Home > Expert Insights, In the News, Science & Research > Vaccination Ethics Come to Question as The Patriot Nurse Strikes Again

Vaccination Ethics Come to Question as The Patriot Nurse Strikes Again

January 25, 2012

Last week, there was quite a lot of discussion about a YouTube video entitled, “Why This Nurse WON’T Vaccinate” that was posted by a woman who refers to herself as the “Patriot Nurse”.  I wrote a blog post here on Shot of Prevention that included the video, along with a point by point commentary from a vaccinating nurse who I refered to as the Canadian Nurse.  Since the Patriot Nurse didn’t allow comments on her YouTube video, my intent was to generate an open discussion here on Shot of PRevention, where we are proud to allow differing views in our comments.  As you can see, the post received quite a few comments and since it’s never been our policy to censor them, you can understand the debate that this video has sparked.

Well today I want to update you on some recent developments with The Patriot Nurse.

It appears that the statements made in the video by The Patriot Nurse were troubling to many people, including blog writer Martine O’Callaghan who writes for Autismum and Nerditorial. She too wanted to write about this video and bring it to the attention of her readers. However, she first tried to verify the identify of The Patriot Nurse, in order to establish her educational and occupational background and experience. That prompted her to write a letter to a birthing center in TN where she believed Ms. Greene (aka The Patriot Nurse) has been employed.

Ms. O’Callaghan explains in her recent blog post that she was in no way calling for the dismissal of The Patriot Nurse.  She simply wanted to verify whether this person representing herself as a nurse on the video was currently working for the birthing center.  She also inquired as to whether the Patriot Nurse’s views on vaccination coincided with the policies of the birthing center.  After all, if a member of the birthing center’s staff has opted out of vaccination, shouldn’t the pregnant women giving birth there be informed of this?  After all, there are dangerous vaccine preventable diseases that can be life threatening to an infant who is still too young to be vaccinated and many cases where infants have died as a result.

It appears that since our last posting, The Patriot Nurse took down the YouTube video and has since made a statement on her Facebook page that suggests that her employer had some questions for her in regards to it.

Certainly, there is nothing wrong with a woman sharing her personal opinions regarding vaccines on YouTube, right?

Unless you are a nurse who attempts to speak as an authority on the subject of vaccines and you happen to have direct contact with pregnant women and newborns, is that it?

So, where exactly does the line get drawn?   What are the ethical implications here?  What are the consequences to these actions?  And what should they be? 

I’m curious to hear what you think in regards to this topic?    However, I feel it is only fair to start off with a comment we received from the Canadian Nurse who first attempted to correct some of The Patriot Nurse’s misinformation.  She commented for Shot of Prevention as follows:

Good morning angry supporters of The Patriot Nurse (TPN).

No one is debating your RIGHT to choose whether or not to vaccinate. But if you have the right to NOT vaccinate, then a patient – especially parents who …will be giving birth to a vulnerable neonate under your care – should have the right to choose whether or not you act as their nurse.

NO one is after The Patriot Nurse’s job. A science writer for a legitimate science zine contacted her work to verify her identity. Which is exactly what a responsible writer does before publication – verifies a source.

Non-vaccinating nurses at other hospitals have to take isolation per-cautions(gloves, gown, mask). This is to protect them and protect the patients. Regardless of whether YOU think vaccines work – science sure thinks that they do, and the employers have a right and a duty to protect those under its care.

The Patriot Nurse is a sham. She states in her video that saying this comes as a great cost to her as a nurse. If she so firmly believes in her anti-vaccination rhetoric – so much so that she would post it online AND STATE THAT SHE WAS A NURSE – then she should be well aware of the potential consequences.

All of you crying “free speech” are being deceived. The Patriot Nurse has deleted EVERY SINGLE comment that was not entirely supportive of her. You can’t claim that her free speech is in jeopardy while she refuses that right to others.

The Patriot Nurse made a video. A stupid video. In which she makes very very basic scientific errors. She was called to answer to those errors on her page, on this blog, on Orac’s blog and elsewhere. She refused to do so. She is not interested in having a dialogue. She had her little diatribe and that was that. NO ONE is so special that they can make sweeping, erroneous statements without recourse.

I know that you anti-vaccination activists have a lot of other anti-vaccination friends online. But the fact of the matter is that 94% of people are still vaccinating. You’re a blip on the radar. You’re the new “trendy” thing to be against. But when it comes down to it, all but a handful of people are intelligent enough to realize that:

1) there is NOT a global conspiracy of scientists and doctors trying to poison your children

2) a few bad nurses or doctors do not discount the whole of the scientific method; nor are the opinions of a few more valid than the opinions of millions

 3) researching vaccines on Google is NOT equal to going to post-secondary education for 10+ years to be a physician, pediatrician, immunologist or what have you.

The Patriot Nurse is not a martyr. She is a nurse who is expected to uphold the ideals and principles of her nursing organization and employer. And seeing as those things adhere to evidence-based medicine – and she doesn’t – she now has a problem. She brought it on herself. It was her choice not to vaccinate, and it their choice (and DUTY to the public) to deal with her how they see fit.

  1. darwynnia
    January 25, 2012 at 12:58 pm

    If you’re coming near my newborn, you’re going to be vaccinated. Period.

  2. Angl
    January 25, 2012 at 1:05 pm

    A little off the exact subject, but as far as I know in Nebraska, you are not allowed to be a nurse in a hospital or other facility without full vaccinations I THOUGHT!! But a mother bringing a new life into the world, should have the choice of fully vaccinated nursing staff and doctors helping her newborn!!

  3. cia parker
    January 25, 2012 at 1:19 pm

    It should be borne in mind that the flu vaccine is very dangerous, most with a full complement of mercury and all with aluminum, as well as the pathogens and other toxic ingredients, and not that effective. Have you read about little Kaylenne in Vermont who was killed by a routine flu vaccine in December? A healthy first-grader December 2, when she got the shot, dead on the 6th, in reaction to the vaccine. Many are killed or paralyzed by it, many develop Alzheimer’s from the aluminum in the vaccine building up in their brain. Many get the flu soon after getting the vaccine, apparently because it can cause the flu.

    Is it really reasonable to ask medical personnel to risk their own life and health on the chance that there might be one day every few years when they are coming down with flu but not yet sick enough to realize it and stay home? Especially since a large percentage of those who get this dangerous vaccine get and transmit the flu anyway? I, obviously, don’t think it is.

  4. January 25, 2012 at 1:24 pm

    “Many” is not a number. Can you please cite your sources and how many “Many” are? And are those “many” more or less than would be “injured” by the actual disease that the vaccine prevents? Again, cite sources, and whale.to or ageofautism.com or adventuresinautism.blogspot.com or any other anti-vaccine sources don’t count.

  5. January 25, 2012 at 1:24 pm

    It’s bad enough that we, as a society, have to worry about exposing our children to potentially life-threatening diseases and illnesses, that in most cases could be prevented, just from being in a public setting. Nurses, doctors, physicians.. hell, anyone in the medical field, are the last people I would hope to worry about passing something nasty on to my kids. Honestly, I believe if one works in the medical field, and they don’t believe in the effectiveness of one of the mainstays of keeping some really nasty bugs at bay (vaccines), then they should really find a different profession. And in my opinion, anyone who has frequent contact with infants in the workplace, should be required to be vaccinated.. And if that’s not the case, anyone getting any kind of attention from medical staff *at all*, should be notified beforehand if said medical employees are vaccinated. Sure, it’s everyone’s right to decide whether to vaccinate or not. But I feel it’s also the right of the patient, to decide whether or not they wish their newborn to be seen by someone who could possibly be harbouring a vaccine preventable disease. I won’t let any of my friends or family visit my new addition when she arrives, unless they’re current on their pertussis booster, due to the recent outbreaks.. why would I expect any less from the medical professionals that come in contact with dozens upon dozens of newborns/infants on a daily basis? The safety of newborn babes, trumps a fool’s right to believe in fear-mongering, conspiracy theorist, anti-vaccine propaganda.

  6. January 25, 2012 at 1:36 pm

    Her video is still up, by the way. And she complains in her Facebook page that she’s being bullied into silence. Her supporters are complaining that “pro-vaxers” would do this, with complete disregard that anti-vaxers pull worse stunts to get people fired. Just look at what happened to Orac a while back.

  7. Chris
    January 25, 2012 at 1:41 pm

    Ms. Parker did you ever read the replies to your post here?

  8. Chris
    January 25, 2012 at 1:44 pm

    Here is what Orac wrote:

    Attacking the opposition. The antivaccine movement is particularly incessant in this tactic, in my experience. I’ve lost track of how many times I’ve been attacked or had antivaccine cranks try to cause me annoyance at my job by e-mailing my bosses. A year and a half ago, a bunch of antivacicne cranks, “inspired” by a false accusation of an undisclosed conflict of interest from Jake Crosby, tried to get me fired from my job through a campaign of e-mails, phone calls, and letters to the board of governors at my university. And what I’ve experienced is minor indeed compared to what someone like Paul Offit has experienced.

  9. January 25, 2012 at 2:29 pm

    Excellent post. The “Patriot Nurse” should have realized what was coming. If she were a nurse on my staff she’d be fired immediately for failing to understand modern medicine and being a menace to public health. Here’s the thing: Patriot Nurse has a right to free speech. She is still free to go on and on and on about her lack of knowledge about vaccines. No one is stopping her. However, her employers have a right to fire her for being unqualified for her job based on her lack of knowledge about vaccines. Actions have consequences. Most of us learn this as toddlers.

  10. January 25, 2012 at 4:26 pm

    My e-mail is in no way malicious nor does it call for action.
    It asks for information. Why shouldn’t freedom of speech go hand in hand with freedom of information?
    No-one, least of all me is saying she doesn’t have a right to express her views but frankly I went about this not entirely believing her to be a nurse due to her fingernail grasp on science and health!

  11. January 25, 2012 at 4:29 pm

    I have only one thing to say and that’s seeking information is not an infringement on anybody’s freedom of speech, nor is it intimidation nor bullying.

  12. Nathan
    January 25, 2012 at 6:33 pm

    Have you read about little Kaylenne in Vermont who was killed by a routine flu vaccine in December? A healthy first-grader December 2, when she got the shot, dead on the 6th, in reaction to the vaccine.

    No, the child died after a febrile illness at some point after the vaccine. It has not been shown to be a vaccine reaction. Have you read about the thousands that actually die from influenza disease every year?

    Many are killed or paralyzed by it, many develop Alzheimer’s from the aluminum in the vaccine building up in their brain.

    Vaccines do not cause Alzheimer’s. Vaccinated people appear to have less Alzheimer’s You are deliberately spreading fear without evidence.

    http://www.alz.org/alzheimers_disease_myths_about_alzheimers.asp

    Many get the flu soon after getting the vaccine, apparently because it can cause the flu.

    Peolpe get the flu or flu like illness after a vaccine because it is flu season and the vaccine cannot protect them 100% against influenza, and not at all against other illnesses. The vaccine does not cause influenza.

    Is it really reasonable to ask medical personnel to risk their own life and health on the chance that there might be one day every few years when they are coming down with flu but not yet sick enough to realize it and stay home? Especially since a large percentage of those who get this dangerous vaccine get and transmit the flu anyway? I, obviously, don’t think it is.

    You are absolutley wrong. The vaccinated spread less disease. It is perfectly reasonable to ask them to get a vaccine and it’s microscopic risk when the benefit is that they are better protected against a potentially life threatening disease and so are their patients.

  13. Steve Michaels
    January 25, 2012 at 8:02 pm

    In civil law, if the request for information is deemed, on the balance of probabilities, to create a situation which can cause harm to the individual being inquired about by the wording of the request, it can be construed as slander, especially if there is no evidence provided that the wording implies facts that have not been proven. If the request actually results in harm to the person being inquired about, then damages can be awarded on top of any punitive sanction. In this case, a person who has stated that they do not believe that vaccines are safe for under 2’s, is, by implication, being accused of violating the health code requirements for her job. Where is your evidence that this is the case? If you have none, then it is slander.

  14. Steve Michaels
    January 25, 2012 at 8:24 pm

    I have broken my comment into smaller bits to avoid moderation delays. When the moderator releases the full comment, then it will be a double post, but that is not the intent:

    Part One:

    WOW!! Here are links that Chris used to DEFEND ‘Shill for Science’ hiding behind an avatar a false name.

    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/08/the_consequences_of_blogging_under_ones.php

    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2010/11/i_am_bonnie_offit.php

    and more, but to put them here would risk moderation delays.

    So, PN decides to post while making it possible to be identified. So what happens?

    Martine O’Callaghan decides to identify, track and contact her employer. Stalker anyone? Malicious attack? Beyond comprehension. What was the basis of these inquiries and contacts? “…to verify whether this person representing herself as a nurse on the video was currently working for the birthing center. She also inquired as to whether the Patriot Nurse’s views on vaccination coincided with the policies of the birthing center. After all, if a member of the birthing center’s staff has opted out of vaccination, shouldn’t the pregnant women giving birth there be informed of this? ”

    Where did this accusation of vaccine opt-out come up? She explicitly states that her objections came up during and after her college and medical education. At no time did she say she had not received her childhood vaccines. At no time did she comment on her own current vaccination status. If her employer requires vaccination, then it is reasonable to assume that she has had them if she is still employed, regardless of any posturing. If her employer does not require vaccination, then the point is moot. In other words, the only purpose of contacting her employer was to in some way cause her problems. I am sure the birthing center policies on vaccination are in keeping with the mainstream, so this was nothing short of harassing someone because they voiced a view that was not accepted by Martine. I am sure she feels that her free speech should be protected, but hypocritically harasses someone else in violation of their free speech.

  15. Steve Michaels
    January 25, 2012 at 8:25 pm

    Part Two:

    So then we move on the Canadian Nurse’s comment. Again, this is full of assumption based on absolutely nothing.

    “NO one is after The Patriot Nurse’s job.” As stated above, no other reason can be reasonable given the fact that she NEVER said she opted out of vaccines. Her comments were strictly limited to vaccination of children. She said that she would not vaccinate HER children, but people should educate themselves and make their own decision. Why do you find that so scary?

    “The Patriot Nurse has deleted EVERY SINGLE comment that was not entirely supportive of her. You can’t claim that her free speech is in jeopardy while she refuses that right to others.” Actually this is entirely false. From the outset, Patriot Nurse stated that the comments were TURNED OFF. There are NO comments for or against. In fact, the fact that comments were NEVER on is embedded as text in the video itself. So this claim that comments were deleted is a complete straw man argument to justify attacking her free speech.

    “But the fact of the matter is that 94% of people are still vaccinating. You’re a blip on the radar. You’re the new “trendy” thing to be against. But when it comes down to it, all but a handful of people are intelligent enough to realize that:

    1) there is NOT a global conspiracy of scientists and doctors trying to poison your children

    2) a few bad nurses or doctors do not discount the whole of the scientific method; nor are the opinions of a few more valid than the opinions of millions

    3) researching vaccines on Google is NOT equal to going to post-secondary education for 10+ years to be a physician, pediatrician, immunologist or what have you.”

    Point 1, if we are a ‘blip’, and 94% is certainly above the presumed “herd immunity” level, why the vehement attacks? Why the hysterical comments, ad hominem attacks, the ignoring of substantive disagreement?

    Point 2, there is a substantial amount of evidence that there is a conspiracy to put profit over health by the pharma industry. This conspiracy is in conjunction with the CDC, the FDA and the NIH. How do we know this? Because these organization have funded and supported pharma in conducting illegal experiments on multiple populations.

    http://www.naturalnews.com/022383_children_child.html

    You may not like the source, but the FACT that these experiments occurred is public knowledge and verifiable. To claim that this is not true is to ignore verified facts.

    Point 3, the scientific method is a work in process. Doctors ‘practice’ because all they are really doing is operating on a theory, germ theory, vaccine theory. The entire paradigm of modern theory has been molded by the AMA and the pharmaceutical industry. This paradigm is promoted as fact when it is not and permeates the entire training protocol of modern doctors and nurses. It is dogmatic theory, NOT fact. And if you question the dogma, you get attacked. That is NOT scientific method. And Canadian Nurse accidentally admits this in her statement about opinions. Opinions are just that, opinions. It matters not whether 1 or a million people share an opinion. The number of people who believe something has no impact on reality or fact. Historically, the entire human population believed that the world was flat. That had no impact on the reality.

    Point 4, no, google is NOT a substitute for professional training. But neither is a dogmatic education system that only superficially covers vaccination and immunity theory for the average GP and surgeon. Yes, for an immunologist, the education is more intensive, BUT the education is still trapped inside the artificial paradigm of the AMA and the pharmaceutical industry. I have questioned my personal doctor about vaccination, studies and questions of efficacy and safety. I certainly knew more than he did. His number one comment was, “I don’t know” and his number two comment was, “we didn’t cover that issue in medical school”. In fact, he admitted that only one module of immunology is taught for GP’s during their entire training. And just to put all of this in perspective, my NHS surgery is the one of the largest TRAINING facilities in England, and my GP is a senior member and trainer. Going back to the google claim, I have reviewed MANY of the research results that are used as justification for vaccine safety claims. Most of them are rife with conflicts of interest and many actually show results contrary to the conclusions drawn. ALL studies about thimerasol that have been referenced on this site are either about efficacy as a preservative with NO research into human use safety or are comparative or concomitant or both. NONE are double blind placebo studies between thimerasol and a control. Hardly scientific inquiries. But pro-vaxers tend to just summarily dismiss these complaints without so much as a ‘by your leave’. This tells me that most of the outspoken pro-vaxers on here are brainwashed into believing what they are told by everyone else with whom they are in agreement. But again, opinion is just opinion, and ego drives people to wrong conclusions because they can’t/won’t admit when the evidence doesn’t support their view. Hence the summary dismissal of substantive disagreement, sometimes with a platitude or ad hominem attack, sometimes by outright ignoring the point.

  16. James
    January 25, 2012 at 8:50 pm

    Steve, way to attack the messenger (Orac) and not the message. Also, Orac isn’t anonymous. Anyone with 30 seconds and a search engine can find who he is and find his other blogs.

    Next, Steve, you are simply wrong on so many levels.

    Re: deleted comments, the Patriot Nurse has a Facebook page where dissent is not allowed.

    Re: “Point 1, if we are a ‘blip’, and 94% is certainly above the presumed “herd immunity” level, why the [...] attacks?”

    Depending on the disease 94% is not the herd immunity level. Whatever that level is it has to be maintained. And when clusters of like-minded people (say, a bunch of people in the same town who listen to the same nurse) choose not to vaccinate then it doesn’t matter what the country-wide vaccination rate is, it only matters what the local rates are.

    Re: Conspiracies, if it is all a matter of public record and “everyone knows it” then why not link to that information from a reputable source?

    Re: Germ theory, if germ theory is wrong (and the scientific method leaves room for that) then something better has to be demonstrated and independently reproduced. It has not. Germ theory represents a scientific convergence of multiple independent scientific disciplines, not all of them medical. Your conspiracy has to go beyond the AMA and the pharma companies, it has to include numerous scientific disciplines who don’t do and don’t care about human medicine.

    Then you repeat all sorts of tired canards. And your accusations of dismissal, of insult, of ignoring the point are, in my opinion, nothing more than obvious projection.

  17. Chris
    January 25, 2012 at 10:07 pm

    A comment that describes Mr. Michaels:

    Again, readers will note that our arguments are “evidence demonstrates,” and that commenters like Steve Michaels’ argument is “I don’t believe you.” Or, “I don’t like your evidence, I like mine better.”

    By the way, not knowing Orac’s real name is a good gauge of someone’s research skills.

    Point 2, there is a substantial amount of evidence that there is a conspiracy to put profit over health by the pharma industry. This conspiracy is in conjunction with the CDC, the FDA and the NIH.

    He keeps bringing that up, but has refused to answer my questions on the other thread about the costs of preventing a disease versus treating it in a hospital. He has yet to answer the very simple question of what number is to the left of the word “vaccines” on page 30 of this document.

    I also gave a link to the full paper of the following:
    JAMA. 1999 Apr 28;281(16):1482-3.
    From the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Impact of vaccines universally recommended for children–United States, 1900-1998.

    I asked him two questions taken that are answered in it, and he has yet to attempt to answer:

    Tell us how every American dollar spent to purchase measles-containing vaccine in 1994 affected medical costs and indirect societal costs. Did it bring more or less money to “Big Pharma”?

    A bit over twenty years ago what was the leading cause of childhood bacterial meningitis and postnatal mental retardation? What happened to that particular bacterial disease in the USA?

    Any one want to take a bet on how contorted Mr. Michaels reasons will be to not even look at a page and give a number? Or even read a paper and answer simple reading comprehension questions?

  18. Steve Michaels
    January 26, 2012 at 3:16 am

    No Nathan, your entire comment is based in falsehood and presumption. Firstly, you have previously said that thimerasol was removed from childhood vaccines, then you promote flu vaccines, most of which contain thimerasol for children and pregnant women. Then you make a fear mongering, propaganda supporting comment like, “No, the child died after a febrile illness at some point after the vaccine. It has not been shown to be a vaccine reaction. Have you read about the thousands that actually die from influenza disease every year?” VAERS has reported THOUSANDS of cases similar to the one referenced. And in virtually EVERY case, the claim is made that it is mere coincidence that a vaccine shortly preceded the death or injury. Yet you, sometimes by implication sometimes explicitly, claim that if someone receives a vaccine and doesn’t get the illness, then the vaccine has done it’s job. Which is it? Are ALL positive outcomes evidence of efficacy and ALL negative outcomes are simply coincidence? This train of thought, which permeates the entire pro-vax mantra, is not reasonable and certainly not rooted in dispassionate application of the scientific method.

    So how effective is the flu vaccine? This is the one you should really let go Nathan. The reported numbers claim some 60% effectiveness. This is patently fallacious.

    http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099%2811%2970295-X/abstract

    The results were clear. Out of every 100 people in the control group, 2.7 had the flu. Out of every 100 people in the subject group, 1.5 had the flu. So, after a bit of numerical trickery, the people who never contracted the flu in BOTH groups were summarily removed from the results. Then the claim is made that a reduction from 2.7 cases to 1.5 is a 60% reduction. That is not science, that is false accounting. What about the 97.5% who did not contract the flu without receiving a vaccine? They are gone. They don’t count in this study. That is the portion of the group that proves that 97% of people will derive NO benefit whatsoever from getting the vaccine. No wonder they were written out of the results! That doesn’t fit the narrative. If you don’t ignore the members of both groups that never got the flu regardless of vaccination status, the differential is 1.2 out of 100. That could be argued as statistically insignificant given the sizes of the groups. It could also be argued that ony 1.2 out of 100, or 1% of the population, can expect any benefit at all and the other 98.8% are getting injected for nothing. But again, that doesn’t fit the narrative. Even the study itself only calls the claimed protective benefits ‘moderate’ while you try to argue from the assumption that the benefits are near blanket protection. Again, completely wrong, and most likely purposely misleading. Oh, and by the way, the study completely excluded 2-17 year olds and over 65’s, thus avoiding any pesky results that could have been even worse then the limited group studied.

  19. Chris
    January 26, 2012 at 4:08 am

    After reading Impact of vaccines universally recommended for children–United States, 1900-1998 can you answer this question: How much every American dollar spent to purchase measles-containing vaccine in 1994 affected medical costs and indirect societal costs, did it bring more or less money to “Big Pharma”?

    We really want to know how preventing measles gives “Big Pharma” more profits. Show us how that happens!

  20. January 26, 2012 at 7:35 am

    Actually you are misquoting:
    “After all, if a member of the birthing center’s staff has opted out of vaccination, shouldn’t the pregnant women giving birth there be informed of this?” that question was not posed in my e-mail. Who needs to get their facts straight?
    And as for “stalking” and “malicious attack” I am a writer and getting information on people, science and the news is what I do. Is that really “beyond comprehension?” really?
    The implication that TPN opted out of vaccinations never came from nor was suggested by me and it is entirely supposition. Oh, and asking for information is not harrassment. How many times do you need to be told that?

  21. CanadianNurse
    January 26, 2012 at 9:48 am

    Slander is spoke.
    Moron.

    If you’re going to make up pretend pseudo-legal threats, at least figure out the difference between slander and libel.

  22. Steve Michaels
    January 26, 2012 at 9:58 am

    I seriously doubt that I misquoted considering the fact that I copy and pasted the quotation… And you were not ‘getting’ information, you were using the ‘getting’ as a pretext to act as an informant with the only reasonable outcome being to cause harm and discomfort to Patriot Nurse. And you were informing based on the supposition that she had opted out of her own vaccines when NO such comment had been made and no reason to believe this to be the case was presented. I am glad that you admit the opt out rubbish was simply supposition. That means that you really are admitting slander when informing her employer based solely on supposition an no evidence.

  23. Steve Michaels
    January 26, 2012 at 9:59 am

    CanadianNurse :
    Slander is spoke.
    Moron.
    If you’re going to make up pretend pseudo-legal threats, at least figure out the difference between slander and libel.

    Slander is communicated though speech or writing. Nice ad hominem by the way. Good to see you are reasonable.

  24. January 26, 2012 at 10:15 am

    slander refers to any transitory statement and it’s libel for written, published or otherwise broadcast words – like calling someone who views information in the public domain and then goes on to seek clarification on a point (without making any allegations against a person) a stalker or having perpetrated a “malicious attack”. That’s a good example of libel xx

  25. January 26, 2012 at 10:20 am

    Oh and you have misquoted. You copied and pasted from this site not my e-mail which, if you had read the article above properly you would know is not directly quoted in that passage. You are talking through your arse.
    Read it again and you might even find a link to e-mail i sent. Go on have a go!

  26. Lawrence
    January 26, 2012 at 10:34 am

    Wow – when you put information out there to the public, you have to expect a public response. And directing inquiries for information is completely different than actively demanding that a person get fired (which has happened to numerous pro-vaccine figures, including Paul Offit, Orac, she who is not to be named, and others).

    So Steve, where is the outrage for these activities?

  27. January 26, 2012 at 12:47 pm

    Ah, the ubiquitous paper tiger lawsuit threat by the anti-vaxxers.What a shock.

    If the Patriot Nurse’s understanding of vaccination is scientifically supported, she has nothing to worry about. In addition, clarification of her credentials and position is just good investigative reporting. It seems clear to me that Martine O’Callaghan’s questions to the clinic were meant to avoid making false statements about who the Patriot Nurse is. PN’s alleged real name and alleged workplace were flying all over the internet. Before reporting it on a blog, Ms. O’Callaghan sought to confirm this information. Seems like a better strategy to me than making assumptions. If, in fact, the PN was NOT who others were stating she was, then you might have a case for libel.

  28. Nathan
    January 26, 2012 at 3:03 pm

    O ho! Steve, I don’t usually use this cliche, but you definitely owe me a new irony meter.

    Why the hysterical comments

    Says the guy who argued that Bill Gates wants to use vaccines to depopulate the world.

    Why the… ad hominem attacks

    Says the guy who compared a respected immunologist who saves lives to a “murderer or rapist.”

    Why the… the ignoring of substantive disagreement?

    Says the guy who regularly needs reminders to link to original sources and prefers to cite quack blogs, as above.

    Point 2, there is a substantial amount of evidence that there is a conspiracy to put profit over health by the pharma industry. This conspiracy

    is in conjunction with the CDC, the FDA and the NIH. How do we know this? Because these organization have funded and supported pharma in conducting illegal

    experiments on multiple populations.
    (link to quack blog)
    You may not like the source, but the FACT that these experiments occurred is public knowledge and verifiable. To claim that this is not true is to ignore

    verified facts.

    That they occurred may well be verifiable. Of course, Adams didn’t make them easily verifiable, you know, with links to actual studies or anything. You

    know, you and Mike have a ton in common in that regard. But, I highly doubt they all had the dramatic flair that Adams’ blog gives them. You don’t suppose

    he leaves out the direct links to obsfucate the truth, do you? Oh, I forgot – hyperbolizing and obsfucating is “attempting to break through the cognitive dissonance to wake people up to what the action REALLY means.”

    But regardless, they are not what you say they are. Someone culled a handful of questionable studies and some seriously unethical transgressions over the

    last one hundred and fifty years, out of literally millions of studies during this time. Most of them do not even appear to be done by pharma, the CDC, FDA,

    or NIH, or a combination thereof, at least by the authors’ description. Nor do many of them seem to be “illegal” for that matter.

    This in no way justifies the statement that “there is a substantial amount of evidence that there is a conspiracy to put profit over health by the pharma

    industry. This conspiracy is in conjunction with the CDC, the FDA and the NIH.” But at least you admit that you believe it’s all a big conspiracy.

    I have questioned my personal doctor about vaccination, studies and questions of efficacy and safety. I certainly knew more than he did.

    Wow. Considering how you regularly demonstrate a lack of understanding of the scientific basics of vaccination, I would be getting a different doctor.

    His number one comment was, “I don’t know” and his number two comment was, “we didn’t cover that issue in medical school”.

    It’s a fair bet that your number one question was, “By what mechanism could vaccines cause global depopulation?” and your number two question was, “Which

    quack blog provides the craziest information about vaccines?”

  29. Steve Michaels
    January 26, 2012 at 4:15 pm

    CanadianNurse :
    Slander is spoke.
    Moron.
    If you’re going to make up pretend pseudo-legal threats, at least figure out the difference between slander and libel.

    Firstly, the correct English is ‘spoken’, not spoke. Secondly calling me names only weakens your claims. Thirdly, if you contacted them asking for information and volunteering uncorroborated claims , that is slander, when you published the fact that you did it on the internet, it became libel. Here is an official definition:

    “A type of defamation.

    Slander is an untruthful oral (spoken) statement about a person that harms the person’s reputation or standing in the community.

    Because slander is a tort (a civil wrong), the injured person can bring a lawsuit against the person who made the false statement.

    If the statement is made via broadcast media — for example, over the radio or on TV — it is considered libel, rather than slander, because the statement has the potential to reach a very wide audience.”

    At no time did I threaten anything. It is not up to me to pursue a civil suit. Only the victim, in this case Patriot Nurse, can do that. I was only informing you that it could happen.

  30. January 26, 2012 at 4:41 pm

    You still haven’t read the actual e-mail have you poppet?

  31. CanadianNurse
    January 26, 2012 at 6:21 pm

    She contacted them through email. Meaning it was never verbal, meaning it was never slander.

    Luckily, nothing said about TPN was even remotely false, so we have nothing to worry about.

    And no, I’m not reasonable with people who are unable to be reasoned with.

  32. Steve Michaels
    January 26, 2012 at 7:01 pm

    Sorry, I did assume a phone call was made. This was because the comment published above states, “A science writer for a legitimate science zine CONTACTED her work…”(emphasis added) The method of contact in this was NOT made clear. However, the point about slander or libel as defamation of character still holds true, although, yes, it would be libel. In fact, the libel did not actually occur until the email was publicized on this site. While you are keen to split hairs on this issue, the fact remains that there is a potential civil penalty to what you have done and the claim that nothing remotely false was transmitted, is false. The video speaks ONLY of vaccination for under 2’s and at no time was her own vaccination status stated. So yes, on the detail of slander/libel you are correct, on the fact that a defamation occurred, regardless of category remains true.

  33. January 26, 2012 at 8:21 pm

    Thanks for the apology.
    You still haven’t read – you can’t have if you think ANY mention was made or question raised as to the TPN’s vaccine status. In fact, I agree with you that saying she would or wouldn’t be vaxed is wholly supposition. This was not the purpose of the contact. I would absolutely not want to identify the wrong person as the TPN nor link an institution to her without evidence. As it transpires, she has provided that herself. Her employer never replied and that’s where I would have had to have left it.
    xx

  34. cia parker
    January 26, 2012 at 9:20 pm

    Jennifer,
    To protect your newborn, you should keep her away from contact with everyone to the greatest extent possible, regardless of whether or not they’ve been vaccinated. Since the pertussis vaccine is only 30-70% effective, about half the people who get it are not immune from pertussis, and may both catch it and transmit it to others. I think Chris had to keep his newborn in quarantine because he couldn’t be vaccinated, but it’s actually a wise practice regardless of anyone’s vaccination status until the babies are four months old and develop airways large enough to handle coughing up the mucus from the lungs.
    My baby got the DTaP at 2, 4, and 6 months, so many would think she should have been protected from pertussis, but she caught it at a La Leche League meeting when she was nine months old, coughed ten times on a breath, coughed up sheets of mucus at the end of every coughing fit, and coughed for over a month (getting less severe with every passing week). She gave it to me and I coughed for over two months. While it was alarming at the time, it wasn’t dangerous, as it is not dangerous in the vast majority of the people who get it. The vaccine can be very dangerous (you knew I was going to say that.), and since I know you aren’t interested in my enumerating its dangers, I won’t.
    My daughter was only saying two words at 18 months old, uh for up and uff for dog, but after she got the DTaP booster at 18 months, those two words disappeared forever, and she didn’t say them or any other word until she was 34 months old. (She’s autistic now, as I’m sure you’ll remember.) I wish more than I’ve ever wished for anything that I hadn’t let her get any vaccine, she would have been normal today if she hadn’t.
    If you totally trust people to be incapable of spreading a disease just because they’ve been vaccinated for it, that would show that vaccinism is a religion for you which is stronger than reason.
    Same goes for the flu vaccine, it’s not that effective, and there are innumerable strains at large every flu season, which may or may not be protected against by the vaccine. Your nurse in the newborn ward may have bravely put her own life at risk by getting the flu vaccine du jour, but may very likely get that strain regardless or may get another strain not in the vaccine. If you insist on seeing her vaccination badge as a sign of her religious affiliation, some of us would think that was pretty silly. Maybe gloves and masks should be required of everyone who handles newborns, that would make more sense.

  35. Nathan
    January 26, 2012 at 10:57 pm

    Firstly, you have previously said that thimerasol was removed from childhood vaccines, then you promote flu vaccines, most of which contain

    thimerasol for children and pregnant women.

    Okay… not sure what this has to do with my last comment.

    Then you make a fear mongering, propaganda supporting comment like, “No, the child died after a febrile illness at some point after the vaccine.

    It has not been shown to be a vaccine reaction. Have you read about the thousands that actually die from influenza disease every year?”

    That is not a fearmongering, propaganda statement in any way. Cia’s would be fearmongering, since she implies that the death was from vaccination, when that

    has not been determined. The fact that influenza kills thousands annually is not in question.

    VAERS has reported THOUSANDS of cases similar to the one referenced.

    Now that is a fearmongering statement, since 1.) I highly doubt there are thousands of flu vaccine reports that are all that similar – deaths following

    vaccines are quite varied, which is what you would expect when their causes are from things other than the vaccine and follow it by random chance, and 2.)

    you well know that a VAERS report is not synonymous with a vaccine reaction. But don’t let those facts get in the way of good fearmongering.

    Yet you, sometimes by implication sometimes explicitly, claim that if someone receives a vaccine and doesn’t get the illness, then the vaccine has done it’s job. Which is it?

    Depends on the vaccine. In the case of measles, when everyone prior to the vaccine used to get it, if you don’t get it, then yes, there is an excellent

    chance that this is from the vaccine, or at least because of herd immunity. In the case of influenza, when only a minority get it every year, then it’s

    really impossible to tell. But your chance of getting influenza was greatly decreased that year.

    See, unlike you, I use the actual evidence to draw my conclusions. You paint dramatic pictures with a broad brush that are not evidence-based.

    Are ALL positive outcomes evidence of efficacy and ALL negative outcomes are simply coincidence?

    No. And I have never stated otherwise. Only you think in these black and white terms. People in favor of vaccines are usually capable of much more nuanced

    thinking. In the case above, Cia made the statement in no uncertain terms that the child was killed by the vaccine. I did not say it was not, but that it had not been determined. In fact, what you describe is what the antivaccine movement does in spades. Attribute everythng that occurs after a vaccine, to the vaccine.

    This train of thought, which permeates the entire pro-vax mantra,

    in Steve’s imagination,

    is not reasonable and certainly not rooted in dispassionate application of the scientific method.

    which is common of most things in Steve’s imagination.

    So how effective is the flu vaccine? This is the one you should really let go Nathan.

    I didn’t bring it up. You are the one desperately trying to defend yours and Mike Adams’ “fallacious” definition of efficacy.

    The reported numbers claim some 60% effectiveness. This is patently fallacious.

    No, Steve, it is not, and you are being patently obtuse. Efficacy is not dependent on the absolute number of people who get the disease. It is dependent on

    the relative reduction in people who get the disease. Think of it this way. If the vaccine is 60% effective, that means that for every ten vaccinated

    people who would get the disease, only four of them would get it if they were vaccinated. If in one year 100% of all unvaccinated people would have gotten

    influenza, then only 40% of vaccinated people would get it. If 50% of unvaccinated people would have gotten influenza, then only 20% of vaccinated people

    would have gotten it. 10% unvaccinated, 4% vaccinated. It is not dependent on the absolute number of people who would have gotten influenza. It is

    dependent on the reduction of influenza.

    I completely agree with you, that in a given year, the majority of the vaccinated population would not have gotten influenza anyway. Of course, it is

    impossible to predict who that minority would be. And yes, in a given year, your chance of getting influenza while unvaccinated is about 3-4% and if you are

    vaccinated, the chance of getting it is 1-2%. This does not change the definition of efficacy. The efficacy of influenza vaccine is still 60%, and it is

    completely correct to state that the vaccine is 60% effective in preventing influenza.

    I understand fully what you are trying to say. And I am saying to you that is not the definition of efficacy in these matters. It is not numerical

    trickery. Efficacy is a standard definition that is not exclusive to vaccines. There is really no reason for you to beat this bloody carcass of horse of

    yours.

    Efficacy is defined this way so it can be used across populations. Let’s say you had a dose of iron supplementation and you wanted to know how well it fixed

    iron-deficiency anemia. And lets say that 10% of the population has iron deficiency. You give the dose of iron for a few months and you find that 5% of the

    study population is iron deficient, and the controls are still 10%.

    Would you conclude that dose if 50% effective for iron deficiency, or 5%?

    Let’s say you conclude it is 5% effective, because you read a lot of Mike Adams. Then you go to a developing country, and in that country 90% of the

    population is iron deficient? What would the iron dose do? If it is only 5% effective, it will only reduce the iron deficiency a little bit. But that is

    wrong – it Mike Adams math. The reality is that it will reduce the 90% iron deficiency to 45%, because it is 50% (half) effective at resolving iron

    deficiency.

    That’s about as elementary as I can make it Steve. Look. I have shown you the definition of efficacy from a textbook. I have shown you how your own sources

    calculate efficacy. You are the one twisting the terms here. The scientific community agrees on the definition of efficacy. It is a standard definition that

    is not exclusive to vaccines. There is really no reason for you to further mutilate this bloody horse carcass of yours. And regardless of how you want to frame it, the influenza vaccine significantly reduces your chance of getting and spreading influenza.

    I apologize for the redundant sentences in the above paragraphs. I am hoping that in this situation, like many, repetition leads to remembering.

  36. January 27, 2012 at 5:21 am

    I’m sorry that your baby had pertussis – it’s a really horrible disease and it breaks my heart seeing little ones with it so I can only imagine what you must have gone through with added frustration of knowing you’d done your best to protect her.
    I’m a mammy and I have an autistic boy who lost words too (Dadad and boob – that was me) but just recently some words have started to appear again and he’s only a little older than your daughter. I hope you hear more words from her again soon. I really do understand why you would feel the way you do about vaccines. Just wanted to share that xx

  37. lyn ward
    January 27, 2012 at 9:44 am

    I think your comment is outrageous, how will you know if adults/children are vacinated or not? are you going to ask everyone for documentation to prove they are? get real.

  38. lilady
    January 27, 2012 at 11:00 am

    I realize that this blog mainly covers the seasonal influenza vaccine, but there are new recommendations for HCPs (Health Care Personnel) to protect patients within the health care system against pertussis.

    I can only hope that TPN’s employer has been following this blog and complying with the recommendations of the ACIP (Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices):

    “Regardless of age, HCP should receive a single dose of Tdap as soon as feasible if they have not previously received Tdap and regardless of the time since their most recent Td vaccination. Vaccinating HCP with Tdap will protect them against pertussis and is expected to reduce transmission to patients, other HCP, household members, and persons in the community. Tdap is not licensed for multiple administrations; therefore, after receipt of Tdap, HCP should receive Td for future booster vaccination against tetanus and diphtheria. Hospitals and ambulatory-care facilities should provide Tdap for HCP and use approaches that maximize vaccination rates (e.g., education about the benefits of vaccination, convenient access, and the provision of Tdap at no charge).”

    (Source: MMWR November 25, 2011 “Immunization of Health Care Personnel” : ACIP)

    I am a recently retired Public Health Nurse/Clinician who practiced in 7 large public health clinics and worked for the Division of Communicable Disease Control in a County health department.

    Pertussis is a particularly deadly disease for newborns and young infants to acquire. During last year’s pertussis epidemic, 10 California infants died from the disease. I remember only too well, the sad death of a young infant from the disease. Following “case” investigation, it was determined that a close household member who was not immunized against pertussis, was the person who infected the infant (verifiable by a naso -pharyngeal swab specimen of the infected person).

    Any pregnant woman has the right to ask staff in a birthing hospital or birthing center if, the hospital or birthing center is following recommendations of the ACIP and the CDC regarding immunization of staff who have direct contact with patients.

  39. cia parker
    January 27, 2012 at 12:32 pm

    Nathan,
    How can you say just by fiat that Kaylenne died of an undisclosed febrile illness? Most people on hearing that she was healthy when she was given the flu vaccine on December 2, got a high fever and severe headache the following day, and died on December 6, would say that was prima facie evidence that she died from a vaccine reaction. If there were any evidence that the illness was totally unrelated to the pathogens in the flu vaccine, don’t you think that the medicrats would be trumpeting that information?
    When my daughter was a baby ten years ago, my child care books said that because flu so rarely causes death or disability in that age group, it was not recommended to give them the flu vaccine. The only thing that has changed in the interim has been the inflation of the vaccine bubble, with the vaccine industry reveling in the astronomical profit margin it now enjoys with its greatly increased schedule, so that for the past eight years, the vaccine has been recommended to be given every year to all children older than six months. It used to be that it was contraindicated for pregnant women, now it is recommended.
    It is very unscientific of you to shout that it wasn’t the vaccine that killed Kaylenne. It almost undoubtedly was, and I think you know it. Have you read Dr. Robert Sears’ The Vaccine Book, in which he gives the figures for how the medical industry artificially inflated the numbers of Americans who died from the flu? He gives what appear to be more accurate figures, and they are much lower than the officially promoted ones.
    It still comes down to the need for making this an educated choice. Some people die from the flu or its complications, but death would be vanishingly rare among children. Some people die or are permanently disabled from the flu vaccine. Employees at some nursing homes refer to flu vaccine day as “culling day,” because it kills so many of the elderly who get it. Lisa Marks Smith was paralyzed for four years by a routine flu shot. Désirée Williams developed a totally disabling seizure disorder after a routine flu shot. Kaylenne Batten died four days after the vaccine, of a febrile illness similar to flu. We would much rather take our chances with the flu, and that is our choice.

  40. January 27, 2012 at 12:43 pm

    Kaylynne’s family is reporting on FB that the cause of death was “undetermined but the Contributing conditions are Myocarditis of unknown etiology days following seasonal vaccination with concurrent Parainfluenza type I infection”

    Since the flu shot is an inactivated vaccine, there is no way that this child died because of the flu shot.

    Of course I doubt that will stop anti-vaxers from blaming the flu shot. Can’t let the facts get in the way of a good fear-mongering campaign, can we?

  41. Chris
    January 27, 2012 at 12:47 pm

    How can you say just by fiat that Kaylenne died of an undisclosed febrile illness?

    Because according to this article what happened to Kaylynne is being investigated:

    Chen says the state has contacted the Centers for Disease Control to see if there have been other unusual reactions to this vaccine. The CDC is investigating.

    Now remember what it really means when you say “It still comes down to the need for making this an educated choice.” That means you have to have all the information, not the just the guesses give before the investigation, and not the opinion of someone who wrote a book. Dr. Sears is not qualified to design his own vaccine schedule.

    What you say about Dr. Sears’ book:

    He gives what appear to be more accurate figures, and they are much lower than the officially promoted ones.

    How do you know?

  42. lilady
    January 27, 2012 at 1:31 pm

    I just LOVE how some posters here, with absolutely no clue about immunology and virology, draw conclusions (“prima facie evidence”) about a child’s death, following a seasonal flu shot. I just located the actual article that stated that the child had “myocarditis” with a viral infection. The child received a “killed” vaccine that could not possibly transmit a virus.

    Just because you read something on a notorious anti-vax site (Age of Autism among others) written by their Media Editor (Anne Dachel), does not make it so.

    There is something to be said about credulous people who rely on notorious anti-vax websites, “mommy intuition” and the “prima facie evidence” conclusions of a poster…it is scaremongering by ignorant-in-the-sciences-of-immunology disease promoters.

  43. January 27, 2012 at 1:45 pm

    “Just because you read something on a notorious anti-vax site (Age of Autism among others) written by their Media Editor (Anne Dachel), does not make it so.”

    Well said

  44. lilady
    January 27, 2012 at 3:07 pm

    @ Autismum: Just when will Dachel and the “regular” posters at AoA, update their article about the death of this child? If they do update their article, it will be a “first time ever” event at this notorious anti-vax website.

    It takes a lot of chutzpah to invoke a legal term (prima facie evidence), when posting about one’s “expertise” in immunology, virology, bacteriology, vaccine-preventable diseases and epidemiology on a blog.

  45. January 27, 2012 at 4:31 pm

    My patience with AoA is non existant. They hijack every health story chew it up and spew out nonsense to fit their very narrow agenda. Logical fallacies, nonsequiturs and outright BS abound. I can’t understand people who would trust health advice given on websites run by actors, journalists and washed up doctors. I find it doubly baffling as there are great sites with genuine expertise and experience behind them to turn to. I could rant all night about AoA (and the rest).

  46. lilady
    January 27, 2012 at 6:20 pm

    I might add that “just because you POST something on AoA, does not make it so”…

    Here is what “cia parker” had to say about flu vaccine on her posting at AoA:

    Many of us are struggling just to live, and it is impossible for us to try to follow these anodyne recommendations. It would have been much more useful to have spent the money on a video that pointed out some of the thousands of people killed or crippled by the flu vaccine, and then gave recommendations like stay in bed, take oscillococcinum, Umcka, bryonia, and/or gelsemium (all homeopathic), drink hot tea or V-8 juice, elderberry juice and
    echinacea. Randall Neustaedter’s book on the flu has a lot more specific recommendations and tips for avoiding pneumonia. And then take comfort in the fact that you are strengthening your immune system by using it, and you’ll have immunity to that flu strain and partial immunity to its future mutations, as opposed to damaging your immune and neurological systems by inflicting a vaccine on them.

    Posted by: cia parker | November 05, 2011 at 12:19 PM

    Where is cia poster now…I’m waiting for her “prima facie evidence” about the death of this child.

  47. Nathan
    January 27, 2012 at 7:50 pm

    Nathan,
    How can you say just by fiat that Kaylenne died of an undisclosed febrile illness?

    I didn’t. The news stories did. The only “by fiat” statement was you declaring in no uncertain terms that she died because of, not just after, vaccination.

    Most people on hearing that she was healthy when she was given the flu vaccine on December 2, got a high fever and severe headache the following day, and died on December 6, would say that was prima facie evidence that she died from a vaccine reaction.

    “Most people” are not well versed in science. Post hoc ergo propter hoc is a common fallacy for “most people.” But prima facie, that is, on first impression, does not mean good evidence or rational evidence. Now, if you can show me evidence that the flu shot causes myocarditis, that would be a different story. Wild viral illnesses are the most common cause of myocarditis in children.

    If there were any evidence that the illness was totally unrelated to the pathogens in the flu vaccine, don’t you think that the medicrats would be trumpeting that information?

    What pathogens? Be specific.

    When my daughter was a baby ten years ago, my child care books said that because flu so rarely causes death or disability in that age group, it was not recommended to give them the flu vaccine. The only thing that has changed in the interim has been the inflation of the vaccine bubble,

    Well, really the most important thing that has changed since then is that we have learned more about the safety and efficacy of the vaccine in these age groups, and also how they help protect other, especially vulnerable children. And also, in pregnant women.

    It is very unscientific of you to shout that it wasn’t the vaccine that killed Kaylenne.

    I did not shout such a thing. You “shouted” that it was from the vaccine. I correctly pointed out that the cause of death was not determined. And now, with the additional information that has been presented, it seems more likely than not that it was from something other than the vaccine.

    Have you read Dr. Robert Sears’ The Vaccine Book, in which he gives the figures for how the medical industry artificially inflated the numbers of Americans who died from the flu?

    Yes, I have. I find that his assessment of the situation, like most of his book, is merely pandering to vaccine fears which is good for his business, both in terms of serving his niche practice and also selling his books. But I’m happy to discuss influenza figures if you can cite some reliable sources instead of a shill’s biased memoirs.

    Employees at some nursing homes refer to flu vaccine day as “culling day,” because it kills so many of the elderly who get it.

    No, it doesn’t, and employees at some nursing homes are apparently ill informed and very offensive. Someone should talk to them about that.

    Lisa Marks Smith was paralyzed for four years by a routine flu shot. Désirée Williams developed a totally disabling seizure disorder after a routine flu shot.

    Desiree Jennings, you mean? This person?

    I could certainly name many times more people conclusively shown to be killed or disabled by influenza than you have listed here (and your list is far less conclusive as to causation). But that would get us nowhere. Why don’t you show us something scientific that shows that your risk of death or disability from the vaccine is greater than your risk from the wild virus?

    Kaylenne Batten died four days after the vaccine, of a febrile illness similar to flu. We would much rather take our chances with the flu, and that is our choice.

    This is an odd statement. A child dies of an influenza like illness and you think that actual influenza is a good thing to take your chances with?

  48. January 27, 2012 at 7:55 pm

    Oh, Lyn, I made this a condition for anyone visiting my newborn as well. I can’t control this in the outside world but in my home, in the first weeks of my newborn’s life, yes, I made sure visitors were vaccinated as a stipulation–even the flu vaccine. Almost everyone said, duh, of course. Who doesn’t vaccinate? These mostly the older folks who had lost classmates to diseases like pertussis, rubella, even chicken pox! That was how I got real, Lyn. Real enough to care enough to protect my newborn from vaccine-preventable diseases in whatever way I could. So he didn’t, you know, die.

  49. January 27, 2012 at 7:59 pm

    Wow, Cia. You realize hardly anything you said is true. There is no mercury in childhood vaccines. You do realize this, right? And if you’re talking about thimeresol, only multi-vial doses of SOME flu vaccines have a trace amount of it, and those are not used during routine immunizations of children. Many are killed or paralyzed by flu vaccine? Really? How did Nightline miss this? The New York Times? I also know of extremely rare instances in which children died as a result of antibiotics use. I take it you wouldn’t offer antibiotics to your child if she were suffering from bacterial pneumonia, right? Hint: side effects from antibiotics are much more common than serious side effects from vaccines. And it is a known fact that the flu vaccine does not cause the flu, because except for the intranasal vaccine, it is not a live virus. So this is an impossibility. Comments like yours betray the basic scientific illiteracy of the anti-vaccine movement.

  50. January 27, 2012 at 9:17 pm

    I had to read that twice to fully absorb all the stupid and if scanning a block of text I see “oscillococcinum” I get an aversion to reading the whole thing. I live in a country that dismisses the risks of ‘flu in all but the pregnant, the elderly and those with exarcerbating conditions. Having seen a friend nearly lose her little (not yet 2 yr old) daughter to ‘flu this year any patience I have with this crap is thin, thin, thin and more brittle still.

    ‘Flu vaccines are available and my hubby and I get them on the NHS for free because we count as carers for our autistic son. If he didn’t have asthma (which is only evident in Spring and late Summer) he, the disabled child we care for, wouldn’t be eligible for the shot for himself. Now, this is made more ridiculous by the fact that he attends special school with children who for genuine medical reasons cannot be vaccinated.
    ‘Flu shots can be bought in pharmacies for between £10 and £15 but they are not allowed to give it to persons under 16. The only way to get it for your children then is to go to a private clinic who may charge up to £300 for a consultation!
    The chicken pox vax is only available through the private system and, of course, consultation fees usually apply.

  51. lilady
    January 28, 2012 at 1:09 am

    In the United States, all Recommended Childhood Vaccines are usually available under our private insurance plans. For children whose parents are uninsured or have private insurance that doesn’t “cover” the cost of the vaccines and administration of the vaccines, there is the VFC (Vaccines for Children) Program. VFC vaccines are available at public health clinics and through VFC providers (pediatricians and family practice doctors).

    Getting back to AoA and other notorious anti-vax sites; “cia parker” is a typical poster where any and all posters who are in lockstep with their theory of “vaccines cause autism” is welcome there.

    AoA is heavily “moderated” so that any poster who is “out of step” with their pseudoscience rarely appears on the site.

    I am so glad that you speak out Autismum, on behalf of the overwhelming majority of parents who have developmentally disabled children…and who don’t blame vaccines for their child’s disability.

  52. January 28, 2012 at 9:51 am

    Wow, Lilady! That is such a compliment. Thank you so much and, I have to say, I love the work you do xx

  53. cia parker
    January 28, 2012 at 12:22 pm

    Ashley,
    Didn’t you know that while mercury has been removed from most vaccines, it’s still there in force in the normal flu vaccine? You have to specify you want one without thimerosal and pay fifty cents or a dollar more to get one without mercury. That would be from an individual vial, as opposed to the nomal multi-dose vial. And with flu vaccines now recommended yearly for everyone (foolish enough to do it), that adds up to a lot of mercury stored in the brain.

  54. Steve Michaels
    January 28, 2012 at 12:52 pm

    So where is the outrage that this was poorly/inaccurately reported on this site then?

  55. Kelly
    January 28, 2012 at 1:02 pm

    cia, citation needed to support your claim that thimerosal from multi-dose flu vaccines accumulates in the brain.

    You really are fond of just making stuff up, aren’t you?

  56. Chris
    January 28, 2012 at 1:13 pm

    Ms. Parker:

    Didn’t you know that while mercury has been removed from most vaccines, it’s still there in force in the normal flu vaccine?

    From this table of pediatric vaccines (edited for clarity, some of those have multi and single dose versions):

    Fluzone – 0.01% (12.5 µg/0.25 mL dose, 25 µg/0.5 mL dose)2
    Fluzone – Free 12/23/2004
    Fluvirin – 0.01% (25 µg/0.5 mL dose)
    Fluvirin – Trace (<1ug Hg/0.5mL dose) 09/28/01
    Fluarix – Free Approved 10/19/09, never contained thimerosal
    Afluria – 0.01% (24.5 µg/0.5 mL dose)
    Afluria – Free Approved 11/10/09, never contained thimerosal
    and
    FluMist -Free Never contained Thimerosal

    That is eight influenza vaccines, of which four do not contain thimerosal. By the way, that is only half, “half” is not most for either quantity. This table and the fact that half do not have thimerosal have been presented to you before, Ms. Parker. Either you never clicked on the link (hence the edited version of the table), or you are deliberately lying.

    What you need to do now, Ms. Parker, is show with sales information that most of influenza vaccines given those children are from the multi-dose versions.

  57. Nathan
    January 28, 2012 at 3:43 pm

    I would imagine it is quite forgotten due to your hysterics.

  58. Steve Michaels
    January 28, 2012 at 7:52 pm

    Nathan, you have a VERY strange definition of ‘hysterics’. From Websters: : a fit of uncontrollable laughter or crying. At no point in these discussions has this been my state. At no point have I been proverbially shrieking at any comments. I am only evaluating what is written and pointing out the flaws in logic, method or conflicts of interested parties. At no point am I calling anyone stupid, dumb or any other pejorative. I have questioned some commentators, including yourself, as to how and why you choose to ignore the many issues from your cited sources while you disparage alternative view sources for the very same reasons.

  59. Steve Michaels
    January 28, 2012 at 8:04 pm

    Yes, Chen says it is being investigated but we may never know what happened. So, will it be listed as vaccine related? NO. When the next one dies, will her case be seen as related? NO. Will the CDC admit it, if it is vaccine related? Probably not. As you and yours like to say, correlation is not causation, of course that is for vaccine reactions. When illness rates fall, vaccines are given top bill as the reason why. Even when those rates were already falling before vaccines were introduced. This has been demonstrated many times on here. So pro-vax correlations DO equal causation. Hypocrisy reigns.

  60. Chris
    January 28, 2012 at 8:13 pm

    Do you have anymore conspiracy theories?

    I could ask you why you refuse to answer any of my questions. What excuse will you come up to not tell us how treating measles is more cost effective than preventing it?

  61. Steve Michaels
    January 28, 2012 at 8:37 pm

    Your con traditions AMAZE me. First you claim, “there are great sites with genuine expertise and experience behind them to turn to”, then you make a statement like this, “Flu shots can be bought in pharmacies for between £10 and £15 but they are not allowed to give it to persons under 16. The only way to get it for your children then is to go to a private clinic who may charge up to £300 for a consultation!, The chicken pox vax is only available through the private system and, of course, consultation fees usually apply.”

    Now then, the FACT is that the reason why these shots are not available is because of the recommendations of the EXPERTS at the NHS. Hmmmm…. a bit selective then aren’t we? The only experts we should turn to are the ones who’s views fit our paradigm. Hardly a reasonable, dispassionate approach, especially considering that UK childhood mortality is LOWER than US child mortality. By the way, I would bet that your son has had every eligible vaccine on the UK schedule. I am sorry that he is autistic. I know it is only anecdotal, but I have 2 sons, aged 2 and 3 and they have had no vaccines, they have had no serious illnesses, they have both had chicken pox with no complications, and they are both WELL above the current average for verbal and mathematical ability. In fact, the UK standard for entry to school at aged 5 has already been exceeded by my 3 year old, and the 2 year old is not far behind.

  62. Steve Michaels
    January 28, 2012 at 8:44 pm

    By the way, just as a side note, here is the NHS commentary on chicken pox:

    “Chickenpox is a common childhood infection. In most cases the symptoms are mild and complications are rare. Almost all children develop immunity to chickenpox after infection, so only catch it once. The disease can be more severe in adults.”

    Autism is not considered an ‘at risk’ illness. The vaccine has NOT been proven to confer life-long immunity. Any claim to the contrary is specious as the vaccine has not been around long enough to confirm. Given that, one, the illness is not particularly dangerous in children, and two, that the vaccine may end up delaying morbidity until adulthood thus increasing the risks of complications, why are you keen to give your son an unnecessary vaccine? Please don’t be offended by my question. I am truly curious as to how and why you want to give him more vaccines than are clinically shown to be necessary.

  63. Steve Michaels
    January 28, 2012 at 8:56 pm

    Chris :
    Do you have anymore conspiracy theories?
    I could ask you why you refuse to answer any of my questions. What excuse will you come up to not tell us how treating measles is more cost effective than preventing it?

    Chris, I have answered your questions on several occasions. The fact that you choose to pretend that this is not the case baffles me. The claim has always been that the measles vaccine ‘saves lives’. When you are challenged on this claim, and soundly refuted, you move the goal posts and then declare scientific certainty based on hypothetical studies of non-existent cohorts and estimated costs that ignore any and all negative reactions to the vaccine itself. It is really getting boring now. It is plain to me that you are incapable of assimilating any information that conflicts with your paradigm. I think the term is Belief Disconfirmation Paradigm. A form of cognitive dissonance. I will save you the tedium of looking up the definition:

    “Dissonance is aroused when people are confronted with information that is inconsistent with their beliefs. If the dissonance is not reduced by changing one’s belief, the dissonance can result in misperception or rejection or refutation of the information, seeking support from others who share the beliefs, and attempting to persuade others to restore consonance.”

    One of the key differences between you and me is that I really don’t care if you agree with me or not. My goal has been, and will continue to be, to show dispassionate and/or uniformed readers that there is more than one side to this debate. Why do I suspect that you suffer from this issue? Because you like to quote what other people ‘think’ about me and offer that as ‘proof’ that you are right. This behavior fits perfectly with the definition. I do not quote others, except to point out logical fallacies, factual errors or reasons for discounting sources.

  64. Chris
    January 28, 2012 at 10:18 pm

    Chris, I have answered your questions on several occasions.

    Okay, perhaps I missed it where you had real evidence that the treating measles in a hospital is more cost effective than preventing the disease. Just tell me where you documented those numbers.

    Show me exactly which comment that you answered the questions based on Impact of Vaccines Universally Recommended for Children—United States, 1900-1998. Where did you tell us how every American dollar spent to purchase measles-containing vaccine in 1994 affected medical costs and indirect societal costs? I asked you multiple times, and yet I don’t see an answer anywhere.

    Answer that question, or just prove that your side of the debate is based on pure fantastic hand waving. In other words: lies and deception.

  65. Chris
    January 28, 2012 at 10:25 pm

    When you are challenged on this claim, and soundly refuted, you move the goal posts and then declare scientific certainty based on hypothetical studies of non-existent cohorts and estimated costs that ignore any and all negative reactions to the vaccine itself.

    And you continue to ignore the reactions to the actual diseases. Plus you just make up excuses of why the real studies are not sufficient, yet do not present any real evidence. This is why you have been, and will still be called liar.

    What part of the paragraph I quoted from The Clinical Significance of Measles: A Review did you not understand?

    So exactly how many of a thousand cases of measles result in Postinfectious encephalomyelitis (PIE)? How many of those result in death? How many of those who survive become permanently disabled? Why are you ignoring those numbers.

    And not while keep blabbering on with you list of my deficiencies, I continue to respond with real evidence. Something you are ignoring. Just like you ignore the people who are disabled by disease, and the costs of taking care of them.

  66. Nathan
    January 29, 2012 at 12:52 am

    Once again your low research ethic has betrayed you. It does not take a lot of investigation to find that “hysteric” also means “A wildly emotional and exaggerated reaction.” Which describes most of your antics on this blog. It certainly describes crying “Slander!” when you haven’t even read the thing you think is slanderous. Or libelous. Or whatever hysterical term you want to throw out there.

  67. January 29, 2012 at 2:01 am

    “..more vaccines than are clinically shown to be necessary.”

    I have to admit I like the “force” into circular logic there. We shouldn’t use the vaccine because it has not been around long enough to prove it confers life long immunity.

    CDC – “Chickenpox is a common childhood infection. In most cases the symptoms are mild and complications are rare”
    stevie – “the illness is not particularly dangerous in children”
    See, stevie, this is another example of your inability to read betraying you again. Complications are rare, but the disease (without the vaccine) is ubiquitous. That is everyone gets it. If everyone gets it, even rare conditions will happen to significant numbers of people. Thus we have you calling a disease which kills hundreds of people a year (again, without general use of the vaccine) “not particularly dangerous”. Your political desires have actually your mind to the point where you would prefer that these hundreds of humans die than live.

  68. January 29, 2012 at 2:03 am

    “Your con traditions AMAZE me.”

    Yeah, Yeah, I know it is a typo. But it also could be a Freudian slip. I’m going to attribute that phrase to you, stevie, from now on. That is, your tradition of attempting to con others, or your “con tradition”. Somehow it suits your behavior quite well.

  69. Steve Michaels
    January 29, 2012 at 10:51 am

    gattarian :
    “Your con traditions AMAZE me.”
    Yeah, Yeah, I know it is a typo. But it also could be a Freudian slip. I’m going to attribute that phrase to you, stevie, from now on. That is, your tradition of attempting to con others, or your “con tradition”. Somehow it suits your behavior quite well.

    Nice one! I hit a space bar by accident and you make statements about that and ignore the entire content of the post, which, by the way, wasn’t directed to you in the first place.

  70. Steve Michaels
    January 29, 2012 at 11:11 am

    gattarian :
    “..more vaccines than are clinically shown to be necessary.”
    I have to admit I like the “force” into circular logic there. We shouldn’t use the vaccine because it has not been around long enough to prove it confers life long immunity.
    CDC – “Chickenpox is a common childhood infection. In most cases the symptoms are mild and complications are rare”
    stevie – “the illness is not particularly dangerous in children”
    See, stevie, this is another example of your inability to read betraying you again. Complications are rare, but the disease (without the vaccine) is ubiquitous. That is everyone gets it. If everyone gets it, even rare conditions will happen to significant numbers of people. Thus we have you calling a disease which kills hundreds of people a year (again, without general use of the vaccine) “not particularly dangerous”. Your political desires have actually your mind to the point where you would prefer that these hundreds of humans die than live.

    Contrary to you belief, children are not dropping like flies from chicken pox in Europe. In fact, as pointed out many times before, the US vaccine schedule is the heaviest in the Western world and childhood mortality is among the worst, so please don’t preach that vaccines are saving lives. Something is killing American children. The experts here consider chicken pox mild and not worthy of a recommendation to vaccinate. My point, which so eloquently ignore, is that when the ‘experts’ don’t support your views, you ignore them. Although that was directed to to autismum, you seem as incapable of consistency. The truth is that the ‘experts’ disagree on most of this stuff. Yes, ‘experts’ can be produced by each side of this debate. The main difference is that anti-vaxers tend to give reasoned objections to your experts, whereas pro-vaxers just call experts with whom they disagree ‘quacks’ or the like, or just outright ignore them, as both you and autismum are doing with the NHS information.

  71. January 29, 2012 at 12:32 pm

    You can’t read a simple string of sentences can you? I did not say my child is in an “at risk” group because he is autistic my point was precisely the opposite and you’re confusing my points on ‘flu vaccine and chicken pox vaccine. Try again sweetie.

  72. Steve Michaels
    January 29, 2012 at 12:39 pm

    Nathan :
    Once again your low research ethic has betrayed you. It does not take a lot of investigation to find that “hysteric” also means “A wildly emotional and exaggerated reaction.” Which describes most of your antics on this blog. It certainly describes crying “Slander!” when you haven’t even read the thing you think is slanderous. Or libelous. Or whatever hysterical term you want to throw out there.

    Am I to suppose that you are somehow telepathically able to determine my state of mind? At no point in any of these discussions have I been ‘emotional’ or ‘exaggerated’. In fact, the one bit where I got it wrong because I depended on the accuracy of this site when it was inaccurate I have calmly accepted and apologized for. Pointing out that a civilly liable action has taken place is neither ‘emotional’ or ‘exaggerated’. It only serves to highlight that facts and reasons with which you disagree are met with ignorance and ad hominem attacks. There is no point being emotional about it. I just enjoy sitting back and watch you do it again and again. If anything, the closest I have come to ‘hysterics’ is the quiet chuckle from time to time when you prove my point. It’s a bit like attacking my doctor and claiming that I asked different questions than the ones that I asked. You are creating a make believe world that corresponds with your own views so that you do not have to go through the stress of questioning your beliefs.

  73. January 29, 2012 at 12:45 pm

    “. By the way, I would bet that your son has had every eligible vaccine on the UK schedule.”
    Yes, I’m a responsible parent.

    “I am sorry that he is autistic”
    I’m not. I love that child exactly as he is. His behaviour can be challenging but patience and understanding are things that grow in me everyday through my love – they are not deficient in my boy. I will do as every good parent on the face of the Earth does – help him learn new skills and strive to help him find what makes him happy and fulfilled. My child is not a tragedy, he is precious, loved and loving.

  74. Steve Michaels
    January 29, 2012 at 12:47 pm

    Autismum :
    You can’t read a simple string of sentences can you? I did not say my child is in an “at risk” group because he is autistic my point was precisely the opposite and you’re confusing my points on ‘flu vaccine and chicken pox vaccine. Try again sweetie.

    I have confused nothing. The reason the vaccines that you are complaining about are not available on the NHS is because the EXPERTS don’t believe they are necessary. Why do you NOT trust these experts yet you claim that us ignorant anti-vaxers should look to the experts? You are being selective in that you are only recommending/supporting the advice of the experts with whom you agree. Again, the point is that your statements contradict themselves. It is a simple fact based on what you have said. Your patronizing manner only serves to highlight that you are actually aware of this.

  75. Steve Michaels
    January 29, 2012 at 12:58 pm

    I have not ignored your questions and I have not been highlighting your deficiencies. In fact, I have been using your own sources as evidence for my case. I think that is what is really bothering you. You keep asking about the costs of the illnesses and quoting hypothetical studies as proof. This fact means that you don’t have any REAL proof to back up your assertion. As such, it is merely an assertion and assertions do not need to be refuted they need to be proven. You provide ‘proof’ that vaccines are not the largest expenditure in healthcare and posit that this means that vaccines save money. I have previously shown that the US spends almost twice as much per capita on healthcare with mediocre results and above average child mortality rates and the highest vaccination load in the world. Then I read your ‘proof’ and find that almost 20% of all healthcare spending (and growing) is on the very same chronic illnesses that anti-vaxers claim are related to vaccine injuries. Now I understand that you don’t accept that any specific injury is vaccine related but that does not mean that you are right. The fact that these chronic ailments have increased in correlation with the addition of new vaccines to the recommended schedule constitutes grounds for true independent research. This research has not occurred and the CDC consistently claim that without proof of causation, they will not investigate whether there is causation. And when the chief has done their job sufficiently to protect the industry, they get a golden parachute position with an industry giant upon leaving public ‘service’.

  76. Steve Michaels
    January 29, 2012 at 1:11 pm

    Autismum :
    “. By the way, I would bet that your son has had every eligible vaccine on the UK schedule.”
    Yes, I’m a responsible parent.
    “I am sorry that he is autistic”
    I’m not. I love that child exactly as he is. His behaviour can be challenging but patience and understanding are things that grow in me everyday through my love – they are not deficient in my boy. I will do as every good parent on the face of the Earth does – help him learn new skills and strive to help him find what makes him happy and fulfilled. My child is not a tragedy, he is precious, loved and loving.

    I have no doubt that he is loved and loving. So are Down’s Syndrome children. So are Parkinson’s sufferers. So are Multiple Sclerosis sufferers. I have heard this before from other parents with autistic children. The difference between ASD, Down’s, Parkinsons and MS is that there is a good chance that parental choice has had an impact on the ASD sufferer. As such, as a matter of cognitive dissonance, parents with children with ASD must argue that they are really normal children, just more challenging. Funny thing though. Knowing that you are in the UK, I think you are aware that you qualify for certain disability payments and public purse help based on your child being disabled. Do you accept these? Are you receiving full time carer allowance? Do you get motability? (some do and some don’t). Do you get rental assistance or council tax credit due to low income while claiming full time carer allowance?

    By the way, I am not asking/pointing this out in any heartless or aggressive way. I believe that children with disabilities should be cared for. I also believe that we need to stop burying our heads in the sand and proactively search for ways to avoid the issue. This includes dispassionate study into vaccine safety. This has not been done and studies that claim to do it are not gold standard studies conducted by truly independent researchers. This point has been shown over and over.

  77. January 29, 2012 at 1:26 pm

    the overriding reason for lower child mortality in the UK is free universal healthcare. Sadly, the NHS is in the control of whatever idiot is in number 10 and messes about with it which often means adopting populist strategies on “the big diseases” like cancer and, in the case of the current incumbents, trying to privatise it with their quacks’ charter. Adding vaccines costs money and that’s why – to our shame – cheapo cervarix was chosen as the HPV vaccine. Every goverment who’ve had their hands on the NHS has done it no good with short termist strategies

  78. January 29, 2012 at 1:38 pm

    WTF do bebefits have to do with whether or not I think vaccines are safe or if they cause autism?
    I don’t argue that my boy is a “normal” child. Never have. My son has a great number of needs ad work everyday to meet them. Oh and he’s not an “ASD sufferer” he has never suffered a day in his happy little life because of autism

  79. January 29, 2012 at 2:03 pm

    If you really think all decisions on what is or is not available on the NHS is made solely by clinicians, doctors and scientists then you are niave in the extreme

  80. Chris
    January 29, 2012 at 2:25 pm

    The fact that these chronic ailments have increased in correlation with the addition of new vaccines to the recommended schedule constitutes grounds for true independent research.

    Prove it.

    Set right along side the proof that treating measles is cheaper than preventing it. And that the chronic conditions after measles (deafness, SSPE, blindness, mental retardation, paralysis,etc) are less drastic than your mythical “chronic ailments).

  81. lisa
    January 29, 2012 at 2:27 pm

    An unvaccinated nurse will not make you sick, you make yourself sick. Learn how to be truly healthy.

  82. January 29, 2012 at 2:44 pm

    Oh and steve you forgot that as well as disability living allowance, carers’ allowance, housing benefit (which helps v few as fewer people in the UK rent than do in the US or most of the rest of Europe) and motability that households that include a person or persons with a disability can also get reduced tariffs on their water, gas and electricity, a reduction in their council tax if a room in the house (other than the room in which the disabled person sleeps) is dedicated to their needs and/or care and then there’s the blue badge scheme which gives discounted/free parking and use of designated parking spaces and examption from certain parking restrictions for individuals with mobility problems. Evenso, a disproportionate number disabled people and their carers live below the poverty line. Too many people with autism (and other disabilities) do not qualify or they or their carers cannot navigate their way through the bureaucracy that encumbers the system that is stacked against awarding these benefits. If your drilling on my finances was your way of asking do I think autism a disability then the answer is an uncategorical yes

  83. Chris
    January 29, 2012 at 3:07 pm

    So if a nurse has pertussis takes care of your newborn, you know how to keep your infant healthy? Oh, do tell. But bring some real references in the form of the title, journal and dates of the PubMed indexed papers that show how to keep a newborn from suffering with pertussis. Pithy comments like “breast milk” are not sufficient.

  84. Nathan
    January 29, 2012 at 4:14 pm

    I don’t need telepathy, Steve. You pour your mind out in these comments for us all to read. Claiming that vaccines are a depopulation tool or that there is “evidence of a conspiracy to put profit over health by the pharma industry… in conjunction with the CDC, the FDA and the NIH.” Is exaggerated to say the least. And your tone is often quite emotional. I’m not saying that you are running around your flat laughing maniacally, but your writings display a strong emotional vibe. Wild accusations of slander, without taking the simple time to read the facts and think before speaking, betray a laxity of the logic that you seem to think is a part of your mode of operations.

  85. Steve Michaels
    January 29, 2012 at 4:33 pm

    Chris :

    The fact that these chronic ailments have increased in correlation with the addition of new vaccines to the recommended schedule constitutes grounds for true independent research.

    Prove it.
    Set right along side the proof that treating measles is cheaper than preventing it. And that the chronic conditions after measles (deafness, SSPE, blindness, mental retardation, paralysis,etc) are less drastic than your mythical “chronic ailments).

    Prove that it should be independently investigated? You’re getting really boring now. The correlation IS the proof, and the investigation would prove or refute your original claims. You should be supportive, not dismissive.

  86. Chris
    January 29, 2012 at 4:41 pm

    You made a claim that “chronic ailments have increased in correlation with the addition of new vaccines” therefore you need to prove it.

    Are you being deliberately obtuse? Prove that that some set of “chronic ailments” are caused by the MMR vaccine. Show these are more expensive and more onerous than measles.

  87. Steve Michaels
    January 29, 2012 at 4:43 pm

    It is the contradiction of the argument that ‘he doesn’t suffer’ and that he is disabled. To assuage your cognitive dissonance, you claim he doesn’t suffer, but financially you claim he is disabled. Depending on the level of ASD, I have seen the diagnosis be used as a cash cow to cover living expenses for people who do not wish to work. This is especially true when the child is old enough to be in full time education and the full time carer payments are still being collected. And of course within the financial scheme you would say it is definitely a disability. To say otherwise would mean that you were cheating the system. I live in the UK and am fully aware of how the benefits system works and is abused. I pay my taxes and get NO benefits except the automatic child benefit. I pay all of my full utilities, council tax, park in children’s bays with the kids and not when I don’t have them with me and get no handouts. And I work damn hard to keep my family and give as much love and attention to my kids as every ASD parent I know. I just don’t get welfare to cover my living expenses.

  88. Steve Michaels
    January 29, 2012 at 5:00 pm

    You know Nathan, 15 years ago I had a friend who we all thought was nuts. He kept going on about the CFR, the Bilderbergers, the Council of Rome, the Rockefellers and the like. We thought he was a raving lunatic and made fun of him behind his back. All you have to do now is read the papers to see that he was actually right. Well, maybe not US papers, but European papers and news outlets freely talk about, not only the existence of these societies, but how they influence public policy against the will of democratic process. They operate behind closed doors and secretly plan policies that elected governments implement against the will of the people. Conspiracy? Yes. Exaggerated? No. If you think for a minute that government agencies are trying to help Americans live healthier, then why do they perform unethical experiments without consent? Why do they attack raw milk producers and do nothing about prescription drugs that are killing 10’s of thousands? Why do they attack supplement companies while allowing GMO to infiltrate the food supply without any labeling when their own scientist have reported the dangers and been ignored? The evidence is so overwhelming that it beggars belief that you can ignore it all!

  89. January 29, 2012 at 5:17 pm

    Wow! what an ableist. Suffering and being disabled are not the same thing. He has greater needs and things that pose no obstacle to other children of his age are more challenging to him. I have no doubt that as he becomes more self aware he will suffer as a result of being autistic and their being ignorant morons like you in this world.

    “I think you are aware that you qualify for certain disability payments”
    Do I?
    “you claim he doesn’t suffer, but financially you claim he is disabled”
    Do I?

    Do you know how the benefits system works?
    How much do people get?
    Who does the assessments?
    How often are the assessments?
    What criteria need to be met before an application will even be considered?
    Which benefits are means tested?
    How are the payments ranked and on what basis?
    What are the income cut-off points for qualification for means tested benefits?
    How is mobility assessed?
    How many references from medical professionals do you need to qualify and which professionals count as a qualifying referees?

    In case you’re wondering how I know – I have volunteered at a group to help disabled people and/or their carers/parents find out what they may or may not be entitled to and their rights in general. I suppose you’d call them scroungers.

    “I have seen the diagnosis be used as a cash cow to cover living expenses for people who do not wish to work.”
    Firstly, I work. I’m a freelance writer and editor or has that escaped you while trying to do an amateur audit of my income?
    Having many parents with disabled children as friends (and some who bug the hell out of me) I can think of no-one that who makes money from the system beyond that which they need to live.
    How many parents of disabled children do you know?
    Do you know what bringing up a disabled child is like – how it can impact on your ability to work? No – you only have genius children I forgot.
    Have you any clue how difficult getting a firm diagnosis of autism is?
    Have you considered what extra expenses are incurred when caring for a disabled child- whatever their disability?

    You have decided, based on no evidence (indeed some to the contrary) that I’m in receit of all this money that you begrudge disabled people and those who care for them

    I consider Autism to be a disability in whatever scheme. Read my blog if you can tear yourself away from the Daily Mail or whatever right wing bigotted rag you read.

  90. ChrisKid
    January 29, 2012 at 8:19 pm

    Oh, no, Chris, I think what she meant is that it would be the baby’s fault if it comes down with pertussis. How dare that baby allow itself to become sick! People are born with the ability to keep themselves perfectly healthy at all time, you know.
    What an absolute slap in the face to all those parents who have lost a child to a contagious disease. It’s bad enough that Steve is trying, in his own inimitable way, to say that Autismum is responsibly for her son’s autism, but then this one comes along and blames everyone for catching transmissible diseases.

  91. Nathan
    January 29, 2012 at 11:46 pm

    You know Nathan, 15 years ago I had a friend who we all thought was nuts. He kept going on about the CFR, the Bilderbergers, the Council of Rome, the Rockefellers and the like.

    Yes, I believe your friend was played by Mike Meyers in So I Married an Axe Murderer. Colonel Sanders was in there too, IIRC.

    Lets assume these secret societies truly exist. I can agree that there are powers that want to influence public policy. But this is entirely different than what we are talking about, because we have tons of hard evidence for the safety and efficacy of vaccines. You can criticize public policy if you like, but you still have to face the reality of the science. And that’s where your little conspiracy theory falls apart.

    Here is a great blogpost that essentially details how ridiculous it is to think that there is a conspiracy that is suppressing the vaccine research that shows vaccines to be unsafe, and manufacturing illegitimate research to back up their safety.

    If you think for a minute that government agencies are trying to help Americans live healthier, then why do they perform unethical experiments without consent?

    Such as? As I said, your list via Mike Adams does not present a whole lot of evidence that this is a pervasive, and certainly not malicious problem, and does not constitute evdience of a conspiracy between the government, the NIH, and pharma to put profit over public health. For example, in the list there was a study, done with consent, in which newborns were stressed by putting a their foot in cold water, and their central blood pressures were assessed. You can argue whether this data was important enough to subject a foot to cold water for 60 seconds. I suspect it was useful data. But it did not endanger the child’s health and was not done for pharma profits.

    Why do they attack raw milk producers and do nothing about prescription drugs that are killing 10′s of thousands?

    They do. Those drugs that you like to bring up that were removed from the market? They were removed from the market.

    And I have no intention of getting into a raw milk tangent.

    Why do they attack supplement companies while allowing GMO to infiltrate the food supply without any labeling when their own scientist have reported the dangers and been ignored?

    Again, not wanting to get into this tangent. It is sufficient to say that your assessment of GMOs is different than the consensus of the scientific community, thus the policies on GMOs.

    The evidence is so overwhelming that it beggars belief that you can ignore it all!

    But you still need to actually have evidence that the risk of a vaccine is greater than the risk of the disease. Your evidence for this is so miniscule that it beggars belief that you believe it. You have to exaggerate it to make anyone take notice. And that does explain the need for these complicated conspiracy theories that apparently involve the Rockefellers. And the like.

  92. lilady
    January 30, 2012 at 12:31 am

    Steve you are way, way off base here. Your feeble attempt to define libel and slander to accuse Autismum of a civil tort is mean-spirited.

    Failing spectacularly at that attempt, you then accuse her of “gaming the system” by claiming benefits to live a life of luxury, based upon her child’s disability. You, on the other hand have healthy children and you don’t want any of your tax dollars paying for assistance to help parents who have disabled kids. What a vile human being you are.

    The subject of this blog is the Patriot Nurse and her deviation from acceptable nursing practice as well as the CDC recommendations for health care practitioners in the United States.

    Autismum mentioned that the varicella vaccine is not recommended, as yet, by the NHS for most children. But it is recommended Steve for health care workers in the U.K. Read further along on the NHS site you linked to. The NHS does not recommend the Tdap vaccine for older children, for health care workers and as a one-time booster for adults in lieu of the Td vaccine…as it is recommended by the CDC for those individuals in the USA.
    The U.K. NHS has a history of lagging by a few years, the vaccines that are licensed for use here in the United States and that are recommended by the CDC for children, for adults and for health care workers. (It was several years between the time the USA implemented a second dose of the measles vaccine and the time that the NHS put that recommendation in place)

    In a prior post I mentioned that every patient here in the United States has the right to inquire if the medical and nursing staff that is caring for them, is fully immunized, according to the CDC recommendations. Patriot Nurse may be attending pregnant women in a birthing center and putting newborns at risk for congenital varicella syndrome or a life-threatening case of pertussis, if she has not been tested for immunity against varicella and has not received the Tdap vaccine. Autismum made an inquiry, nothing more…and she deserves our praise for this inquiry and for blogging about this nurse on her web page.

  93. January 30, 2012 at 12:48 am

    Remember, Chris, stevie makes claims of facts not because they are facts, but because they highlight a political situation that he wants highlighted. I’d say it was lying to make a point, but for that to be true he’d have to have a point in the first place. I think I will just put it down to his “con tradition”.

  94. January 30, 2012 at 1:05 am

    stevie lies – “Contrary to you belief, children are not dropping like flies from chicken pox in Europe.”

    I never said, implied, or even hinted that I believe children are dropping like flies from chicken pox in europe. Because you have trouble identifying them, stevie, this is another lie from you.

    “The experts here consider chicken pox mild and not worthy of a recommendation to vaccinate. ”
    No, they do not consider mass vaccinations to be cost effective. They still approve the varicella vaccine for use by anyone who wants it. Which suggests that these experts you are now championing indeed believe that the vaccine is safe and effective. Care to admit that this vaccine is safe and effective?

    stevie lies – “just outright ignore them, as both you and autismum are doing with the NHS information.”
    No, stevie, no one is ignoring the decision of the NHS to not recommend mass vaccination with the varicella vaccine. You are the one drawing conclusions from it which are not warranted.

    It is not warranted to conclude that “the illness is not particularly dangerous in children” from this decision is not warranted. Neither can you conclude that it is an “unnecessary vaccine”. All you can conclude is that the NHS believes that mass vaccinations with it are not cost effective given the models they used to calculate cost effectiveness.

    It is not contradictory to suggest that the NHS experts are experts in their field, AND that the CDC experts are experts in their fields. These two groups looked at similar (not identical) information and came to slightly different decisions, for different groups of people in different situations, BTW. BOTH decisions have scientific grounding. NEITHER decision implies that the varicella vaccine is either unsafe, ineffective, a tool of the vast conspiracy to depopulate the planet, nor anything else you sometimes come up with.

    Everything you type, stevie, has to be read in the context of your long established tradition of lying. You lie regularly. Correspondingly, you are disbelieved.

  95. Steve Michaels
    January 30, 2012 at 2:51 am

    Contrary to gattarian’s posturing, you are asking me to ‘prove’ the results of the research that I am saying should be, but hasn’t been, done. And you call me obtuse? The incidence of chronic illness has increased in correlation with increased vaccination loads. More vaccines, more chronic illnesses simultaneously. Research required. Why does this concept scare you so much?

  96. Steve Michaels
    January 30, 2012 at 2:58 am

    Firstly, it was not mean spirited to point out that a civil offense may have been committed. Latching on to that as an issue is a bit lame. I did not accuse autismum of ‘gaming the system’. I simply pointed out that there was a contradiction that I have seen many times in parents of autistic children who become activists. This contradiction is partially fed by the need for these parents to maximize the issues their children have to qualify for benefits and then minimize them to avoid admitting what they are doing. And yes, the UK does lag behind the US with it’s lower level of recommended vaccines. It also has a LOWER childhood mortality rate then the US. But these figures don’t jive with your view so you ignore it.

  97. Steve Michaels
    January 30, 2012 at 3:06 am

    Gattarian you really do like to play it both ways, don’t you? On one hand you expect parents to blindly follow the vaccination schedule because the ‘experts’ recommend it because vaccines ‘save lives’. Then you claim that when they don’t recommend them, just merely approve use, that this constitutes the same claim. You make no sense. Your ad hominem of calling me a liar really belie the fact that you have no rational argument to make in refutation. Chicken pox can be deadly in children. It is at least 4 times more deadly in adults. This means that, without any proof whatsoever that the vaccine provides life long immunity, the trade off you recommend is to take the risk of contracting chicken pox later in life, with the increased risk of complications, instead of contracting it at the lowest risk time-frame. That makes no sense at all.

  98. Steve Michaels
    January 30, 2012 at 3:07 am

    Actually I do not begrudge legitimate benefits being paid out to the disabled. What does bother me is the self-righteous posturing as a martyr to a child’s disability and the complete and utter disregard for really trying to get to the bottom of the causes of autism. It’s a bit like breast cancer. An awful lot of posturing about prevention while the causes are ignored. In the US, a study was conducted that showed a 70% reduction in incidence of breast cancer. How? No mammograms, sonograms or thermal imaging instead and no HRT. No artificial hormones and no radiation to ‘aid’ detection. Where did the study go? It got buried because it’s bad for business to actually prevent this stuff. That has been my point all along. And just as a side note, you obviously know more about the system than I do, as I was unaware that you can actually get your utilities paid for as well. Given that the average UK wage is around £22,000, the benefits you list, in my situation, would alone be worth that before any cash payments. Of course all of these benefits are essentially tax free so, in my 40% bracket, not including NI, the non cash benefits you list are worth over £30,000 in taxable income. That is to say that the benefits are worth more than working. You betray your attitude that benefits are deserved by default. It is not a ‘right’ or ‘left’ issue. People that get benefits want the system to be lax. People who provide the money being paid out in benefits don’t want to be taken for a ride.

  99. January 30, 2012 at 5:12 am

    The parents I can think of who become activists who do the matyr thing tend to be the antivax lot who cannot accept autism or their child and define him/her stolen, soul-less or poisoned. They too, if in the UK, might qualify for benefits. They may well spend them lining the pockets of quacks in the search for a cure for their child. That isn’t my business.

    My son is severerly autistic and requires 2 to 1 care in all public settings. Yet I still contend it doesn’t cause him direct suffering because we meet his needs and adapt to them. I am not a matyr to him or his condition. He is my inspiration and a joy even though things can be very tough at times like when I don’t understand his behaviour or anticipate potential triggers for tantrums etc. Like when he destroys parts of our home. He doesn’t suffer when he does this and neither do we. We make repairs and adaptations and get on with things. I do not play down his disability and on my blog have moaned several times that too many people – like you – do not realise or have any comprehension of how disabling a condition autism can be.

    I owe a great debt to autism self advocates, especially those who blog so eloquently, for giving me a greater understanding of what my child might be experiencing and helping me to understand why he may need to behave as he does. Does that mean that living with autism is easy? no. Because I have some understanding of autism and utter acceptance of my child he no longer has additional needs? no.

    Nowhere have I said that what causes need not be looked into. They interest me greatly but knowing a cause does not equal having a cure. The cause of cystic fibrosis is well established yet there is no cure – the parents of children with cf get money too, do they deserve it according to you? Is it just parents whose children are “mentally” not physically disabled that are the scourge of the society? You clearly do not understand that autism can have physical characteristics – and I don’t mean the bowel disease Andrew Wakefield invented.

    You really think disabled people get all their utilities paid?
    “persons with a disability can also get reduced tariffs on their water, gas and electricity” You read then you fantsize.

    You’re a bigotted conspiracist with no idea of what’s involved in bringing up a child with autism or indeed any other disability. You have no conception of the extra costs that can be involved in time, money and energy. Worse, you refuse to believe that anyone can be happy to give that extra to their child or that the experience can, though at times challenging, be extremely enriching. It is possible to live a contented and fulfilled life with disability in it.
    You are the blight on society not parents doing whatever they can – often with very little – to bring up their disabled children and give them as happy a life as possible. Though I doubt you believe disability and happiness are in anyway compatible.

  100. January 30, 2012 at 11:08 am

    A common myth repeated by anti-vaxers is that there is lifelong natural immunity to varicella zoster virus. A natural infection does not provide lifelong immunity. Yes, most people are immune to chicken pox, only getting a bout once in their lives, but the virus reemerges as shingles when immunity wanes. Shingles is not a mild illness. This review describes the disease, treatment and prevention.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2664599/

    The vaccine prevents chicken pox and lessens the risk of shingles later in life. I don’t think it is unreasonable to expect that this vaccine-induced immunity will be lifelong considering a natural infection doesn’t provide lifelong immunity. The situation can easily be monitored while the vaccine is in use. It is unreasonable to withhold the vaccine while long term prospective studies are pending.

  101. Nathan
    January 30, 2012 at 12:10 pm

    Sorry, here’s that blogpost to which I was referring.

    http://thepoxesblog.blogspot.com/2011/10/we-pharma-shills.html

  102. Nathan
    January 30, 2012 at 12:13 pm

    Indeed, if only there could be a way to “boost” immunity if it started to wane. A “boost-er shot” if you will.

    If only.

  103. Chris
    January 30, 2012 at 12:38 pm

    Mr. Michaels, you made a claim, therefore there should be some study that you are basing that claim on. So you need to support that claim with actual evidence.

    If you don’t have evidence for something, then don’t make a claim. So if that claim is actually not true or proven, then you must actually answer the question of how treating measles is more cost effective than preventing most of them with two doses of an MMR vaccine.

    Getting a child two doses of the MMR vaccine is about $200 total if you count clinic time. The hospital sent me the total of two days of charges before insurance and it is over $15000 (that does not count the costs of specialists, like the doctors who read the MRI and echocardiogram). Children hospitalized with measles usually stay much longer and have more serious interventions (between four to five days). So those are some numbers you have to work with, along with the several papers I have given you in the past (like the costs California paid during the 1990 epidemic, West J Med. 1996 Jul-Aug;165(1-2):20-5. ).

    Before the a measles vaccine was introduced in the 1960s, almost every single child came down with the disease. About one in a thousand ended up in the hospital, with around five hundred leaving in a coffin per year in the USA.

  104. Chris
    January 30, 2012 at 1:52 pm

    Looking at this price list, I am changing the cost of two MMR doses to between $40 to $100. If I am going to ask someone to use real data, I should do the same.

  105. lilady
    January 30, 2012 at 7:35 pm

    @ Steve: In addition to being a public health nurse, I am the parent of a child with a rare genetic disorder, who died seven years ago, at age twenty-eight. He brought much joy into our lives and the lives of people he touched during his short life. He was profoundly mentally retarded, had spastic cerebral palsy, a partially controlled grand mal seizure disorder, pancytopenia and was also immune suppressed. Our time and our financial resources were devoted to his care. You are clueless about the personal financial resources that are expended by parents of such children, for therapies not covered by private insurance. Why should a child whose parents do not have resources be denied access to medical care and therapies that enable them to survive, just because mean-spirited people do not value their lives.

    Like Autismum, I too took up the cause of advocacy for disabled kids…I have been actively involved with parents for the past 35 years and expect to continue that advocacy. I have testified at hearings to deinstitutionalize kids and adults who are warehoused in large state-run institutions, published articles under my “real name” in respected newspapers, appeared on television and radio…and posted often on science-based medicine blogs under my ‘nym.

    I will continue these activities to educate the general public and to dispel myths perpetuated by notorious anti-vax websites that appeal to ignorant and credulous people like you.

  106. January 30, 2012 at 7:42 pm

    Lilady, diolch xx

  107. January 30, 2012 at 11:01 pm

    Restating it is not proving it. You have to prove that chronic illnesses have increased in correlation to an increase in vaccinations. You have not done so, but continue to claim that it is true.

    You are the one making the claim, simply tell us the basis you have for that claim. Why are you so afraid of this?

  108. January 30, 2012 at 11:12 pm

    stevie lies – “On one hand you expect parents to blindly follow the vaccination schedule …”

    I never once said or implied any such thing. You really need to see a professional about your need to lie. It seems clinical to me.

    stevie – “Then you claim that when they don’t recommend them, just merely approve use, that this constitutes the same claim. You make no sense. ”

    I make no sense to YOU because you are so focused on finding an evil here that you miss my point entirely. I did not ever say that anyone should blindly follow anything. All I suggested was that the expert panels in the US and in the UK came to slightly different conclusions about widespread vaccine use. Namely the US panel thought it would be cost effective and the UK panel thought it would not. Neither of these decisions supports your claim that the vaccine is not needed.

    “Your ad hominem of calling me a liar really belie the fact that you have no rational argument to make in refutation.”

    You have the causation wrong again. I am not disregarding your claims because I have called you a liar, I am calling you a liar because I have demonstrated several times that your claims are false. Ad Hominem works the other way.

    stevie – “Chicken pox can be deadly in children. It is at least 4 times more deadly in adults. This means that, without any proof whatsoever that the vaccine provides life long immunity, the trade off you recommend is to take the risk of contracting chicken pox later in life, with the increased risk of complications, instead of contracting it at the lowest risk time-frame. That makes no sense at all.”

    No, stevie, your ignorance of the facts betrays you again. It is true that the vaccine has not been around long enough to prove absolutely that it confers life long immunity. It has been studied for many years, however, and shown to confer high levels of imunogenicity for those many years. I am not suggesting a trade off between catching the disease early or later in life. I am suggesting the trade off between catching the disease and not ever catching it. None of the choices is a certainty. But the option of never catching chicken pox provides the only choice which reduces the chance of dieing from chicken pox to 0.

  109. January 30, 2012 at 11:59 pm

    stevie calling the kettle black: “And yes, the UK does lag behind the US with it’s lower level of recommended vaccines. It also has a LOWER childhood mortality rate then the US. But these figures don’t jive with your view so you ignore it.”

    According to wiki, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccination_schedule#Country_Specific_Schedules
    The US regularly vaccinates against 15 diseases while the UK regularly vaccinates against 12. The US vaccinates against 25% more diseases.

    Child mortality is indeed slightly different between the two countries as well.
    United Kingdom 5.4
    United States 7.5

    http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=sh_dyn_mort&idim=country:USA&dl=en&hl=en&q=child+mortality#ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=sh_dyn_mort&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=region&idim=country:USA:GBR:DEU&ifdim=region&hl=en&dl=en

    Is this a correlation?

    Well, Germany vaccinates against 13 diseases. It has an child mortality rate of 4.1.
    Australia vaccinates against 14 diseases and has a child mortality rate of 4.9.

    That would seem to be a very weak correlation if any at all.

    Who is ignoring information because it does not confirm his bias, stevie?

  110. January 31, 2012 at 12:08 am

    I know its not my place, but can I just say, Thank you to both of you.

  111. Steve Michaels
    January 31, 2012 at 3:14 am

    I feel for the position you were in and I applaud your efforts. However, you argument about finances falls short with the UK model as once diagnosis is confirmed, the NHS provides necessary treatments without so much as a co-pay. I would like to point out one thing that your case, tragic as it is highlights about vaccine safety. The courts have found that certain genetic mitochondrial dysfunctions vastly increase the risk of serious and permanent vaccine injury. I have also read estimates that this dysfunction is present in as many as 20% of children. It would seem to me that supporting a policy of blanket vaccination without regard to specific diagnosis of potential risk would violate the Hippocratic Oath. To do no harm does not mean that known potential issues should be brushed under the carpet in the interests of ‘public health’, To support a blanket, one size fits all policy, is to basically call every child with the mitochondrial disorder cannon fodder. I find that abhorrent.

  112. Chris
    January 31, 2012 at 3:17 am

    Mr. Michaels:

    I have also read estimates that this dysfunction is present in as many as 20% of children.

    Citation needed. A real one.

  113. lilady
    January 31, 2012 at 4:23 am

    Steve: are you inferring that my deceased disabled son had a mitochondrial disorder? Well you are wrong. The NIH funded a grant to investigate the gene(s) responsible for his genetic disorder and a few months before his death the genes were identified.

    I suppose you are referring to Hannah Poling who was compensated by the Vaccine Court in the United States; she had a mitochondrial disorder. The court determined that the fever that developed after immunization caused the onset of epilepsy. You might also do some research on mitochondrial disorders to find that any fever associated with any childhood illness, can and does trigger epilepsy in these genetically vulnerable children. It was only happenstance that the first high fever that Hannah experienced was associated with immunization.

    The vaccine court in the United States has a table of injuries that are “covered” for reimbursement. Hannah “qualified” because her fever/onset of epilepsy fell within the 15 day period following immunization. In spite of what you might read on notorious anti-vax websites, parents do have the option of suing a vaccine manufacturer directly in a civil court…where the burden of proof is much higher. Most parents seek remuneration in the Vaccine Court because of the far lower burden of proof.

    Steve, I really doubt that the NHS would provide the intensive (4 times weekly) physical therapy that my son required to prevent joint contractures. My son received therapy twice weekly from his day program provider and I funded the other therapies.

    You have again smeared the nursing profession by your vicious inference that I or any other public health nurse would ever immunize a child who would be put at risk by the vaccine. You are aware, aren’t you, that each child is screened for any pre-existing medical condition, such as disease related or treatment related immune suppression for live vaccines and a history of a severe allergic reaction to a vaccine component, before an immunization is given? You are aware, aren’t you, that parents who “opt out” of immunizations are free-riders, who depend on the herd immunity effect, to protect their children from some deadly diseases?

    If you ever provided medical or nursing care to a youngster with invasive bacterial meningitis or septicemia, or cared for a child with amputated limbs and major organ failure due to a vaccine-preventable disease, you would have a different view of the benefits of vaccines.

    Now how about that study from a peer reviewed medical journal that Chris requested, about what you read somewhere that mitochondrial disorders are present in 20 % of children.

  114. January 31, 2012 at 9:57 am

    “with[in] the UK model… once diagnosis is confirmed, the NHS provides necessary treatments without so much as a co-pay.”
    Bollocks
    Tell that to the mother of a little girl with brain damaged and cerebral palsey who needs physio and speech therapy and gets each once a month because she can’t take up her place in special school becuase of health and safety issues in transporting her there – she’s on a waiting list for a wheel chair.

    Tell that to a parent whose child has just been diagnosed with autism and gets seen by a speech therapist once every 6-8 weeks and is put on a year long waiting list for occupational therapy. That mum will know (or be told) that applied behavioural analysis or pivitoal response therapy or intensive interaction therapy have been shown to help a great many autistic kids but you can’t have it – it’s not funded and the NHS has few people with any training in it. My son gets a form of PRT which would normally cost £25,000 because we searched for researchers and got him on a study offering it – taking the chance he would be in the contro group and not get it.

    Tell it to the parents of an autistic child who needs physio and speech therapy to help with his eating and drinking and core stability who’ve been told he can’t have it.

    Do you want a longer list? I really could go on.

  115. January 31, 2012 at 10:58 am

    xx

  116. January 31, 2012 at 11:09 am

    In the space of one thread Steve has gone from lawyer to accountant to politician and now a doctor! All I’m convinced of is that he is an ignorant and vile little man.

  117. January 31, 2012 at 12:54 pm

    please excuse all the typos – tired as a bear!

  118. Steve Michaels
    January 31, 2012 at 3:15 pm

    As would be said to me if I did what you were doing….. Anecdotes do not constitute proof of anything. If you have as many problems as you say, than you either have a rubbish GP who is not giving proper referrals or your Trust is very poorly run, or both.

  119. Steve Michaels
    January 31, 2012 at 3:20 pm

    Thank you for educating me. I mentioned that there were benefits to be had for claiming disability. You educated me that there was a lot more on offer than I was aware. Then you call me an accountant when you obviously know the system better than I. Not sure about the politician thing. As far as the doctor thing goes, I make no such claim. This is simply a straw man argument to set the stage for a rude, vicious and personal ad hominem attack. Such things only lower your standing in the eyes of a neutral observer. You have done very little other than call me names.

  120. Steve Michaels
    January 31, 2012 at 3:30 pm

    “Steve: are you inferring that my deceased disabled son had a mitochondrial disorder? Well you are wrong. The NIH funded a grant to investigate the gene(s) responsible for his genetic disorder and a few months before his death the genes were identified.”

    I made no such claim. I merely pointed out that there are known medical conditions which are counter indicative of vaccination. Your comment is simply putting words in my mouth. You stated early on that he had a genetic disorder. I never assumed that it was mitochondrial or otherwise. Perhaps a paragraph break would have made it clear that I was moving on to a different point.

    “You might also do some research on mitochondrial disorders to find that any fever associated with any childhood illness, can and does trigger epilepsy in these genetically vulnerable children. It was only happenstance that the first high fever that Hannah experienced was associated with immunization. ”

    And the second most common adverse reaction to vaccines, after local soreness is HIGH FEVER! So thank you for admitting that vaccines can and do put these children at risk.

    “You have again smeared the nursing profession by your vicious inference that I or any other public health nurse would ever immunize a child who would be put at risk by the vaccine. You are aware, aren’t you, that each child is screened for any pre-existing medical condition, such as disease related or treatment related immune suppression for live vaccines and a history of a severe allergic reaction to a vaccine component, before an immunization is given?”

    Not in the UK! A friend of mine who’s oldest son regressed after vaccination decided to continue with vaccinating her younger son. She chose, with her doctor’s advice, to only have one jab per visit and space out the visits. Her youngest son showed severe local irritation and swelling on his last visit, so she postponed the next visit for 30 days. Even after reporting the severe reaction to the most recent jab, the nurse tried to administer multiple jabs and only backed down when the father stepped in. Were any tests conducted? No. In fact, considering that the Hep vaccine is given at birth, it is impossible to claim that there is ANY screening before vaccination commences.

  121. cia parker
    January 31, 2012 at 4:11 pm

    Thank you, autismum, I appreciate your kindness. I really am in this battle with the desire to protect children as well as adults from harm. I believe very sincerely that the vaccines are more dangerous than the vaccine-preventable diseases, and I’ve done a lot of research on this issue since I realized my daughter had autism. I’m willing to converse with those who hold a different sincere view, if they can leave the sarcasm and attacks aside. Thank you again for your comment.

  122. cia parker
    January 31, 2012 at 4:17 pm

    In most cases, measles does not need to be treated by a doctor. In most cases, it’s enought just to have the patient stay in bed in a darkened room and keep them warm and well-hydrated. Vitamin A will lower the small risk of complications, and you should avoid giving any fever reducers such as Tylenol, which greatly increases the rate of fatality (which is somewhere between one in one and three thousand). Kaylenne Batten’s doctor recommended she be given fever reducer. If her parents complied, that would in itself have increased her risk of dying.

  123. January 31, 2012 at 5:04 pm

    Why don’t you just acknowledge that you were wrong to say that Kaylenne died from the flu vaccine, cia parker?

    Who are you to say that her parents killed their child by giving Tylenol on the advice of a physician? Can’t face the fact that you were wrong so you make up another lie?

    And you acknowledge that measles has a mortality rate of 1 in 1 – 3,000, but you still think the vaccine has a greater risk. What is the mortality rate of the vaccine, cia?

  124. January 31, 2012 at 5:16 pm

    You want more than anecdotes to disprove your theory that, ““with[in] the UK model… once diagnosis is confirmed, the NHS provides necessary treatments without so much as a co-pay.”

    http://www.bild.org.uk/humanrights/docs/A%20life%20like%20any%20other%20Vol%201.pdf

    page 13 is particularly interesting and saddening
    and links from this page will take you to the NAS “You Need to Know” campaign

    http://www.autism.org.uk/get-involved/campaign-for-change/our-campaigns/you-need-to-know/the-facts.aspx

    If I were to put up links for how the NHS has failed individuals wilth mental health problems I’d be here all night, so just one:

    http://www.mind.org.uk/blog/4223

    Did I say these were all my issues? Certainly some are.
    My GP is fantastic and wonderfully supportive and knows how to do referrals thank you very much. My NHS Trust is about average for England & Wales.
    What you are implying is, after the suggestion that I somehow gave my son autism so that I could claim benefits for which you have no evidence that I’m entitled is that it is also my fault that I don’t have access to the provision he and others with his condition need because of poor choice of GP or area to live in. You are quite something!
    You tell me where in the UK you can get the 40 hours of ABA, 12 months a year until agreed outcomes are achieved (usually at least 2 years) on the NHS. These are interventions with the greatest chance of success if applied early – i.e. pre-scool. Even at the special school my child attends they cannot afford the staff ratios to put this in place.

  125. lilady
    January 31, 2012 at 5:42 pm

    Hmmm, we have a difference of opinion here about wheelchairs and therapies provided by the NHS for disabled children. Let’s go back over the posts from Steve and from Autismum to see which person is not qualified and which person is qualified, to discuss the NHS and the funding of wheelchairs and therapies for developmental disabled kids:

    Steve…who jumped on the bandwagon with the anti-vaxers about a death of a child after a flu vaccine, who then had to be disabused about simple legal terminology and civil tort practice in the USA, who then accused Autismum of “gaming the system”. Steve, who has absolutely no contact with disabled children and has never assisted parents to get durable medical equipment and therapies in place. Smug Steve who has children who are not disabled and no empathy or compassion for disabled children and their parents. Steve who also is a conspiracist about Big Government, Big Pharma, physicians and nurses.

    Or…

    Autismum…who has actually researched each vaccine, who actually understands immunology and who has knowledge about the diseases that vaccines prevent, who is aware of the rare adverse events associated with each vaccine and who made a simple inquiry about “Patriot’s Nurses” employment. Autismum, who actually has a child with autism and has used her experience and volunteers her time to assist parents of developmentally disabled children to get the NHS to provide a wheelchair and therapies for their child. Autismum…who actually has a blog to provide information and as forum for parents who have disabled kids. Autismum, who has no “agenda” and is not a conspiracist and who appreciates the skill set and competence of physicians and nurses.

  126. January 31, 2012 at 5:52 pm

    I have stated my opinion of you and stand by it

  127. Lizzy
    January 31, 2012 at 6:16 pm

    I am a RNLD. I am in the ‘fortunate’ position to see the effects of the lack of services for children and how they develop into major issues in the adult services thereby costing far more than these interventions would if they were used early.
    there is so much overwhelming evidence to support early intervention and yet the NHS is storing up problems for the adult services.

    intensive interaction is amazing btw! (when it’s used appropriately)

  128. Nathan
    January 31, 2012 at 6:33 pm

    Wait, are you now saying that Kaylenne died of measles and Tylenol? You have entirely lost me.

  129. January 31, 2012 at 8:09 pm

    and it’s brilliant fun – knackering though!

  130. January 31, 2012 at 8:10 pm

    Thank you again xx

  131. February 7, 2012 at 6:15 am

    Steve Michaels :
    once diagnosis is confirmed, the NHS provides necessary treatments without so much as a co-pay.

    I wonder where you live, because it cannot be in the UK.

  132. October 20, 2012 at 10:50 am

    I tend not to drop many comments, but i did a few
    searching and wound up here Vaccination Ethics Come to Question
    as The Patriot Nurse Strikes Again | Shot of Prevention.
    And I actually do have a couple of questions for you if you do not mind.
    Could it be just me or does it look like a few of the comments look like coming from brain dead visitors? :-P And, if you are posting on other social sites, I’d like to follow everything new you have to post. Would you list of the complete urls of your community pages like your Facebook page, twitter feed, or linkedin profile?

  133. Father Time
    January 30, 2013 at 1:28 am

    A quick suggestion: view the 2011 documentary The Greater Good. (It will break your heart.) Then go ahead with vaccinations – if you dare.

  134. Chris
    January 30, 2013 at 1:50 am

    Why? Why are you commenting on an article that is a year old?

    Why should a biased documentary overrule the real scientific evidence?

    Remember, the plural of anecdote is not data, as noted by this review. What make it even funnier is that the film maker of that silly movie was the moderator of a “debate where the anti-vaccine guy presented the most brain dead plot ever used in history (where everyone becomes autistic before girls… which is mathematically impossible).

    Please, “Father Time”, present some real evidence or risked being laughed at.

  135. January 30, 2013 at 8:35 am

    @FT – actually, it breaks my heart when I read about children that die or suffer debilitating side-effects from vaccine preventable diseases. In this day and age, when we have access to the best modern medical care and vaccines, that we still allow our children to suffer (and die) from these diseases is a horrible thing.

  136. Disgusted
    May 4, 2013 at 7:33 pm

    It’s obvious most of the brainwashed who are posting here don’t even know what a vaccination is supposed to do, much less be able to absorb potentially lifesaving information from one who is situated to know what she is talking about. Go ahead and subject your infants to hundred of jabs of poison – just don’t complain when they are mentally or physically damaged as a result of your stubbornness and cultivated stupidity!

  137. Chris
    May 4, 2013 at 8:24 pm

    Disgusted, please tell us what “poison” is in vaccines that is worse than the very real toxins created by the bacterial infections from pertussis, tetanus and diphtheria. Provide verifiable scientific documentation showing anything in the vaccine is more toxic then tetanospasmin.

    And please provide the PubMed indexed study that shows a vaccine causes more harm than the disease. For example one that shows the MMR vaccine causes more harm than measles, a disease that causes encephalitis more than once in a thousand measles cases.

  138. novalox
    May 4, 2013 at 8:52 pm

    @disgusted

    Stay classy, troll, stay classy.

    Also, [citation needed], or we can assume that you do know know what you are talking about.

  139. Billy
    May 7, 2013 at 6:40 pm

    “It’s obvious most of the brainwashed who are posting here don’t even know what a vaccination is supposed to do, much less be able to absorb potentially lifesaving information from one who is situated to know what she is talking about. ”

    Very true, but what else can we do, but keep repeating the truth – surely eventually, the Patriot Nurse and her fans (whom you accurately describe as “brainwashed”) will come around.

    “Go ahead and subject your infants to hundred of jabs of poison – just don’t complain when they are mentally or physically damaged as a result of your stubbornness and cultivated stupidity!”

    Now this is unnecessary. The “biomedical” crowd uses dangerous chemicals in their misguided attempts to treat the children unfortunate enough to be in their care, but that’s no reason to celebrate the damage they are causing to those poor innocents. You should be ashamed of yourself.

  140. Alyce Williams
    July 5, 2013 at 11:05 am

    Wow! You really lack so much knowledge on this matter!! I have done over 5 years of research and KNOW that vaccines have NO affect on the sicknesses they claim to! They only harm! You are rude and its a shame you are so brainwashed ! One piece of advice.. Think for yourself, do you’re own research instead of listening to mainstream media! Those of us who are against these poisons they call vaccines are the ones who ask questions and find answers! Knowledge is power and you are very weak!

  141. Chris
    July 5, 2013 at 1:06 pm

    You are welcome to share that research, Ms. Williams. It only took you a year to find this article, and I am sure you are reading all of the more recent articles.

    The following table is from American census data for much of the twentieth century. Please explain with verifiable scientific evidence why the incidence of measles fell 90% between 1960 and 1970. Do not mention any other disease, any other country (some think England and Wales are American states), any other decade, and definitely do not mention deaths (mortality).
    From http://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

  142. Subie
    July 5, 2013 at 4:30 pm

    Apparently, the dramatic decrease in measles incidence is only attributed to “clinical” confirmation. What is not being reported is subclinical measles infection which is very common amongst recently vaccinated.

  143. Lawrence
    July 5, 2013 at 5:36 pm

    Oh looky, thingy- troll is back….

  144. Kate
    July 5, 2013 at 10:35 pm

    Why may no one not mention the extremely low death rate from measles in England and Wales for many decades when there was still a lot of it around? If the death rate in other countries is not relevant, why do you keep bringing up the deaths from measles of malnourished children in Africa?

  145. Gray Falcon
    July 5, 2013 at 10:55 pm

    Kate, we didn’t bring up deaths in Africa, you did. Measles can have long-term effects besides death, and there is no possible excuse for you not to know that.

  146. novalox
    July 5, 2013 at 11:45 pm

    @kate

    And you do know that measles can have some serious complications, including pneumonia, encephalitis, and SSPE (subacute sclerosing panencephalitis).

    From the CDC: http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/complications.html

    SSPE is a very rare, but fatal degenerative disease of the central nervous system that results from a measles virus infection acquired earlier in life. Analysis of data from an outbreak of measles in the United States during 1989-1991 suggests a rate of 4-11 cases of SSPE per 100,000 cases of measles. A risk factor for developing this disease is measles infection at an early age. Studies in the United Kingdom indicate that 18 out of every 100,000 people who get measles when they are less than a year old will develop SSPE. This is compared to 1.1 per 100,000 in those infected after 5 years of age. On average, the symptoms of SSPE begin 7 to 10 years after measles infection, but they can appear anytime from 1 month to 27 years after infection.
    The first signs of SSPE may be changes in personality, a gradual onset of mental deterioration and myoclonia (muscle spasms or jerks). The diagnosis of SSPE is based on signs and symptoms and on test results, such as typical changes observed in electroencephalographs, an elevated anti-measles antibody (IgG) in the serum and cerebrospinal fluid, and typical histologic findings in brain biopsy tissue.
    SSPE progresses in stages, which can vary from person to person. In some cases, the cognitive decline may continue for years before progression to more severe neuromuscular disorders are observed, and thus the diagnosis may be delayed or missed. There are reports of remission and some treatments are available; however, the average survival is one to two years.
    All of the genetic analyses of viral material derived from brain tissue of SSPE patients have revealed sequences of wild-type measles virus, never vaccine virus. There is no evidence that measles vaccine can cause SSPE. Cases of SSPE in patients who have a history of measles vaccination but no knowledge of having had measles either had an undiagnosed rash illness or possibly a mild measles infection early in life due to the presence of maternal antibody. Therefore, physicians should consider SSPE in the differential diagnosis of encephalitis even when the patient does not have a history of measles.

  147. Chris
    July 5, 2013 at 11:59 pm

    Kate:

    Why may no one not mention the extremely low death rate from measles in England and Wales for many decades when there was still a lot of it around?

    Who mentioned Africa? Please reference the comment that referenced “measles of malnourished children in Africa” from someone other than yourself. Then go and read the more recent this more recent article here.

    Anyway, why should there be any death rate from measles when it is easily prevented? Especially since measles also causes permanent disabilities like deafness, blindness, paralysis and permanent neurological damage. Encephalitis is not a joke.

    Now, Kate, you get to answer the question I gave to Ms. Williams. I hope you will remember that neither England nor Wales are part of the United States of America. And need I remind you that I never mentioned Africa, since that continent is also not part of the USA? Do tell us why measles fell 90% in the USA between 1960 and 1970.

  148. July 6, 2013 at 8:03 am

    @Chris – not to mention that we’ve eradicated domestic measles in the US – the cases we’ve had over the past couple of decades have been entirely brought in from overseas…..

  149. Subie
    July 6, 2013 at 11:05 am

    Is Chris implying subclinical measles infection in the recently vaccinated not measles? How about the measles outbreak in a highly vaccinated population? Who do you think were responsible for the outbreak Lawrence?

  150. Chris
    July 6, 2013 at 12:31 pm

    Go away Thingie.

  151. Subie
    July 6, 2013 at 2:09 pm

    I see. So it’s either Chris intentionally disregards subclinical measles infection or she’s totally clueless about it. Why I am not surprised she doesn’t even know the implication of her chart.

  152. July 6, 2013 at 2:13 pm

    @insano-troll – getting around your ban again? Go away.

  153. Chris
    July 6, 2013 at 3:53 pm

    Thingy, you don’t even make sense. Please re-read this blog’s comment policy:

    http://shotofprevention.com/about/comment-policy/

    Especially the following two:
    personal attacks of any kind;
    unsupported accusations;

    And, Ms. Williams, I am waiting for you to answer my question.

  154. Subie
    July 7, 2013 at 1:55 am

    I wasn’t falsely accusing you. I was just saying that you are an infection promoter Chris. ”
    INTERPRETATION: Increased antibody titre after subclinical measles may be common in vaccinated children in West Africa where the intensity of exposure is high. As measles vaccination coverage increases, the circulation of wild measles will decrease, and vaccine-induced antibody is less likely to be boosted. Thus, new epidemics, albeit milder in form, may occur in vaccinated areas which should be recognised in campaigns to eradicate measles.”

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/10023894/

  155. Chris
    July 7, 2013 at 2:22 am

    “I wasn’t falsely accusing you. I was just saying that you are an infection promoter Chris.”

    That is both:
    personal attacks of any kind;
    unsupported accusations;

    And for the record, Thingy, West Africa is not in the USA. Please go away and real psychiatric help.

  156. Subie
    July 7, 2013 at 11:40 am

    It all about THE measles Chris. Oh so you want something close to home. Alrighty then.

    Measles Outbreak in a Fully Immunized Secondary-School Population

    “We conclude that outbreaks of measles can occur in secondary schools, even when more than 99 percent of the students have been vaccinated and more than 95 percent are immune. (N Engl J Med 1987; 316:771–4.)”

    http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJM198703263161303

    See you really are an infection promoter Chris.

  157. Chris
    July 7, 2013 at 12:14 pm

    Thingy, you have posted the reason why children are given two MMR vaccines. And why studies from before a policy change has been made are no longer relevant.

    For lurkers, here is why we do not give Thingy (Subie here) any thought, and why she is often banned, she does not live in reality:

    Why should I let the child walk on the dirt when there is a dry concrete pavement next to it? A toddler would readily know which is the safe path to take even without the knowledge of C. tetani, but I am just fascinated how parents are offering very poor choices (or lack thereof).

    Ms. Williams, have you come up with an answer yet?

  158. Subie
    July 7, 2013 at 12:32 pm

    Thingy, you have posted the reason why children are given two MMR vaccines. And why studies from before a policy change has been made are no longer relevant.

    That is demonstrably false Chris. The reason the second dose of measles vaccine was recommended for the previously vaccinated ( not the unvaccinated) is because they were the source of these large outbreaks in a highly vaccinated population. The CDC had openly admitted this adverse event (vaccine failure) and you just made yourself irrelevant.

    In addition to the increase in cases among unvaccinated persons, a large number of cases were reported among persons who were appropriately vaccinated. Approximately 2%-5% of persons who receive a single dose of measles vaccine at greater than or equal to 15 months of age will not develop protective immunity (i.e., vaccine failure). If measles virus circulates at relatively low levels, as occurred from 1981 through 1988, then the risk of measles among persons who fail to respond to a single dose of vaccine will be small and these persons will accumulate in the population. Consequently, when measles virus is introduced into environments where large numbers of vaccinated persons congregate (e.g., schools or colleges), the relatively few susceptible persons may be sufficient to sustain transmission and outbreaks may occur. In order to reduce this pool of susceptible persons resulting from vaccine failure, the Immunization Practices Advisory Committee (ACIP) has recommended a second dose of vaccine for groups of persons at high risk for measles, including new entrants to schools and colleges and other institutions for post-high school education (7). If fully implemented, this strategy should eventually eliminate measles outbreaks in these settings. In the meantime, aggressive outbreak control in school-based outbreaks with revaccination of persons at risk will continue to be necessary (7).

    http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00001632.htm

  159. Chris
    July 7, 2013 at 1:19 pm

    Ms. Williams, why did the incidence of measles in the USA fall 90% between 1960 and 1970? Are you seriously going to wait a full year to respond?

  160. July 7, 2013 at 1:48 pm

    @Chris – ignore insano-troll, I’ve already let Christine know someone left the door to the nuthouse open again….

  161. Subie
    July 7, 2013 at 2:05 pm

    You’ve been told repeatedly in the past but you still choose to remain adamant. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC414019/pdf/bactrev00057-0102.pdf

    Measles has long been recognized as one of the “inevitable traumas of childhood” (356). Although the advent of a successful vaccination program during the past decade has greatly reduced the incidence of “clinical” measles infections (24, 180, 198), research on measles virus has recently received increased attention.

    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/01/14/andrew-wakefield-great-science-fraud/#comment-177037

  162. Gray Falcon
    July 7, 2013 at 2:56 pm

    Some readers may wonder what “Subie”‘s point is, seeing that at no point did that article refer to the vaccination as an infection. The answer is simple, she believes the following:

    1) I am a genius, therefore anything I think or say must be brilliant.
    2) I know I am a genius, because if I weren’t one, how could I say so many brilliant things?

  163. Subie
    July 7, 2013 at 3:26 pm

    You can deny it all you want Gray but serological confirmation does not lie.

    The presence of IgM is generally accepted as evidence of primary measles infection (by wild virus or vaccine).

    http://www.measlesrubellainitiative.org/mi-files/Tools/Guidelines/WHO/Manual%20for%20the%20Laboratory%20Diagnosis%20of%20Measles%20Virus%20Infection.pdf

  164. Gray Falcon
    July 7, 2013 at 3:45 pm

    At no point did that article say that the vaccine always caused a primary infection. Read only the words that are there, and no more.

  165. July 7, 2013 at 4:01 pm

    @Gray – actually, I like this particular section….otherwise, insano-troll doesn’t live on the same planet as the rest of us….

    1.3 Feasibility of eradication
    Measles is considered an eradicable disease due to the single serotype, effective
    vaccine, lack of naturally occurring non-human reservoirs and high clinical expression
    of the disease. The high communicability of measles infection, its resemblance in the
    prodromal stage to other febrile rash diseases, and the occasional occurrence of
    asymptomatic and non-classical cases are seen as challenges which can be surmounted.
    Some efforts are currently being directed towards the elimination of measles, defined
    as the sustained interruption of transmission in a sizeable geographic area with the
    continuation of vaccination to guard against reintroduction. Global eradication will
    be based on successful elimination in all countries.

  166. Subie
    July 7, 2013 at 4:16 pm

    Thanks for not arguing Gray that measles vaccine causes primary measles infection. You just made it easier for me.

  167. Gray Falcon
    July 7, 2013 at 4:22 pm

    Subie doesn’t understand the concept of probability. One could, on rare occasions, be hit by a car on the sidewalk. One is very likely to be hit by a car walking in the street. Which is safer?

    Likewise, the vaccine could cause, on rare occasions, an infection. The virus is far more likely to cause an infection. Which is safer? If one cannot comprehend this concept, one should go back to third grade.

  168. Subie
    July 7, 2013 at 4:36 pm

    So Gray is suggesting that vaccination is a safer way (than natural infection) to promote primary measles infection. I see.

    Measles vaccine is a live replicating vaccine. Infection and replication in the host is a MUST to develop a primary immune response. Saying otherwise would be a sign of cluelessness.

  169. July 7, 2013 at 4:40 pm

    @Gray – ignore insano-troll, as I would expect the ban hammer to fall fairly soon (I’m sure it took advantage of the holiday weekend to get around Christine’s original ban).

  170. dingo199
    July 7, 2013 at 4:51 pm

    Play it your way, thingie.

    I fully endorse and support “infection promotion”, when that “infection” is entirely harmless to the host and gives rise to immunity from “reinfection” with a dangerous strain of the infection.

    Vaccination is wonderful! A rose by any other name smells as sweet, after all.

  171. K
    July 7, 2013 at 4:56 pm
  172. July 7, 2013 at 5:02 pm

    Seriously Ms. Parker? Another sockpuppet? Please get help.

  173. Subie
    July 7, 2013 at 5:10 pm

    You are supposed to prevent measles NOT promote it, dingo199. Please do mind your place.

  174. Subie
    July 7, 2013 at 5:27 pm

    And one more thing dingo, not only the recently vaccinated had primary measles infection caused by the vaccine, the previously vaccinated who were considered to be immune to measles had shown susceptibility to measles reinfection (vaccine failure). And because of their bragging numbers in a highly vaccinated population, the have caused to sustain measles transmission to other susceptibles thus creating large outbreaks.

  175. July 7, 2013 at 5:50 pm

    @Dingo – please ignore insano-troll….her time on the internet should be just about over & she’ll be back in the asylum shortly….

  176. Seb
    July 7, 2013 at 9:01 pm

    Dingo,
    Most SSPE these days is caused by the measles vaccine: there’s a special registry for recording cases of this fatal disease.

  177. Chris
    July 7, 2013 at 9:22 pm

    Thingy (Seb), you are now lying, again. Which is why you were kept in the spam queue here.

    Go away, Thingy.

    For lurkers:
    J Infect Dis. 2005 Nov 15;192(10):1686-93.
    Subacute sclerosing panencephalitis: more cases of this fatal disease are prevented by measles immunization than was previously recognized.

  178. dingo199
    July 8, 2013 at 4:34 am

    Subie :You are supposed to prevent measles NOT promote it, dingo199. Please do mind your place.

    But I thought mealses was a harmless entity, a mere trivial rite of childhood passage, a footnote on the journey to adulthood, a mere flea bite on the hide of a buffalo?????

    I promote the infection of children with a harmless strain of measles, so that they can avoid catching the full-blown disease (which does have many complications, btw). What can be wrong with that? Surely you must agree? You are the one who wants kids to get infected, surely, so lets give them harmless infections that generate immunity from the hprrors of the full blown disease!

    Makes sense to me.
    Great idea thingie, well done!!

  179. Christine Vara
    July 8, 2013 at 9:18 am

    A quick evaluation by the admin regarding the identity of “Seb” reveals that this person has commented on this blog 45 times since March, 2013 using 17 different names to include Val, Addie, K, Valentia, Dee, Seb, Cara, Tamar, George, Talin, Skiler, Beth, Maritza, Paul, Esther, Matt and Christie. There is simply no logical reason for this type of behavior. Unfortunately, this person’s irrational and childish conduct doesn’t add to the conversation, but interferes with an open and honest exchange of ideas, which is why we reserve the right to restrict their further participation in this forum.

  180. Subu
    July 8, 2013 at 10:13 am

    I promote the infection of children with a harmless strain of measles, so that they can avoid catching the full-blown disease (which does have many complications, btw).

    Firstly, there is no such thing as a harmless strain of measles. Secondly, persons who are vaccinated are still susceptible to measles reinfection. Yeah why don’t you promote your harmless vaccination to those children who are otherwise cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons.

    BTW, who would believe you?

  181. dingo199
    July 8, 2013 at 10:54 am

    Subu :

    I promote the infection of children with a harmless strain of measles, so that they can avoid catching the full-blown disease (which does have many complications, btw).

    Firstly, there is no such thing as a harmless strain of measles.
    BTW, who would believe you?

    Subu :

    I promote the infection of children with a harmless strain of measles, so that they can avoid catching the full-blown disease (which does have many complications, btw).

    No such thing as a harmless strain of measles???

    So Subu, Val, Addie, K, Valentia, Dee, Seb, Cara, Tamar, George, Talin, Skiler, Beth, Maritza, Paul, Esther, Matt, Christie or whatever your name is, you agree measles is harmful.
    Right. We are making progress.

    Do you also accept that the “vaccine” strain of measles is less harmful and damaging than the “wild strain”???

    If not, why not (citations needed, with reference to all the complications that arise from natural wild-type measles).

  182. Subu
    July 8, 2013 at 11:45 am

    That’s why i do NOT promote measles infection by any means either natural infection or vaccination. Do you have any problem with that? No problem, good. End of the story.

  183. Gray Falcon
    July 8, 2013 at 11:54 am

    I should note that when Th1Th2 was asked about natural measles infections, she would go into one of two different patterns:
    1) Assume the asker was talking about deliberate infection.
    2) Come up with utterly nonsensical prevention methods, such as quarantining an entire city.

    It is also worth noting that Th1Th2 cannot comprehend the most basic logical constructs. When given the following:
    1) A solution she suggested using was to use the methods used in the Middle Ages to deal with rhinderpest.
    2) The solution she suggested, in the source she gave, involved slaughtering infected and exposed livestock.
    She could not reach the conclusion:
    3) Her suggestion would requiring the mass killing of infected people.

  184. July 8, 2013 at 11:55 am

    And yet – insano troll have never hazarded to grace us with what mechanisms should be utilized to avoid the spread of one of the most contagious diseases on the planet (to the extent that over 95% of the population could expect to become infected before age 15)…..

    Go away insano-troll, your constant rantings are just annoying.

  185. July 8, 2013 at 11:56 am

    @Gray – I remember that, in fact, it was quoted here on this very blog. Insano-troll insisted that those methods were effective in the past, thus they should be put back into effect….though if I remember correctly, insano-troll ducked out before truly answering the question of methods.

  186. Subu
    July 8, 2013 at 12:12 pm

    So who promoted rinderpest in the past? If you can asnwer that then you’ll know why I do NOT promote measles.

    It’s your job anyway, not mine.

  187. Subu
    July 8, 2013 at 12:21 pm

    And by logical construct, rinderpest is a childhood disease. Nice try again Gray-no-matter.

  188. Gray Falcon
    July 8, 2013 at 12:24 pm

    #187: And this is why everyone calls her insane: She makes statements that can only be explained by schizophrenia.

  189. Subu
    July 8, 2013 at 12:25 pm

    That was your logical construct Gray.

  190. July 8, 2013 at 12:26 pm

    @Gray – she definitely doesn’t live in the same reality or even the same planet as the rest of us….at least she annoys antivaxxers (she was banned at AoA too) as much as anyone else.

  191. Gray Falcon
    July 8, 2013 at 12:28 pm

    I wasn’t talking to you, Th1Th2. Unless you learn what the word “analogy” means, we have nothing to discuss.

  192. Subu
    July 8, 2013 at 12:31 pm

    You created a false analogy because you have nothing to discuss. Pwned.

  193. July 8, 2013 at 12:59 pm

    @Gray – ignore her, I doubt even she understands the insane stuff she posts….

  194. July 8, 2013 at 2:21 pm

    @Gray – re-reading what you wrote, it wasn’t even an analogy….it was a discussion of disease eradication, so insano’s response is even less coherent (if that is even possible).

  195. Gray Falcon
    July 8, 2013 at 3:27 pm

    Good point, Lawrence. I did mention analogies, though, as a reference to her other blunders. Truth be told, she’s only really interesting as a study in abnormal psychology.

  196. Angie
    July 8, 2013 at 3:32 pm

    Reading these comments, I was wondering why you are acting as though measles were the Black Plague. Contagious yes, deadly no, except in a very small number of cases. Close to 100% get it and then get well, with no problems.

  197. July 8, 2013 at 3:39 pm

    @Angie – Measles isn’t benign, as it can have very serious side-effects, including SSPE (see below):

    http://justthevax.blogspot.com/2013/06/micha-is-dead.html

    Not to mention that Measles is one of the most contagious diseases on the planet & still kills over 150,000 people per year, globally (and many more suffering from complications from the disease).

    I don’t think you really know what you are talking about…..

  198. July 8, 2013 at 3:50 pm

    @Angie – and this:

    http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/complications.html

    http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Measles/Pages/Complications.aspx

    And this:

    http://www.who.int/immunization_monitoring/diseases/en/

    Representing the deaths from all VPDs worldwide – which is 17% of the total child mortality (1.5million deaths)

    So, tell us again why we shouldn’t be concerned?

  199. Subu
    July 8, 2013 at 3:59 pm

    Because Gray et al cannot justify why they are infection promoters, he then resorted to strawman by wrongly analogizing rinderpest to measles, cattles to children and diseased animals to infected people, therefore, “requiring mass killing of infected people.”

    Are there some more logical fallacies you’d like to share Gray?

  200. Subu
    July 8, 2013 at 4:13 pm

    And of course, the measles vaccine can be a “safer” way to promote SSPE, than wild measles.

    Based on estimated nationwide measles vaccine distribution, the association of SSPE cases to measles vaccination is about one case per million vaccine doses distributed. This is far less than the association with infection with wild-type measles, 6-22 cases of SSPE per million cases of measles.

    http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/m/mmr_ii/mmr_ii_pi.pdf

  201. July 8, 2013 at 4:17 pm

    Go away insano-troll.

  202. Chris
    July 8, 2013 at 4:21 pm

    Lawrence, the “measles only kills a little” is a Cia classic. Obviously she doesn’t care about the more that became permanently disabled. She can be ignored, and banned again.

  203. July 8, 2013 at 4:23 pm

    @Chris – right, that must be Ms Parker (again).

    Our insano-troll also didn’t quote the rest of that paragraph:

    The results of a retrospective case-controlled study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention suggest that the overall effect of measles vaccine has been to protect against SSPE by preventing measles with its inherent higher risk of SSPE.

    I wonder why? Besides the fact that she’s insane and all, I mean.

  204. Subu
    July 8, 2013 at 4:28 pm

    Preventing measles by measles vaccination that causes primary measles infection? Why I am not surprised provaxers are clueless about SSPE. Try again Lawrence.

  205. July 8, 2013 at 4:32 pm

    Again, insano-troll refuses to articulate exactly how she would prevent the spread of one of the most contagious diseases on the planet, that still kills over 100,000 people per year….other than the discussion about rinderpest, where she articulated her support for mass killing of infected individuals to prevent disease spread…….isn’t that right, insano-troll?

  206. Subu
    July 8, 2013 at 4:33 pm

    I do NOT support conclusions derived from false analogies, do you Lawrence?

  207. July 8, 2013 at 4:35 pm

    @insano-troll – I am beginning to doubt that you understand English, since that isn’t what I asked nor what was said.

  208. Subu
    July 8, 2013 at 4:40 pm

    Why would someone promote mass killing of infected people Lawrence? You tell me.

  209. Gray Falcon
    July 8, 2013 at 4:46 pm

    Th1Th2, you were the one who suggested doing so. You pointed out an article about rhinderpest control in the Middle Ages, and suggested we use the same methods for dealing with other diseases like measles. Or do you not remember?

  210. July 8, 2013 at 5:03 pm

    @Gray – I’m really surprised she doesn’t remember that, given how highly she touted that article as “proper disease control.”

  211. Lancisi
    July 8, 2013 at 5:53 pm

    What I have suggested before was the use of isolation, exclusion and quarantine of acutely infected children with measles including the recently vaccinated to protect other susceptible from catching transmission-based infection. In reference to rinderpest, these control measures were the reason rinderpest was first eradicated long before the advent of the vaccine. Do we have any problem with that?

  212. July 8, 2013 at 6:12 pm

    Still trying to get around your ban, insane troll?

  213. July 8, 2013 at 7:02 pm

    And no way to actually prevent or eradicate the disease in question either…….really pathetic.

    Go away insane troll…..

  214. Gray Falcon
    July 8, 2013 at 7:41 pm

    An actual quote from Lancisi: “it is better to kill all sick and suspect animals, instead of allowing the disease to spread in order to have enough time and the honour to discover a specific treatment that is often searched for without any success”.

  215. maverick
    July 29, 2013 at 4:23 am

    i actually researched this carefully because i also didn’t want to be vaccinated, risking many in-cureable auto-immune illnesses for the chance of increased temporary immunity to one illness, that it is most likely that if i did contract it i would heal in 6weeks with lifelong natural immunity. As a scientist and health carer it is never enough for me to hear that something ‘may’ work, or ‘may’ be bad. If i have concerns i want to form my own opinion with my own resreached from published science papers, and to check the length of time and a range and backers of these studies. I do not think there is conspiracy, but there is a lot of ignorance in both camps. I do think it is an outrage that that healkthcare workers are bullied into these vaccinations. Havin also researched the law i realised that there actually isn’t any that can insist upon this for the role, however, you still stand to lose your study or work placement going through the legal procedures to protect your rights. There is little recourse and little choice, and this must be changed. Healthcare is about protection, but the truth and law must be more visible for staff and patients alike to make their choices on an informed basis. I thought i knew a lot, and then i reserached and several veils were schockingly lifted. there is more than one way to protect yourself and others, and everyone should have the right to choose. In fact legally they do in this country, but they are bullied to feel they don’t! I haven’t heard the original video and i don’t care. if its not scientifically backed it doesn’t interest me. Equally this ‘diatribe’ to quote back, takes a derrogatory tone without backing its superior overtones in any way, which is just what it accuses the other nurse of doing. Opinion is one thing, but without fact they cannot help you, whichever camp you’re in, adn everyone has the right to their own opinion, this is why i give none of my own. i will say only this. if you have doubts, research! check the validity, longevity, range and backing of the published facts. stand up for your choice with science and law, but always stand up for yourself! do not bully or pressure others to doing what you believe is right in the same vein!

  216. July 29, 2013 at 5:38 am

    @maverick – actually, plenty of evidence has been cited in this thread, which show that vaccinations are very effective & also extremely safe, when compared to the diseases that they prevent, which can be extremely dangerous and also cause severe adverse reactions at a rate much higher (by a magnitude or more) than vaccines.

    Even the Cochran Report states that the Influenza vaccine is one of the safest vaccines on the market, with an extremely low rate of reactions. If you are such a big fan of research, please show your research that states that vaccines are linked to “in-cureable auto-immune illnesses for the chance of increased temporary immunity to one illness, that it is most likely that if i did contract it i would heal in 6weeks with lifelong natural immunity”

    Which statement, of course, makes even less sense when talking about the Flu…..so, citations please.

  217. novalox
    July 29, 2013 at 3:53 pm

    @maverick

    [citation needed]

  218. maverick
    July 30, 2013 at 4:56 am

    Lawrence, I didn’t ever suggest that no evidence had been cited in this thread, nor did i offer an opinion on vaccination (deliberately!) either way, only that i had concerns that inspired me to research further. In the same way i haven’t made any citations because i am not trying a prove a point scientifically with my post, nor was i refering to a flu vaccine. The vaccine i was refering to is irrelevant to my point so i deliberately didn’t mention that either.

    There are risks of complications with illnesses, there are risks of complications with vaccines. The only point i was trying to make is the weighing up of these risks should be based on well researched information, and most importantly, a matter of personal choice. Unlike many on this thread it is not my intention to convert anyone one way or the other, only to suggest that they take some time to weigh up the risks with really good research and stand up for their right to choose, whether they decide to vaccinate or not. In the end everyone wants to protect themselves, how they choose to do that will vary, but hopefully that decision will be based on well researched, impartial and published scientific studies, which are not as easy to come by as they should be, but can be found. I am sure you have done your own research and if you are happy with it then great. Pro-choice!

  219. Chris
    July 30, 2013 at 12:27 pm

    “Pro-choice!”

    My choice as a parent of someone who had surgery, was to have it where vaccination is mandatory for all who come into contact with patients.

    “There are risks of complications with illnesses, there are risks of complications with vaccines.”

    The real research shows that the vaccine is always safer than the disease, and high vaccination rates reduce the spread of disease. If you have anything that is contrary to that conclusion, please present the PubMed indexed study by a reputable qualified researcher. And it must show the relative risk, not just some symptom may occur.

  220. novalox
    July 30, 2013 at 1:30 pm

    @maverick

    You do know that the risk for vaccines are a whole lot less than that of the diseases that they help to prevent, right?

    But since you are pushing your assertions, [citation needed].

  221. maverick
    August 1, 2013 at 5:11 am

    i am not pushing my assertions novalox, only you are doing that! I mentioned that i had concerns that the risks outweighed the benefits which inspired me to research very thoroughly, i never mentioned my conclusions. I think everyone that is interested in finding out should do the same. if you are not interested in finding out then you have no problem. if you already have, then good for you. Make up your own mind it’s yours and so is your body! i think a lot of people on this thread are more interested in winning an argument than they are in their health, and that fine, but since i’m not one of them this’ll be my last.

  222. Gray Falcon
    August 1, 2013 at 8:25 am

    Maverick, are you aware that diseases can spread? When someone makes a decision, they are not just putting their own body on the line.

  223. novalox
    August 1, 2013 at 4:44 pm

    @maverick

    Again, [citation needed], since you made the assertions.

    Otherwise, why should anyone believe you, since your opinion flies in the face of actual science.

  1. January 26, 2012 at 3:26 am
  2. February 1, 2012 at 7:37 pm
  3. February 4, 2012 at 2:19 pm
  4. February 4, 2012 at 2:21 pm
  5. February 13, 2012 at 11:33 am
Comments are closed.
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 386 other followers