Autism News Beat

An evidence-based resource for journalists

Autism News Beat header image 2

AAP asks CBS to pull anti-vaccine ad

April 13th, 2011 · 72 Comments · Kudos

The American Academy of Pediatrics has asked CBS Outdoor to pull an anti-vaccine video from the Times Square jumbotron. The 20-second ad is sponsored by the deceptively-named National Vaccine Information Center, and quack-medicine vendor Mercola.com.  According to NVIC, “the message is shown every hour for 18 hours a day on the 20 by 26-foot full color big screen located on 42nd St. between 7th and 8th Avenues near Broadway and the NY Port Authority and directly beneath where the crystal ball drops at midnight on Times Square every New Year’s Eve.”

Here is the letter:

April 13, 2011

Mr. Wally Kelly
Chairman and CEO
CBS Outdoor
405 Lexington Ave., 14th floor
New York, NY 10174

Dear Mr. Kelly,
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) objects to the paid advertisement/public service message from the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) being shown throughout the month of April on the CBS JumboTron in Times Square, New York. The AAP and many other child health organizations have worked hard to protect children and their families from unfounded and unscientific misinformation regarding vaccine safety. Vaccines are safe.

By providing advertising space to an organization like the NVIC, which opposes the nation’s recommended childhood immunization schedule and promotes the unscientific practice of delaying or skipping vaccines altogether, you are putting the lives of children at risk, leaving them unprotected from vaccine-preventable diseases. Diseases like measles and pertussis (whooping cough) can have serious consequences, including seizures, brain damage and even death. From January 1 through December 31, 2010, 9,477 cases of pertussis (including ten infant deaths) were reported throughout California. This is the most cases reported in 65 years there.

The AAP’s 60,000 member pediatricians urge you to remove these harmful messages, which fail to inform the public about the safety of life-saving vaccines. Please do your part to help reassure parents that vaccinating their children on schedule is the best way to protect them from deadly diseases.

Sincerely,

O. Marion Burton, MD, FAAP
President

The ad tells parents to “get informed”, but directs them to NVIC and Mercola, where misinformation about vaccine risks, ingredients, and benefits abound. Here is the ad:

Orac, Skepchick, and Skeptical Teacher have more on CBS Outdoor and the anti-vaccine ad.

  • Share/Bookmark

Tags:

72 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Lisa R. // Apr 13, 2011 at 3:27 pm

    I really have to wonder about CBS. They have let their gullible reporter Sharyl Attkisson repeat the baseless claims of the antivaccine crowd at least twice, and now they’re actively promoting antivaccine organizations. They have no shame.

  • 2 sharon // Apr 13, 2011 at 3:42 pm

    This is where common sense and the right to free speech collide. Whilst we all enjoy the benefits of living in a democracy that allow freedoms not afforded to other less fortunate souls, the price paid is living with a lot of stupid that can be openly aired. Dr Oz, Oprah, Sears, Jenny, Jay Gordon et al Are free to spread their uninformed messages with a free ride from mainstream media. All trading on (and making money out of) fear. Most annoying.

  • 3 gwen // Apr 13, 2011 at 4:43 pm

    I will have to forward this website to my friends with autistic children. It is the first one I have seen, that pushes the science, instead of the woo and scaremongering fostered by Oprah, Jennie, Dr Oz ad nauseum. Thank you for being a responsible source of information.

  • 4 Steve // Apr 13, 2011 at 4:46 pm

    If you don’t like the ad, pay CBS and run your own ad. It’s america, compete! Speak up or shut up. Don’t complain about someone else speaking louder than you, put your own ad up.

  • 5 ChrisKid // Apr 13, 2011 at 5:37 pm

    Steve, yes, it’s America, which is why people have a perfect right to object to something that’s been said. (Or in this case, advertised.) It’s all part of the free speech process.

  • 6 Steve // Apr 13, 2011 at 5:44 pm

    @ChrisKid – Of course you can object to what they are saying, but do not try to stop them from saying it. They have a right to advertise and free speech. Who are we to tell them to shut the ad down? That seems to defy free speech.

  • 7 Todd W. // Apr 13, 2011 at 6:17 pm

    @Steve

    Free speech applies to the right for people to say what they want without government interference. CBS is not the government. They can decide who they sell ad space to and who they do not sell it to.

  • 8 Orac // Apr 13, 2011 at 6:59 pm

    Exactly, and we can use our right to free speech to try to make CBS see why it shouldn’t be providing such a high profile platform for these ads.

  • 9 sharon // Apr 13, 2011 at 9:03 pm

    The problem is we live in a democracy that is also capitalist (an economic system I admit to benefiting from) which tends to mean businesses will do a deal with the devil if it increases revenue. I suspect in this case money talks louder than any cogent argument against why CBS should not provide space for this sign. It’s not ethics, it’s business.

  • 10 michele // Apr 13, 2011 at 10:34 pm

    “Vaccines are safe.” NO THEY AREN’T.
    “Diseases like measles and pertussis (whooping cough) can have serious consequences, including seizures, brain damage and even death.” SO DO VACCINES.

  • 11 sharon // Apr 14, 2011 at 3:16 am

    Aah michele, here you are again. I leave Orac’s blog to visit this one, and here you are with the exact same message. I suggest you return to Respectful Insolence to answer all the questions you have there before starting here.

  • 12 Julian Frost // Apr 14, 2011 at 4:12 am

    Michele:

    “Vaccines are safe.” NO THEY AREN’T.
    Diseases like measles and pertussis (whooping cough) can have serious consequences, including seizures, brain damage and even death.” SO DO VACCINES.

    Writing in capitals doesn’t make your claims true. Please give citations to back up what you say. Oh, and whale.to and Mercola are not regarded as credible sources.

  • 13 Valerie // Apr 14, 2011 at 6:25 am

    I’m no lawyer, but isn’t this a legal matter? CBS Outdoor and other entities have entered into a contract with one another, where CBS was paid to perform a service (advertising). What right does another outside entity have to void their contract?

  • 14 Red Herring // Apr 14, 2011 at 6:29 am

    Free speech protections do not apply if someone is yelling “Fire!” in a theatre.

    @ChrisKid – Of course you can object to what they are saying, but do not try to stop them from saying it. They have a right to advertise and free speech. Who are we to tell them to shut the ad down? That seems to defy free speech.

  • 15 Thos // Apr 14, 2011 at 6:48 am

    What right does another outside entity have to void their contract?

    @Valerie, in what way does the AAP asking CBS to reconsider constitute an outside entity voiding a contract? It’s up to CBS…

    Also, it’s silly for @Steve to object to the AAP’s letter on “free speech” grounds. As others have pointed out, even if CBS decides to pull the ads, no one has had their “right to free speech” infringed, since this right does not entail an obligation on CBS’ part to advertise/publicize your speech.

  • 16 Cheryl // Apr 14, 2011 at 7:24 am

    The Vaccine business is like any other – they’re out to make money, use up all their stocks of flu vaccines etc. They don’t really care about your health or mine, or our childrens – they simply want to make more money!
    They lie all the time, telling people they HAVE to have a specific shot before going to school or work, they cover up those that have suffered serious side effects. On top of it all you can’t sue them if your child becomes ill as a direct result of a vaccine, even those few side effects they list in the inserts, if you child gets hit with GB or seizures or anything else – you can’t sue them to pay for medical costs or anything else.
    If they’re exempt from paying for damages and illness, do you think they’re going to worry about it at all?
    In the letter above, they do fail to mention the number of those pertusis cases in children who were fully vaccinated – so whats the point? Take a chance with all those side effects, and STILL get sick? Idiots….

  • 17 Brooke // Apr 14, 2011 at 7:24 am

    There’s nothing wrong with that ad. It’s just saying to research, and know your choices. Just because it’s sponsored by Mercola and NVIC doesn’t mean that you can’t search out resources on your own. There are also plenty of pediatricians that would agree that you should do your own research and decide what’s right for your family. If you believe in herd immunity, or vaccination immunity at all, it shouldn’t matter one way or another what individual decisions are made within a family unit. 40% of parents now, according to CDC reports, are delaying vaccinations. There must be something there. Health and wellness/natural immunity should be favored by all-but again, your choice, your child.

  • 18 Outookone 2 for me // Apr 14, 2011 at 7:34 am

    Uhm, I have a question for all the PRO supporters out there..

    Why is it that we can pass traits and immunities to certain things thru our genes to a child (per science), yet not anti-bodies from all the shots we received in our own youth? I received them, my children received…WHY should my grandchild get them now?!?

  • 19 autblog // Apr 14, 2011 at 8:28 am

    Why is it that we can pass traits and immunities to certain things thru our genes..

    Which ‘certain things’ you are talking about?

  • 20 Rose // Apr 14, 2011 at 8:36 am

    “Vaccines are safe”? Why don’t you try asking that question to someone with a vaccine injured child. Vaccine Court is there for a reason, to pay off the people who get injured from vaccines. check out this site: https://genesgreenbook.com/content/proof-vaccines-didnt-save-us That’s all science based evidence.

    Anyway, I feel that if big pharma can advertise their products willy nilly just to make more money, can’t a little company like NVIC advertise when there is NO profit in it for them? I feel more inclined to trust the person who is not going to get paid based on my decision to vax or not.

  • 21 Valerie // Apr 14, 2011 at 8:57 am

    @Thos, Let me rephrase. What right does an outside entity have to implore CBS to break a contract after it has been executed? If there are any lawyers reading, I would be interested to know.

  • 22 Steve // Apr 14, 2011 at 9:06 am

    I have the freedom to pay CBS to put up an ad and within that ad I can give information pointing them toward my product. That’s the point of advertising: Increasing awareness about my product. And the good news here is, Advertising Works! So we know people are listening to this message which encourages people to do research nothing more and then it gives them a starting point.

    If you’re jealous of that starting point, feel free, come together and put your own ad up with your own link. Well to free market America folks. You can’t stop it now many how much ‘science’ you believe is on your side.

  • 23 autblog // Apr 14, 2011 at 9:18 am

    What right does an outside entity have to implore CBS to break a contract after it has been executed?

    I’m sure CBS Outdoor has advertising guidelines for the jumbotron. And AAP is well within its right to ask CBS Outdoor to reconsider the anti-vaccine ad in the context of those guidelines.

  • 24 Righttoinform // Apr 14, 2011 at 9:31 am

    Julian Frost what would you consider “credible sources”? Would any source you deem unworthy be then in fact improbable to you? Is that what you are saying when you write “Oh, and whale.to and Mercola are not regarded as credible sources.” So then any “source” you (and I would capitalize,you ,but that mean I find your claims true) like is the only good source there is. Aww I see where freedom of speech is important to you, as long as you agree with it.
    Oh and Sharon dear I love the way you contradict yourself. Sweetheart look at your quotes “Aah michele, here you are again. I leave Orac’s blog to visit this one, and here you are with the exact same message. I suggest you return to Respectful Insolence to answer all the questions you have there before starting here.” See only you have the basic right of the first admendment to be on serveral differnt blogs to spread what your message is because you agree with your message,but not Michele’s . Tisk tisk let us be fair now! And let me not overlook this wonderful quote you made ” The problem is we live in a democracy that is also capitalist (an economic system I admit to benefiting from) which tends to mean businesses will do a deal with the devil if it increases revenue. I suspect in this case money talks louder than any cogent argument against why CBS should not provide space for this sign. It’s not ethics, it’s business.” Yes in deed we do live in a capitalist nation which I believe is one of the many reason this Nation is the best! The problem lies is when those capitalist such as Big Pharmaceutical companies put their best interest at heart, which is money,above those of the people of this Nation so yes my dear they do deal with the devil daily to increase their revenue! I mean look at your favorite TV show or magazine and tell me how many ads you see trying to sell you the latest best drug they just came out with that is sure to cure you of what ever it is your ailing from! Run don’t walk to your Dr and start popping those pills and getting those shots, my love I only have your best interest at heart here!
    Wait I can’t forget what Todd W said “Free speech applies to the right for people to say what they want without government interference. CBS is not the government. They can decide who they sell ad space to and who they do not sell it to.” Seems to me CBS had already decided to sell this time slot to this ad and yet you and those who don’t want this free speech to be heard are the ones that want them to remove it! And last let me not forget what Red Herring said “Free speech protections do not apply if someone is yelling “Fire!” in a theatre. ” Yes and who is yelling “Fire” here? Seems to me the ones yelling fire are the ones that profit from the fear they sell to get you to shoot your kids up with toxins and known poisons! They are the fear mongers. You see the AAP and you have the right to not like what NIVC or Dr Mercola have to say but you do not have the right to silence their message. This ad is a twenty second ad that simply suggests for you to educate yourself before being forced to vaccinate or do any other medical procedure you may question. There is nothing wrong with knowing what is going into your body. You don’t have to like it but you do have to let their freedoms as American citizens be heard or yes it is censorship. Or, I guess as long as you agree with what is being censored you’re fine with the rights of others being dismantled!

  • 25 Valerie // Apr 14, 2011 at 9:39 am

    @autblog, If there are guidelines as to what can and cannot actually go on the screen, I’m sure that this ad was subject to a preapproval process. Should they decide to remove it after having put it up, NVIC/Mercola or whomever paid for the ad should have the right to sue in court on the basis that the ad even made it onto the screen in the first place. I suppose it all comes down to the details. If in their contract there is anything that says that they can remove any content at any time without refunding any money, then they may consider it. Otherwise, I suspect they will just run the ad and wait for this whole thing to blow over so as to keep their compensation.

  • 26 Kim // Apr 14, 2011 at 10:16 am

    For those of you wanting it silenced, I challenge you to read the ingredients for yourself on the CDC website and then go to the FDA website and cross reference what levels of mercury and other ingredients listed are acceptable. I think as you research it for yourself, you will be shocked. Read the ads that tell you that thimerosal is no longer in there and then look up the ingredients for YOURSELF.

    https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/thimerosal/index.html

    https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/additives.htm

    Did you read that thimerosal is used as well as formaldehyde? Might want to read these. At the bottom of the page, it says where thimerosal is marked with *, note that these are to be considered the same as thimerosal free. What does that mean? They have to list it as an ingredient but we need to pretend that it isn’t really in there. Did you really read that and think about it?

    Why are you that approve vaccine not reading the journals and checking out these sites for yourself. If you feel led to vaccine, at least vaccine one vaccination at a time to give those little bodies time to adjust. See how well that goes over with your doctor. Oh, do you agree that medicines should be adjusted for age and size? Most do but look at the dosing for adults and infants for vaccines.

    Healthy debates are wonderful because it is an opportunity to learn. Go get educated from the government CDC and FDA and see what you think.

  • 27 Kim // Apr 14, 2011 at 10:25 am

    On the same page they have this little box at the top right hand side…

    Since 2001, with the exception of some influenza (flu) vaccines, thimerosal is not used as a preservative in routinely recommended childhood vaccines.

    Talk about contradictions. Read it for yourself.

  • 28 Anonymous // Apr 14, 2011 at 10:36 am

    Just want to add my two cents for any other mothers who read this article and may be swayed one way or another… I believe parents know their children better than any doctor. I also believe parents are capable of making decisions in the best interest of their children. I’m a well educated mother and from the research I have done to make vaccine decisions for my child, I’ve seen that the research on safety is lacking MUCH. I question the credibilty of any doctor who tries to tell a parent not to be informed. I’ve been swayed further away from trusting doctors on this because of their complete refusal to discuss. I praise an add that makes patents think and encourages them to be informed. Let each parent decide for themself. What are you afraid of?

  • 29 Alina // Apr 14, 2011 at 10:46 am

    As someone who watched my nephew have horriffic seizures moments after being injected with the MMR vaccine, with a fever that spiked at 106 and then regress into himself until the Dr’s diagnosed Autism… I simply don’t believe any more that vaccines are safe. When you watch something this horriffic happen to a healthy child going into a pediatrician’s office for a well child checkup, then come out moments later with devastating consequences… you have to believe the evidence of your own experience. What the talking heads say on tv doesn’t mean anything in contrast to watching a child you love lose all his language and motor skills right before your eyes in a matter of hours. What was different? Just the needle in his arm. He was healthy, talking up a storm, running and playing, even in the moments in the office right before the shot… but after… No amount of money in the world can compensate our family for this loss. Not that we’ve been at all successful in getting our “claim” approved by the Vaccine Court. They claim it’s “genetic.” How can it be genetic when there is not a single person on either side of the family that has ever been recorded with this disease? How can it be genetic when he was normal in the moments before the shot but forever not normal in every moment after?

    After watching that happen to my nephew, I will never expose myself or my children to any of the poisons masquerading as medicine in the form of vaccines. All of the sheep out there who parrot “but vaccines are safe!” and “you should be forced to because you put everyone else at risk” probably have never bothered to read the ingredients they put in vaccines. If “herd immunity” were a real thing and vaccines really worked, then my less than fully vaccinated child would be of no risk to yours, and we wouldn’t be seeing whooping cough and measles cropping up in fully vaccinated individuals. Vaccines are the bloodletting of modern medicine. It’s only a matter of time before the real harm caused by injecting mercury, formaldehyde, Tween 80, MSG, Nutrasweet, aborted fetal cells, monkey parts, chicken parts, cow parts, and various non-intentional viral contaminants becomes wholly evident.

    No Pharma Liability? No Vaccine Mandates!

  • 30 Steve // Apr 14, 2011 at 11:05 am

    @Kim who said, “On the same page they have this little box at the top right hand side…”

    That little box contradicts the ingredients lists being put out by the vaccine manufacturers. Merck and Phfizer both still list Thimerosal in most of their infant vaccines.

    And those vaccines that do not have it, are replacing it with aluminum which has been linked with dimensia. Lovely eh?

    The vaccine manufactures are also no longer liable for damage the vaccine does. The recent supreme court ruling protects the drug companies from lawsuit!! I wish I could make a protect, let’s call it a GUN, and then if any of my guns randomly explode and kill the user, they can’t sue me for faulty manufacturing. Hey, I would make a KILLING because I wouldn’t have to do any safety checking! Brilliant! But wait, I guess I should give some of my profits to the government, that way they stand behind me. Yeah I guess I can do that.

    In a nutshell, that’s the relationship between big pharma and our government.

    So yes, please, I hope people read this ad and ask questions. I hope they go to the site and ask MORE questions. I hope this accomplish it’s goal.

  • 31 Sarah // Apr 14, 2011 at 11:06 am

    GMAB! All the ad says is that there are risks to getting vaccines, which there are. And that families have choices, which we do. How is this harmful, risky or unscientific? And by the way, “vaccines are safe” is an unscientific statement, AAP, or the CDC wouldn’t require a list of the many known dangerous side effects in the vaccine inserts.

  • 32 Jeanie // Apr 14, 2011 at 12:14 pm

    “Vaccines are safe”????? Some are, some are not so safe – please look at ingredients. As a parent of 3 grown kids who only received 7-8 shots total before kindergarten, and who wonders if child #3 suffered a bit from the MMR vaccine as she is slightly autistic, why should we not question have 36 shots now before kindergarten? My granddaughter is 15 mos, no shots, but will get the Polio at 3-4 yrs, the DPT next month, maybe no more.
    The Pertussis outbreak in California and beyond this year – the Pertussis is an outdated vaccine they are using up. Could that be the reason for more outbreak or is it people here illegally?
    We need to do our research before we blindly get our babies the overload of shots today. The pro-vaccine crowd will not listen to anti-vaccine people say “too many, too young” – balance is the key. Only get the absolutely necessary ones!

  • 33 Melissa Mersey // Apr 14, 2011 at 12:23 pm

    Anyone who agrees that any vaccine should be mandated and that people who speak ou against them shouldn’t obviously does not have a concience or has not done any unbiased research! It is really appalling what some people and companies will do for money!

  • 34 Chris // Apr 14, 2011 at 1:39 pm

    The Vaccine business is like any other – they’re out to make money, use up all their stocks of flu vaccines etc. They don’t really care about your health or mine, or our childrens – they simply want to make more money!

    Please explain how preventing diseases is more expensive than treating kids with measles, pertussis, Hib, etc who are hospitalized? There were eight kids hospitalized in Minneapolis with measles. Having spent, even with insurance, a great deal of money when my toddler was hospitalized I know that the cost of one day in a hospital could buy hundreds of MMR doses.

    Your statement makes no sense.

    Why is it that we can pass traits and immunities to certain things thru our genes to a child (per science), yet not anti-bodies from all the shots we received in our own youth?

    Please take a basic biology course to understand that Lamarckism was a silly concept.

    Rose, that link about “vaccines did not save us” is a classic case of lying by cherry picking points on a graph:
    https://www.software3d.com/Home/Vax/Graphs.php

    If fourth grade child created graphs like that in math class they would have received a failing grade.

    I believe parents know their children better than any doctor.

    That only applies if the parents have also spent several years in medical school and residency. I am an engineer, and I did not know about seizures, nanny’s elbow or that apple juice makes diarrhea worse (the apple juice was advice from a natural baby care book, it landed my kid in the emergency room!).

    As someone who watched my nephew have horriffic seizures moments after being injected with the MMR vaccine, with a fever that spiked at 106 and then regress into himself until the Dr’s diagnosed Autism

    Nice anecdote. But anecdotes are not data. My kid had seizures a week after his MMR, but it was due to another infection that was made worse with the idiotic apple juice advice (that book got burned after returning from the hospital).

    Please provide real verifiable data that shows the MMR causes more seizures than measles (where encephalitis happens one in a thousand cases).

    That little box contradicts the ingredients lists being put out by the vaccine manufacturers. Merck and Phfizer both still list Thimerosal in most of their infant vaccines.

    Documentation, or we will assume you made it up. Just like your statement that aluminum is replacing thimerosal (no, it isn’t… mainly because it is an adjuvant not an antiseptic).

    GMAB! All the ad says is that there are risks to getting vaccines, which there are. And that families have choices, which we do. How is this harmful, risky or unscientific?

    Because it ignores the dangers from the actual diseases. There is a notion of relative risk that is being obscured.

    The Pertussis outbreak in California and beyond this year – the Pertussis is an outdated vaccine they are using up.

    The DTaP and Tdap have only been used in the last few years. How is it outdated?

    Anyone who agrees that any vaccine should be mandated

    Where in the USA are they mandated? There are plenty of states with all to easy ways to get an exception, plus there are several private schools (like where the pertussis outbreak occurred in Virginia).

  • 35 Trisha // Apr 14, 2011 at 1:57 pm

    I’d like to sit here and pretend that all you opinionated people know something, but the reality is that you’ve all been brainwashed by money. Vaccines are backed by big pharma. That’s a fact. They have no benefit to providing the risks of vaccines. And while I don’t deny there are benefits, there ARE risks. Yes that was in Caps for all you reactive fools. My son (10 months) was killed by a reaction from amoxicillin. The most common, “safe” drug prescribed by these pharma companies. So to sit here on some health board and be judgmental about things that all US citizens have been brainwashed about is silly. Educate yourself and be comfortable with your choice.

  • 36 Dr. Matt // Apr 14, 2011 at 2:37 pm

    Why are people so protective over vaccines? Some of you on this forum are viscous towards people like Dr. Mercola, Jenny McCarthy, and others. Where does your fear of these people come from? Why do you take some science as fact and others as junk? You don’t believe the science of the tobacco companies, why would you take the science of the pharmaceutical companies? Why would you take the word of people that make money off of the findings that their product is safe? Do you trust the government to raise your kids? Why would the government protect the makers of vaccines from lawsuit? Maybe because they are scratching each other’s back, maybe because they are financially entwined. Why are government studies more valuable than studies from NVIC or whale.to? Was the recent H1N1 virus stopped because the vaccine was rushed to market and everyone got one? I would say no because no one I know got one. They are all still alive.
    Why do you trust doctors? Why do you trust some doctors but not other doctors. Two doctors who come on different sides of an argument, and then you call Mercola a quack? How about Mendhelson? He was a world renowned pediatrician firmly against vaccinations.
    Being a doctor myself I don’t trust many doctors when I do an exam and find a diagnosis for myself. On complex cases I can usually find three or four doctors that got it wrong. So are those doctors absolutely right when it comes to vaccines?
    As a dedicated Libertarian, I empower people to make their own choice. I educate people about the dangers of vaccines and how they are unnecessary in today’s world. I then let them know that it is their choice but I will still be their doctor regardless. I just make sure that people have more proper information and dispel the myths.

    Common Myths-
    Vaccines are required for school- Nope

    Vaccines are responsible for the eradication of disease—– Biggest lie ever told, data records from 15 countries over the past century show the correlations.
    https://genesgreenbook.com/resources/obamsawin/ImmunizationGraphs-RO2009.pdf

    Vaccines are safe— if you consider asthma, allergies, auto-immune, and neurological disorders safe, then sure. (sarcasm intended)

    I hope you think about your dedication to being pro-vaccine and question why is it that you feel so strongly for something that is a hoax, (my opinion and many others’ as well)

    If there was indisputable evidence available right now, would you change your mind or dig in more firmly.

    This is America and I demand the right to raise my family drug and vaccine free, and I will stand up for you to be able to choose one way or another, regardless of your choice. I will attack anyone who thinks that vaccines should be mandatory, or that parental neglect should be punished on people that don’t vaccinate.

  • 37 vmv // Apr 14, 2011 at 3:09 pm

    If a certain incident or event happens following a previous incident or happening, and it happens once, it could possibly be a coincidence. But when the same thing happens thousands of times, is it still a coincidence?
    Thousands of parents have filed petitions in the federal vaccine court because they believe their child’s autism was caused by a vaccine. Is it only a coincidence that these thousands of children have regressed into autism following a vaccine, usually the MMR vaccine?

  • 38 Chris // Apr 14, 2011 at 3:19 pm

    Vaccines are backed by big pharma. That’s a fact. They have no benefit to providing the risks of vaccines.

    So what? Please show us how vaccines are more profitable than treating the diseases? Are you part of “Big Hospital Supply”?

    Vaccines are responsible for the eradication of disease—– Biggest lie ever told, data records from 15 countries over the past century show the correlations.

    No, the biggest lie was the shenanigans involved in making those graphs. If ten year old kid created plots like that he would have received a failing grade on his math homework. See (again):
    https://www.software3d.com/Home/Vax/Graphs.php

    Thousands of parents have filed petitions in the federal vaccine court because they believe their child’s autism was caused by a vaccine. Is it only a coincidence that these thousands of children have regressed into autism following a vaccine, usually the MMR vaccine?

    And how many have been found true? Any of the Autism Omnibus test cases?

    Which is a more likely correlation to an increase of autism diagnosis:

    1) The MMR vaccine that was introduced in the USA in 1971?

    2) The DSM IV, which expanded the diagnostic criteria that was introduced in 1994?

    Do provide evidence that “thousands of children have regressed into autism following a vaccine” started forty years ago.

  • 39 Steve // Apr 14, 2011 at 3:24 pm

    @Chris – A valiant attempt.

    You mention the ‘outbreak’ of 8 cases of measles. Let me ask YOU something. Why didn’t we hear about this case which was HUGE!! Thousands of cases of Mumps, and…oh crap…do I read that right? Over 80% were VACCINATED!!!! Well that’s cant be, surely my source must be wrong. Well I’ll let you tell the CDC they were wrong. And I’ll let you explain why this was covered up but we hear about 8 people sick with measles???

    https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5905a1.htm

    Your link to the graph interpretation is a really fuzzy math. I’ve read it twice and I still can’t wrap my mind around the logic the author uses, and I really tried. The reality is though, the author’s logic is well…not logical. He has the graph right in front of his face and is looking for a way to prove it wrong.

    Here’s a quote: “Yes, death rates dropped significantly before vaccines were introduced because other improvements in medicine and sanitation meant that we were better at treating the disease, but it does not indicate that less people had the disease to begin with.”

    Uhhh, what? The author agrees death rate dropped before the vaccine, but then tries to claim people are still ‘infected’ somehow? How can the other possibly prove that statement? He can’t. He’s grasping at straws and falling flat on his face.

    Thanks for posting Chris, I laughed the whole time while I read your stuff. Then I found some real facts about how vaccines don’t work. Oh and I found it on the CDC web site.

  • 40 Bruce // Apr 14, 2011 at 3:55 pm

    The most common argument I hear to vaccinate is that vaccines are safe and are responsible for eliminating measles, polio, etc. Two points, “safe” is not a well-defined term. In fact, there have been no studies of vaccine safety lasting longer than two weeks and there have been no studies of vaccine safety looking at vaccines in combination with each other. More importantly, when safety of new vaccines is studied, they compare the new vaccine with people who have already had the old vaccine, not with people who are unvaccinated. So “safe” when compared to what? You can’t cite studies that have never been published.

    Vaccines have not been proven to have eliminated the infectious diseases we vaccinate against. In fact historical data shows in every case that the incidence of the disease had gone down 80-95% before any vaccination was given. The same is true of TB and scarlet fever, for which no vaccine was ever developed.

    The way to measure a vaccines effectiveness is by antibody titre. There is no doubt shots increase antibody titre. At least temporarily. Antibodies protect against one part of the viral life cycle and so the outward signs of illness are not expressed. But vaccines actually suppress cellular immunity, leaving a person more vulnerable to chronic infections. Example: chicken pox is down, shingles are up.

    If a more vaccinated society is a healthier society we should not be ranked 37th in the world in health.

  • 41 Dr. Matt // Apr 14, 2011 at 4:05 pm

    @Chris, you obviously didn’t ponder my questions very much. The biggest lie ever was those graphs??? that’s not a very big lie. What is a big lie is when you can get an entire nation and world to go along with and try to mandate a harmful substance as “necessary”. I don’t think you get the idea.

    So I ask once again, why are you so vehemently defending something? I disagree with you and your defense of false logic and bad science, but I don’t attack you with bad metaphors.

    I ask this because I know the physiology, neurology, and immunology of healthy and diseased states. I have a clear understanding of how vaccines affect the nervous system that I am constantly updating with new research.

    Without going into scientific detail because it is a 45 minute presentation of physiology, I will state it as I state for my patients.

    “Physiologically speaking, you cannot inject something in the body without the nervous system detecting it, and processing it, and formulating a response to it. This is true with shots, and food, and drink, and chemicals. But when we trick the immune system, as is the goal of a vaccine, of a developing brain that is formulating new patterns every day that will guide it’s future, it has negative consequences on how the brain programs the response of the primary and secondary immune systems.” (Source cited= ME)

  • 42 sharon // Apr 14, 2011 at 4:08 pm

    Righttoinform, I dont go from blog to blog posting the same point verbatim. I read comments and respond accordingly. You may not like what i say, but at leats it is relevant to the topic at hand. I dont have an issues with michel posting here, I have a problem with the fact she did not address the topic at hand rather simply cut and pasted the same rubbish. Your smarmy attitude just makes you look sillier than the rant alone. You might want to work on your delivery. You sound like Dinah Everett Snyder.
    BTW I dont live in the US, so cant agree it is the best.

  • 43 Dr. Matt // Apr 14, 2011 at 4:11 pm

    Just note that I did not say “I know this for a fact”, or “I know it all”. I am constantly learning as much about the body and the physiology and neurology as research comes out to negate what was previously found to be true. When I was in school I was told in my neurology classes that nerve cells do not heal when injured, there are no stem cells in the brain, and that a damaged area will not regenerate or move. In case you haven’t guessed, those facts were negated in the past 5 years.

  • 44 Chris // Apr 14, 2011 at 4:35 pm

    So I ask once again, why are you so vehemently defending something?

    Because my son had neonatal seizures and was denied protection from pertussis (only got the DT vaccine) at a time our county had a pertussis epidemic. His health depended on herd immunity. He had a another seizure while suffering from a now vaccine preventable disease and is now permanently disabled.

    Why do you think those graphs are valid?

    What evidence do you have for this statement: “Vaccines are safe— if you consider asthma, allergies, auto-immune, and neurological disorders safe, then sure. (sarcasm intended) “?

    Please use cites from PubMed, not a website with pretty colored graphs. If you were a real medical doctor you have never posted that website with Obomsawin lies, especially when I noted they were garbage in a previous comment.

    In case you haven’t guessed, those facts were negated in the past 5 years.

    That is because science moves on, and they learn more. If you had really taken neurology classes you have learned that measles causes encephalitis and SSPE. You would have learned that polio, Hib, pertussis, tetanus and other diseases also cause brain damage. And at a rate greater than vaccines.

    Some papers for you to ponder (these are actual PubMed cites, consider a hint of how you should respond):

    J Infect Dis. 2005 Nov 15;192(10):1686-93. Epub 2005 Oct 12.
    Subacute sclerosing panencephalitis: more cases of this fatal disease are prevented by measles immunization than was previously recognized.
    Bellini WJ, Rota JS, Lowe LE, Katz RS, Dyken PR, Zaki SR, Shieh WJ, Rota PA.
    Respiratory and Enteric Viruses Branch, National Center for Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, USA.

    Impact of specific medical interventions on reducing the prevalence of mental retardation.
    Brosco JP, Mattingly M, Sanders LM.
    Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2006 Mar;160(3):302-9. Review.

    Encephalopathy after whole-cell pertussis or measles vaccination: lack of evidence for a causal association in a retrospective case-control study.
    Ray P, Hayward J, Michelson D, Lewis E, Schwalbe J, Black S, Shinefield H, Marcy M, Huff K, Ward J, Mullooly J, Chen R, Davis R; Vaccine Safety Datalink Group.
    Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2006 Sep;25(9):768-73.

    Childhood vaccinations, vaccination timing, and risk of type 1 diabetes mellitus.
    DeStefano F, Mullooly JP, Okoro CA, Chen RT, Marcy SM, Ward JI, Vadheim CM, Black SB, Shinefield HR, Davis RL, Bohlke K; Vaccine Safety Datalink Team.
    Pediatrics. 2001 Dec;108(6):E112.

    Pediatrics. 2010 Jun;125(6):1134-41. Epub 2010 May 24.
    On-time vaccine receipt in the first year does not adversely affect neuropsychological outcomes.
    Smith MJ, Woods CR.

    Now, do tell us why the incidence of measles decreased by more than 90% between 1960 and 1970 in the USA? Again, post only PubMed cites.
    From https://www.census.gov/prod/99pubs/99statab/sec31.pdf
    Year…. Rate per 100000 of measles
    1912 . . . 310.0
    1920 . . . 480.5
    1925 . . . 194.3
    1930 . . . 340.8
    1935 . . . 584.6
    1940 . . . 220.7
    1945 . . . 110.2
    1950 . . . 210.1
    1955 . . . 337.9
    1960 . . . 245.4
    1965 . . . 135.1
    1970 . . . . 23.2
    1975 . . . . 11.3
    1980 . . . . . 5.9
    1985 . . . . . 1.2
    1990 . . . . .11.2
    1991 . . . . . .3.8
    1992 . . . . . .0.9
    1993 . . . . . .0.1
    1994 . . . . . .0.4
    1995 . . . . . .0.1
    1996 . . . . . .0.2
    1997 . . . . . . 0.1

  • 45 janice' // Apr 14, 2011 at 5:02 pm

    We all need to hear everything and make our own decisions. Mercola warnings are way ahead of time. His studies are not based on studies done by the drug manufactures but independent. Follow the money. Time has proved him correct in the past if you have followed him. Remember vioxx.. Stay tuned for gardisel next.

  • 46 Chris // Apr 14, 2011 at 6:28 pm

    His studies are not based on studies done by the drug manufactures but independent.

    What studies are those? All I can find from Mercola on PubMed are letters, no real papers.

    Do you mean the articles he writes to help sell his supplements? I would say that to follow the money, would show that Mercola is not exactly immune from finger pointing.

  • 47 Chris // Apr 14, 2011 at 7:39 pm

    Dr. Matt:

    Why are government studies more valuable than studies from NVIC or whale.to?

    Neither of those sites do studies. As far as whale.to go, do you also believe in the Illuminati and satanic ley lines?

    Steve:

    You mention the ‘outbreak’ of 8 cases of measles.

    Look at what I wrote more closely. I did not say “outbreak”, I said “hospitalized.” Today the outbreak is up to seventeen. That means half of them were bad enough to require hospitalization. Do you understand the difference?

  • 48 Chemmomo // Apr 14, 2011 at 7:50 pm

    Jeannie re pertussis. Forget about California – explain this outbreak to me: https://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/wb/282419
    Exactly why do you think this is a good thing?

    And Bruce: “The same is true of TB and scarlet fever, for which no vaccine was ever developed.”

    OK, then what’s the BCG for? Hint: https://www.cdc.gov/tb/topic/vaccines/default.htm
    It’s not on the schedule in the US, but it’ s so commonly used in Europe that many of my European-born teaching colleagues here in CA have to get regular chest x-rays because of it.

    And Janice: “Follow the money.” I did. I compared Mercola’s site with the CDC. Which one of those two websites actually directly sells stuff? Oh, hey, it’s Mercola’s. Follow the money indeed.

  • 49 ASDDoc // Apr 14, 2011 at 8:57 pm

    a few pointers I use re:the vaccine debate: if your child is highly allergic to foods or breastmilk, with eczema or asthma or having significant and recurrent gut problems…be VERY careful, selective and delay immunizations. One can minimize likelihood of reactions via pre-treating with omega 3 oils and vitamins A & D. Measles severity can be dramatically curtailed by 1 dose (50,000IU) of vitamin A , that is what is used in areas with epidemics among starving people. All of us need to determine if we are really on the Pharma bandwagon which promotes the idea that virtually all infectious disease is potentially deadly and therefore should have a vaccine developed for it. Natural immunity can be enhanced relatively easily and this approach is without significant side effects. One exposure, in a person with a good immune system, lifelong immunity…end of story!
    Tragedy happens, people and yes, even children die; due to vaccines, due to being unvaccinated and due to unfortunate convergence of circumstance. I hope none of these things happen to all readers, but much of what could be easy, non-toxic, preventive strategies are being forsaken due to Pharma’s marketeering… and people BUYING it!

  • 50 Chemmomo // Apr 14, 2011 at 9:57 pm

    ASDDoc, why are you recommending overdoses of fat-soluble vitamins? Excess of fat soluble vitamins are not excreted via urine as the water-soluble one are – they are stored in fat cells. One can easily overdose on fat soluble vitamins, including both Vitamin A and Vitamin D.
    See https://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002400.htm

    Your approach is NOT “non-toxic” and it is irresponsible of you to promote as such.

  • 51 sharon // Apr 14, 2011 at 10:49 pm

    ASDDoc I sincerely hope you are not a Dr who treats anyone with Autism. BTW, out of morbid curiosity, if a child is allergic to breastmilk what do you suggest the mother do?

  • 52 Rose // Apr 14, 2011 at 11:15 pm

    Seriously people, all this ad is saying is there are risk to vaccines. Which there are! It is not saying that not-vaxxing is completely safe. Of course there are risks either way, it is up to every parent to educate themselves on the risks and benefits of vaxxing or on-vaxxing and make their own choice. But the way the doctor’s push it, so many parents (like me with my first) do it because they blindly think it is the only choice and that if vaccine’s weren’t around everyone would be dropping dead like flies, which is simply untrue. I am sure as a parent it is horrifying either way, to have your child suffer terrible from a “vaccine preventable disease” (I put that in quotations because many people get the vaccine yet still get the disease) or watch your child go through a horrible reaction to the vaccine. I personally would much rather take my chances the natural way. I don’t think anyone should do anything just because it is what everyone else doing. Everyone should have the freedom to make a choice for themselves about what is right or not.

    If vaccines truly are safe and effective, why are doctors and big pharma so scared of people doing research and being educated?
    Just reading the vaccine ingredients from the merck website was enough to make me change my mind. if someone reads all the information out there, and knows all the risks and benefits and still decided to vax, I won’t hold anything against them, because it’s their choice.

  • 53 Rose // Apr 14, 2011 at 11:20 pm

    Oh, and also extended breastfeeding offers so much more than a vaccine every could. Improved immune system, less likelihood of getting childhood illnesses, and yes that included “vaccine preventable diseases,” better IQ, less chances of being obese, and overall better health throughout life, what if doctors pushed breastfeeding even half as much as they pushed vaccines? What if doctor’s started refusing to care for babies who were formula fed? Women would be outraged because their choice would be taken away. Why is no one as equally outraged about the push on vaccines?

  • 54 Julian Frost // Apr 14, 2011 at 11:45 pm

    Rose:

    But the way the doctor’s push it, so many parents (like me with my first) do it because they blindly think it is the only choice and that if vaccine’s weren’t around everyone would be dropping dead like flies, which is simply untrue.

    Before vaccination became common, Measles, Smallpox, Polio and other diseases WERE big killers. The reason they aren’t is because people are vaccinated against them. Without vaccines, people would be dying from them in huge numbers.

    If vaccines truly are safe and effective, why are doctors and big pharma so scared of people doing research and being educated?

    They don’t. They fear them becoming deceived by anti-vaxx propaganda and lies, and choosing to forego one of the best disease prevention mechanisms ever created.

    [M]any people get the vaccine yet still get the disease.

    And people who don’t get the vaccine are far more likely to get the disease. In the recent outbreaks most, if not all, were started by an unvaccinated child going on vacation to an area where the disease was endemic, becoming infected and infecting others on return.

    I personally would much rather take my chances the natural way.

    200 years ago, most people also had to “take their chances the natural way. Most died before their 18th birthday.

    Everyone should have the freedom to make a choice for themselves about what is right or not.

    Parents have been sent to jail (and rightly so) for refusing medical treatment and relying on prayer or quackery to help their children, who died as a result.

  • 55 Rose // Apr 15, 2011 at 1:12 am

    I don’t have time to address everything you wrote right now, but just had to say one thing
    “200 years ago, most people also had to “take their chances the natural way. Most died before their 18th birthday.” If this is true how are any of us alive today? By this logic no one should be alive right now because all those diseases would have already killed us off if hardly anyone was living past age 18.

    ANd let me remind you that 200 years ago people would shit and eat in practically the same place. We have made huge advancements in hygeine and sanitation since then.

  • 56 sharon // Apr 15, 2011 at 1:41 am

    “200 years ago people would shit and eat in practically the same place”? Really? I think you’ll find that few people put their toilets in their kitchens. Both were common 200 years ago. Sigh!

  • 57 Julian Frost // Apr 15, 2011 at 2:52 am

    Rose:

    “200 years ago, most people also had to “take their chances the natural way. Most died before their 18th birthday.” If this is true how are any of us alive today?

    Logic fail, Rose. I said most people died before their 18th birthday, not all. You also forget that 200 years ago, families had more than 2 children. Some had 10 or more. That is how people were able to survive even though diseases killed most people before 18.

  • 58 Vera // Apr 15, 2011 at 4:19 am

    Its amazing how we all dont work together with the pros and cons and not think of the profit big Pharma makes from promoting these vaccines. The formaldehyde, mercury, preservatives etc. have no effect? Think again. People please research, come up with your own answers. But we have the right to choose whether we want this in our bodies and our childrens. The drug companies have been granted liability protection. It the product was so good and so safe then they would not have went to the extreme for this protection. Freedom of choice what we put in our bodies, freedom of speech for all. This is what America is supposed to be. Read ingredients, research this is our children and future generation that has more sicknesses, more health problems due to the chemical work we live in. Chemicals are profit. No one cares about you and yours, you must care! Your life.

  • 59 Julian Frost // Apr 15, 2011 at 4:48 am

    Vera,
    There’s a little expression: the dose makes the poison. Your cells make formaldehyde as part of the metabolic processes. More, in fact, than is in a vaccine. The mercury is in compound form. Table salt is a compound of Sodium and Chlorine. Yet we all eat a few grams a day and don’t die.
    Big Pharma does not make much profit from vaccines. As others have pointed out, the pharma co.s would make far more from medicines for vaccine preventable diseases. You ask people to research, but make factually inaccurate claims to support your position.
    Lastly, w.r.t. Parents Rights, as I said before, some parents chose to forego effective treatments and use prayer and quackery, only to wind up in jail when their children died.

  • 60 ALERT: Demand That CBS Not Air Outdoor Anti-Vaccine Ad! « The Skeptical Teacher // Apr 15, 2011 at 8:26 am

    [...] [**Update (4-15-11): The American Academy of Pediatrics has requested that CBS pull the anti-vax ad.] [...]

  • 61 Chris // Apr 15, 2011 at 9:53 am

    Rose:

    Oh, and also extended breastfeeding offers so much more than a vaccine every could.

    Citation needed, please.

    There is some immunity, but it often fails with pertussis and tetanus. Plus my daughter was a six month old baby only getting breastmilk when she got chicken pox.

  • 62 Chris // Apr 15, 2011 at 3:29 pm

    Steve, here is another update: there have been twenty people with measles with ten (half!) requiring hospitalization.

    Would someone please tell me how Big Pharma and Big Hospital Supply make more money from forty doses of the MMR (two per person) than the costs of ten hospital stays. Please show your work.

  • 63 sharon // Apr 15, 2011 at 5:28 pm

    Vera you highlight perfectly the main issue as I see it. People reading ingredietns, doing google searches and then thinking they know something. But.. have no scientific training to understand what the f#$% they are reading!

  • 64 Steve // Apr 15, 2011 at 7:28 pm

    @Chris, I really don’t care about a puny event with 20 people sick when I post about THOUSANDS getting sick who HAVE been vaccinated. 20 people is not a large enough group to discuss, unless of course, you’re trying to claim, “SEE, SEE!!! They should have been vaccinated!” I claim by the CDC website, “See, See, even when people are vaccinated IT DOESN’T HELP.”

    You’re asking for an either forty doses of MMR or hospitalization. The problem is, it’s not an either or. It’s BOTH. It’s – get the MMR and increase your risk of going to the hospital. Vaccines do not prevent illnesses. Even the CDC website supports my view.

  • 65 Chris // Apr 15, 2011 at 10:37 pm

    Steve, I was noting that you were unaware that there were more infected than hospitalized.

    Guess what? We know that vaccines are not 100% effective. If there was better herd immunity the ones who had two MMR vaccines and still not immune to mumps would not have had mumps. There were probably hundred times more exposed who did not get mumps.

    I had mumps twice! The actual disease, not the vaccine. I cannot become immune to mumps. I depend on herd immunity. That is yet another reason to encourage vaccination.

    Actually, the cost of the hospitalizations would pay for thousands of MMR vaccines. Thereby increasing herd immunity to three diseases and decreasing the chance of hospitalizations.

    Vaccines do not prevent illnesses.

    Why did the numbers of people getting measles decrease by over 90% in the USA between 1960 and 1970? Do not try to cloud your answer by mentioning any other decade, nor focusing on death rates (which are influenced by advances in hospital care).

  • 66 Sleaze Returns to Times Square with a Vengeance – Part I | Rogue Medic // Apr 16, 2011 at 3:34 am

    [...] [1] AAP asks CBS to pull anti-vaccine ad Autism News Beat April 13th, 2011 Article including letter from the American Academy of Pediatrics [...]

  • 67 Valerie // Apr 16, 2011 at 1:18 pm

    Chris, 2 things.

    1. You ask what incentive the medical profession has for giving vaccines since they are cheaper for a person/consumer than treating the disease would be. Proponents of vaccine safety (a.k.a. ‘anti-vaccine’ people) would argue that vaccines cause chronic illness, thereby costing much more in the long run than a one time hospitalization for a disease. I am not arguing this point, simply pointing out the argument that the ‘other side’ has for this question you have asked.

    2. You said that your child received DT but not P before having seizures. Did you ever wonder if the D toxin added to the causation of the seizure, even if it was caused by a vaccine-preventable illness? Diptheria antigen is just about as toxic as the Pertussis antigen. By the way, I am very sorry for your circumstance.

  • 68 Steve // Apr 16, 2011 at 1:20 pm

    @Chris – Of course there were more infected than hospitalized. Of those hospitalized over 85% were Vaccinated!! That’s more than just a few. You can’t say, “Oh vaccines are not 100% effective.” Actually, vaccines are less than 10% effective as evidence by watching the disease outbreaks the CDC lists. The CDC is kind enough to check if people with the disease got the vaccine. We find that the vast majority of people getting these diseases WERE vaccinated. Clearly, they don’t work.

    You can’t ignore ever other decade leading into the 1960s. We know Measles was on the decline already through the 50s. We know that in the 40s people were just beginning how to prevent the transfer of the disease. The 50s saw and increase in awareness, and the 60s saw a decrease in the disease. It’s really perfectly logical and is confirmed today by the number of people still getting the disease that have already been vaccinated.

    Vaccines do not consistently prevent the disease from occurring. If the MMR vaccine worked, you’re right, it would prevent hospitalizations. The problem is, getting the vaccine is causing damage to our immune system and CAUSING AN INCREASE in doctors visits and hospital visits.

    You’re not willing to look at the numbers. Clearly the CDC is reporting vaccines are failing to protect us. It’s not just 5% getting the disease who were vaccinated, it’s well over 75%!!! That’s a problem for me. Why should I bother getting vaccinated, put chemicals in my body that are damaging my immune system, if it doesn’t do what they claim it can do?? I’m not willing to take that risk, and I’m thankful for this ad causing people to question the risks vaccines have.

  • 69 Chemmomo // Apr 16, 2011 at 6:58 pm

    Steve,
    the problem with your argument is you’re looking at this from wrong viewpoint. Who cares if the people who became ill were vaccinated, or not?

    What matters is the people who were exposed to the illness, and did NOT become ill. How many of them were vaccinated? How many of them are not?

    Studies have shown that refusing vaccines increases your risk of infections disease. Here’s one from 2009 looking at pertussis rates in Colorado: https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/123/6/1446

    As for the rest of your notions – do you have any data to back them up?

  • 70 Steve // Apr 16, 2011 at 8:06 pm

    @Chemmomo – We care if vaccinated people become ill because it tells us if the vaccine works. The CDC reports many outbreaks and we see a HUGE majority of those people getting sick were vaccinated. The point is, Vaccines fail to protect the majority of people that receive them.

    Your linked article is interesting. Here are a few points:

    1. “Children of parents who refuse pertussis immunizations are at high risk for pertussis infection relative to vaccinated children. ”

    Note, this does not say child of parents who refuse pertussis GET THE DISEASE MORE. They can’t say that, because it’s not true. Actually the opposite. When we look at CDC reporting and the links posted here, we see the vast majority of children with Pertussis WERE vaccinated. This article knows it, and avoids saying it with awkward phrases like this one that don’t mean anything at all.

    2) Herd immunity does not seem to completely protect unvaccinated children from pertussis.

    I was SHOCKED to read this. It’s saying herd immunity FAILED!!! So why bother trying to achieve herd immunity if ‘herd immunity’ as a concept fails when we try to implement it?? There it is, in your own article saying Herd Immunity failed.

    Thanks for posting Chemmomo, you’ve just strengthened my view that 1) Vaccines do not work, and 2) They are not safe.

  • 71 Chemmomo // Apr 16, 2011 at 8:47 pm

    Steve, you’ve still missed the point.

    You need to look at the total group of people exposed to the illness.

    Then break that down into vaccinated or not vaccinated. That’s what tells you whether or not the vaccine worked – NOT the sick people.

    Getting back to the sick people: I cannot comprehend how you can suggest “this does not say child of parents who refuse pertussis GET THE DISEASE MORE” with a straight face. Do you understand how the authors of the study calculated the relative risk of getting the disease? They counted the children who GOT PERTUSSIS and checked their vaccination status.

    Did you even read the article, or just the abstract? Look Table 1 and tell me how many of the 595 control (who did NOT get pertussis) children were unvaccinated. What percentage of those 595 children is that? Yeah, I know we have no way of assessing how many of the control children were actually exposed to the disease, but after you look at that number (the percantage out of 595 children), compare it to the percentage of children who got ill who were not vaccinated.

    I’ll be waiting for your response.

  • 72 Chris // Apr 16, 2011 at 9:38 pm

    Vera:

    Proponents of vaccine safety (a.k.a. ‘anti-vaccine’ people) would argue that vaccines cause chronic illness, thereby costing much more in the long run than a one time hospitalization for a disease.

    Evidence? The recent study from Germany shows that is untrue.

    By the way my son had seizures when he was newborn, which is why he only had the DT. He did not have any vaccine prior to two months of age, where it was decided to only give him the DT. So how do you explain the D part giving him seizures two months before he got it?

    You can’t ignore ever other decade leading into the 1960s. We know Measles was on the decline already through the 50s.

    Deaths were in decline due to better medical management, but the incidence was not (see graphs in link). Look at the table I gave:Year…. Rate per 100000 of measles
    1912 . . . 310.0
    1920 . . . 480.5
    1925 . . . 194.3
    1930 . . . 340.8
    1935 . . . 584.6
    1940 . . . 220.7
    1945 . . . 110.2
    1950 . . . 210.1
    1955 . . . 337.9
    1960 . . . 245.4

    So how is 337 less than 210? Also, do think about what economic thing happened in the 1930s. It started with the word “Great.” You may have heard of if in history class. But you may not like the lack of data points. Let us use the CDC Pink Appendix G table to see what happened with measles in the 1950s:
    Disease: Measles in the USA
    Year__Cases
    1950__319,124
    1951__530,118
    1952__683,077
    1953__449,146
    1954__682,720
    1955__555,156
    1956__611,936
    1957__486,799
    1958__763,094
    1959__406,162
    1960__441,703

    Hmmm, I see cycles but not much of a decrease. Certainly not 90%.

    Steve does not understand that if vaccines were eliminated then the numbers of mumps and measles would increase exponentially. He seems to have issues with reading. He missed the part of the CDC MMWR report that says “Although mumps vaccination alone was not sufficient to prevent this outbreak, maintaining high measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccination coverage remains the most effective way to prevent outbreaks and limit their size when they occur.”

    He does not understand basic herd immunity. Some herd immunity arithmetic:

    Take 1000 people (ignoring the infants under 2 months who cannot be vaccinated, or babies under a year who can only be partially vaccinated), if 5% refuse vaccines then the numbers are:

    950 vaccinated persons (assuming full schedule)
    50 unvaccinated persons

    The pertussis vaccine is actually only 80% effective at worse, so the numbers are:

    760 protected persons
    190 vaccinated but vulnerable persons
    50 unvaccinated persons

    There is an outbreak and it gets spread to 20% of the population, then:

    760 protected persons without pertussis

    38 vaccinated persons get pertussis
    152 vaccinated person who may still get pertussis

    10 unvaccinated persons get pertussis
    40 unvaccinated persons who may still get pertussis.

    This is how more vaccinated persons get the disease than unvaccinated. Even if the infection rate was at 100%, there would still be more of the vaccinated getting the diseases because there are more of them!

Leave a Comment