Immunizations....what has happened

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 1 - 20 of total 115 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Topic Author's Original Post - Dec 29, 2012 - 08:21pm PT
There seems to be recurrent discussion and interest in immunizations, their safety and use.

I've posted about this before, but there is a remarkable thing happening, which is the eradication of polio effort.

This has been due soley to the use of vaccines.

the first human disease eliminated, of course, was smallpox.

This year, there were only 215 cases IN THE WORLD. It is circulating in only three countries, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Nigeria. There were only 5 cases that occurred in one other country, exported from the three.

Contrast this with last year: 604 in the world, with 309 cases having broken out of the endemic countries into 13 other countries.

The smaller the number, the easier it is to corral the remaining cases.
We are really approaching the end of another disease, forever.
Mighty Hiker

climber
Vancouver, B.C.
Dec 29, 2012 - 08:27pm PT
It may be a while before they eradicate polio from those countries. Geographic, economic and political problems, and this:

Gunmen shot dead six health workers on an anti-polio drive in a string of attacks in Pakistan over 24 hours, officials said on Tuesday, raising fears for the future of efforts to eradicate the crippling disease in one of its last strongholds.

It was not clear who was behind the shootings, but Taliban insurgents have repeatedly denounced the vaccination campaign as a Western plot. The campaign aims to wipe out polio in one of the last three countries where it is endemic.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/six-polio-health-workers-killed-in-string-of-attacks-in-pakistan/article6504738/

Fundamental religion of all kinds never seems comfortable with science. Not to mention the anti-science crowd who promote falsehoods about the risks of routine vaccinations.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 29, 2012 - 08:32pm PT
True, MH, although this violence was undoubtedly abetted by the astonishing foolish decision of the CIA to use a vaccine-worker cover to go to Osama bin Laden's compound. When this became known, all vaccine workers were put at risk, as well as the world-wide effort.

Even with this problem, there remains great progress in that country this year, from 181 cases to 57.

There is also another disease that is nearing the path to eradication:
Guinea Worm infection.
Down to under a thousand world-wide cases.

http://www.who.int/dracunculiasis/en/
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Dec 29, 2012 - 08:52pm PT
this violence was undoubtedly abetted by the astonishing foolish decision of the CIA to use a vaccine-worker

The violence against vaccine workers in the Pak tribal areas goes back at least a dozen years.

There's the "Zionist sterilization plot" myth coupled with an aversion to anyone coming in from the outside, especially if connected to the central govt. in some way.

It took many years to get an effective vaccine program in N Africa against Muslim resistance as well.

Place the blame where it lies.
donini

Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
Dec 29, 2012 - 08:57pm PT
The biggest problem we face is over population. Global warming, famine, ehtnic cleansing, deforestation, acceleration in vanishing species are all tied to population growth.
How about a vaccine that would make people impotent after they have produced replacements for themselves.
Kidding.....sort of.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 29, 2012 - 09:00pm PT
Another disease that has been dramatically affected by immunization, is invasive pneumococcal disease, which is particularly an affliction of infants and the elderly.

A vaccine was introduced in 2000 to be given to children. What happened was astonishing: By the end of 2001, in children under 2 years old, the incidence of the disease was reduced by 69%! Very interesting, there was also a reduction in adults by 30-some %, even tho adults WERE NOT IMMUNIZED.

"At the end of 2004, all-cause pneumonia admission rates had declined by 39% (95% CI 22-52) for children younger than 2 years, who were the target population of the vaccination programme."

"During the 8 study years, 10,659 (2%) children younger than 2 years admitted with pneumonia were coded as having pneumococcal disease; these rates declined by 65%"

This has been replicated in country after country.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 29, 2012 - 09:03pm PT
TGT, you apparently don't know people who work in the vaccine field, but I do. The level of fear created among workers because of the CIA action cannot be overstated. What it did was VERIFY the rumors that it took years to overcome.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 29, 2012 - 09:08pm PT
Donini, I'm with you, even tongue in cheek.

Of interest, 50% of all pregnancies in the US are not desired, so simply facitiliting what people actually want will have a huge impact on population.

I'm writing an article right now, about the consequences of a study carried out in Detroit, where they took a thousand women in poverty, and made birth control easily available and free, then watch to see what happened over the following 3 years. What happened was a 80% reduction in birth rate, compared with similar groups in that city, state, and the country as a whole.

So all we have to do, is let people do what they actually want to do, and it will have a very big effect on population with time.
Jan

Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
Dec 29, 2012 - 10:36pm PT
Not sure what Donini has against sex. You can make people sterile without making them impotent.
In fact, sterilization after the desired number of children is the most common form
of contraception in the developing world.

It surely is amazing to see the drops in infant mortality in the developing world thanks to immunization.
This is important because studies have shown parents do lower the number of children they want to have
when they see that infant mortality declines. They make this connection even when they are totally illiterate.
SteveW

Trad climber
The state of confusion
Dec 29, 2012 - 10:42pm PT

But my child will be autistic if he gets vaccinated!!!!
Ricky D

Trad climber
Sierra Westside
Dec 29, 2012 - 10:58pm PT
But my child will be autistic if he gets vaccinated!!!!

No - your child will be autistic because you watch Fox News.

Not only that - but because you once shopped at Walmart - the little f*#kers gonna have a peanut allergy too!

An don't even get me started about the obesity and diabetes factor from eating at Applebee's last summer!
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 30, 2012 - 08:02pm PT
From the medical site Medscape:


Hi. My name is Paul Offit. I am talking to you today from the Vaccination Education Center at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia.

Today is December 21, 2012, a day that according to the Mayan calendar should mark the end of the world as we know it. Speaking of ancient beliefs that aren't founded on good science, I thought it would be of interest to talk about a paper that appeared in the journal Pediatrics [1] this week, about thimerosal in vaccines.

Many of you might wonder why we are still talking about this. Hasn't this issue been resolved? Yes, it has, but it has come up again because of an effort by antivaccine groups that have lobbied the World Health Organization and other global health groups to try and get thimerosal out of vaccines given to infants and young children in the developing world -- something that would be disastrous.

In the late 1990s, as children began to receive more and more vaccines in the United States, they also received more and more thimerosal, an ethyl mercury-containing preservative in vaccines. Concern was expressed at the time that this may put children at risk. Mercury at high doses can cause harm, but the question was whether mercury in the form of ethyl mercury, given at much lower doses, could cause harm. This caused a great deal of concern in the late 1990s. As a consequence, there was a real effort to get thimerosal out of vaccines given to infants and very young children.

Since that time we have learned, in a series of 7 studies, that children who received thimerosal-containing vaccines compared with children who received the same vaccines without thimerosal are not at greater risk for neurodevelopmental problems, including autism or even subtle signs of mercury toxicity. In the late 1990s, a handful of children died of hepatitis B because the health centers in which they were born were so scared of thimerosal, which had been given a "scarlet letter," that they abandoned their hepatitis immunization program -- even for children who were born to mothers who had hepatitis B.

At the time, this action was considered a precaution: Let's get thimerosal out of vaccines until we learn more about thimerosal. Children died as a result; therefore, we didn't follow a precautionary principle that argues to do something to avoid harm, but in fact we caused harm. This new article is putting forward the idea that we should not make the same mistake, because now we know that the level of thimerosal in vaccines doesn't cause harm. If it is decided by the World Health Organization or other global health agencies to remove thimerosal from vaccines, it would mean using single-dose vials instead of multidose vials, which makes vaccines much more expensive for countries that already can't afford them.

If we were to do this, instead of a handful of children dying, hundreds or thousands of children will die. This paper is saying, "Mea culpa; let's not make the same mistake again." Thank you very much for your attention and happy holidays.

Tami

Social climber
Canada
Dec 30, 2012 - 08:38pm PT
Ken I appreciate what you are promoting here. I had my kids immunized when they were little.

But I just can't buy into this thread. It's more stuff on the internet.

If there is no dissent and we all roll up our sleeves and accept anything "Science" has to offer, then what do we fully open ourselves up to? It's an open-ended question with no real answer.

Thanks for allowing dissent on this forum !!!







Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 30, 2012 - 08:48pm PT
Tami, it's easy for me.....I've spent my life training in this, treating some of the diseases involved and seeing what happens with them.

What I find supremely ironic is that my profession comes in for a raft of sh*t, much of it deserved, for not spending sufficient time on *prevention* of disease, but concentrating on treating it.

And yet....and yet.....that is exactly what we are talking about here....prevention.

It would be nice if we could prevent all disease by dietary means, and by excercising. I'm not sure we are ready to force people to do either. Additionally, I think we live FAR too close together, in a way that facilitates the spread of infection diseases. Unless we are willing to kill off 3/4 of the population, and all go and live on farms, that's not going to change.

We have to deal with what we face today.

Tami, I'm not particularly fond of the concept of coercing people to do things. Whether it is good diet, or other health practices that protect the health of the community as a whole.

I'm much more in favor of talking about things, in a setting where the possibility of good information flow might exist.
Mighty Hiker

climber
Vancouver, B.C.
Dec 30, 2012 - 08:52pm PT
//Unless we are willing to kill off 3/4 of the population, and all go and live on farms, that's not going to change.//

Except that so many human diseases originate in herd animals...
Tami

Social climber
Canada
Dec 30, 2012 - 08:58pm PT
I'm no depopulationist that's fer sure. I agree with you we live in too-tight proximity to one another. Plagues ( bubonic & otherwise ) were able to take advantage of this human situation in the past.

I also think people are looking too far outside themselves for answers to their problems. As you say, people need to be smart with what they put into their bodies. But some people think KFC is good for you. Sheesh.

Mostly what I disagree with is the idea that Science is somehow all-powerful and dissenting viewpoints are tin-foil hat crazies. I agree with neither the all-powerful nor the tin foil ( although it's good for wrappin' fish on the bbq to keep it moist........... )



Jan

Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
Dec 30, 2012 - 09:26pm PT
If more and more people in First World countries like the U.S. refuse to vaccinate their children, then eventually we will have an epidemic that kills a lot of kids. Ironically, First World countries need more children yet put theirs at risk while Third World Countries are grateful for the chance to be vaccinated and will have more that survive. Evolution at work but in a strange way.

Meanwhile CDC is telling us that this is going to be a particularly bad flu season which has in fact begun early this year.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 30, 2012 - 09:43pm PT
//Unless we are willing to kill off 3/4 of the population, and all go and live on farms, that's not going to change.//

Except that so many human diseases originate in herd animals...

Well, free-range, of course. :)
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 30, 2012 - 09:49pm PT
Jan, the issue with first world contries needing more children is contrived. It only seems so, because we have built infrastructure that is dependent upon constant growth.

It should be obvious that model must eventually fail. But in the meantime, it creates pressures that are unsustainable. Malthus was right. Because he wasn't right in the correct timescale is irrelevant.

In the meantime, we have to do things, or we will be overtaken by events.
There was a time when shortage of food was a real possibility in this country, although it seems hard to believe now. But that problem will seem to be simple in contrast to others.

Water seems to be a convergent factor.
Jan

Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
Dec 30, 2012 - 09:54pm PT
It's true we all need just balanced replacement growth or diminished populations but none of us can get it right. Some societies have too many old, others too many young, while an increasing number have too many males compared to females. It's predicted that the next 50 years will be the most dangerous for the human race. If we survive that then population all over the world will decline and the human race might have a future.

The other part of the equation is that developed countries, but especially America use so many resources. One American consumes as much as ten or more in a less developed society.
Messages 1 - 20 of total 115 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews