bush_cheney2004 Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 No, it's entirely reasonable to blame stupid anti vaxxers. The vaccine itself is fine. Blame them for what....a vaccine that was modified to reduce side effects....and effectiveness against pertussis ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 That's all nonsense. -k In terms of the whooping cough outbreak, 90% of those who got it were vaccinated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 Blame them for what....a vaccine that was modified to reduce side effects....and effectiveness against pertussis ? Blame them for being stupid and listening to blonde airhead porn actresses and paranoid loonies instead of doctors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 Ms. McCarthy is a natural brunette...and she has proven it. That "airhead porn actress" got $25 million from Jim Carrey, not doctors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted January 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 Agreed...it is nonsense to expect herd immunity when the current pertussis vaccine is not as effective as before. It is stupid to blame "anti-vaxxers" when the actual vaccine sucks. In terms of the whooping cough outbreak, 90% of those who got it were vaccinated. Ok, you two guys clearly don't understand how herd immunity works. Would you like some help with it, or is this just going to turn into another Pliny vs Magnets type situation? -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted January 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 Ms. McCarthy is a natural brunette...and she has proven it. Oh. Well then I guess she must be smart then. -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 Oh. Well then I guess she must be smart then. Oh my...so serious are we ? OK...what will those poor Americans do about anti-vaxxers and a piss poor pertussis vaccine? Canada can only pray and hope ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overthere Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 Smack an anti-vaxxer upside the head today. And then get yourself ot a public health clinic to be revaccinated for pertussis. I did that a couple weks ago, at the urging of the public health nurse who was giving me an unrelated travel vaccination. The shots we get when young have a shelf life. Whooping cough can be deadly for the elderly and especially for infants- babies cannot be vaccinated until age one. Most deaths of children from whooping cough are contracted from adults: the parents and family crowding around that new birth. The public nurse had about of the disease herself a couple years ago. She saidf she coughed until she vomited for weeks, and in the process broke two ribs from violent coughing. All preventable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 Let's try this again... Protection against the disease pertussis, or whooping cough, doesn’t appear to be as strong with the currently administered vaccine when compared with the older version administered up until the 1990s, according to a new study in Pediatrics. During a pertussis outbreak in 2010–11 in California teens who had received four doses of the current vaccine were at almost six times more likely to get pertussis as those who had received four doses of the older preparation. The study offers more precise evidence that the earlier pertussis vaccine was superior to the current one, building on previous research that had already shown that the newer vaccine’s effectiveness wanes sooner than expected. The new formula’s reduced effectiveness is most likely driving the recent epidemics of pertussis, says the study’s lead author, Nicola Klein, co-director of Kaiser Permanente Vaccine Study Center in Oakland, Calif. After more than three decades that never saw annual U.S. pertussis cases top 10,000 (they usually totaled fewer than 3,000), the number of cases began climbing rapidly in the late 1990s. The 27,550 cases in 2010 were the highest since 1959, and the preliminary 2012 numbers, at 41,880, were the highest since 1955. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/whooping-cough-vaccine-falls-short-of-previous-shots-protection/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 If were blaming anti-vaxxers, then way the outbreak of mumps among NHL players? Are they also anti-vax? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 If were blaming anti-vaxxers, then way the outbreak of mumps among NHL players? Are they also anti-vax? Same general cause. Stupidity. I mean, come on! It's winter and you're going to share someone's water bottle!? Really!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCoastRunner Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 If were blaming anti-vaxxers, then way the outbreak of mumps among NHL players? Are they also anti-vax? If you had of read the previous post regarding the mumps outbreak, you might have gained some sort of inkling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 There are about 170 pairs of whooping cranes in North America. Perhaps if we got rid of these then the disease may be eradicated. Perhaps not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted January 4, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Let's try this again... Yes, I saw that earlier. And as I pointed out then, you clearly don't get the whole idea of herd immunity. Herd immunity doesn't require that every member of the herd be immune, it only requires that a sufficiently large proportion of the herd be immune for the infection to find insufficient vulnerable members to achieve the traction to become established. Isolated cases can still occur, but vulnerable individuals are too rare for it to turn into an outbreak. In other words, an outbreak is unlikely in a population where everybody is immunized, even if the vaccine is only 87% effective. However, in a population where 60% of people are using a vaccine that's 87% effective, and 40% of people are using miso soup and yoga to ward off infection, an outbreak is far more likely. -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 ...In other words, an outbreak is unlikely in a population where everybody is immunized, even if the vaccine is only 87% effective. Clearly that is not the case in California, where those who were immunized with the recommended four doses did not enjoy protection at that level. What's worse than no vaccinations ? Assuming protection from a crappy vaccine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted January 4, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Then explain why the outbreak is at schools with these lowest vaccination rates. Explain why we keep seeing outbreaks of measles at churches where they think prayer will protect them from disease. The new vaccine might not be as good as the old one but it is a hell of a lot more effective than miso soup. You seem strangely unable to grasp this concept. -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Then explain why the outbreak is at schools with these lowest vaccination rates. Explain why we keep seeing outbreaks of measles at churches where they think prayer will protect them from disease. The pediatric studies also found ineffective vaccinations for high rates as well. Lots of people pray after they get a disease. The new vaccine might not be as good as the old one but it is a hell of a lot more effective than miso soup. You seem strangely unable to grasp this concept. You seem to have missed the point that a weaker, lower side effects vaccine was developed and administered to increase the participation rate that seems to worry you so, with an opposite epidemiological outcome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted January 4, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 You seem to have missed the point that a weaker, lower side effects vaccine was developed and administered to increase the participation rate that seems to worry you so, with an opposite epidemiological outcome. People aren't refusing to get vaccinations because they heard the effectiveness has dropped. They're refusing because quacks have told them it'll make their kids autistic. -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 The current pertussis vaccine would still be less effective regardless of vaccination rates. Those who refuse or fail to get vaccinated do so for a variety of reasons, not just "quacks" on the interwebs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted January 4, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Still exponentially better than miso soup. -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 No...not exponentially better, as that mathematical term relates to a specific relationship for a data set, not supported by the evidence gathered to date. It is, however, very popular but meaningless rhetoric. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 However, in a population where 60% of people are using a vaccine that's 87% effective, and 40% of people are using miso soup and yoga to ward off infection, an outbreak is far more likely. -k I understand the herd immunity, however in the group that the CDC reported, close to 90% who got whooping cough ALSO had the vaccine. How does herd immunity work if the vaccine is NOT effective? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overthere Posted January 5, 2015 Report Share Posted January 5, 2015 If you have infants in your home, do not allow anybody not vaccinated for pertussis anywhere near the baby. Whooping cough can and is a slow and nasty death for babies. The odds of a baby catching it from a vaccinated person is much smaller than it is from an unvaccinated person. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
segnosaur Posted January 20, 2015 Report Share Posted January 20, 2015 I understand the herd immunity... Apparently you don't. however in the group that the CDC reported, close to 90% who got whooping cough ALSO had the vaccine. How does herd immunity work if the vaccine is NOT effective? Ok, first of all, you are incorrect when you say that the "vaccine is not effective". It is not 100% effective, but it does work in the majority of people. And its certainly not that surprising to see more vaccinated people catch a disease than unvaccinated... Lets say you had 10 people exposed to a disease. 2 were unvaccinated, both got sick. 8 were vaccinated with an imperfect (but still partly effective) vaccine. 3 vaccinated people got sick, but the vaccine stopped the illness in 5. In that case, technically more vaccinated people got sick, but that's not the number you should look at... you should look at what percentage of vaccinated people got sick, and compare that to the percentage of unvaccinated people who got sick. Same with your '~90% were vaccinated' claim. You should not be looking at the numbers who were sick and saying "how many were vaccinated vs. unvaccinated". You need to look at the 2 groups separately, and compare the number of sick people in each group. Herd immunity works by eliminating as many as possible sources in transmitting the disease. Disease transmission is complex.. one person passes it to multiple people, who then pass it to multiple people. Stop the first transmission (via a vaccine) and you can stop a whole chain reaction. And herd immunity does work... for example, the Smallpox vaccine was only 95% effective. In theory you could still have vaccinated people transmitting the disease to other vaccinated people (if they fell in the 5% for whom the vaccine was ineffective). But herd immunity took over, and as a result, smallpox was eliminated as a disease world wide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted January 21, 2015 Report Share Posted January 21, 2015 Anybody know if you have had whooping cough (that'd be me) does that mean I no longer can? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.