California enacts mandatory vaccination law

The answer is we don't know.

http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/150/11/1238.short

This is one of the reasons why the CDC schedule keeps being modified to include additional courses both earlier and later. We don't know if this will solve the "problem" but it can't hurt, right?

 

Damn...I should have bought Phama stock. But, nooooooo.

Anyway, I'd be inclined to challenge that decree in court, but it is CA, sooooo, maybe not. Funny, CA welcomes large numbers of invaders from the south who you know damn well aren't vaccinated, yet mandate tax paying citizens vaccinate their kids. But who knows, maybe it's because of the invaders kids they're mandating this but they can't say it is. It's frikkin CA, so who knows.

 

What I find ironic is that if the wind blows east they'll spend a few months stinking up the front of a corporation complaining about cronyism and then when the wind turns west they'll demand we use the force of government to mandate cronyism. Idiots.

 

You do know that diseases of yesterday, miraculously could spring up today, right? Ancient history, recent history, doesn't matter! I take it that "have a nice day" is code for the fact that you have no counter argument to facts of our past?

 

Sounds like a good idea. While your at it, see if she can teach you a little history, but not while your using Peyote.

 

I know two people who had polio as children. Both are paraplegics because of it. They were born in countries that didn't vaccinate against polio at the time.

I think vaccinations are the way to go.

 

I'd like to see the study that supports this claim,

 

I bet I can teach her a little bit about hygiene, clean water sources, and modern treatments for infectious diseases, too.

Not sure where we're going with this, but I guess you think it somehow supports our current vaccination strategy?

No idea why that would be the case, but as long as you feel it's helping you, good for you.

 

No hyperbole at all. Don't vaccinate your kids. Be a "man" and stand up to the G. Just keep them in the back woods and out of regular society.

 

Of course it comes as no surprise, before the white settlers, those infectious diseases were virtually nonexistent in the Indian population. But now that the white man brought those diseases with him, I guess a little teaching about infectious diseases is the least you can do.

The concept is pretty simple, unless you choose to make it complicated. Certain vaccines sent certain diseases out to pasture, or at least culled them back to rates that the disease could somewhat be contained. If those vaccines hadn't come about, the old lady may not have lived to tell you a story, and for you to remind her about hygiene. And the Indians from long ago, would have survived to see another day. That is where I am going with this.

 

Again, no clue how you think this pertains to our current use of vaccines.

Smallpox is a highly specialized virus. It was entirely contained within humans, has a well studied transmission profile, and was eliminated not just by vaccination strategy, but by the simple strategy of isolating it from transmission to new hosts. Smallpox is not a virus that is well adapted to remaining endemic in a population that knows how to identify it. It has a relatively short incubation, and some pretty stark symptoms that betray its presence. You don't have to vaccinate the globe. You just have to vaccinate the people near it.

Meanwhile we're currently working to eliminate diseases that are much more capable of remaining endemic. 72% of people who are infected with polio, for example, have no symptoms. Most of those who do present think they have the flu. Only .5% of people experience paralysis, and only a small fraction of those have lifetime complications or death. With diseases like this, of course it's attractive to force people to receive a vaccination, but there's two big questions. Is it ethical, and does it achieve the goal?

There's like 98% vaccination coverage in California and California still experienced a large pertussis outbreak, and a large rubeola outbreak. We need to figure out a good answer for why, because it's not the minority of unvaccinated children that are the cause of infection in the fully vaccinated populations. There was a huge failure rate in the pertussis coverage among fully vaccinated adolescents. Why? Are you arguing it was because some old indian woman got a smallpox shot?

 

You don't get measles vaccine as an adult. 90% if you do it at ages recommended.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11483273

 

No evidence of a link between vaccines and GBS.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19388722

 

It's common sense. The chicken pox vaccine wasn't available to the public until 1995. It


Here's what the CDC has to say:
http://www.cdc.gov/shingles/surveillance.html

 

That study does not say what you think it says.

90.3% in children revaccinated at 15 months of age does not mean 90.3% in adults at 25 years of age.

You should investigate MMR efficacy a bit further. You're going to find that concrete evidence of lifelong immunity is..murky...to say the least.

http://www.indiamedicaltimes.com/20...ects-only-1-out-of-5-children-in-delhi-study/

Just for the mathematically challenged, 1 out of 5 is not 90%...

 

Below for children
Actually, the vaccination coverage in California is much lower than that, depending on vaccine:
http://www2a.cdc.gov/nip/coverage/n...03_antigen_state_2013.pdf&qtr=Q1/2013-Q4/2013
Nationwide the vaccination rate for MMR is only in the 92% range. (CA at around 91%). DtaP is lower at around 83%.

 

Do you understand how attenuated vaccines work? Adults don't have to receive the vaccine in order to be affected by it. The virus still reproduces in the host, live viruses are still shed from the body in fluids, and they still have the ability to mutate. This is one of the reasons why we don't use OPV anymore...which coincidentally was much more effective at producing immunity.

 

Yet, kids are getting herpes zoster at a lower rate than before...

 

Read and learn

http://www.webmd.com/vaccines/adult-mmr-vaccine-guidelines

 

No, it doesn't.

 

Learn what? What did you learn by reading that? Did you learn that I'm right, and adults born after 1957 should get at least one booster vaccination? Why would they suggest that if the vaccine produces 90% efficacy at 15 months of age?

 

Nothing should be forced on Americans. I live in Northern California, but I do what I want. That may mean jail time someday. Not yet, not in this half of the state.

 

Not quite.

According to the CDC, http://www.cdc.gov/MMWR/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6406a5.htm

Among the 110 California patients, 49 (45%) were unvaccinated; five (5%) had 1 dose of measles-containing vaccine, seven (6%) had 2 doses, one (1%) had 3 doses, 47 (43%) had unknown or undocumented vaccination status, and one (1%) had immunoglobulin G seropositivity documented, which indicates prior vaccination or measles infection at an undetermined time. ​

Basically, if you are vaccinated then you don't have to worry about measles. So get vaccinated, get your kids vaccinated, and you don't have a reason to impose your will on everyone else.

And why do people have to have so many vaccinations? Polio is one thing, I don't think many would argue people should not get a polio vaccination.

But rotavirus? That's almost nonexistent in the US, and its main effect is diarrhea which in the US easily treatable.

Measles, mumps, chicken pox are something else, until recently those were childhood illnesses which with rare exceptions a child acquired, missed a few days of school, and went about their life. Those illnesses can be serious in an adult, but in a child they are minor. Plus there is a good argument that having those illnesses as a child builds the child's immune system.

Also, having the actual illness provides life long immunity. Having the vaccination does not provide life long immunity, most vaccination based immunity wears off within 10 years. So if you haven't had lots of boosters in the past 10 years then you are not vaccinated.

Which brings up another question - herd immunity. Almost nobody gets boosters after they leave school, meaning almost the entire population over the age of 30 has no vaccination based immunity to all those illnesses. So why doesn't everyone get sick? Where are the epidemics? There are none because quality of life (clean water, proper sanitation, healthy diet, shelter, etc) plays a huge role in disease incidence.

 

90.7±5.3

You're arguing about a few percentage points?

Does do you think that efficacy hinges on +- 10% of the population, of which a certain percentage will still be exempt? Or do you think the problem just might be with the even greater percentage of the whole that will have no seroconversion despite full participation?

 

I like how they passed the law to only affect children who aren't homeschooled...