re: The Anti-Science Advocates have won: Measles Outbreak in NYC

Why don't you tell me how often does eating sugary foods harms someone OTHER than the consumer.

I'm prepared to be floored by the numbers, since you think it's equatable.

quote:

---

You seem to know a thing or two about epidemiology so it's curious that you added this fact in spite of being illrelevant.

It's like arguing that Ebola isn't really that bad because .00000000000000001 Americans die from it.

That's lower than the rate of amusement park deaths!


Even today, with all of the supportive care and nutrition, mortality of measles is around .1%

Yes, it's still low.

But it is so rediciously easy and cheap to prevent that even that one out of a 1000 is too high.

---

All of this processes through my mind, I think the same things, I understand where you're coming from.

There is meaning to the .0002% figure. I followed it with the fact that more people died from diabetes each year when we started to vaccinate for measles.

That should make one wonder why such drastic measures are taken to eliminate measles while the diet that brings on diabetes is encouraged through advertising and enabled through farm subsidies that make junk food cheaper.

When we vaccinate for measles we may lower and already low death rate, but we're removing a natural process and herd immunity approach that was working quite well for our species. The natural process brought the death rate down to well under 1%, why would we disrupt and reverse the progress of this natural process?

It also must be said that living conditions can shoulder some blame for these outbreaks. In densely populated, low income areas this is going to spread faster. It's why the northeast has lots of dots on the OPs map. We have progressed a great deal as a society, but since the recent financial fallout in 2008 conditions have aided an environment suitable for virus's to spread. Fittingly, these measles outbreak scares started around 2008.

quote:

---

follows blue/red voting trends for the most part

---

They do love themselves some Darwin, maybe they're just trying to prove him right again.

Has anyone ever provided even a scintilla of reliable scientific evidence linking vaccination and autism?

quote:

---

It does cost OTHERS a great deal more in healthcare spending.

---

this is an unrelated argument

quote:

---

That should make one wonder why such drastic measures are taken to eliminate measles while the diet that brings on diabetes is encouraged through advertising and enabled through farm subsidies that make junk food cheaper. 

---

Killing yourself vs. killing your child

quote:

---

Has anyone ever provided even a scintilla of reliable scientific evidence linking vaccination and autism?
No.

---

Well, that is not exactly true. A hypothesis published in the late 1990's had it that the MMR vaccine may cause autism.

However, follow up studies were not supportive. Fast forward 15yrs, and obviously we now have substantial evidence discounting a causal relationship between the MMR and Autism.

Unfortunately, the public lumps that fact under other headings of "scientific consensus" and "preponderance of evidence." In a scenario where Anthropogenic Global Warming is being foisted by "Scientists" on to the community as supposed Scientific Fact, I cannot blame the lay public for a bit of general skepticism directed at more legitimate findings.

My concern with vaccines is a little more with the Govt and Big Pharm. Drug companies have no liability if one of their vaccines proves to have health risks bc of a vaccine law approved thru Congress. All vaccine related cases are handled thru a special federal court and any restitution (and there has been a lot paid out over the years) is paid basically by the taxpayers.

Second concern I have is with the combo vaccines. Each vaccine has side effects some being relatively severe tho rare. Problem is when u combo vaccines there is no way to know which vaccine is causing the side effects which could influence the parent to stop administering the vaccine all together. Also usually the vaccines are combo'd out of convenience. Take the MMR. They can do individual shots but that would be more costly. Measles and Mumps are a threat to small kids; however, Rubella poses no threat to children yet it is added to the combo. My problem is Rubella has the worst side effects.

The discussion about vaccines between Dr. and parents is a not a bad practice.

quote:

---

You referencing that study put out by that Limey bastard, Andrew Wakefield?

His research was so damn fraudulent that he was barred from practicing medicine.

---

I'd share in the revelry if the same outcome was rendered on Phil Jones and his 98% consensus climate "scientists". Until then, quality claims as to the public good become a boy-who-cried-wolf game. That is the price of charlatan tolerance under guise of legit work.

IOW, bad science promoted through politically motivated funding by loud mouths and shrill voices diminishes public confidence in quality work. As such, it unfortunately invites reduction of valid medical studies to Jenny McCarthy equivalency levels.

In an intellectually contaminated environment, how is the lay community to distill quality science vs pc promotion?

how many of the kids with measles were vaccinated and how many weren't? Also, assuming vaccinations work, why worry about this unless you're not vaccinated (in which case, you're clearly already not worried)?