Studies Show Unvaccinated Children Healthier

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]ActivitiesGuy wrote:

I’m not really sure about transmission of live-attenuated virus vaccines into others. Aragorn, do you know what happens if an unvaccinated, immunocompromised person stands next to a vaccinated child on the street and catches the little bugger’s live-attenuated-virus-carrying sneeze? My guess is that it’s pretty low risk.[/quote]

Hmm, I’m not sure. I’ll have to do some looking into this. Seems like this might be a good question for your other epidemiology friend as well. I misunderstood what Airtruth was asking I suppose.

My gut reaction is that with a non-immunocompromised individual there is no way to become sick or infected. Immunocompromised individuals are a hard question. It is known that most infections require some minimum threshold of virus particles to be present, but on the other hand that is a very disease/illness specific number. More virulent strains can become infectious and symptomatic at very low #'s of molecules. Interestingly this is one reason why Ebola is such a bitch, because my understanding of the science is that Ebola needs only about 10 individual molecules (I may be misremembering the actual number, I just remember being shocked at how few were necessary). But again this is a murky issue and especially so with Ebola.

I think I’ll look into this a bit. Regardless I think it bears repeating that even if this ends up being a legitimate concern, it is only at a very specific time after the vaccination shot–say 2 days. Before and after it is not realistically possible because your immune system has killed whatever little virus was present or because the attenuated virus vaccine hasn’t circulated in your system enough to be excreted via any known pathway.

82

[quote]magick wrote:

[quote]ActivitiesGuy wrote:
Sadly, many chiropractors are at the forefront of the anti-vaccine movement. And now we’ve come full circle. Some of the guys trying to fight the good fight, viewing health and wellness as a holistic thing that’s not just taking pills, are also the ones leading the anti-vax charge.[/quote]

Imo most chiropractors are full of it. They’re as bad as the “modern” doctors who prescribe pills. While it’s good to see that they were engaged with your ex-GF, they’re still stuck in their own ideas and concepts and will see things in that manner. I’ve met chiropractors who claimed modern medicine is bunk, and they’re dumb. If nothing else, the vaccination programs of the 20th century is the crowning achievement of modern medicine. That’s why I have such a strong anger towards anti-vaccination people.

The vaccination programs were a triumph in every sense of the word. It is one of the greatest achievements of mankind, and we have people completely ignoring it if not outright saying it’s wrong.

FUCK THEM.

I do have respect for certain Korean (trained in Korea) doctors who practice acupuncture and Chinese medicine. They receive a shit-ton of training in both modern and Chinese medicine and have healthy respect for both. My understanding is that modern acupuncture practitioners know what their stuff can treat and limit it at that- no claims of it being a cure-all and know when to send their patients to the hospital.[/quote]

Oh, I agree with you. I have met and dealt with some chiros that were complete quacks, and TBH the guy who treated my ex definitely was one himself (he, also, was anti-vac). The only positive thing I have to say about the guy, and his kind, is that he was more hands-on in actually attempting to work with his patients to solve problems rather than passing out pill prescriptions like candy.

I relayed that anecdote more to show that I don’t like how we have “Western medicine” on one side and “anything that’s different” on the other side instead of finding a meaningful amalgamation. Recognizing that there is a place for so-called “natural” treatments instead of trying to cure everything with a pill. And, the flip side of that, recognizing that there are some things “natural” treatments cannot do, like protect us against deadly viruses.

83

[quote]ActivitiesGuy wrote:
The only positive thing I have to say about the guy, and his kind, is that he was more hands-on in actually attempting to work with his patients to solve problems rather than passing out pill prescriptions like candy.[/quote]

Ya, that’s true. I think doctors buy into the myth of “medicine can solve everything” themselves and prescribe too much medicine.

[quote]ActivitiesGuy wrote:
I relayed that anecdote more to show that I don’t like how we have “Western medicine” on one side and “anything that’s different” on the other side instead of finding a meaningful amalgamation. Recognizing that there is a place for so-called “natural” treatments instead of trying to cure everything with a pill. And, the flip side of that, recognizing that there are some things “natural” treatments cannot do, like protect us against deadly viruses.[/quote]

I like to believe that medicine is medicine. Just find out why it works and keep an open mind.

I do realize that keeping an open mind is really hard when your reputation/honor/personal something and money is involved, but … bleh.

84

[quote]ActivitiesGuy wrote:
Thanks for chiming in here. Good stuff.[/quote]

I have an amateur interest in virology and infectious diseases. They terrify me.

I would appreciate it if you could name any books on the subject that you consider readable for a layperson. I’m always looking for more things to read.

85

Ok, so a quick check-around on info comes back as follows:

live virus vaccines do in fact represent threats to immune compromised individuals in the initial stages of the shot (i.e. before the weakened virus is killed off by your immune response, so days 1-3 or whatever). It is in fact possible to be contagious. However, one of the benefits of this is herd immunity. The vaccine virus can spread to other individuals and confer immunity on them as well. Obviously, if this is someone with a non-functional immune system that is a threat.

This is not a threat to immune-competent organisms.

One of the other downsides to live attenuated vaccines is that they can revert to wild-type strains genetically as they reproduce. THIS EXTREMELY RARE!!! But it is possible. Generally this will not matter however, as the body has already mounted an immune response and will kill off the vaccine. But it has occurred before (polio).

The mechanism behind this, loosely, is that most often the vaccines in the past have been inactivated by point mutations (a single base of DNA or RNA is mutated to a wrong letter, which inactivates the gene) in the genetic code in the host organism or cell culture used to generate it. Again, polio was noticed to contain ~15 nucleotide mutations.

In this scenario, polio had reverted in situ and had regained the wild-type sequence at several points along with several other random mutations that allowed it to become virulent again.

However, modern day molecular biochemistry techniques allow us to bypass this by allowing us to introduce mutations we desire in particular genes of our choice that are required for virulence instead of having to observe a culture and passively select non-virulent strains from random mutations. We can also delete entire genes instead of simple point mutations. Loss of whole genes practically guarantees that no reversion to wild-type infectious ability will ever be attained.

86

[quote]magick wrote:

[quote]ActivitiesGuy wrote:
Thanks for chiming in here. Good stuff.[/quote]

I have an amateur interest in virology and infectious diseases. They terrify me.[/quote]

That’s because you’re a smart person. They should lol.

I would suggest the Hot Zone, but I am certain given your interest you have already read it. That is terrifying.

87

“In 1736 I lost one of my sons, a fine boy of four years old, by the small-pox, taken in the common way. I long regretted bitterly, and still regret that I had not given it to him by inoculation. This I mention for the sake of parents who omit that operation, on the supposition that they should never forgive themselves if a child died under it; my example showing that the regret may be the same either way, and that, therefore, the safer should be chosen.” Benjamin Franklin

We like to believe that this debate is new, but its not.

88

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]magick wrote:

[quote]ActivitiesGuy wrote:
Thanks for chiming in here. Good stuff.[/quote]

I have an amateur interest in virology and infectious diseases. They terrify me.[/quote]

That’s because you’re a smart person. They should lol.

I would suggest the Hot Zone, but I am certain given your interest you have already read it. That is terrifying.[/quote]

Great book.

89

It looks like the OP tossed a skunk in the room and then ran for cover.

90

[quote]magick wrote:
I like to believe that medicine is medicine. Just find out why it works and keep an open mind.
[/quote]

Not exactly. It’s nice to know how things work. But not a requirement. Really the bottom line is does it work.

No idea why diuretics are used to treat diabetes insipidus. Doubt you’ll find many who have a clue. But it works.

Now that I see it from the other side, sometimes I feel like we expect too much of doctors and blame them when they can’t live up to our impossibly high standards. It’s kind of crazy to think that you’re trusting a person to be an authority on all things health-related. Yet they’re people too, and just as fallible as everyone else. That’s a lot of responsibility to shoulder, and truly no one can be an authority on everything. This is why I ask ActivitiesGuy, was the doc your ex saw a GP? Many don’t know a whole lot about MSK stuff and he might’ve been stepping outside of his area of expertise in trying to treat her. I bet you would’ve had a different experience if you had seen a physiatrist.

91

[quote]Apoklyps wrote:
Now that I see it from the other side, sometimes I feel like we expect too much of doctors and blame them when they can’t live up to our impossibly high standards. It’s kind of crazy to think that you’re trusting a person to be an authority on all things health-related. Yet they’re people too, and just as fallible as everyone else. That’s a lot of responsibility to shoulder, and truly no one can be an authority on everything. This is why I ask ActivitiesGuy, was the doc your ex saw a GP? Many don’t know a whole lot about MSK stuff and he might’ve been stepping outside of his area of expertise in trying to treat her. I bet you would’ve had a different experience if you had seen a physiatrist.[/quote]

Part 1) I absolutely agree that in some ways, docs are led to impossibly high standards. I feel that way even in my own job, when a doc assumes that I’m a supercomputer that can take their data and just, poof, make it do exactly what they want. I can only imagine how stressful it is to have patients looking at you, expecting you to listen to a heartbeat and take their blood pressure and NOW CAN YOU FIX ME?

Part 2) the experience with my ex at an urgent care clinic: I’m sure the doc was a GP and likely knew she was in no position to adequately treat a patient with chronic neck pain. I’d be more understanding if she had just admitted as much and attempted to refer us someplace more suitable - that certainly would have been preferable to conducting her own physical examination if she didn’t know what she was doing.

What grinds my gears is that a) she did not give a “you know, I’m not really qualified to assess this. Here’s a script for a muscle relaxer to temporarily relieve your pain, but you should really go see a physical therapist/orthopedist/athletic trainer who is used to dealing with these conditions” and b) she brushed off the value in a more thorough exam. It was clear from her tone that she just wanted us in and out as fast as possible and hoped that the muscle relaxer prescription - which might have helped the pain temporarily, but that’s about all - would get rid of us.

92

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
That’s because you’re a smart person. They should lol.

I would suggest the Hot Zone, but I am certain given your interest you have already read it. That is terrifying.[/quote]

Ha.

The Hot Zone IS the book that got me terrified of infectious diseases =P

Hyperbole aside, I took an overview of infectious diseases courses back in college. The course essentially covered some of the most terrible infectious diseases of all time, such as HIV, polio, ebola, TB and such. It was my first actual study of them, and I found it to be a fascinating course.

Also made me realize just how terrible infectious diseases can be.

93

[quote]ActivitiesGuy wrote:

[quote]Apoklyps wrote:
Now that I see it from the other side, sometimes I feel like we expect too much of doctors and blame them when they can’t live up to our impossibly high standards. It’s kind of crazy to think that you’re trusting a person to be an authority on all things health-related. Yet they’re people too, and just as fallible as everyone else. That’s a lot of responsibility to shoulder, and truly no one can be an authority on everything. This is why I ask ActivitiesGuy, was the doc your ex saw a GP? Many don’t know a whole lot about MSK stuff and he might’ve been stepping outside of his area of expertise in trying to treat her. I bet you would’ve had a different experience if you had seen a physiatrist.[/quote]

Part 1) I absolutely agree that in some ways, docs are led to impossibly high standards. I feel that way even in my own job, when a doc assumes that I’m a supercomputer that can take their data and just, poof, make it do exactly what they want. I can only imagine how stressful it is to have patients looking at you, expecting you to listen to a heartbeat and take their blood pressure and NOW CAN YOU FIX ME?

Part 2) the experience with my ex at an urgent care clinic: I’m sure the doc was a GP and likely knew she was in no position to adequately treat a patient with chronic neck pain. I’d be more understanding if she had just admitted as much and attempted to refer us someplace more suitable - that certainly would have been preferable to conducting her own physical examination if she didn’t know what she was doing.

What grinds my gears is that a) she did not give a “you know, I’m not really qualified to assess this. Here’s a script for a muscle relaxer to temporarily relieve your pain, but you should really go see a physical therapist/orthopedist/athletic trainer who is used to dealing with these conditions” and b) she brushed off the value in a more thorough exam. It was clear from her tone that she just wanted us in and out as fast as possible and hoped that the muscle relaxer prescription - which might have helped the pain temporarily, but that’s about all - would get rid of us.[/quote]

I have a huge problem with GP’s who prescribe anti-depressants and pain killers when such things are way outside their realm. I finally found a GP I like around here (my only visit to the doc is for a yearly physical and bloodwork) and part of what I like about him is he has a sign hanging up that says “If you are in pain, you will be referred to someone to help you manage it, if you are stressed you will be referred to a psychiatrist, if you just want pills you will be referred to the door or rehab, your choice”

94

^^ I’ve found Doctors for the most part breach their duty of care to patients in chronic pain because they’re scared to prescribe pain killers because of all the junkies. Example; I was in hospital after surgery and I was written up for 40mg of oxycontin a day. I never needed it because I was in bed the whole time. Then when I left hospital I was in terrible pain having to try to walk again and so on. But the GP I see wouldn’t give me any painkillers when I actually needed them. I had to wait six weeks in terrible pain to see a specialist and even he’s a pain in the arse with prescribing. I’ve actually come to the realisation that I’m going to have to try to manage without pain relief because they just won’t help me. It’s a disgrace. And yet the junkies can get them because they just go from one doctor to another(doctor shopping).

95

[quote]jbpick86 wrote:

[quote]ActivitiesGuy wrote:

[quote]Apoklyps wrote:
Now that I see it from the other side, sometimes I feel like we expect too much of doctors and blame them when they can’t live up to our impossibly high standards. It’s kind of crazy to think that you’re trusting a person to be an authority on all things health-related. Yet they’re people too, and just as fallible as everyone else. That’s a lot of responsibility to shoulder, and truly no one can be an authority on everything. This is why I ask ActivitiesGuy, was the doc your ex saw a GP? Many don’t know a whole lot about MSK stuff and he might’ve been stepping outside of his area of expertise in trying to treat her. I bet you would’ve had a different experience if you had seen a physiatrist.[/quote]

Part 1) I absolutely agree that in some ways, docs are led to impossibly high standards. I feel that way even in my own job, when a doc assumes that I’m a supercomputer that can take their data and just, poof, make it do exactly what they want. I can only imagine how stressful it is to have patients looking at you, expecting you to listen to a heartbeat and take their blood pressure and NOW CAN YOU FIX ME?

Part 2) the experience with my ex at an urgent care clinic: I’m sure the doc was a GP and likely knew she was in no position to adequately treat a patient with chronic neck pain. I’d be more understanding if she had just admitted as much and attempted to refer us someplace more suitable - that certainly would have been preferable to conducting her own physical examination if she didn’t know what she was doing.

What grinds my gears is that a) she did not give a “you know, I’m not really qualified to assess this. Here’s a script for a muscle relaxer to temporarily relieve your pain, but you should really go see a physical therapist/orthopedist/athletic trainer who is used to dealing with these conditions” and b) she brushed off the value in a more thorough exam. It was clear from her tone that she just wanted us in and out as fast as possible and hoped that the muscle relaxer prescription - which might have helped the pain temporarily, but that’s about all - would get rid of us.[/quote]

I have a huge problem with GP’s who prescribe anti-depressants and pain killers when such things are way outside their realm. I finally found a GP I like around here (my only visit to the doc is for a yearly physical and bloodwork) and part of what I like about him is he has a sign hanging up that says “If you are in pain, you will be referred to someone to help you manage it, if you are stressed you will be referred to a psychiatrist, if you just want pills you will be referred to the door or rehab, your choice”[/quote]

That guy sounds like the exact opposite of a doc I ran into a number of years ago. I see this guy for some reason, can’t remember what, and at the end of the appointment, he says something like “hey, anything you need, just let me know”. I said okay thanks while mentally looking sideways at him.

I actually wished I could remember the guys name a few years later when I wanted to see if testosterone therapy might help with chronic injuries I was having at the time.

96

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]jbpick86 wrote:

[quote]ActivitiesGuy wrote:

[quote]Apoklyps wrote:
Now that I see it from the other side, sometimes I feel like we expect too much of doctors and blame them when they can’t live up to our impossibly high standards. It’s kind of crazy to think that you’re trusting a person to be an authority on all things health-related. Yet they’re people too, and just as fallible as everyone else. That’s a lot of responsibility to shoulder, and truly no one can be an authority on everything. This is why I ask ActivitiesGuy, was the doc your ex saw a GP? Many don’t know a whole lot about MSK stuff and he might’ve been stepping outside of his area of expertise in trying to treat her. I bet you would’ve had a different experience if you had seen a physiatrist.[/quote]

Part 1) I absolutely agree that in some ways, docs are led to impossibly high standards. I feel that way even in my own job, when a doc assumes that I’m a supercomputer that can take their data and just, poof, make it do exactly what they want. I can only imagine how stressful it is to have patients looking at you, expecting you to listen to a heartbeat and take their blood pressure and NOW CAN YOU FIX ME?

Part 2) the experience with my ex at an urgent care clinic: I’m sure the doc was a GP and likely knew she was in no position to adequately treat a patient with chronic neck pain. I’d be more understanding if she had just admitted as much and attempted to refer us someplace more suitable - that certainly would have been preferable to conducting her own physical examination if she didn’t know what she was doing.

What grinds my gears is that a) she did not give a “you know, I’m not really qualified to assess this. Here’s a script for a muscle relaxer to temporarily relieve your pain, but you should really go see a physical therapist/orthopedist/athletic trainer who is used to dealing with these conditions” and b) she brushed off the value in a more thorough exam. It was clear from her tone that she just wanted us in and out as fast as possible and hoped that the muscle relaxer prescription - which might have helped the pain temporarily, but that’s about all - would get rid of us.[/quote]

I have a huge problem with GP’s who prescribe anti-depressants and pain killers when such things are way outside their realm. I finally found a GP I like around here (my only visit to the doc is for a yearly physical and bloodwork) and part of what I like about him is he has a sign hanging up that says “If you are in pain, you will be referred to someone to help you manage it, if you are stressed you will be referred to a psychiatrist, if you just want pills you will be referred to the door or rehab, your choice”[/quote]

That guy sounds like the exact opposite of a doc I ran into a number of years ago. I see this guy for some reason, can’t remember what, and at the end of the appointment, he says something like “hey, anything you need, just let me know”. I said okay thanks while mentally looking sideways at him.

I actually wished I could remember the guys name a few years later when I wanted to see if testosterone therapy might help with chronic injuries I was having at the time.
[/quote]

Most of the docs around here are like the doc you describe. That’s why such a script abuse issue.

97

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
You’re going to argue biology against a guy who does it as his career? Ok, it’s your (academic) funeral.[/quote]

So people who practice “biology” cannot be incorrect?

Opening with an appeal to authority is a bold move.

I don’t agree with either the science behind vaccines nor do I believe anyone has the right to force them into people.

Can I not use both arguments since they are both relevant to my case against them?

I think more “conspiracy theories” should be more closely examined. So what?

[quote]The symptoms do NOT = the disease. I can get flu like symptoms from a regular cold, or more than a dozen other NOT INFLUENZA VIRUS illnesses or problems.
[/quote]

I DON’T WANT THE SYMPTOMS which is why I don’t want the flu in the first place!

“Sir, please hold still. In order for us to keep you from getting sick we are going to inject you with something that will make you feel sick but you won’t actually be.”

Bahahahahahahahhaahahahahaha!

Yeah, right!

98

[quote]ActivitiesGuy wrote:
The symptoms cannot “kill just as bad as the infection.” Flu-like symptoms (fever, headache, chills) - the cluster of unpleasant thingies that people have come to call “the flu” - are not going to kill you. An actual infection of influenza virus, now, that IS something that might kill you.

The fact that I even have to try to explain this is disturbing.

[/quote]

So you are telling me people don’t die from fever or asphyxiation of their own sick? Old people are the most at risk.

I am surprised I have to explain this to a super smart scientist like you.

99

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]ActivitiesGuy wrote:
The symptoms cannot “kill just as bad as the infection.” Flu-like symptoms (fever, headache, chills) - the cluster of unpleasant thingies that people have come to call “the flu” - are not going to kill you. An actual infection of influenza virus, now, that IS something that might kill you.

The fact that I even have to try to explain this is disturbing.

[/quote]

So you are telling me people don’t die from fever or asphyxiation of their own sick? Old people are the most at risk.

I am surprised I have to explain this to a super smart scientist like you.[/quote]

So you think we’d all be better off without ever inventing or using the smallpox vaccine? I haven’t seen anyone in here argue that a flu shot is a lock or that it should be mandatory.

100

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
I don’t agree with either the science behind vaccines
[/quote]

Based off of what?