Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

[Off_White]

If the concern is autism, I think that horse has already left the barn, because there's a whole lotta perseveration going on here.

 

[tvashtarkatena]

Well, that saved me a googlez.

 

How does one type and flap one's arms simultaneously?

 

I'm guessing two little keyboards and a lot of duct tape.

 

There's genius in that.

Edited November 15, 2012 by tvashtarkatena

[Kimmo]

If the concern is autism, I think that horse has already left the barn, because there's a whole lotta perseveration

 

you are getting remarkably good at throwing substanceless non-sequiters out there, but unfortunately nothing else. What happened?

Edited November 15, 2012 by Kimmo

[tvashtarkatena]

Bipolar's more common than you might think.

[Kimmo]

I knows. and it has a stronger genetic component than autism. you'd be an interesting research subject.

Edited November 15, 2012 by Kimmo

[tvashtarkatena]

Back to cancer prevention:

 

The best way to minimize the risk of the most common cancer is to have a penis.

 

The best way to eliminate the risk of the second most common cancer is to do the opposite.

 

Death from either eliminates the risk of vaccine complications, so there's that.

[matt_warfield]

The best way to avoid cancer is to hope you die of something else first. Hopefully something noble or at least less painful.

Edited November 15, 2012 by matt_warfield

[JosephH]

First off, did you read all of that wiki page you linked to? You know, down to this part:

 

A new study by the Stanford University School of Medicine examined narcolepsy incidence in relation to upper airway infections and a H1N1 vaccine (not Pandemrix) in Chinese patients. Their principal conclusion was that an increased incidence of narcolepsy was seen following a wave of upper airway infections (such as H1N1 influenza). They found no correlation between vaccination and narcolepsy. According to the authors "The new finding of an association with infection, and not vaccination, is important as it suggests that limiting vaccination because of a fear of narcolepsy could actually increase overall risk."

And on this...

 

joe, many things in life are cost/benefit analyses. the flu shot is one. hey if you wanna get a vaccine that even parts of our medical establishment questions the efficacy of, does carry some risk, and proffers (questionable) protection for a benign illness, then go for it.

You're obviously of Eleanor McBean's persuasion if you think flu is in some way benign. There is nothing benign about it. It's a deadly virus and capable of startling waves of lethal pandemics killing millions. And who believes that flu is horrific rather than benign? Well, Dr. Michael T. Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota for one and he is the 'vaccine critic' who is the subject of the blog post in your original link for one:

 

BANGKOK (Jan. 25) — Much of the world, including governments, business and the news media, is “asleep at the switch” about one of the biggest threats to human existence ever known, a leading American specialist on infectious diseases said here this week. Dr. Michael T. Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota and a frequent writer on such topics as avian flu and bioterrorism, said the world fails to fully understand the implications of such threats.

But then you and all the other anti-vaccers are the product of the success of medicine at minimizing the societal effects of infectious disease. Again, my parents lost many friends and classmates all through their school careers and beyond. They saw firsthand the effects of childhood diseases and remember TB sanitariums and masses of polio victims in respirators. If we stopped vaccinating tomorrow the effects would be horrific.

 

As for your initial link, the NYTimes writer entirely misinterprets and misrepresents the conclusions and recommendations of the very report she's writing her blog post on. Dr. Osterholm is criticizing our lack of efficacy data in various populations and is not arguing against the use of current vaccines, but rather saying we need vaccines with high efficacy. Read his actual report linked above - here are his real conclusions:

 

Seasonal influenza is an important public health and medical challenge. Pandemic influenza would cause a substantial burden of disease and seriously threaten the global economy. Based on a track record of substantial safety and moderate efficacy in many seasons, we believe the current influenza vaccines will continue to have a role in reduction of influenza morbidity until more effective interventions are available. However, evidence for consistent high-level protection is elusive for the present generation of vaccines, especially in individuals at risk of medical complications or those aged 65 years or older. The ongoing public health burden caused by seasonal influenza and the potential global effect of a severe pandemic suggests an urgent need for a new generation of more highly effective and cross-protective vaccines that can be manufactured rapidly.

 

New vaccines based on novel antigens that differ from the presently licensed vaccines are in development. Active partnerships between industry and government are needed to accelerate research, reduce regulatory barriers to licensure, and support financial models that favour the purchase of vaccines that provide improved protection. Active pursuit of this goal now will save lives every year and when the next influenza pandemic occurs. In the meantime, we should maintain public support for present vaccines that are the best intervention available for seasonal influenza.

The good doctor isn't recommending against our current vaccines, he's arguing for MORE funding for BETTER vaccines - specifically he and everyone else in the business are searching for a 'universal' vaccine that, given once, would confer immunity against all flu, seasonal and pandemic.

 

Next time read the actual report that is the topic of a blog posts you link to and be aware that all medicine and especially that related to public health and infectious disease is a societal 'best effort' affair with stark risk / benefit tradeoffs and someone will always end up with a short straw - a bummer, but that's life in an imperfect world.

[Kimmo]

First off, did you read all of that wiki page you linked to? You know, down to this part:

 

sure did. they studied chinese patients, none of whom were given Pandemrix (the vaccine in question).

 

and, did the study conclude then that all these post-vaccine cases of narcolepsy in Finland and Sweden were associated with upper respiratory infections or H1N1?

 

We just aren't told enough about the study (how many chinese patients, how many developed narcolepsy, etc etc.) to draw any conclusions. maybe if we knew about the glaring omissions, the case would be stronger? maybe you want to research the study a little more?

 

And on this...

 

 

You're obviously of Eleanor McBean's persuasion if you think flu is in some way benign. There is nothing benign about it. It's a deadly virus and capable of startling waves of lethal pandemics killing millions.

 

are you referring to the flu pandemic of 1918?

 

and exactly how is the flu shot available RIGHT NOW at your local pharmacy going to protect you from the "horrors" of a new pandemic? the medical establishment is guessing as to which strain will emerge, and if a new "pandemic" "killer" flu emerges, the current vaccine will do nothing about it.

 

And who believes that flu is horrific rather than benign? Well, Dr. Michael T. Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota for one and he is the 'vaccine critic' who is the subject of the blog post in your original link for one:

 

BANGKOK (Jan. 25) — Much of the world, including governments, business and the news media, is “asleep at the switch” about one of the biggest threats to human existence ever known, a leading American specialist on infectious diseases said here this week. Dr. Michael T. Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota and a frequent writer on such topics as avian flu and bioterrorism, said the world fails to fully understand the implications of such threats.

 

joe, i don't think he's referring to the known strains of flu we currently vaccinate against. he's referring to emergent strains that we have no protection against (through vaccines) until they actually emerge, right? maybe i'm missing something? edify me.

 

 

But then you and all the other anti-vaccers are the product of the success of medicine at minimizing the societal effects of infectious disease. Again, my parents lost many friends and classmates all through their school careers and beyond. They saw firsthand the effects of childhood diseases and remember TB sanitariums and masses of polio victims in respirators. If we stopped vaccinating tomorrow the effects would be horrific.

 

CONFLATION ALERT! CONFLATION ALERT! oh and STRAW MAN ALERT!

 

Calling for proper research does not equate to what you present above.

 

Dr. Osterholm is criticizing our lack of efficacy data in various populations

 

oh please. does this sound like he's criticizing efficacy data of our current flu vaccines?

 

“We have overpromoted and overhyped this vaccine,” said Michael T. Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy, as well as its Center of Excellence for Influenza Research and Surveillance. “It does not protect as promoted. It’s all a sales job: it’s all public relations.”

 

that's english, joe, and it's pretty clear.

 

is not arguing against the use of current vaccines, but rather saying we need vaccines with high efficacy. Read his actual report linked above - here are his real conclusions:

 

agreed. this was never in question. people will make different recommendations based on the same data sets; i believe it's our responsibility to inform ourselves in order to make these decisions for ourselves.

 

and regarding peeps getting vaccines in order to protect others? health care workers no less....

 

another biased source.

 

one last thing you should do is inform yourself how the CDC comes up with the "annual flu death" stats in the US. let's just say it's an interesting process (i'll provide info later; gotta run).

Edited November 16, 2012 by Kimmo

[Kimmo]

and just to clarify, Joseph, I am NOT dismissing the Stanford study. I do hope though that we share enough common ground that the information presented was lacking, and difficult to draw a conclusion from.

 

having said that, certainly very interesting that respiratory infections were associated with the development of narcolepsy, yes? certainly no more or less interesting than if a vaccine may have done so.

[ivan]

good time to remind you boys of the "100 character" rule of spray - jesus - text boxes w/n textboxes are the unabomber manuscripts of the 21st century - be funny n' astute, or at least offensive, n' get out!

[JayB]

There are viruses that known to cause cancer.

Many of these virus live in a very latent state and have numerous methods of evading the immune system.

Most of these viruses are so good at this that by current methods detection would be unlikely.

Many of these viruses have a b-cell tropism.

These viruses can only replicate when the b-cell is undergoing cell division.

When you are immunized the presence of antigen illicit a large b-cell response in the germinal centers (centres in canada)..

This stimulation causes b-cells to replicate.

.......

 

By that logic any sort of infection that would activate the adaptive immune system would cause an immune response and B-cell replication, therefore unleashing your said cancer making virus.

 

Not saying your logic is wrong, just that its not specific to immunizations, which goes back to the point I made earlier in my previous post.

 

Every cell in our bodies is rife with self-replicating DNA elements (they constitute roughly half the DNA in our genomes) that resemble viruses (some of them encode their own reverse-transcriptase and integrase, others use the RT and integrase expressed by other "retroelements") that could theoretically exploit the mechanisms of normal cell division to propagate themselves every time any cell of any type divides.

 

Good but slightly out of date review here:

http://www.pnas.org/content/101/suppl.2/14572.full

 

Thankfully this is not a new problem, and each cell also has mechanisms that keep them in check. Most of them are also active against exogenous viruses. The APOBEC and TRIM families of proteins are good examples of this sort of innate host defense.

 

Which is a long way of saying that this is one of the many reasons I join you in *not* worrying about the potential for B-cell division in response to immune activation causing cancer, and would be astonished if there's any evidence to suggest that the risk posed by lymphomas derived from B-cell activation in response to vaccines (as opposed to "natural" infections)is even a billionth as likely as getting cancer secondary to infection by an oncogenic virus that could have been prevented by getting vaccinated (HPV is the first that comes to mind).

 

If living organisms with adaptive immune systems didn't have elaborate mechanisms to keep every infection that activates B cells from turning into a lymphoma, or even making it appreciably more likely - they wouldn't have lasted very long. The simple fact that we're here and most of us live to a ripe old age despite our B-cells getting activated roughly a gajillion times is the single strongest proof that these mechanisms are quite robust.

[Kimmo]

Ivan, joe and myself are involved in a privacy conversation in a public forum, and might possibly change the the current parameters of the vaccine debate altogether.

 

also, I found your input neither offensive nor

[Kimmo]

funny.

[Off_White]

If the concern is autism, I think that horse has already left the barn, because there's a whole lotta perseveration

 

you are getting remarkably good at throwing substanceless non-sequiters out there, but unfortunately nothing else. What happened?

 

I've outsourced the substance to my content providers, Joseph and JayB. I only have time for drive-by spray, no room for reading or consideration in the schedule. I'm guessing you must be between projects.

[JayB]

Interesting thread. A lot of the typical responses.

 

 

 

 

There is not deny pharmaceutical companies are making bank and causing problems, as mentioned earlier regarding some shortages. I can't recall how many times in the last six months in my ED have we been out of meds due to manufacture shortages.

 

The genesis of the current drug shortage is controversial. Seems like a simple and direct consequence of the price control formulas introduced in the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 - but evidently that's controversial so perhaps its more complicated.

 

http://aspe.hhs.gov/sp/reports/2011/DrugShortages/ib.pdf

 

 

 

 

[Water]

Toxoplasmosis

 

it is a parasite and not a virus but how many of you huffed cat shit when you were young? cause that could explain a lot

 

http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/9/11/03-0143_article.htm

 

 

[Kimmo]

your post on the previous page truly piqued my interest. looking forward to a more in depth read when time presents.

[AlpineK]

[video:youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9ym5jc_SO8

 

 

[ivan]

funny.

like most prophets, i'm a lousy fucking practicer of what i preach...

 

...cocksucker!

[JayB]

your post on the previous page truly piqued my interest. looking forward to a more in depth read when time presents.

 

Not sure if this was in response to my post - but if it was - there's a condensed version of the report here:

http://www.iom.edu/~/media/Files/Report%20Files/2011/Adverse-Effects-of-Vaccines-Evidence-and-Causality/Vaccine-report-brief-FINAL.pdf

 

I haven't read the longer report because I'm convinced the benefits of vaccinations vastly outweigh the risks for all but an exceptionally small percentage of the population (I'd guess something like 0.001%<), but if you read the entire report let me know if it influences your thinking in any way.

 

I have an easy time understanding how stupid people reject vaccines (one of whom proceeded to tell me that she doesn't microwave food because "it's been exposed to radiation," just after explaining why she doesn't vaccinate her children - 1)Toxins 2)Doesn't want to "overload" her child's immune system"), but you seem like quite an intelligent fellow and I have a harder time understanding how people I put in the "intelligent-non-expert" category wind up refusing to vaccinate themselves or their children.

 

 

[AlpineK]

According to a definitive new study published June 3, Washington State ranks among the worst in the nation in meeting childhood vaccination targets. In the Centers for Disease Control's (CDC) epidemiological newsletter, the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, our state ranges between 88 and 93 percent compliance for "required" vaccinations like polio, whooping cough, measles, hepatitis B, and chicken pox. The CDC's target is 95 percent. But even more embarrassing, our state now leads the nation in parent-signed exemptions for kindergarten enrollees at 6.2 percent, a rate that has more than doubled over the past decade.

 

In other words, Washington is suffering an epidemic of stupid fucking Jenny McCarthy–worshiping anti-vaccine hippies. Only eight states report a lower compliance rate on the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine than Washington's 91.7 percent, while Mississippi leads the nation with 99.7 percent compliance.

 

Our current epidemic of anti-vaccine hysteria kicked off in 1998, when former physician and researcher Andrew Wakefield published a controversial study in British medical journal the Lancet linking the MMR vaccine to the development of autism. I emphasize "former physician and researcher" because Wakefield lost his license to practice medicine after he was found guilty of serious medical misconduct and unethical research practices, as the BBC reported in 2010. But that, and the fact that there is no credible scientific research supporting a causal link between vaccines and autism, hasn't stopped the anti-vaccine movement from growing. Led by celebrity advocates like "actress" Jenny McCarthy—who has made her own son the poster child for confusing correlation with causality by very publicly blaming his autism on vaccinations rather than on, say, chance, genetics, or a cruel and capricious God—the anti-vaccine movement continues to gain adherents, particularly among stupid fucking hippies.

 

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/stupid-fucking-anti-vaccine-hippies/Content?oid=8526583

 

 

[img:center]http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/measles-yes_jim-carrey-279x300.jpg[/img]

[ivan]

taking parenting/medical advice from a playboy bunny is like....

[JayB]

According to a definitive new study published June 3, Washington State ranks among the worst in the nation in meeting childhood vaccination targets. In the Centers for Disease Control's (CDC) epidemiological newsletter, the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, our state ranges between 88 and 93 percent compliance for "required" vaccinations like polio, whooping cough, measles, hepatitis B, and chicken pox. The CDC's target is 95 percent. But even more embarrassing, our state now leads the nation in parent-signed exemptions for kindergarten enrollees at 6.2 percent, a rate that has more than doubled over the past decade.

 

In other words, Washington is suffering an epidemic of stupid fucking Jenny McCarthy–worshiping anti-vaccine hippies. Only eight states report a lower compliance rate on the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine than Washington's 91.7 percent, while Mississippi leads the nation with 99.7 percent compliance.

 

Our current epidemic of anti-vaccine hysteria kicked off in 1998, when former physician and researcher Andrew Wakefield published a controversial study in British medical journal the Lancet linking the MMR vaccine to the development of autism. I emphasize "former physician and researcher" because Wakefield lost his license to practice medicine after he was found guilty of serious medical misconduct and unethical research practices, as the BBC reported in 2010. But that, and the fact that there is no credible scientific research supporting a causal link between vaccines and autism, hasn't stopped the anti-vaccine movement from growing. Led by celebrity advocates like "actress" Jenny McCarthy—who has made her own son the poster child for confusing correlation with causality by very publicly blaming his autism on vaccinations rather than on, say, chance, genetics, or a cruel and capricious God—the anti-vaccine movement continues to gain adherents, particularly among stupid fucking hippies.

 

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/stupid-fucking-anti-vaccine-hippies/Content?oid=8526583

 

 

[img:center]http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/measles-yes_jim-carrey-279x300.jpg[/img]

 

Love the back and forth in the comments there:

 

"

Other strong correlations re: Autism.

 

The rise of autism strongly correlates with the rise of automobile usage.

 

The rise of autism strongly correlates with increased lifespans.

 

The rise of autism strongly correlates with the rise of cancer rates.

 

The rise of autism strongly correlates with the rise of commercial airline travel.

 

The rise of autism strongly correlates with increased diagnostic techniques, increased attention to mental disabilities, and better access to health serves.

 

The annual rise and fall of drowning deaths strongly correlates with the rise and fall of sales of popsicles."

[JayB]

"here are two very valid sides to this argument. On the one hand, you have pretty much the entire scientific community. On the other hand, you have Jenny McCarthy's boobs. At the end of the day, it's hard to know who to trust. I would usually say err on the side of boobs, but when we're talking about kids dying from wholly preventable illnesses, I might have to go with the doctors.

 

And for those saying vaccines aren't effective, please tell me how many people you know who've had polio. How about measles? How many infants have you watched die from pertussis? Or maybe those diseases were just made-up, and it's just a big pharma conspiracy. Riiigghhht.."