What is in those Vaccinations?????

Max C. wrote:
Acutally, I'd be fascinated to read such studies. Could you please
rpovide the group with some?

Max.


There is a lot out there on this subject. As you can imagine, studies
of these sorts are very difficult to conduct, and have lots of ethical
issues associated with them. As such they tend to be quite complex,
confusing, and often don't provide clear answers. The advantage of the
anti-vaccine groups is that they get us around some of the ethical
considerations, although there are socio-economic issues that come into
play. Here is a few papers, I grabbed them randomly so I cannot say how
representative they are of the field:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_DocSum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_docsum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_docsum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_docsum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_DocSum

Bryan

"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Max C. wrote:
Mark Probert wrote:
Welcome to the world of the anti-vac liars. Why they do it is a mystery,
but, they do it. If Autism was totally disproven to be vaccine related,
they would come up with another scary disease to fear monger to parents.

Heh... interesting that you would use the term fear monger, since it's
one of your trademark characteristics. In welcoming Bryan, are you
agreeing with everything he just said? Stay tuned while I debunk a
large section of his post.

Should be interesting considering his background.

Just do not resort to the 'Opinion Weasel'.

Like..Mark just did by NOT answering Max's question.

*In welcoming Bryan, are you agreeing with everything he just said?*

Mike McWilliams wrote:
Max C. wrote:
It's the non vaccinated that helped determine that for vaccines to be
effective enough to prevent spread amongst the naieve population you
need vaccination around 70%


Not so - it varies greatly from disease to disease, and is also
dependent on social conditions (i.e. population densities, sexual
promiscuity, etc, etc, etc). A good example of failed herd immunity is
the MMR vaccine. Every year, in university campuses across the Americas
and Europe, there are small outbreaks of mumps and german measles (i.e.
the 2 M's in MMR). These outbreaks tend to be limited to the
unvaccinated, or those who did not receive the full course of MMR
injections. There have been a few documented cases, such as the one at
the University of Oregon, where cases of mumps were occurring even
though the "herd" had immunization levels of at least 90%. Other
diseases such as HepA and influenza are particularly notorious for
lacking in herd immunity.

Probably the biggest factor in determining if herd immunity occurs or
not is whether or not the pathogen has a natural host outside of humans.
If it doesn't then herd immunity tends to work. However, if the
pathogen has non-human hosts (i.e. the flu can live in ducks and pigs),
or can survive in the environment for long periods of time outside of
people, then herd immunity often does not occur.


So basically as long as the proportion of the population that hates
vaccination as much as you do stays somewhere less than 30%, us vaccine
takers are keeping your lives safe.


Depending on the disease, we may need rates of 95% or greater. Hence
the huge push for universal vaccination for many diseases.


Of course this rough value is different for different diseases and
vaccines, but the idea of herd immunity relative to ratio of vaccinated
to nonvaccinated is certainly interesting

It is. The most depressing part is that it doesn't seem to work as well
as we had originally thought.


Bryan

"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...
Jan Drew wrote:
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...

Jan Drew wrote:

Blood work from kids SHOULD have been taken within two to four hours,
NOT days
after vaccines


What are you talking about?


http://tinyurl.com/jfxrp

Wow, yet another unsubstantiated article written by the anti-vaccine
group - specifically YOU.


And interestinlgy, the link you claim proves your statement doesn't work.
Will the wonders ever end?

Bryan

Vaccines-Thimerosal-MMR-Government Hearings 2002

Any doubts..check it out yourself.

I get the impression from reading your links that you just searched for
"herd immunity" and posted the first few. Specifically, I was wanting
to see studies of unvaccinated groups, which I thought was what
prompted me to ask for studies in the first place.

I also get the impression that you're not used to people actually
reading the material you post. You'll learn quickly that it is not the
case with me, as I am interested in what's best for me and my family,
and learning all there is to learn about vaccines is paramount in my
family's health.

Max.

Bryan Heit wrote:
Max C. wrote:
Acutally, I'd be fascinated to read such studies. Could you please
rpovide the group with some?

Max.


There is a lot out there on this subject. As you can imagine, studies
of these sorts are very difficult to conduct, and have lots of ethical
issues associated with them. As such they tend to be quite complex,
confusing, and often don't provide clear answers. The advantage of the
anti-vaccine groups is that they get us around some of the ethical
considerations, although there are socio-economic issues that come into
play. Here is a few papers, I grabbed them randomly so I cannot say how
representative they are of the field:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_DocSum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_docsum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_docsum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_docsum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_DocSum

Bryan

Jan Drew wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Max C. wrote:
Mark Probert wrote:
Welcome to the world of the anti-vac liars. Why they do it is a mystery,
but, they do it. If Autism was totally disproven to be vaccine related,
they would come up with another scary disease to fear monger to parents.
Heh... interesting that you would use the term fear monger, since it's
one of your trademark characteristics. In welcoming Bryan, are you
agreeing with everything he just said? Stay tuned while I debunk a
large section of his post.
Should be interesting considering his background.

Just do not resort to the 'Opinion Weasel'.

Like..Mark just did by NOT answering Max's question.

*In welcoming Bryan, are you agreeing with everything he just said?*

Bryan uses science. I welcome someone to add to front lines fighting the
bull**** of the anti-vac liars.

I do not agree with everything anyone says. If you do, you do not think.

Jan Drew wrote:
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...
Jan Drew wrote:
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...

Jan Drew wrote:

Blood work from kids SHOULD have been taken within two to four hours,
NOT days
after vaccines

What are you talking about?

http://tinyurl.com/jfxrp
Wow, yet another unsubstantiated article written by the anti-vaccine
group - specifically YOU.


And interestinlgy, the link you claim proves your statement doesn't work.
Will the wonders ever end?

Bryan

Vaccines-Thimerosal-MMR-Government Hearings 2002

Any doubts..check it out yourself.

That is *political* science, not real science.

"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...
So to summarize, you are completely unable to substantiate any of your
claims using actual medical literature. All you have is a little webpage
you put together featuring articles from your fellow anti-vaccine
groupies, and opinion pieces selected from a few MD's out of the millions
of MD's out there.
appeal to numbers ploy http://www.whale.to/a/appeal_to_the_majority.html

I loved this part:

"They are all part of the medical industry, so hardly likely to sing from
another hymn sheet. Your argument is here is called authority ploy"

Or in other words, it is all a conspiracy!

I didn't give you the link for authority ploy which explains that
http://www.whale.to/vaccine/authority.html

That is not a conspiracy that everyone is in on, which is why it is called
authority ploy, not conspiracy ploy

'Conspiracy theory' (Name Calling) http://www.whale.to/a/conspiracy.html

that's not an argument, just in case you can't see that. It is a logical
fallacy and a rationalization
http://www.whale.to/vaccine/rationalization_h.html

All of us scientists are out to get you - evolution, vaccines, relativity,
heliocentricity - it's all a myth promoted by "the man" to protect the
profits of corporations. After all, the people who work in universities,
government organizations, NGO's, biotech companies, etc, couldn't possibly
INDIVIDUALS, each with their own ideas and opinions. No, they must all
follow the thoughts transmitted to them from the master biotech overmind
(patent pending).


Had I known that you were going to draw out this old card I wouldn't even
have bothered to reply to your messages. Obviously you won't even
consider the things I say - after all, I am a scientist, and according to
you don't have a mind of my own. I just tote the line of the drug
companies for some undefined reason which I'm sure you'll be more then
happy to inform me of...

Why not? Pays well doesn't it?

"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...
So to summarize, you are completely unable to substantiate any of your
claims using actual medical literature. All you have is a little webpage
you put together featuring articles from your fellow anti-vaccine
groupies, and opinion pieces selected from a few MD's out of the millions
of MD's out there. I loved this part:

"They are all part of the medical industry, so hardly likely to sing from
another hymn sheet. Your argument is here is called authority ploy"

Or in other words, it is all a conspiracy! All of us scientists are out
to get you - evolution, vaccines, relativity, heliocentricity - it's all a
myth promoted by "the man" to protect the profits of corporations. After
all, the people who work in universities, government organizations, NGO's,
biotech companies, etc, couldn't possibly INDIVIDUALS, each with their own
ideas and opinions. No, they must all follow the thoughts transmitted to
them from the master biotech overmind (patent pending).

Had I known that you were going to draw out this old card I wouldn't even
have bothered to reply to your messages. Obviously you won't even
consider the things I say - after all, I am a scientist, and according to
you don't have a mind of my own. I just tote the line of the drug
companies for some undefined reason which I'm sure you'll be more then
happy to inform me of...

Bryan

Do prove you are a scientist.. please.

Max C. wrote:
I get the impression from reading your links that you just searched for
"herd immunity" and posted the first few.


Hardly. I picked newer articles, both reviews and primary research
articles, which outlined some of the work going on today. If you find
the content questionable you're welcome to search for more. I used both
"herd immunity" and "population immunity" as inputs - you can do the same.

I'd also point out that there is nothing keeping you from searching on
your own. Probably best, as otherwise you'll just accuse me of
hand-feeding you articles which support my side...


Specifically, I was wanting
to see studies of unvaccinated groups, which I thought was what
prompted me to ask for studies in the first place.


The studies I linked to looked at both unvaccinated and vaccinated
groups. That's how its usually done. I don't think you'll find too
many articles just on the unvaccinated - that's poor experimental design.


I also get the impression that you're not used to people actually
reading the material you post.


You obviously didn't - you replied to the message ~45 minutes after I
posted it. I somehow doubt you were able to download, read and
comprehend the papers I linked to.


You'll learn quickly that it is not the
case with me, as I am interested in what's best for me and my family,
and learning all there is to learn about vaccines is paramount in my
family's health.


Than maybe you should actually read the articles I linked to. Once
again, I'd like to point out that I'll freely provide any article to
which you do not have access (assuming I have access myself). Feel free
to request any ones you want, even ones you dig up yourself.

Here's a couple more articles directly related to herd immunity. The
first article is particularly telling about the successfulness (or lack
thereof) of herd immunity:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_docsum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_docsum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_docsum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_DocSum

Bryan