PDA

View Full Version : Legal Autism-vaccination lawsuits are now even more difficult to win


alnorth
02-22-2011, 09:51 AM
For those who care, the supreme court just issued an opinion in Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, a somewhat-important vaccine case. By a vote of 6-2 (Kagan abstained), the court ruled in favor of the vaccine manufacturers, with Scalia writing the majority opinion. This is a little wonky and technical, and I'm not sure if there's much to discuss. Explanation (as I see it) below.

Quick background: Decades ago, people were freaking out about a Pertussis vaccine being harmful. Although their claims were widely discredited by the scientific community, many plaintiffs were able to convince some stupid juries to ignore the evidence and hand out huge awards using emotional arguments and sympathy. Manufacturers started to get out of the vaccine business.

In response, congress passed a law setting up the "Office of Special Masters of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims", otherwise known as Vaccine Court. All cases, other than manufacturing defect or failure to warn of proven side effects, must first go to vaccine court. That basically includes almost all vaccine lawsuits since they are usually arguing design defect (you made the vaccine correctly, but this vaccine's design hurt me) rather than manufacturing defect or failure to warn. In vaccine court you do not get a jury, you have to convince a judge that your claims have merit. Out of thousands of autism lawsuits, all have failed except for one case where a girl had a weird genetic defect that caused her to have a bad reaction in her brain to a vaccine. If you lose in vaccine court, then you can proceed with a civil case but that is very rare because 1) after all the legal bills to go through vaccine court the plaintiff is usually broke, and 2) when a jury hears that you lost in vaccine court, they are very unlikely to rule in your favor.

This case: A plaintiff tried to argue that some cases of design defect were not included by the law that congress passed and they should be able to bypass vaccine court. Specifically, if there are multiple ways to create a vaccine at the time a vaccine is given, the manufacturer must use the safest method to avoid civil lawsuits. The vaccine manufacturer disagreed, saying the law forces all design defect cases to go to vaccine court (where the case is probably doomed to die), as long as the FDA approved the method they don't have to use the safest method. (e.g. what if one vaccine has a 1 in a billion chance of killing you and costs $100 to make, and a similar vaccine has a 5 in a billion chance to kill you and costs 50 cents to make? Should they be forced to spend that extra $99.50?)

Decision: The vaccine manufacturer is correct. All design defect cases must first go to vaccine court, regardless of whether one method is safer than another method, all they need is FDA approval.

BIG_DADDY
02-22-2011, 11:45 AM
Make every doctor promoting the schedule and every maker of vaccines be required to be fully vaccinated. There is a reason doctors are some of the most undervaccinated groups out there.

chiefsnorth
02-22-2011, 11:49 AM
You can read books by people like Offit, who have actual experience in immunology and actual formal medical training and all that - or you can read bloggers and demonstrated frauds. Who do you trust?

BucEyedPea
02-22-2011, 11:52 AM
I trust Dr. Robert S. Mendelsohn (1926 – 1988) an American pediatrician who wrote How To Raise a Healthy Child In Spite of Your Doctor.

MagicHef
02-22-2011, 12:29 PM
You can read books by people like Offit, who have actual experience in immunology and actual formal medical training and all that - or you can read bloggers and demonstrated frauds. Who do you trust?

Offit probably isn't the best person to rely on, unless you don't care about conflicts of interest. Also, there are people with "actual experience in immunology and actual formal medical training and all that" who diagree with Offit.

BIG_DADDY
02-23-2011, 02:57 PM
Quick background: Decades ago, people were freaking out about a Pertussis vaccine being harmful. Although their claims were widely discredited by the scientific community, many plaintiffs were able to convince some stupid juries to ignore the evidence and hand out huge awards using emotional arguments and sympathy. Manufacturers started to get out of the vaccine business.


Decision: The vaccine manufacturer is correct. All design defect cases must first go to vaccine court, regardless of whether one method is safer than another method, all they need is FDA approval.

So let me get this straight. Big Pharm with billions on the line were getting out of the business because they couldn't win court cases against average Joe's because jury's are filled with stupid people. Got it.

People now have no defense against the giants and the harmful effects of their products and they don't even have to give us safer methods. Awesome.

Earthling
02-23-2011, 03:47 PM
Make every doctor promoting the schedule and every maker of vaccines be required to be fully vaccinated. There is a reason doctors are some of the most undervaccinated groups out there.

A perfect response. :thumb:

I felt the same way towards UA's (urine analysis) when they were first introduced and I had to stand in line to let someone stare at my dick as I pissed into their cup. (In the Navy then). Let the lawmakers that passed that law be the first to take them...prolly wouldn't have made it thru the Senate.

alnorth
02-23-2011, 06:42 PM
So let me get this straight. Big Pharm with billions on the line were getting out of the business because they couldn't win court cases against average Joe's because jury's are filled with stupid people. Got it.

People now have no defense against the giants and the harmful effects of their products and they don't even have to give us safer methods. Awesome.

Yes, they were getting out of the business of making vaccines because juries were filled with stupid people who ignored evidence and paid attention to emotional sympathetic empty appeals to the heart, that is correct. The fact that these companies might be making money is irrelevant, because there's almost no profit to be made in vaccines. The markup on vaccines is so little that if there's ANY significant risk of loss, then its not worth it, they'd rather spend more time on more expensive drugs.

As for "no defense", that is completely wrong. The FDA must approve every vaccine, and if a vaccine is manufactured incorrectly, they are wide open to a lawsuit. That doesn't happen though because most of these autism lawsuits are dubious bullcrap "design defect" lawsuits without significant statistical or scientific merit.

alnorth
02-23-2011, 06:46 PM
doctors are some of the most undervaccinated groups out there.

I call bullshit. Prove it. Swine flu doesn't count.

tiptap
02-24-2011, 11:28 AM
Make every doctor promoting the schedule and every maker of vaccines be required to be fully vaccinated. There is a reason doctors are some of the most undervaccinated groups out there.

Almost all hospitals require staff to be vaccinated. Even H1N1 and stuff in order to be on staff. That includes physicians. Yes I am sure you know doctors who do otherwise but it is the exception.

MagicHef
02-24-2011, 01:34 PM
Yes, they were getting out of the business of making vaccines because juries were filled with stupid people who ignored evidence and paid attention to emotional sympathetic empty appeals to the heart, that is correct. The fact that these companies might be making money is irrelevant, because there's almost no profit to be made in vaccines. The markup on vaccines is so little that if there's ANY significant risk of loss, then its not worth it, they'd rather spend more time on more expensive drugs.

I've never heard this before. Do you have a link?

teedubya
02-24-2011, 01:39 PM
Vaccines are mostly devious, IMO.

BIG_DADDY
02-24-2011, 05:35 PM
Almost all hospitals require staff to be vaccinated. Even H1N1 and stuff in order to be on staff. That includes physicians. Yes I am sure you know doctors who do otherwise but it is the exception.

Good god dude we went all through this just last year. The industry was freaking out about having to get the vaccine. I posted a lot on this issue and YOUR WRONG. No, I am not going to go back and look it up all over again, you do it.


I call bullshit. Prove it. Swine flu doesn't count.

I looked back and couldn't find it. If I do I will post it AGAIN. I am just kind of burnt out on the whole subject. The information is there for those willing to look. The fact that you think that BIG PHARM is being victimized by some idiots in a court system that doesn't work even on a very unlevel playing field that favors them is laughable. THe only thing more ludicrous is putting the wolf in charge of watching the chicken coop. I am perfectly happy with the way things are. If people are stupid enough to load themsleves up with vaccines and want to poison their kids who an I to get in their way? Just don't tell me and my family what to do.

Bewbies
02-24-2011, 05:41 PM
LMAO

This thread is full of secret CIA bullshit.

Bewbies
02-24-2011, 05:42 PM
This vaccine thing reminds me of the lady that convinced the world that DDT was bad, and her ignorance has cost millions, and millions, and millions of lives due to malaria.

Bewbies
02-24-2011, 05:43 PM
When I'm not showing the world my tits or sucking off some Hollywood star I brushed up on my medical degree and determined that vaccines are teh evil.

alnorth
02-24-2011, 05:50 PM
I've never heard this before. Do you have a link?

I assume you wanted to know about the low profit in vaccines? I found lots of links, here's one. Its a blog commenting on a newspaper article. If you dont like the blog, click through to the article. People aren't exactly excited to pay much for flu vaccines anyway even when they do vaccinate, which depresses prices, the government buys a fair amount but they insist on low low prices. Finally, since it takes an incredibly long time to make a vaccine, the maker has to guess how many they need and hope they picked the right strain of flu. If they make too many, they throw a lot of vaccine away and lose money. If they guessed wrong on the strain, that is discovered by the public (those who decided to risk it by waiting to thanksgiving or so to see if its working) quickly who then buy less vaccine, causing a lot to be thrown away.

http://cafehayek.com/2004/10/the_cause_of_th.html

In some countries you may find links and articles where a vaccine maker made a decent profit, but that is usually because the government wanted to incentivize vaccine makers by handing them piles of money in the form of tax breaks.

MagicHef
02-24-2011, 07:43 PM
I assume you wanted to know about the low profit in vaccines? I found lots of links, here's one. Its a blog commenting on a newspaper article. If you dont like the blog, click through to the article. People aren't exactly excited to pay much for flu vaccines anyway even when they do vaccinate, which depresses prices, the government buys a fair amount but they insist on low low prices. Finally, since it takes an incredibly long time to make a vaccine, the maker has to guess how many they need and hope they picked the right strain of flu. If they make too many, they throw a lot of vaccine away and lose money. If they guessed wrong on the strain, that is discovered by the public (those who decided to risk it by waiting to thanksgiving or so to see if its working) quickly who then buy less vaccine, causing a lot to be thrown away.

http://cafehayek.com/2004/10/the_cause_of_th.html

In some countries you may find links and articles where a vaccine maker made a decent profit, but that is usually because the government wanted to incentivize vaccine makers by handing them piles of money in the form of tax breaks.

Oh, so that's for flu vaccines. For some reason I thought you were talking about scheduled vaccines. Nevermind.

KILLER_CLOWN
02-24-2011, 11:42 PM
When I'm not showing the world my tits or sucking off some Hollywood star I brushed up on my medical degree and determined that vaccines are teh evil.

Living the good life are ya?

Bewbies
02-24-2011, 11:47 PM
Living the good life are ya?

http://www.generationrescue.org/

KILLER_CLOWN
02-24-2011, 11:48 PM
http://www.generationrescue.org/

She does great work doesn't she?

tiptap
02-25-2011, 09:30 AM
CDC: Less Than 1% of Kids Get No Vaccination by Age 19-35 Months
By Miranda Hitti
WebMD Health News
Reviewed by Louise Chang, MD
Vaccination Coverage Kids

Sept. 4, 2008 -- Childhood vaccination rates are at or near record highs, the CDC announced today.

Most parents are vaccinating their kids, with less than 1% of children not getting any vaccines by age 19-35 months, according to a new CDC report.

Parenting Videos
High Fever
Video: What Is a High Fever?
Video: Obesity Education
Video: Kids and Cold Medicines
All Parenting-Related Videos
Related Slideshows

* Baby's First Year Milestones
* Toddler Milestones

Related to parenting

parenting tips, potty training, baby food, pink eye, chicken pox, asthma, lice, autism, newborns, toddlers, preschoolers, schoolage, teens, tantrums, breastfeeding, ADHD
2008 WebMD, LLC. All rights reserved.

"The ongoing success of our nation's immunization program is largely dependent on the trust that parents put in the safety of vaccines and in those caregivers who administer them," CDC Director Julie Gerberding, MD, MPH, says in a news release. "I want to encourage parents to continue to be informed and to ask their pediatricians about the safety of vaccines or any other concerns they may have about their child's health."

The CDC's latest childhood vaccination statistics, based on telephone interviews conducted last year with the parents of about 17,000 kids born during January 2004 to July 2006, focus on the following vaccines:

* At least four doses of the diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis vaccine (DTAP)
* At least three doses of the polio vaccine
* At least one dose of the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine
* At least three doses of the Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) vaccine
* At least three doses of the hepatitis B vaccine
* At least one dose of the varicella (chickenpox) vaccine

More than three quarters of U.S. kids -- 77% -- met all of those vaccination goals in 2007. And at least 90% met the goal for each vaccine, except for the DTaP vaccine. Most kids had gotten at least three doses of the DTap vaccine, but only about 85% had gotten the fourth dose, too.

For the first time, 90% of kids had gotten the varicella vaccine. And the percentage of kids who got the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine PCV7 reached 75%, a "substantial increase" since the vaccine was first recommended in 2000, the CDC report states.

Vaccination with the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine is at a record high, but almost 8% of kids aged 19-35 months hadn't gotten vaccinated against measles. That coverage gap could help explain recent measles outbreaks, notes the CDC.

Overall, 66% of U.S. kids got all of the recommended doses of the DTaP, polio, measles, Hib, hepatitis B, varicella, and PCV7 vaccines, according to the CDC's figures, published in tomorrow's edition of the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.

http://children.webmd.com/vaccines/news/20080904/childhood-vaccination-rates-high
and a second later reference: http://www.cdc.gov/Features/dsChildImmunization/

Individual provider behavior may be the most important determinant of the immunization status of children followed by private pediatricians. In our samples, the effect of parental characteristics was limited. State-sponsored VVPs were not associated with higher immunization rates, perhaps because cost of vaccines did not seem to be a significant barrier to immunization in this population.
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/99/2/209?siteid=pediatrics&ijkey=dH9xtbj3%2F7J9.&keytype=ref


The above two articles are indicative of a large body of literature that indicates First that Health care Providers' attitudes toward vaccinations are a large contributor to the use of vaccinations. 2nd that the vaccination rates are good though they could be improved. So Big Daddy's claims that physicians or health providers are not immunizing their own children or themselves is a BIG NASTY claim with real influence and needs more than just the claim that I provided proof sometime in my life to make such a claim.

If you don't want to immunize your children, and I am willing to understand since you had a premature infant and there may be true counter indications to taking immunizations at least initially for your child, but to make your opinion known and attempt to justify it and expand the refusal to vaccinate without real substantive counter arguments is reckless. YOU do not claim to have health training. And yet you want to put your opinions on the same level. Even though as seen above the overwhelming push among health providers including physicians is to reach acceptable levels of immunization.

BIG_DADDY
02-25-2011, 12:27 PM
CDC: Less Than 1% of Kids Get No Vaccination by Age 19-35 Months
By Miranda Hitti
WebMD Health News
Reviewed by Louise Chang, MD
Vaccination Coverage Kids

Sept. 4, 2008 -- Childhood vaccination rates are at or near record highs, the CDC announced today.

Most parents are vaccinating their kids, with less than 1% of children not getting any vaccines by age 19-35 months, according to a new CDC report.

Parenting Videos
High Fever
Video: What Is a High Fever?
Video: Obesity Education
Video: Kids and Cold Medicines
All Parenting-Related Videos
Related Slideshows

* Baby's First Year Milestones
* Toddler Milestones

Related to parenting

parenting tips, potty training, baby food, pink eye, chicken pox, asthma, lice, autism, newborns, toddlers, preschoolers, schoolage, teens, tantrums, breastfeeding, ADHD
2008 WebMD, LLC. All rights reserved.

"The ongoing success of our nation's immunization program is largely dependent on the trust that parents put in the safety of vaccines and in those caregivers who administer them," CDC Director Julie Gerberding, MD, MPH, says in a news release. "I want to encourage parents to continue to be informed and to ask their pediatricians about the safety of vaccines or any other concerns they may have about their child's health."

The CDC's latest childhood vaccination statistics, based on telephone interviews conducted last year with the parents of about 17,000 kids born during January 2004 to July 2006, focus on the following vaccines:

* At least four doses of the diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis vaccine (DTAP)
* At least three doses of the polio vaccine
* At least one dose of the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine
* At least three doses of the Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) vaccine
* At least three doses of the hepatitis B vaccine
* At least one dose of the varicella (chickenpox) vaccine

More than three quarters of U.S. kids -- 77% -- met all of those vaccination goals in 2007. And at least 90% met the goal for each vaccine, except for the DTaP vaccine. Most kids had gotten at least three doses of the DTap vaccine, but only about 85% had gotten the fourth dose, too.

For the first time, 90% of kids had gotten the varicella vaccine. And the percentage of kids who got the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine PCV7 reached 75%, a "substantial increase" since the vaccine was first recommended in 2000, the CDC report states.

Vaccination with the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine is at a record high, but almost 8% of kids aged 19-35 months hadn't gotten vaccinated against measles. That coverage gap could help explain recent measles outbreaks, notes the CDC.

Overall, 66% of U.S. kids got all of the recommended doses of the DTaP, polio, measles, Hib, hepatitis B, varicella, and PCV7 vaccines, according to the CDC's figures, published in tomorrow's edition of the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.

http://children.webmd.com/vaccines/news/20080904/childhood-vaccination-rates-high
and a second later reference: http://www.cdc.gov/Features/dsChildImmunization/

Individual provider behavior may be the most important determinant of the immunization status of children followed by private pediatricians. In our samples, the effect of parental characteristics was limited. State-sponsored VVPs were not associated with higher immunization rates, perhaps because cost of vaccines did not seem to be a significant barrier to immunization in this population.
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/99/2/209?siteid=pediatrics&ijkey=dH9xtbj3%2F7J9.&keytype=ref


The above two articles are indicative of a large body of literature that indicates First that Health care Providers' attitudes toward vaccinations are a large contributor to the use of vaccinations. 2nd that the vaccination rates are good though they could be improved. So Big Daddy's claims that physicians or health providers are not immunizing their own children or themselves is a BIG NASTY claim with real influence and needs more than just the claim that I provided proof sometime in my life to make such a claim.

If you don't want to immunize your children, and I am willing to understand since you had a premature infant and there may be true counter indications to taking immunizations at least initially for your child, but to make your opinion known and attempt to justify it and expand the refusal to vaccinate without real substantive counter arguments is reckless. YOU do not claim to have health training. And yet you want to put your opinions on the same level. Even though as seen above the overwhelming push among health providers including physicians is to reach acceptable levels of immunization.


I am not going to get in a pissing match with you over a subject I have posted on endlessly over the years. The real information is out there if you really care to look for it from many sources including those that were even in the industry. If you think you're going to get any truth from the FDA, CDC or the WHO organization though you really deserve any bad thing that ever happens to you and your family. They were right on the money with all those epidemics weren't they? The problem with going back is things become dated and go away and I don't really feel like wasting hours trying to dig it back up and posting uhgain to someone who is only interested in hearing what those totally corrupt organizations have to say. Just for shits and giggles though lets take their most recent lies you posted here and put it to the test compaing it to what the regular media is reporting. This article's ink isn't even dry yet going over our local numbers. Let's compare it to the less than 1% stat the CDC is giving you.

http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110213/OPINION/102130321&cid=sitesearch

February 13, 2011 Vaccinations against serious childhood illnesses have saved countless lives over the decades, not to mention preventing lifelong suffering from paralysis and blindness, and continue to do so. But that triumph of science over disease is possible only if enough parents make sure their children are immunized.

Largely as a result of a flawed study published in 1998 that appeared to suggest the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine could cause autism, many parents decided not to have their children vaccinated. The study was subsequently discredited and retracted, and Andrew Wakefield, the doctor who co-authored it, was stripped of his medical license.

No other study has ever documented a causal link between the vaccine and autism. Just last month, the British Medical Journal published an investigative article revealing that data in Wakefield's study were falsified, and the journal ran an editorial calling the study an elaborate fraud.

And yet, in Ashland today, more than half of the children in one private school have not been immunized. In Ashland as a whole, nearly 25 percent of all children are unvaccinated because their parents obtained religious exemptions. That exemption rate has doubled over the past 10 years.

At Willow Wind Community Learning Center, 57 percent of students are unvaccinated. At Ashland High School, the rate is 21 percent.
If parents who refuse to immunize were risking only their own children's lives and health, it might be tempting to say they should have that choice. But the risk is not just to their own children.

The more unvaccinated children who live in a community, the greater the risk of an outbreak of measles, mumps, rubella or even polio. While immunized children would be protected, infants too young to be vaccinated would be at extreme risk, as would anyone with a compromised immune system.

Because vaccines have largely eradicated serious childhood illnesses, today's parents who were vaccinated themselves have no memory of losing family members, friends or acquaintances to measles or diphtheria or whooping cough. But those diseases have not disappeared. They can come back if too many children go unvaccinated for too long.

The irony in all of this is that today's parents have the freedom to decline immunization with little fear because everyone else's children are vaccinated. But when more than half the population of a single school is unvaccinated, the odds begin to shift in the other direction.

We hope they do not come to regret their decision.

BIG_DADDY
02-25-2011, 12:39 PM
tiptap,

Bottom line is I really don't care what the fuck you or anyone else does. Everyone will get what they deserve in the end. I just don't want anyone telling me what to do. You really want to get on the 42 vaccine schedule, knock yourself out. I don't give a fuck if you have 142. The bottom line is there is a growing body of concern over these vaccines and the most highly educated people are the one's who are not taking them. I posted an article on that once too. The damage is wide spread enough now that many people now know somebody who has been effected by it. I believe that number will continue to grow over the next decade or two to the point that most people will know somebody directly. They can try and cover up things by putting the wolf in charge of the coop but eventually it won't matter.

Jenson71
02-25-2011, 12:43 PM
This vaccine thing reminds me of the lady that convinced the world that DDT was bad, and her ignorance has cost millions, and millions, and millions of lives due to malaria.

Rachel Carson?

BIG_DADDY
02-25-2011, 01:02 PM
One more thing while this is still on my mind. There is a good reason why they are reporting that number. The growing body has been asking for independent studies of vaccinated kids -vs- unvaccinated kids for a very long time now. They want to compare all neurological disorders, allergies and digestive disorders between the two. The answer has always been it would be highly unethical to not give kids vaccines so we can't do it. Bottom line is there are already communities where this research can be done right now. They know there is a problem so they tell you less than 1% of kids are unvaccinated and the research can't be done. It's total bullshit, just like everything else that comes out of those organizations. Is it any wonder they need their own court?

tiptap
02-28-2011, 08:13 AM
Air travelers may have been exposed to measles
1 hr 30 mins ago

WASHINGTON Public health officials are warning travelers and workers present at four U.S. airports on two recent days that they may have been exposed to measles from a traveler arriving from London.

Authorities said Saturday that a New Mexico woman later confirmed to have measles arrived at Washington Dulles International Airport late in the afternoon of Feb. 20. Two days later, the measles-infected traveler departed from BWI Thurgood Marshall Airport near Baltimore on an evening flight to Denver, Colo., and then on to Albuquerque, N.M.

The traveler became sick and was subsequently diagnosed with measles in New Mexico, said Tom Skinner, a spokesman for the Atlanta-based Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. He said Saturday night that authorities in those states are trying to notify travelers who sat close to the infected passenger on the flights.

The New Mexico Department of Health's scientific laboratory division didn't identify the traveler by name but said she was a 27-year-old Santa Fe, N.M., woman who had not been immunized against measles.

"The appropriate steps are being taken to reach out to those passengers on the plane that were in close enough proximity," Skinner said of those seated five rows in front or behind the infected passenger.

Although most Americans have been vaccinated for measles or are immune because they've had the disease, public health officials are concerned about those not immunized, including babies. Pregnant women and those with weakened immune systems are also more at risk.

Authorities say people who were at the airports at the same time as the infected traveler and develop a fever or other symptoms should contact their doctors.

Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease specialist at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine in Nashville, said the potential exposure of so many travelers in airport terminals is a cause for concern.

He said measles is "highly communicable" and can be associated with complications leading to death. "We don't want measles to be imported back into the U.S. once it gets a foothold," Schaffner told The Associated Press.

Although vaccinations have reduced measles cases in the U.S. to fewer than 150 annually since 1997, it remains a common disease worldwide with an estimated 10 million cases and 164,000 deaths globally each year, according to the CDC. That's why the center recommends that U.S. citizens traveling or living abroad remain up to date on immunizations.

The CDC says on its website that despite vaccinations in the U.S., health officials still see sporadic cases when visitors from other countries or Americans traveling abroad become infected and spread measles to those not vaccinated or unprotected against the virus.

A 2008 CDC report said the risk for measles transmission by air travel in the United States "is considered low because of high U.S. population immunity."

Measles is a highly contagious respiratory disease caused by a virus, according to the CDC's web site. It typically produces fever, runny nose, cough, red and watery eyes and a body rash. The virus, which is spread by sneezing and coughing, can stay in the air for two hours.

Infection can lead to an ear infection or pneumonia in children, and in rare cases, death. Children in the U.S. generally are vaccinated starting at one year of age, and it is recommended earlier if they're being taken abroad.

People who are considered immune include those born in the United States before 1957, who previously had measles or who have had two measles vaccine shots.

Last week, Boston public health officials sought to contain a possible measles outbreak after an employee of the French consulate came down with the infectious disease earlier this month.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap_travel/20110228/ap_tr_ge/us_travel_brief_airports_measles

tiptap
02-28-2011, 08:15 AM
On a personal note, my Grandfather and Grandmother on my father's side were both deaf, one from exposure to Mumps and the other to Measles. I learned sign language growing up to communicate with them. But it doesn't change the fact that those deficits are preventable by vaccinations.

Ebolapox
02-28-2011, 08:26 AM
I am not going to get in a pissing match with you over a subject I have posted on endlessly over the years. The real information is out there if you really care to look for it from many sources including those that were even in the industry. If you think you're going to get any truth from the FDA, CDC or the WHO organization though you really deserve any bad thing that ever happens to you and your family. They were right on the money with all those epidemics weren't they? The problem with going back is things become dated and go away and I don't really feel like wasting hours trying to dig it back up and posting uhgain to someone who is only interested in hearing what those totally corrupt organizations have to say. Just for shits and giggles though lets take their most recent lies you posted here and put it to the test compaing it to what the regular media is reporting. This article's ink isn't even dry yet going over our local numbers. Let's compare it to the less than 1% stat the CDC is giving you.

http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110213/OPINION/102130321&cid=sitesearch

February 13, 2011 Vaccinations against serious childhood illnesses have saved countless lives over the decades, not to mention preventing lifelong suffering from paralysis and blindness, and continue to do so. But that triumph of science over disease is possible only if enough parents make sure their children are immunized.

Largely as a result of a flawed study published in 1998 that appeared to suggest the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine could cause autism, many parents decided not to have their children vaccinated. The study was subsequently discredited and retracted, and Andrew Wakefield, the doctor who co-authored it, was stripped of his medical license.

No other study has ever documented a causal link between the vaccine and autism. Just last month, the British Medical Journal published an investigative article revealing that data in Wakefield's study were falsified, and the journal ran an editorial calling the study an elaborate fraud.

And yet, in Ashland today, more than half of the children in one private school have not been immunized. In Ashland as a whole, nearly 25 percent of all children are unvaccinated because their parents obtained religious exemptions. That exemption rate has doubled over the past 10 years.

At Willow Wind Community Learning Center, 57 percent of students are unvaccinated. At Ashland High School, the rate is 21 percent.
If parents who refuse to immunize were risking only their own children's lives and health, it might be tempting to say they should have that choice. But the risk is not just to their own children.

The more unvaccinated children who live in a community, the greater the risk of an outbreak of measles, mumps, rubella or even polio. While immunized children would be protected, infants too young to be vaccinated would be at extreme risk, as would anyone with a compromised immune system.

Because vaccines have largely eradicated serious childhood illnesses, today's parents who were vaccinated themselves have no memory of losing family members, friends or acquaintances to measles or diphtheria or whooping cough. But those diseases have not disappeared. They can come back if too many children go unvaccinated for too long.

The irony in all of this is that today's parents have the freedom to decline immunization with little fear because everyone else's children are vaccinated. But when more than half the population of a single school is unvaccinated, the odds begin to shift in the other direction.

We hope they do not come to regret their decision.

I have a great idea: being that I do research in a microbiology lab and am about to go into grad school (Ph.D program) for immunology/infectious disease research, I can probably get a few samples of pathogenic bacteria and viruses. OBVIOUSLY, immunizations are bad for your kid. some kids who DON'T get immunized will get sick from diseases that we don't see due to herd immunity now--so why don't we do your kid and other unimmunized kids a favor and directly inject them AND you with a cocktail of lethal bacteria and viruses?

I mean, seriously--they don't NEED to be immunized, so they're OBVIOUSLY immortal and can't be harmed by pesky bacteria or viruses... so how about it? all you need to do is sign an informed consent page and we can do some serious research on your kid and you. you in? PM me your fax number, it's rare to get anybody to volunteer for serious scientific research--you could be bettering mankind by helping us spread the secrets to total immunity that is within your kids and you!
:thumb:

Ebolapox
02-28-2011, 08:29 AM
put your money where your mouth is... although I'm joking (for the record, I'd never willfully inject anybody with a pathogenic microbe, that's some josef mengele shit right there), it's laughable how little you understand about the human immune system and biology in general.

Brock
02-28-2011, 09:42 AM
tiptap,

Bottom line is I really don't care what the fuck you or anyone else does. Everyone will get what they deserve in the end. I just don't want anyone telling me what to do. You really want to get on the 42 vaccine schedule, knock yourself out. I don't give a fuck if you have 142. The bottom line is there is a growing body of concern over these vaccines and the most highly educated people are the one's who are not taking them. I posted an article on that once too. The damage is wide spread enough now that many people now know somebody who has been effected by it. I believe that number will continue to grow over the next decade or two to the point that most people will know somebody directly. They can try and cover up things by putting the wolf in charge of the coop but eventually it won't matter.

Jenny, sorry to hear about your breakup with Jim.

chiefsnorth
02-28-2011, 09:53 AM
On a personal note, my Grandfather and Grandmother on my father's side were both deaf, one from exposure to Mumps and the other to Measles. I learned sign language growing up to communicate with them. But it doesn't change the fact that those deficits are preventable by vaccinations.

Providers all the time are begging people here to get DPT. Meanwhile we have a huge upsurge in the number of whooping cough cases in the last few years.

I only speak for one facility but at this one it's mandatory for all clinical staff to be vaccinated unless you want to walk around basically in a spacesuit. I never see anyone wearing the face shields - moreover among the actual MDs, the vaccination rate this year for influenza was 100%.

I'm going to chalk this "doctors are the ones not getting shots" up to quacks and Internet kookery.

Amnorix
02-28-2011, 10:24 AM
BD -- quick question -- do you agree that we have pretty much eliminated smallpox, measles, malaria, typhoid, polio and whooping cough -- diseases that killed untold millions during human history, through vaccinations?

If you agree with that, then is your argument that there are too many vaccinations for too many things, which may have negative side effects? Or is it that all vaccinations are bad, in which case how do you prevent all those nasty killer diseases from rearing their ugly heads again?

chiefsnorth
02-28-2011, 10:27 AM
As far as "there are to many"... Isn't this what science is intended to do? Develop treatments over time to prevent illness? Of course we can prevent more than we could 40 years ago...

It's like saying, "cars have too many computers and safety features nowadays, It seems unnatural. I just feel weird about it..."

BIG_DADDY
03-01-2011, 05:40 AM
I am at the Cleveland clinc right now dealing with real world issues posting from my phone so I am going to keep this short. Looking at this thread reminds me of why so many people who agree with me on this subject won't post on it anymore. Your points are cosistantly ignored follwed by some mocking posts, terrible analogies and another reference to Jenny McCarthy. The only post worth replying to was amnorix and I am surprised he doesn't know this already. I will procede with vaccines on an individual as needed basis. Herd immunity is horseshit and has never been proven. I can't wait to see the results of an independent study on vaccinated kids/unvaccinated kids when it comes to neurological disorder, digestive disorders and allergies. If truly independent and complete I think those results will truly shock the world.