something is rotten in denmark!

http://www.mothering.com/discussions/showthread.php?p=3607218#post3607218

 

[CurtC]

I see we have the usual clutching at straws, in the form of an alleged sub-group who are susceptible: That is, she believe vaccines damage children in some way, therefore if an epidemiological study shows no damage, it must be because it's damaging a small sub-group not easily detectable by epidemiology.

To be fair, if this were really true that a very small sub-group of the population were susceptible, you would not be able to see it with epidemiological studies of 800,000 children. The study didn't disprove this; it only disproved that larger numbers of kids are affected.

Of course, there is also no reason to believe that it's true. "More study" in this case would require first figuring out what this susceptibility consists of, then doing studies on that sub-population, but that is almost impossible. The susceptible subpopulation is an argument that's almost impossible to falsify, so it will be around for a while.

 

[Eos of the Eons]

Saying there MIGHT be susceptibility is like saying (in cases of paternity testing) that the one in 5 billion chance that the match is NOT the kid's dad might be the case. It's so unfathomable, so unrealistic, so astronomically unlikely that it's a wast of time to consider.

It's also ridiculous. We might as well consider that doing surgery for appendicitus is not worth the "risk".

Idiocy. Why even try to appease the ignorant. Let them get mad and rant. Enough time and money has been wasted. Let them have their "choice" and not vaccinate. The outbreaks are taking care of it. Babies are dying, and they are happy their babies died "of natural causes". Everyone's happy...except the dead babies...but we don't give them choices since the parents are the ones that get to decide if their unfounded fears based on ignorant lies by "naturopaths et al" mean more than their childrens' lives.

 

[clarsct]

Saying there MIGHT be susceptibility is like saying (in cases of paternity testing) that the one in 5 billion chance that the match is NOT the kid's dad might be the case. It's so unfathomable, so unrealistic, so astronomically unlikely that it's a wast of time to consider.

It's also ridiculous. We might as well consider that doing surgery for appendicitus is not worth the "risk".

Idiocy. Why even try to appease the ignorant. Let them get mad and rant. Enough time and money has been wasted. Let them have their "choice" and not vaccinate. The outbreaks are taking care of it. Babies are dying, and they are happy their babies died "of natural causes". Everyone's happy...except the dead babies...but we don't give them choices since the parents are the ones that get to decide if their unfounded fears based on ignorant lies by "naturopaths et al" mean more than their childrens' lives.

Ah, but Eos, you forget that you're letting thousands of generations of viruses reproduce in the kids that aren't "vaxxed". This gives a virus more time and oppourtunity to mutate and pose a threat to the kids whose parents are slightly brighter than 10 Watts.

NO, they must be fought. Anti-Vax folks are creating a public danger, the way I see it. They're creating places to harbor harmful viruses, kind of like cockroaches. An early education in science is key. We must educate!

Sorry, I'll take my soapbox and run along now, before I really get started....

 

[Eos of the Eons]

I totally understand. Thing is, why try to appease anti-vax idiocy with more studies? Pointless. Better to educate those who aren't as prone to listening to lies. I've seen some stats saying only 1% of the population fill out the forms for exemptions. We need to focus on getting vaccinations to those who do want them in order to keep herd immunity up. I say ignore anti-vaxxers and keep up education and vaccination for the 99% of the population that will not fall for idiocy. Keep up the research and funding in case the anti-vaxxers cause mutation rates for the microbes to be a cause for concern.
Make people aware the need for herd immunity since the anti-vaxxers create pockets for outbreaks.

We have mutations in the flu microbe several times a year. We barely keep up with yearly vaccinations for the flu because of that.

We're not seeing mutated forms in most other vaccine preventable diseases even though they are prevalent in other parts of the world. Measles kills thousands per year.

http://www.azdhs.gov/news/2005-all/pout.htm

Create newer and better vaccines, incease coverage for age groups where immunity is waning.

It's time to ignore the noise makers, the jerks that cause us to take funding from improving vaccination and waste it on unneeded defence of them. Ignore the 1%, swat down the liars, and keep moving forward.

 

[clarsct]

*nod*

I thought you were giving up for a minute, there..


Can't have that.



The thing is, we have a very vocal 1% to a relatively silent 99%. As history teaches us, it is entirely possible for a vocal 1% to control a silent 99%. We must be on guard.


I thought you were saying:
"Heck with them! Let them do what they want!"

When really we should be saying:
"Hell NO! If you do not want to vaccinate your children, then quarantine them from mine!"

They are modern day pariahs, and should be treated as such.

As for more studies, well, more studies aren't a bad thing. THe preponderence of evidence will weigh in our favor. We should be studying how the stimulation of the immune system STREGNTHENS the immune response, granted. More science is always good, M'Dear....

 

[Asolepius]

This topic has a broader perspective. I am going to bore everyone yet again with my favourite quotation:

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke).

I do not believe that people should be free to believe irrational and dangerous things without challenge. Allowing them to do so undermines society. We all have a responsibility to humanity to oppose the present political correctness which threatens to bring on a new Dark Age.

 

[geni]

I totally understand. Thing is, why try to appease anti-vax idiocy with more studies?

Due to they way the helthcare system works in denmark these kind of studies are pretty cheap to do. Now we just need to explain why some vaccines seem to be protecting against illnesses they were not ment to.

 

[Deetee]

I've seen some stats saying only 1% of the population fill out the forms for exemptions. We need to focus on getting vaccinations to those who do want them in order to keep herd immunity up. I say ignore anti-vaxxers and keep up education and vaccination for the 99% of the population that will not fall for idiocy.

In the UK its 85% who decide the "risk" of MMR is greater than the diseases.
By all means lets help the sensible ones reinforce their good practice by keeping on educating them, but mostly we will preach to the converted.
How we reach the remaining 15% is important. The majority of these will be those who have read something woolly about MMR risk in the papers or a magazine, but actually know very little by way of true facts. These should be the main target.
The rabid antivaxers (the 1% or so) will never change, even if their own kids die - they will rationalise it away by calling it something else, absolving themselves from all responsibility.

Recently a very vocal AIDS denialist's child died (Christine Maggiore). She denies she has HIV, and both her kids have been born without the benefit of preventive measures to stop them getting HIV during birth. Now one has died, and the denialists are blaming it on doctors who "failed" to recognise and treat an ear infection quickly, which spread to septicaemia and death. Christine refuses to accept her own HIV status, and will never entertain the probability that her own child was HIV infected and succumbed to infection that could have been stopped by her. These are the sort of people who will never be amenable to the truth, like some antivaxers.

 

[clarsct]

AIDS denialists?

When does the hurting stop?

 

[Eos of the Eons]

Yep, a complex issue that ties into other strange beliefs that are popping up like those moles on that "whack-a-mole" game. We can thank the internet, the media, and crazy/normal humans.

I can appreciate what that 1% does. It does affect everyone. I'm just so darn tired of all the idiocy, the uphill battle, and the neverending tides of more idiocy.

If people could only appreciate where the anti-conventional, pro-feel good but do-nothing garbage comes from. It's a thankless fight that has won me nothing but alienation and disrespect in my own life. I am wearing down as there is no positive reinforcement of any kind on my end. Only ridicule and stress.

At work the chiros are getting more support, meaning people are getting more coverage to see them regularly. Chiros are notoriously anti-vaccine around here. Them getting more support will only create larger battles for the "mainstream". I ended up opening my big mouth to a couple of coworkers, and now I'm the butt of jokes. Chiros are "doctors". I'm a weirdo. When folks were rejecting the free flu vaccines I went up and got it. A nurse set up shop at our workplace for crying out loud, and the shots were free, but people were all saying "oh it will just make you sick, blah blah". I'm allergic to eggs, and all I got was a sore arm!!

So don't mind me. I'm just getting tired of trying to do a bit for critical thinking. It's a lonely thankless job.

 

[clarsct]

I had no idea that Canadians were so.....woo-ish. I've garnered some support amongst my friends for my beliefs. Of course. Loaning out my first and second season DVDs of Bull$h!t helped a bit with that.

It sounds as if you need some new friends, kiddo. I admit I have friends who believe in ghosts and all sorts of nonsense, but I am getting through to them. Slowly. Oh, so slowly. But they respect my beliefs, as well. I tend to be tolerant, to a point. But when it becomes a health and safety issue, my famed tolerance tends to take a back seat. I hadn't known there WAS a anti-vaxx movement before I started posting here. I find it appalling. I guess down here in IL, we have too many farmers that have to vaccinate their own animals. I don't know.

At least you have some support here, little as it may be. Keep up the good fight and know you are not alone!!

"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."-Tennyson, from "Ulysses"

 

[IIRichard]

I agree with those who say, "There is no convincing these people." I sometimes wonder if their irrational behavior doesn't segue into mental illness.

What I do think should be done is to make it so inconvienient NOT to vaccinate that the fence sitters or those merely following on like sheep will take the easy way out and vaccinate.

Perhaps requiring those who object on one ground or another to get a court order would be a start. Better minds than mine can think of other ways.

IIRichard

 

[BillHoyt]

So don't mind me. I'm just getting tired of trying to do a bit for critical thinking. It's a lonely thankless job.

Only thankless if you look to the woos to give thanks. If, however, you take pleasure in finding things out (as Feynman suggests), that is the only immediate thanks you get be assured of. Sorry, Eos. illegitimi non carborundum

 

[Eos of the Eons]

Thanks for the words of wisdom. Don't mind me. I get frustrated now and then.

So, I've been thinking of trying to get resources for the next time free flu shot are offered at work. Good refutations for the rampant claims that the shots cause the flu or don't prevent it at all. Those were the main reasons given by the guys for not getting it.

Claims of immune system overloads by vaccines are just plain ludicrous. If that were the case then we'd be overwhelmed by everything we take in just by breathing, eating, and drinking.