Quote:
Originally Posted by westcoastforme
USA has been polio free for 40 years. I m sure some vaccines are ok but not all are needed
|
As previously pointed out, polio is only a plane ride away. It is still circulating in Pakistan, and you will not be able to get on that plane and
leave the country without proof of vaccination if you are there a month or more. In fact, a booster is recommended for adults before they go there.
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/destina.../none/pakistan
"Country exit requirement: If you will be in Pakistan for more than 4 weeks, the government of Pakistan may require you to show proof of polio vaccination when you are exiting the country. To meet this requirement, you should receive a polio vaccine between 4 weeks and 12 months before the date you are leaving Pakistan. Talk to your doctor about whether this requirement applies to you."
Polio vaccine is free at all Pakistani airports:
Islamabad International Airport - IIAP -
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reefmonkey
Again, success at subduing polio worldwide were due to vaccination. But now polio infection rates (along with several other preventable diseases) are on the rise (polio is up by 84%) thanks in part to smug knownothings like you.
https://reference.medscape.com/featu...table-diseases
Oh, and Nigeria is the most populous country in Africa, and the largest source of African immigration to this country. But you keep banging your antivax tin drum. |
People who do not vaccinate against polio in the US are not really part of the problems preventing eradication of polio. Those are largely political and confined to areas where the wild virus still circulates.
There are two kinds of polio: wild and vaccine derived. Vaccine derived comes from oral polio vaccine viruses that escape the attenuation of the live vaccine production process. Vaccine derived polio can be eliminated by using only the inactivated injection, but that is more expensive, requires trained personnel to deliver it, and is more difficult to deliver to remote locations because it needs to be refrigerated.
To date this year, all of the wild cases have been in Pakistan and Afghanistan (3 and 10, respectively) and 15 vaccine derived cases in non-endemic countries, including two in Nigeria.
This Week – GPEI
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnivalGal
I'm going to come in a little differently here. I don't think vaccines are harmless. I do think there is some risk if injury, just like there is for every, other medication. I also think the number of vaccines has increased largely to increase profits for pharma. I think it's odd that I, born in 1972, am considered fully vaccinated but I've had less than half the shots that my kids have had. For the record, both of my kids were fully vaccinated on schedule.
That said, I think there is no question that the benefits of vaccines FAR outweigh any risks. I also think the medical community's failure to really admit that someone MAY have a SMALL chance of a bad reaction makes it look like they are covering something up, so people become suspicious and turn to groups who make outrageous claims about vaccines.
Vaccines DO NOT cause autism. They just don't. Do I think there is an environmental factor that is responsible for the huge upswing in autism? Absolutely. But I don't think it's vaccines. That link has been studied ad nauseum and no connection has been found. We'd be better served to move on and find what IS causing it (and also the upswing in allergies). It could be pesticides, it could be plastics, it could be hundreds of things. But it's not vaccines.
Is there a small risk of bad reactions with vaccines? Of course. Same as with antibiotics or even ibuprofen. But there is a much, much bigger risk to NOT vaccinating.
|
The risks of vaccines are listed on the Vaccine Information Statement that accompanies every single dose of every single vaccine. Federal law requires it. The problem is that parents' perception of risks is often at odds with the facts, including the persistent belief that vaccines cause autism.
No one is going to waste money developing a vaccine unless it will reduce morbidity and mortality. That is just not going to happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
It is exactly this type of post that leads me to be very weary of vaccines. Someone in favor of vaccines should have no problem whatsoever with those that don't vaccinate. If the vaccines really work, the vaccinated have nothing to worry about.
Your reasoning on the flu vaccine is faulty as well. But I am sorry about your friend.
|
This has been addressed before. Those of us in favor of vaccines worry about those that cannot be vaccinated due to age or medical problems or impaired immunity and the small percentage who are not protected by vaccines, which do "really work" for the vast majority who take them.
The reasoning on the flu vaccine is not faulty, either. It is the least effective vaccine we have but that does not make it worthless, and people who are vaccinated tend to have less severe symptoms if they get infected despite being vaccinated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
In other words you are admitting that the vaccines don't work as advertised. Regardless of your stance on vaccines, this alone should give anyone pause. I also find it alarming that hospitals won't administer the vaccines until the patient or parent signs a hold harmless agreement first.
Probably the most concerning thing to me is how anyone in the medical field that publicly opposes vaccines is threatened with loss of their medical license.
I highly suggest that anyone curious about this subject reads up on former medical professionals that have been censored, had their licenses suspected, or otherwise threatened due to their professional opinions against vaccines.
|
No, the fact that vaccines do not work 100% of the time does not mean they "don't work as advertised".
There is no "hold harmless agreement" for vaccines. Source? I would love to see a copy of one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
JThat efficacy argument cuts both ways and many that are pro vaccine don't acknowledge the obvious.
|
Acknowledge what? Vaccine efficacy can be measured. It's not a matter of someone's opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayrandom
The real reason that big pharma is pushing vaccines is that they make all their money off of rich old people. People who are vaccinated as children stand a better chance of growing up to some day be rich old people.
|
Cannot rep you again, but this is so true.
There can also be made the argument that "Big Pharma" is behind the anti-vax movement, because it would make so much more money treating vaccine preventable diseases than preventing them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by westcoastforme
Chicken pox, flu shot, HPV
|
All of those infections can maim and kill people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnivalGal
But the patent for pills expires and then generic versions can be introduced. The patents on vaccines are protected by different intellectual property laws and don't really expire. So there will be a generic version of Invokana eventually, meaning the manufacturer will lose a substantial market share, as most insurance companies will require generic. But the pharmaceutical companies reap all the profits on vaccines they develop pretty much forever. So actually vaccines are more profitable for them in the long run.
Ironically, the number of vaccines required suddenly increased pretty dramatically when the intellectual property law regarding this was changed, making the vaccines more profitable. I hardly think it's a coincidence.
|
Nope. Treating vaccine preventable diseases would be far more lucrative.
Vaccines Don't Just Save Lives
"In 1994, the U.S. government began a program called Vaccines for Children, which provides vaccines to children who would otherwise not be able to afford them. This program is estimated not only to have saved countless children from illness and death, but also to have saved nearly $259 billion in direct costs and $1.38 trillion in total societal costs."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marie Joseph
Vaccines do not cause autism; there have been many studies which have been validated that have shown this. The amount of methylmercury in vaccines today is MUCH lower than it was in years past.
I've had cervical cancer caused by HPV virus. The Gardasil vaccine covers the most common types of HPV that can cause cervical cancer so I don't understand why anyone would not do this for their daughter.
|
The preservative in older vaccines, thimerosal, was ethylmercury, not methylmercury. Some vaccines never used it, including the MMR, because they contain live virus.
Mercury was removed from all childhood vaccines despite the absence of any evidence that it was harmful. Autism rates did not go down, one of the facts that support, as you note, autism not being caused by vaccines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnivalGal
If you've read my previous posts, you'll see that I'm not anti-vaccine at all. Quite the opposite. However, I also think that the pharmaceutical companies are out to make as much money as possible. So, yes, I do think they've changed and added vaccines solely to make more money. Does that mean they don't work? Not at all. But I do think there are diseases that we could probably be fully vaccinated from in two doses rather than 3 or 4.
|
Yes, pharm wants to make money, but they can only do so if a vaccine is cost effective, and calculations on that support the newer vaccines.
New vaccines are added because the diseases they prevent can cause serious illnesses and death. That includes chickenpox and HPV.
The number of doses needed is based on studies that measure how many people are protected after a given dose in the series. It's not just made up out of thin air. The second dose of measles and chickenpox vaccines were added after experience with them showed one dose did not protect a high enough percentage of recipients. On the other hand, two doses of HPV vaccine, rather than three, are effective if given before age 15.
https://www.cdc.gov/hpv/parents/questions-answers.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by nobodysbusiness
The majority of people have been indoctrinated by the current culture, which has been manipulated by pharmaceutical companies.
Today's vaccine schedule is much different than that of yester years.
Giving a newborn a HepB vaccine, for instance, is nonsensical and dangerous.
The pro-vaccine crowd (the "flock" - majority of people) will bully you, so educate yourself and don't even think of having an intellectual conversation with them (already one person has called people who question pumping children full of toxins "morons") . . .
Read up on the current literature.
|
Let's see, do we listen to J.B. Handley or all the medical experts from around the world who support vaccination.
Some good sources:
https://www.chop.edu/centers-program...ucation-center
Immunization Action Coalition (IAC): Vaccine Information for Health Care Professionals
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/parents...ces/index.html
https://www.aap.org/en-us/advocacy-a...ions-home.aspx
https://www.amazon.com/Your-Babys-Be.../dp/144221578X
Can someone explain to me why being able to prevent
more serious infectious diseases is a bad thing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by westcoastforme
Can you die from chicken pox?
If everyone has HPV vaccination then should be ok. Or don’t sleep with 20 people
Never had flu shot. I think I’ll be alright
|
Yes, you can die from chickenpox. Adults are at higher risk to do so.
As noted by a previous poster, unless both partners have never engaged in any sexual activity at all - and it does not mean just intercourse - you can get HPV from the very first such experience. Promiscuity is not required to get HPV.
You
hope you will be all right by not taking flu vaccine. Every year millions get it. Some, mostly unvaccinated (especially kids), die.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charolastra00
While few people died of the chicken pox, many more die of shingles. Now, granted, that's an older population typically so there is a higher death rate. Shingles itself is no fun. I was 23 when I developed shingles, couldn't go to work for 2 weeks because even wearing a loose skirt that brushed against my skin was absolute agony, barely got any sleep (same idea), and I will never have any feeling back on most of my outer thigh up to my hip except random blinding pain - even 7 years later. I'm not being precious about saying the pain was the worst I'd ever felt. Just a few weeks before, I had a bone marrow biopsy where a large-bore needle was thrust through my pelvis bone and marrow was sucked through. I was awake and you can't numb bone. Shingles pain was worse by a significant margin and it was constant.
And just because I had shingles before doesn't mean I won't get it again.
As I also mentioned earlier in this thread, a friend of mine also developed shingles in her 20s and it impacted her face and optic nerve. She wasn't completely blinded, but close. She has ongoing pain in her face and jaw as a result of the illness and will for the rest of her life.
Shingles isn't a joke. If you can reduce the risk of developing shingles, you should do it. The shingles-specific vaccine is not given until you are elderly. For young people, the best protection is the chicken pox vaccine.
|
I just want to point out that shingles itself rarely kills people unless it hits someone who is immunocompromised and disseminates. However, post-herpetic pain can be so severe it drives someone to suicide. In fact, it is the most common pain-related trigger of suicide in the elderly.
The rest of your post is spot on.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
