Family’s Exposure to Measles Reveals Importance of Herd Immunity
Feb 09, 2015

After being notified that he and his family were exposed to measles, Dr. Tim Jacks signed on to the family’s online CaringBridge journal to vent his frustration. His 3-year-old daughter Maggie is fighting acute lymphoblastic leukemia (blood cancer) and as a result has a compromised immune system.  His 10-month-old son Eli received all his recommended vaccines, but is too young for his first dose of MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccine. The children were with their mother at a Phoenix Children’s Hospital clinic when they were exposed to measles. Frustrated and concerned, Dr. Jacks wrote a journal entry as though he was speaking directly to the person who was responsible for putting his family at risk. The next day, Kid Nurse reprinted the story and Dr. Jacks and his wife were soon being interviewed by various national news outlets, to include CNN, FoxNews as seen here:

Dr. Tim Jacks, DO, FAAP is board certified by the American Board of Pediatrics and a fellow of the American Academy of Pediatrics. As an Every Child By Two Immunization Champion, Dr. Jacks has given us permission to share his story here on Shot of Prevention, as well as on our Vaccinate Your Family website.  Every Child By Two (now Vaccinate Your Family) also invited him to present testimony in front of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on The Reemergence of Vaccine-Preventable Disease: Exploring the Public Health Successes and Challenges at 10am on Tuesday, February 10, 2015.  We hope that Dr. Jacks’ personal experience will help educate Congress about the plight of those who depend on herd immunity and the importance of protecting those who are most vulnerable to vaccine preventable diseases.

DrJacksAndFamily

To the parent of the unvaccinated child who exposed my family to measles:

I have a number of strong feelings surging through my body right now. Towards my family, I am feeling extra protective like a papa bear. Towards you, unvaccinating parent, I feel anger and frustration at your choices.

By now we’ve all heard of the measles outbreak that originated in Disneyland. Or more accurately, originated from an unvaccinated person that infected other similarly minded vacationers. I won’t get into a debate about the whole anti-vaccine movement, the thimerisol controversy (no longer even used in childhood vaccines), or the myth that MMR causes autism (there are changes in autistic brain chemistry prior to birth).

Let’s talk measles for just a minute. It once was widespread in the US. It is now considered ‘eliminated’ in the US (not continually circulating in the population—only contracted through travel out of country). Measles is highly contagious (>90 percent infectious) and can survive airborne in a room and infect someone two hours later. Another fun fact is that measles is transmittable before it can be diagnosed—four days before the characteristic rash appears. “Measles itself is unpleasant, but the complications are dangerous. Six to 20 percent of the people who get the disease will get an ear infection, diarrhea, or even pneumonia. One out of 1000 people with measles will develop inflammation of the brain, and about one out of 1000 will die.” That sounds fun!

Okay.

Calm down, self.

I assume you love your child just like I love mine. I assume that you are trying to make good choices regarding their care. Please realize that your child does not live in a bubble. When your child gets sick, other children are exposed. My children. Why would you knowingly expose anyone to your sick, unvaccinated child after recently visiting Disneyland? That was a boneheaded move.

Why does this affect me and mine? Why is my family at risk if we are vaccinating? I’m glad you asked.

At 10 months old, Eli has received all his recommended vaccines, but is too young for his first dose of MMR vaccine.

Regarding measles, there are four groups of people.

All are represented in my family.

First, the MMR vaccine results in immunity for most who receive it. Two doses provides protection that can be confirmed with blood titers. My wife is in this group.

Second, about 3 percent of fully vaccinated children do not develop a lasting immune response. They have low blood titers and are not protected against measles. If exposed, this group will likely get the illness. I am in this group. I was thankfully not exposed.

Third, we have the unvaccinated. My son, Eli, is 10 months old. He is too young to received the MMR vaccine and thus has no protection. Whether by refusal or because they are too young, exposed unvaccinated children have a 90 percent chance of getting measles.

Fourth, there are children like my Maggie. These are children who can’t be vaccinated.

Maggie before being diagnosed with cancer.

Maggie before being diagnosed with cancer.

Children who have cancer. Children who are immunocompromised. Children who are truly allergic to a vaccine or part of a vaccine (i.e., anaphylaxis to egg). These children remain at risk. They cannot be protected, except by vaccinating people around them.

Maggie was diagnosed last August with ALL—acute lymphoblastic leukemia (blood cancer). She has had multiple rounds of chemotherapy, lumbar punctures, and surgery to implant her port. She has been admitted six times since diagnosis and spent over three weeks at Phoenix Children’s Hospital (including Halloween and New Years). She had been immunized fully, but we are unable to immunize her further until after treatments end.  Her treatment will prayerfully end shortly after her 5th birthday, in January 2017.

Here is how the measles outbreak has further complicated our situation.

Maggie waits to get her measles immune globulin.

Maggie waits to get her measles immune globulin.

It was a Wednesday. Maggie had just been discharged from Phoenix Children’s Hospital after finishing her latest round of chemotherapy. That afternoon she went to the PCH East Valley Specialty Clinic for a lab draw. Everything went fine, and we were feeling good…until Sunday evening when we got the call. On Wednesday afternoon, Anna, Maggie, and Eli had been exposed to measles by another patient. Our two kids lacked the immunity to defend against measles. The only protection available was multiple shots of rubeola immune globulin (measles antibodies). There were three shots for Maggie and two shots for Eli. They screamed, but they now have some temporary protection against measles. We pray it is enough.

Eli had to receive multiple shots of measles antibodies due to the exposure he had.

Since Eli was exposed to measles but is unvaccinated, he had to received multiple shots of measles antibodies to try to keep him well.

Eli and Maggie were exposed to measles on January 21. Despite the treatment noted, they could start showing signs of measles any time from now through February 11 (21 days post exposure). After a new blood test, both my wife and I were found to be immune to measles, but the children will remain in isolation until February 11.

Unvaccinating parent, thanks for screwing up our three-week “vacation” from chemotherapy. Instead of a break, we get to watch for measles symptoms and pray for no fevers (or back to the hospital we go). Thanks for making us cancel our trip to the snow this year. Maggie really wanted to see snow, but we will not risk exposing anyone else. On that note, thanks for exposing 195 children to an illness considered ‘eliminated’ from the US. Your poor choices don’t just effect your child. They affect my family and many more like us.

Please forgive my sarcasm. I am upset and just a little bit scared.

–Papa bear

 

Dr. Tim Jacks, DO, FAAP is board certified by the American Board of Pediatrics and a fellow of the American Academy of Pediatrics. Originally from Elmhurst, Illinois, Dr. Jacks has lived in the greater Phoenix area for the past 25 years. When not working as a pediatrician, Dr. Jacks enjoys spending time with his wife and two children, running, playing with computers, exploring the great outdoors, and being involved at his church.


Related Posts

This guest post was written by Alethea Mshar out of concern for her son Ben.  A version of this post originally appeared on her blog Ben’s Writing, Running Mom. Like all parents, my child’s health...

I could hear it clearly from across the auditorium.  A distinctive cough in a very small child.  It was painful to my ears and I brought a sinking feeling to my heart.  My daughter glanced over...


115 responses to “Family’s Exposure to Measles Reveals Importance of Herd Immunity”

  1. Dr Jacks, in regards to the MMR vaccine you say “Two doses provides protection that can be confirmed with blood titers.” Actually, according to the Merck M-M-R II Information Sheet, it appears most seronegative children are likely to be immune after one dose of effective live MMR vaccine.

    However, two doses of live MMR vaccine are mandated in many US states, and most parents are not informed of the option to have antibody titre testing (i.e. a blood test) to verify a response after the first dose of MMR vaccine.

    Dr Jacks, are you aware of The Antibody Titer Law (Holly’s Law) in the state of New Jersey? This law allows parents to seek testing to determine a child’s immunity to measles, mumps and rubella before receiving the second dose of live MMR vaccine. The law was enacted in response to the death of five year old Holly Marie Stavola who died of encephalopathy which she developed seven days after receiving her second dose of MMR vaccine. Holly’s family campaigned for this law, wishing they had known about the option of the antibody titre test before Holly’s arbitrary revaccination with the second dose of live MMR vaccine.

    This information about the option of antibody titre testing to verify immunisation after live MMR vaccination should be available to all citizens, not just those in the state of New Jersey. All parents should be informed of the reportedly high seroconversion rates after live MMR vaccination at the appropriate age, i.e. after maternally derived antibodies have waned. All parents should be properly informed about the risks and benefits of individual vaccine products.

    Dr Jacks, are you a practicing paediatrician? Do you inform parents about the option of antibody titre testing to verify a response after the first dose of live MMR vaccine? Like you, many other parents are concerned about their children’s health, and cautious parents may not wish to over-vaccinate their children with unnecessary vaccine doses. They may also wish to verify that their children are protected. (I note that you and your wife have had the benefit of a blood test to verify your immunity to measles.)

    I suggest that failing to provide information about antibody titre testing in relation to live MMR vaccination contravenes the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program Authorizing Legislation Sec. 300aa-26. In this regard, please see my letter to Sylvia Mathews Burwell, Secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services, dated 7 January 2015: http://users.on.net/~peter.hart/Letter_to_Sylvia_Mathews_Burwell_HHS_re_MMR_second_dose.pdf

    Dr Jacks, given your concern about measles, perhaps you could raise the matter of antibody titre testing when you give your testimony in front of the US Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on The Reemergence of Vaccine-Preventable Disease: Exploring the Public Health Successes and Challenges.

  2. Lawrence says:

    @Elizabeth – the science behind the recommendations for two doses of the MMR is clear & was a result of the large outbreak in the early 1990s, when the limitations of one MMR became clear.

    We don’t “overvaccinate” and there is no evidence whatsoever that two doses of MMR is in any shape or form dangerous to the child.

  3. Lawrence says:

    @stuart – correct, they aren’t. Billions of doses of vaccines have been given & fewer than 3600 claims have been paid.

    Any product in the world should have that kind of safety record.

  4. Lawrence says:

    And a quarter of the compensated claims are for a vaccine that isn’t even given anymore (DTP).

  5. Lawrence says:

    And thank you for posting that – I find pages 7 – 10 to be great for showing how safe vaccines are.

  6. Stuart Little says:

    So you spit in the eye of the vaccine injured. I thought so.
    Also, your calculation of the injured is way off.
    Claims does not = total injuries. It equals claims.
    Do you understand what claims means?

  7. Lawrence says:

    So, now you’re making assumptions again?

    You’re the one that posted that link which shows out of 2 Billion plus vaccination being administered here in the United States, there have been less than 16,000 claims since 1988, which works out to around 640 claims per year – 1/4 of those claims relate to a vaccine that isn’t even used anymore (and hasn’t been for over two decades).

    So, on average, around 89,400,000 doses of vaccines are given each year – which result in approximately 640 claims to the vaccine court for injury, and of those claims, 68 are paid.

    That works out to a percentage of: 7.06e-7 (or 0.000007%) – which means that you have a greater chance being struck by lightning or drowning in a home toilet than you do of suffering a severe vaccine reaction.

    Now, the numbers skew even more in favor of vaccines when you remove the DPT entries – since that vaccine isn’t used anymore.

    You were the one that wanted to show statistics – and that’s what those statistics show, that vaccines are perhaps one of the safest items (of any kind) on the planet. Planes don’t even come close to that kind of safety record, yet tens of millions of people fly every year.

  8. Lawrence says:

    As a basis of comparison – here is a sample breakdown of automobile fatalities from 2010:

    MONTH FATALITIES PER MONTH IN-VEHICLE CASUALTIES EXCL. UNINJURED BUS OCCUPANTS NON-VEHICLE CASUALTIES INCL. PEDESTRIANS
    01/2010 2290 4785 427
    02/2010 2016 4340 386
    03/2010 2423 5087 407
    04/2010 2777 5775 404
    05/2010 2934 6066 418
    06/2010 2795 5809 348
    07/2010 3095 6763 456
    08/2010 3083 6549 428
    09/2010 3024 6309 511
    10/2010 3056 6382 543
    11/2010 2795 5842 573
    12/2010 2597 5417 54

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year

    More people are killed in a single month (not to mention injured, which is substantially higher) in automobile accidents than have been compensated for serious vaccine injuries in over 25 years (yes, that’s one month vs. 25 years).

    If you think vaccines are dangerous, then you must think cars are the devil…..

  9. Stuart Little says:

    “Claims” does not = total injuries. It equals claims.
    Do you understand the difference between claims made and injuries?
    Apparently not.

  10. Lawrence says:

    Hey, you posted the numbers – I’m just showing what the numbers mean, from a percentage standpoint. It’s not my fault that you don’t know what you are posting and why.

    If you have different numbers that show # of injuries, why don’t you post them?

  11. Stuart Little says:

    I guess I am not allowed to comment any more on the other article. My last 3 comments went into moderation.
    I looked at all of your source links provided and none of them provide any information about measles deaths in the last 12 years. The Pink source has all of the other information but doesn’t mention anything about deaths and I couldn’t find the last source provided.

    Why don’t you just admit that the chart is completely fictional. If it were true, the CDC would have it in a nice easy place to find and it would be all over the news.

  12. Stuart Little says:

    You like to avoid direct questions don’t you? Always coming up with straw man arguments rather than answer direct questions. Your dishonest methods do amaze me, but I’m not sure why I am surprised.

  13. novalox says:

    @stewart little

    Funny from someone who cannot even click a link.

    Also, considering your continuing hee-hawing and avoidance of answering questions, we can assume that you are here only top troll. Your cruelty to those who have been affected by the measles outbreak is noted.

  14. Karen says:

    Immunocompromised children like Maggie should be kept at home, out of harm’s way. There are germs out there in nearly everyone which could injure or kill her completely apart from the vaccine-preventable diseases, and there’s no reason to believe or expect that many of the adults in the world are up on all the many vaxes, nor the children either. There’s still no reason to expect any parent to risk severe damage or even death from the MMR (etc.) in their own child because you think it might benefit an immunocompromised child like Maggie.

  15. Lawrence says:

    Hello Ms. Parker – and once again, you are dead wrong, based on the information I’ve already provided. Go home and take care of your daughter.

  16. Christine Vara says:

    @Karen I would like to clarify that Maggie and her brother were at a clinic. That is the place were they go to see their doctor. It seems unreasonable to think that Maggie would be able to receive all her treatments, therapy and blood draws within the confines of her home. But thanks to the unvaccinated person who showed up at the clinic with measles, Maggie and her brother Eli have since been quarantined at home for the past 21 days. If I were given a choice of who I think should remain home, it would not be the young girl battling cancer, or the child who is not yet a year old, but the unvaccinated person who makes the choice (and yes it is a choice) not to participate in the “public’s” health.

  17. Dr Jacks, I understand you are a practicing paediatrician? Do you vaccinate children with the live MMR vaccine? If so, I presume you’ve read the Merck M-M-R II Information Sheet?

    According to the Information Sheet for Merck’s M-M-R II (Measles, Mumps, and Rubella Virus Vaccine Live) “clinical studies of 284 triple seronegative children, 11 months to 7 years of age, demonstrated that M-M-R II is highly immunogenic and generally well tolerated. In these studies, a single injection of the vaccine induced measles hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) antibodies in 95%, mumps neutralizing antibodies in 96%, and rubella HI antibodies in 99% of susceptible persons.”(1)

    No reference to published details of the “clinical studies of 284 triple seronegative children” is provided in Merck’s M-M-R II Information Sheet. However, the ACIP report on MMR vaccination appears to support Merck’s information re the high seroconversion rate after primary vaccination, particularly in regards to the measles and rubella components of the MMR vaccine, (although there appears to be some ambiguity about the effectiveness of the mumps component of the MMR vaccine). The ACIP’s report on MMR vaccination also admits that: “The second dose of measles-containing vaccine primarily was intended to induce immunity in the small percentage of persons who did not seroconvert after vaccination with the first dose of vaccine (primary vaccine failure).”(2)

    Given that most children are likely to be immunised after the first dose of effective live MMR vaccine, I question whether parents are being given the opportunity to properly give their ‘informed consent’ to the second dose of live MMR vaccine, also often described as a ‘booster’.(3) This question is particularly pertinent as adverse events have been reported after MMR vaccination. The VAERS database contains reports of children of four years and over who have experienced adverse events after vaccination with the MMR vaccine. The case of Holly Stavola, who died of encephalopathy which she developed seven days after receiving her second dose of MMR vaccine (and referred to in my previous comment), is a very sad example of an adverse event after vaccination.

    References:
    1. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc. M-M-R® II. (Measles, Mumps, and Rubella Virus Vaccine Live). Information Sheet: http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/m/mmr_ii/mmr_ii_pi.pdf
    2. Prevention of Measles, Rubella, Congenital Rubella Syndrome, and Mumps, 2013. Summary Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. Vol. 62, No.4. June 14, 2013: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/rr/rr6204.pdf
    3. For example, in the article “Does my child still need a booster shot if a blood test shows that he’s already immune to a disease?”, authored by Paul Offit and published on the babycenter website, the second dose of MMR vaccine is inappropriately described as a ‘booster’: http://www.babycenter.com/404_does-my-child-still-need-a-booster-shot-if-a-blood-test-show_1463679.bc

  18. Lawrence says:

    @elizabeth – because the extra 4% effectiveness that can be gained from a second dose of MMR can make all the difference in a large outbreak:

    http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/measles/vacc-in-short.htm

    This was discovered after examining the evidence from the 1990 – 1991 major outbreak in the United States which involved more than 50,000 cases of measles.

    And the safety profile of the MMR vaccine was recently reconfirmed in a major study.

  19. Karen says:

    Christine,
    Any medical clinic is going to be teeming with germs, because that’s where many sick people go. In Europe it is still the practice for doctors to make house calls, the way my grandfather used to spend part of every day doing when he was a physician in the U.S. many years ago. There ARE many procedures which couldn’t be carried out at home, but it’s still true that hospitals have a VERY large number of antibiotic-resistant germs which present a real threat for everyone in them, especially the sick with depressed or deficient immune functioning. It would be a very difficult situation to care for a child with cancer, and every family would have to make its own choices, bearing in mind that if they want to keep up a somewhat normal life of taking the child to the store, to church, or to the park, they will be exposing them to germs that present no danger for healthy people, but may be deadly to an immunocompromised child. However, it is not fair to the rest of the world to say that everyone has to risk their lives and health by getting vaccines. If they are not afraid of them and are willing, they may do so, but those of us who are afraid may not morally be compelled to take the chance.

  20. Lawrence says:

    @Karen – if you don’t want to vaccinate your kids, that is your choice. However, in the interest of public health, requiring vaccines for public school attendance (and only granting certified medical exemptions) is the best policy to protect everyone.

    If you don’t like – you have a choice, home school

  21. jgc56 says:

    “Claims does not = total injuries. It equals claims.”

    Claims of vaccine injury also doesn’t equal claims of injuries which were actually caused by vaccination, even when compensation is awarded: recall that more than 90 percent of the claims for which plaintiffs have been awarded compensation by the NVICP are for table injuries where a finding of a causal association between vaccination and the injuries claimed is neither required nor recognized by the court..

    ‘There’s still no reason to expect any parent to risk severe damage or even death from the MMR (etc.) in their own child because you think it might benefit an immunocompromised child like Maggie.”

    There’s also no reason to expect the parent is palcing the child at risk of either by vaccination ghtem: there’s no evidence supporting the premise that risk associated with immunizing your child against infectious diseases exceeds the risks associated with remaining vulnerable to infection by those diseases.

    If you believe otherwise, by all means point us to that evidence.

  22. jgc56 says:

    “However, it is not fair to the rest of the world to say that everyone has to risk their lives and health by getting vaccines.”

    And your evidence that the rest of the world is risking their lives and health by getting vacines would be…what, exactly. Karen?

    Oh, wait–that’s right. YOU DON”T HAVE ANY.

  23. Karen says:

    jgc56,
    Your saying there is no evidence of vaccine injury is either so silly or so corrupt that there is not point dealing with you.

    Lawrence,
    While I know that Dorit has been working feverishly 24/7/365 to eliminate personal exemptions to the vaccine “requirement” for schools, she has not yet attained her and the pharma industry’s goal, and at this time there are religious exemptions available in 48 states. The SCOTUS Hobby Lobby decision last July held that in those states, the state may NOT play religious police and may not question the sincerity of any parent wishing to claim this exemption. We are all waiting with bated breath to see how you guys are going to eviscerate the religious exemption, and compel all parents who wish to send their children to public school to vax to the max, which will inevitably kill or disable many more children than are currently being damaged or killed by vaccines. And that, of course, would bring the inevitable backlash from damaged families and those who fear similar damage, but the interests of short-term greed are willing to live with that.

  24. Lawrence says:

    @Karen – absolutely nothing you’ve said is true, with the exception that, yes, “religious” exemptions should be eliminated and have no place in causing harm to both public and individual health.

    I would expect, that given the attention that the recent outbreak has generated to the bankruptcy of the anti-vax position, that more states will join both Mississippi and West Virginia in limiting exemptions to only those for legitimate medical reasons.

    And since there is no evidence that vaccines are “killing or maiming” children, but that the actual chance of suffering a serious vaccine reaction is recognized and vanishingly small (there is a greater chance of being struck by lightning or drowning in a toiler), your fears are unfounded and nothing short of hysterical.

    Your position is untenable, since you have no actual scientific evidence or facts to back it up & instead you rely on nothing but “fear” and spreading false information and rumors to try to support it.

    Luckily, the vast majority of parents have rejected your viewpoint – and more importantly, they see the need to protect children in public schools and support these mandates (as does the Supreme Court).

  25. jgc56 says:

    “Your saying there is no evidence of vaccine injury is either so silly or so corrupt that there is not point dealing with you.”

    I haven’t said that, though, have I? There are to be sure adverse consequences associated with vaccinations–what you refer to as vaccine ‘injuries’, but those that are common are both minor and transient (soreness at the site of injection, low grade fever of short duration) while those that are serious are all but vanishingly rare–often so rare (as in the case of guilian barre syndrome, for example) that it isn’t possible to demonstrate a true casual association)

    What I’ve said is in response to your post was that you have no evidence which demonstrates by being vaccinated the ‘rest of the world’ is risking their lives and health, rather than reducing the existing risk to their lives and health posed by infectious disease.

    So one direct question, Karen: What evidence demonstrates the risk associated with routine childhood and/or seasonal flu vaccination exceeds the risks associated with remaining vulnerable to the infectious diseases they protect against? Be specific.

  26. Harvey says:

    “while those that are serious are all but vanishingly rare–often so rare (as in the case of guilian barre syndrome, for example) that it isn’t possible to demonstrate a true casual association)”

    BS!!! I am so sick and tired of serious vaccine injuries being down-played. They are NOT rare. That’s NOT rare! Get it! They are more and more common every day. Quit denying the truth and wake the F up!

  27. Lawrence says:

    @Harvey – and your proof of that is, what exactly?

    You just can’t pick a list of conditions and connect them to something without evidence.

  28. novalox says:

    @harvey

    [citation needed] for you assertions, because they fly in the face of the actual scientific evidence.

  29. Karen says:

    Lawrence,
    The recent outbreak has not bankrupted anything. There has been no serious outcome in any of the cases, what, is it up to even 120 cases yet? Obviously if we don’t vax, it will come back, and that would be good. Much better than a lifetime with autism or other serious reactions to that or other vaccines. If you could say, OMG, 50 deaths and 40 cases of measles encephalitis, everyone can PLAINLY see that the danger of the natural disease is MUCH greater than the danger of the vaccine. But you can’t. All you can say is OMG, over a hundred people sick in bed for a week, and then got well, with permanent immunity! Panic in the streets! We’d all MUCH rather severely disable as many children for life with autism and bowel disease as necessary, in order to prevent a SINGLE child for having fever for a few days! So let’s take a vote. House, are you out there?

  30. jgc56 says:

    Harvey, exactly what serious vaccine injuries do you believe are not rare? Be specific, and be sure to identify the evidence which demonstrates the existence of a causal association between these injuries and routine childhood vaccination.

  31. jgc56 says:

    “There has been no serious outcome in any of the cases, what, is it up to even 120 cases yet?”

    One in four of those infected have required hospitalization. By what rational argument does that not represent serious outcomes?

    “Obviously if we don’t vax, it will come back, and that would be good.”

    By what rational argument could the return of a easily preventable but serious infectious disease, which prior to vaccination resulted each year in an estimated 3–4 million people (mostly children becoming infected, resulting in on average of whom 48,000 hospitalizations, 1,000 people developing a chronic disability from measles encephalitis, and 400 to 500 deaths, be considered a GOOD thing?.

    “Much better than a lifetime with autism or other serious reactions to that or other vaccines.”

    This is not a realistic fear: the MMR vaccine is not causally associated with the development of autism spectrum disorders and the incidence of serious reactions associated with the MMR vaccine is orders of magnitude lower than the incidence of serious reactions associated with measles infection.

    “If you could say, OMG, 50 deaths and 40 cases of measles encephalitis, everyone can PLAINLY see that the danger of the natural disease is MUCH greater than the danger of the vaccine. But you can’t.”

    There’s no NEED to point to 50 deaths etc. associated with the current Disneyland outbreak to demonstrate that the risks associated with measles infection is much greater than the risks associated with the MR vaccine. Recall again what was seen in the US every year prior to routine MMR vaccination–3-4 million infections, 48,000 hospitalizations, 400 to 500 deaths.

    “We’d all MUCH rather severely disable as many children for life with autism and bowel disease as necessary, in order to prevent a SINGLE child for having fever for a few days! So let’s take a vote.”

    Karen, your evidence demonstrating that MMR vaccination is causally associated with the development of autism spectrum disorders and/or chronic bowel disease would be…what, exactly? Be specific.

    I mean, you DO have some…right?

  32. Dr Jacks, the CDC warns us that “measles is the most deadly of all childhood rash/fever illnesses”(1).

    As a person who has had the benefit of a titre test to verify your immunity to measles, do you think it is ethical to withhold this evidence-based option from others, including children?

    Reference:
    1. Measles Vaccination. Vaccines and Immunizations. CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (accessed 12 February 2015):http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/measles/default.htm

  33. Dr Jacks, parents of small children might be surprised to discover that vaccination ‘best practice’ for companion animals is now more advanced than that for children, with international vaccination guidelines for dogs re live virus vaccines recommending antibody titre testing rather than an arbitrary ‘booster’(1), i.e. “…the principles of ‘evidence-based veterinary medicine’ would dictate that testing for antibody status (for either pups or adult dogs) is a better practice than simply administering a vaccine booster on the basis that this should be ‘safe and cost less’”.(2)

    Further vaccination advice for dog owners from the Vaccination Guidelines Group of the World Small Animal Veterinary Association states: “The WSAVA supports the use of titre testing. This is where a small sample of blood is taken from the dog and checked for the presence of circulating antibodies. The presence of circulating antibodies indicates that the dog is immune, and revaccination (with core vaccines) is not required. You may decide to titre test before giving the 12 month booster, as this may show that boosting is unnecessary. Two new in-practice titre-testing kits are now available which will allow your vet to do a titre test very quickly, without sending the blood sample to a laboratory. Ask your vet to look into this less expensive option…”(3)

    Unfortunately, most dog owners are unaware of titre testing because many veterinarians, like many paediatricians, are not properly informing their clients of this option.(4)

    Instead, many likely already immune dogs and children are being over-vaccinated with live virus vaccine products.

    References:
    1. As in human medicine re the live MMR vaccine, the term ‘booster’ is also used inappropriately in veterinary medicine in relation to modified live virus (MLV) core vaccines for dogs (i.e. parvovirus, distemper virus and adenovirus.)
    2. MJ Day, MC Horzinek, RD Schultz. World Small Animal Veterinary Association’s (WSAVA) Guidelines for the Vaccination of Dogs and Cats. Journal of Small Animal Practice. Vol.51. June 2010.
    3. Vaccination guidelines for new puppy owners. Vaccination Guidelines Group, World Small Animal Veterinary Association. Here is a link to the guidelines with highlighting added by Elizabeth Hart: http://users.on.net/~peter.hart/WSAVA%20Puppy%20Vax%20Guidelines%20May%202013.pdf
    4. Companion animals have been grossly over-vaccinated for years. For example veterinarians and vaccine manufacturers have pressed pet owners to vaccinate their dogs with modified live virus (MLV) vaccines for parvovirus, distemper virus and adenovirus every year without any evidence of benefit. Recently there have been slow moves to triennial re-vaccination, which has also not been proven to be necessary. The evidence-based option of antibody titre testing to verify an immune response after puppy vaccination is still not being offered to many pet owners by veterinarians. See my webpage “Over-vaccination of pets – an unethical practice” for further background: http://over-vaccination.net/questionable-vaccines/pet-vax/

  34. Chris says:

    Ms. Hart: “As a person who has had the benefit of a titre test to verify your immunity to measles, do you think it is ethical to withhold this evidence-based option from others, including children?”

    I’m sorry, I don’t understand. Are you suggesting that we draw blood from children for test, one that cannot be cheap? Why not just make sure they get their two MMR vaccines on time? Where is that suggested in the CDC link?

  35. Chris says:

    A little reveals that Ms. Hart actually wants to have expensive tests done that require traumatizing children by having blood draws. Some hints in two thread she started, the first one is a particularly interesting read (yes, it is five pages, but they are short pages!):

    Is the MMR ‘booster’ necessary?

    BMJ/Brian Deer – Apparent Egregious Ethical Misconduct

    By the way, since I was born after 1956 and have no record of getting any measles vaccine (even in my very extensive Dept. of Defense dependent shot record, which has listed both Yellow Fever vaccines). Also I had mumps twice, apparently “natural” immunity to some diseases is imperfect. We are planning a trip to California, and I do not want to get measles, nor do I wish to get mumps for a third time.

    So I got an MMR on Monday. It was essentially a tiny prick in the skin, it stung for a few minutes, nothing else. It was certainly less painful and annoying than the blood draws I get every year to test my cholesterol levels. Those things hurt! And much less painful than the mumps I had in 1968 (which was the year the Jeryl Lynn mumps vaccine was approved, plus a mumps epidemic year… triple lose for me: get mumps a second time during an epidemic the year the vaccine was approved, le sigh).

    So, by doing veterinary research on annual vaccines, this woman has a strange desire to see kids get painful and traumatic blood draws. Also, according to the last page or two of the first thread she is not very good at answering questions. It is best we ignore her.

  36. Chris says:

    Stupid typos. The first sentence should start with “A little research reveals…”

    The second link is (though the first one is more interesting):
    http://www.badscience.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=27392&p=730236#p730236

  37. Karen says:

    j,
    You’ll have to get more details on the hospitalizations. Were they really necessary, and why? Or were they just a fearful reflex in the face of what has been reputed to be a “killer” disease for the past few decades? What treatment was given, and for what conditions? When I was a child, 99% of kids got it, no one worried about it, and I never knew or even heard of anyone who had been hospitalized for it, not I nor any of the kids I knew was, even though we ALL got measles.

    Chris,
    Are blood draws more traumatizing than shots? I was horrified by shots when I was a child, terrified of doctors and nurses, and kept whirling around paranoid the whole time I was at the doctor’s office, afraid that someone was going to sneak up behind me and plunge a needle deep into me. Seriously. I had nightmares about it. Since this particular argument is going to require sticking needles into the child one way or another, and since the vaccines are very dangerous, and a positive test for antibodies (for those who don’t care about getting all the benefits of natural measles) will avoid the need to play another round of vaccine roulette, it’s certainly a wise precaution before getting another vaccine.

  38. Chris says:

    Get help, Ms. Parker. If not for yourself, at least for your family. (hint: don’t shorten names to one syllable if you don’t want your newest sock puppet to be discovered)

  39. In my first comment on this thread I note that I have forwarded a letter to Sylvia Mathews Burwell, Secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services, suggesting that failing to provide information about antibody titre testing in relation to live MMR vaccination contravenes the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program Authorizing Legislation Sec. 300aa-26.

    My letter to Secretary Burwell can be accessed via this link: http://users.on.net/~peter.hart/Letter_to_Sylvia_Mathews_Burwell_HHS_re_MMR_second_dose.pdf

    In response to my letter, I received an email from Pamela J. Cox, PhD, MA, Director, Division of the Executive Secretariat, Office of the Chief of Staff, CDC.

    In her email response Dr Cox said: “Dear Ms Hart: Thank you for your e-mail to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia M. Burwell questioning the mandated second dose of Merck MMR live vaccine. Secretary Burwell shared your message with the appropriate subject matter experts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for review, and Ms. Candace [sic] Swartwood is pleased to provide you with the attached response. We appreciate you taking the initiative to voice your opinion and to share your ideas. Please accept our best wishes.”

    I find the letter from Ms Swartwood to be most interesting, and I am considering my response.

    As this is a matter of public interest, and in the interests of transparency and accountability, I’ve published the letter from Candice Swartwood, Deputy Associate Director for Policy, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, on the internet and it can be accessed via this link: http://users.on.net/~peter.hart/MMRdosage_prepared_for_Elizabeth_Hart.pdf

  40. Chris says:

    Ignore Ms. Hart, she is cutting and pasting the same stuff that posted in my first link about her. Only a sadist who hates children would push for unnecessary blood draws.

  41. Parrish says:

    Please give us a follow up. How are Maggie and Eli now? I can imagine that your family and loved ones will have been extremely concerned about the children! It is now past the 11th of February, so I am hoping and praying that they are fine.

  42. ‘Chris’, you say “Ms. Hart actually wants to have expensive tests done that require traumatizing children by having blood draws”. (February 13, 2015 at 12:13 am.) You also say: “Only a sadist who hates children would push for unnecessary blood draws.” (February 14, 2015 at 12.05 pm.)

    It’s my understanding that blood tests for children are not that uncommon. For instance, this “KidHealth” website describes the complete blood count (CBC) “which is a common blood test that evaluates the three major types of cells in the blood: red blood cells, white blood cells, and platelets.” In regards to “Why It’s Done”, the website notes: “A CBC may be ordered as part of a routine check-up, or if your child is feeling more tired than usual, seems to have an infection, or has unexplained bruising or bleeding.” http://kidshealth.org/parent/general/sick/labtest4.html

    Also, the Merck M-M-R II Information Sheet refers to trials involving seronegative children and antibody results after a single injection of M-M-R II measles, mumps, and rubella virus vaccine live: http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/m/mmr_ii/mmr_ii_pi.pdf

    ‘Chris’, how do you think these antibody results were obtained?

  43. Chris says:

    Ms. Hart, you still want painful and expensive blood draws on children. None of my three children required a blood draw as part of their annual exam, yet this is something you think should be routine. Mostly because they were normal kids. The oldest did have a heart murmur found during a normal exam, which did lead to an echocardiogram that showed an abnormal genetic heart issue.

    Still an echocardiogram is not as invasive as a blood draw. You are still an unrepentant vampire, who sadistically wants to draw the blood of kids. A second MMR is minor compared to a blood draw.

    Only an idiot would think expensive blood draws would be better than a second MMR, a literal prick in skin.

  44. Dr Jacks, you state: “Our two kids lacked the immunity to defend against measles”.

    How was it verified that your two children (i.e. 10 month old Eli and 3 year old Maggie) “lacked the immunity to defend against measles”?

    I would appreciate your clarification on this matter.

  45. Dr Jacks, I understand your 3 year old daughter Maggie was diagnosed last August with ALL – acute lymphoblastic leukemia (blood cancer), and as a result has a compromised immune system.

    You note that Maggie “had been immunized fully, but we are unable to immunize her further until after treatments end. Her treatment will prayerfully end shortly after her 5th birthday, in January 2017.”

    Dr Jacks, was Maggie vaccinated with an MMR vaccine around 12-15 months, as recommended on the US schedule? http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/downloads/child/0-18yrs-child-combined-schedule.pdf

    I presume you had an antibody titre test to check if she was already immune before she was injected with the three rubeola immune globulin (measles antibodies) shots?

  46. ‘Chris’, I do not appreciate you calling me “an unrepentant vampire, who sadistically wants to draw the blood of kids”. (February 15, 2015 at 2.55 am.)

    For your information, here is the link to the brochure describing the Antibody Titer Law, which “gives parents a choice BEFORE they consent to a second dose of measles, mumps and rubella vaccine.” http://www.state.nj.us/health/cd/documents/antibody_titer_law.pdf

    The brochure notes that: “An antibody titer (pronounced ty-ter) is a test that can be done to find out if your child is immune. For this test, a blood sample is sent to a laboratory and tested for antibodies.** If a person has developed a sufficient level of antibodies, they may not need the second dose of vaccine. Written laboratory proof of immunity exempts a child from the 2nd dose of MMR vaccine.”

    The brochure has been prepared by the New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services to assist parents in making the decisions related to the MMR vaccine and the test.

  47. Chris says:

    Oh, poor you, Ms Hart! You are still a sadistic vampire who want to poke large needles into children. Just like Wakefield did at his son’s birthday party, where they laughed at the kids who ended up crying.

    So what if New Jersey allows parents to consent to expensive painful blood draws? It was probably bullied through by another child hating vampire.

    Redeem yourself and provided a real economic analysis that getting blood titres from every child is cheaper than a second MMR dose.

  48. Lawrence says:

    @Chris – Elizabeth seems to be ignoring all of the evidence that showed that a second MMR dose was necessary to maximize the effectiveness of the vaccine – including the 1990-1991 Outbreaks in the US, the experience with the recent outbreak at Disney (where those with only one dose have been infected), and even China, where outbreaks are still common in a population where over 95% of the population has received one dose of MMR.

    And since we know that the MMR vaccine is incredibly safe – there is no reason to go through the extra effort of a titers test.

  49. Chris says:

    She is also clueless and did not read the article. She wrote: “How was it verified that your two children (i.e. 10 month old Eli and 3 year old Maggie) “lacked the immunity to defend against measles”?”

    Obviously she has no clue that the first MMR is not until a child is over a year old, nor that kids going through chemotherapy for cancer have problems with immunity.

    So, along with ignoring the evidence she is ignoring what is written at the top of this page. This was the issue she had at the Bad Science Forum a few years ago. She totally ignored every response to her, and refused to answer question. Not only does she not understand the issues, she refuses to learn about them.

  50. ‘Chris’ and ‘Lawrence’, can you please clarify, are you arguing that paediatricians and other healthcare providers should actively withhold information on antibody titre testing from their clients, thereby depriving them of the opportunity to make a fully informed decision on the medical intervention of vaccination and any alternative options?

    Also, do you know why measles/mumps/rubella vaccination is delayed until 12-15 months on the US vaccination schedule? http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/downloads/child/0-18yrs-child-combined-schedule.pdf

  51. Gray Falcon says:

    Elizabeth: We’re saying we oppose the use of unnecessary and traumatic medical procedures to no valid benefit.

  52. Lawrence says:

    @Gray – correct.

  53. Chris says:

    No, Ms. Hart. They will answer the questions about testing if asked. You, on the other hand, are campaigning for unnecessary and painful procedures on children when you have demonstrated absolutely no cognition of the basic MMR vaccination issues.

    If you knew what you were writing about you would not have asked about the measles immunity of a child under age one (too young to be vaccinated), nor that of a child being treated for cancer. There is absolutely no reason to accept medical suggestions who does not know the basics, like why the schedule for the MMR is the way it is (and yes, I know why).

  54. ‘Chris’ (February 15, 2015 at 11.57 am)

    Re your comment: “So what if New Jersey allows parents to consent to expensive painful blood draws? It was probably bullied through by another child hating vampire.”

    The Antibody Titer Law (Holly’s Law) was passed in 2004 in response to the death of five year old Holly Marie Stavola who died of encephalopathy which she developed seven days after receiving her second dose of MMR vaccine. Holly’s family campaigned for this law, wishing they had known about the option of the antibody titre test before Holly’s arbitrary revaccination with the second dose of live MMR vaccine.

    On the HopeFromHolly website, Holly’s parent Robin Stavola says: “I served on the Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services as a parent of a vaccine injured child. We were compensated by the government for death. My family and I hope that Holly’s story will make a difference and help you realize that you must be aware of the benefits and risks of vaccinations for your child just as you make yourself aware of the benefits and risks of any medical procedure. We, unfortunately, were not educated in the area of vaccinations and because of this were not able to help the medical people help our daughter Holly. The reason we would like to tell Holly’s story is because we think other parents, as well as doctors, should know the truth and become educated about vaccinations.” http://hopefromholly.com/blog/our-purpose/

    The Antibody Titer Law brochure is available via this link: http://www.state.nj.us/health/cd/documents/antibody_titer_law.pdf

    Dr Jacks, do you think it is ethical to withhold information on the option of antibody titre testing from parents and other individuals?

  55. Chris says:

    So, again, we are not taking medical advice from someone who thinks a ten month old should already be immune from a vaccine he was not eligible to receive, nor understands the immune issues of those getting cancer treatment.

    And silly laws based on one case report do not trump the science. The science and ethics that you, Ms. Hart, obviously do not understand.

  56. jgc56 says:

    “You’ll have to get more details on the hospitalizations. Were they really necessary, and why? Or were they just a fearful reflex in the face of what has been reputed to be a “killer” disease for the past few decades?”

    It’s not ‘reputed’ to be a killer disease, it is demonstrably a killer disease: worldwide roughly 20 million cases of measles are reported annually, and in 2013 almost 150 thousand of those infected (mostly children under the age of 5) died. In the US, prior to routine vacination against measles, between 400 and 500 deaths due to measles were reported each year (again, mostly in young children).

    “When I was a child, 99% of kids got it, no one worried about it, and I never knew or even heard of anyone who had been hospitalized for it, not I nor any of the kids I knew was, even though we ALL got measles.”

    Whether you knew or heard of anyone being hospitalized for measles isn’t evidence that measles isn’t a serious illness: it’s evidecne that as a child you simply weren’t AWARE it was a serious illness. The CDC was and documents that in the US, in the decade prior to the introduction of routine measles vaccinations, on average 48,000 people were hospitalized due to measles each year.

  57. In 2012, when I was having a general health check-up, including some standard blood tests for cholesterol, vitamin D etc, I asked the doctor if she would also request tests to check my immune status for measles, mumps and rubella. (I was born in London in late 1959 and I do not have any record of having measles/mumps vaccination, although it’s likely I was vaccinated for rubella as a girl.

    The blood test wasn’t a problem for me, I was having it anyway as part of my health check-up. I looked away when the doctor drew the blood, and it was surprisingly quick. Certainly I’d prefer a blood test to check my immune status rather than a possibly unnecessary vaccination with live virus vaccines.

    My measles, mumps and rubella blood test results are accessible via this link: http://users.on.net/~peter.hart/MMR_serology_Eliz_Hart.pdf According to these results, I understand I’m classified as immune. I’m glad I had a blood test to verify my immunity (i.e. evidence-based medicine), rather than an unnecessary vaccination with a combined measles/mumps/rubella live virus vaccine.

    (For information on potential side effects and ingredients in the vaccine, see for example the PRIORIX Measles-Mumps-Rubella vaccine live Consumer Medicine Information Leaflet: https://www.ebs.tga.gov.au/ebs/picmi/picmirepository.nsf/pdf?OpenAgent&id=CP-2010-CMI-05278-3 This is the GlaxoSmithKline vaccine used in Australia.)

  58. Further to my previous comment, I was aware of antibody titre testing due to my investigation of companion animal vaccination, which I commenced after my eight year old dog became very ill and was put down after what I subsequently discovered was unnecessary revaccination, in September 2008. Needless to say, I was most unhappy that the veterinarian I had relied upon for ‘expert’ advice had pressed me to have questionable vaccinations for my dog, and had not properly obtained my ‘informed consent’ before this medical intervention.

    A few months after my dog’s death I submitted a report on this matter to the government regulator of vaccine products, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority. My report is titled “Is over-vaccination harming our pets? Are vets making our pets sick?” and can be accessed via this link: http://users.on.net/~peter.hart/Is_%20over-vaccination_harming_our_pets.pdf I suggest that people concerned about over-vaccination of children and adults might find some interesting parallels in my report, e.g. the reluctance to acknowledge adverse events after vaccination – see pages 13-21.

    In response to my concerns about the over-vaccination of pets in Australia, the APVMA convened a special meeting of senior scientific staff in April 2009. I provide more background on my website: http://over-vaccination.net/questionable-vaccines/pet-vax/

    Antibody titre testing to verify an immune response after modified live virus vaccination of puppies is now regarded as ‘best practice’ by vaccination experts in veterinary medicine, as I describe in a previous comment [February 12, 2015 at 9:55 pm].

    In human medicine, information on the option of antibody titre testing for measles, mumps and rubella largely continues to be withheld from parents and other individuals.

  59. Chris says:

    Ms. Hart: “The blood test wasn’t a problem for me, ”

    You are not a child. You obviously have never dealt with children, and you do not understand that they are not the same as dogs. We have no reason to take medical advice from someone who does not understand the psychology of human children, nor the reasons for the MMR vaccine schedule and definitely not someone who does not understand the immunity issues of anyone with cancer.

    “According to these results, I understand I’m classified as immune.”

    Because as someone born over fifty years ago you actually got the diseases. Only a sadist would want children to go through any disease, plus get invasive blood tests.

    Short version: children are not dogs, and you do not have a clue.

  60. ‘Chris’, I’m not compelling people to have antibody titre testing. I’m merely arguing that healthcare practitioners should properly inform people about vaccination and alternative options (e.g. antibody titre testing) so they can make an informed decision in the best interests of themselves and their children.

    Back in 2004, the New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services Vaccine Preventable Disease Program acknowledged parents right to consider antibody titre testing before the second dose of measles, mumps and rubella vaccine, years before I knew anything about antibody titre testing: http://www.state.nj.us/health/cd/documents/antibody_titer_law.pdf

    I find it intriguing that you are so desperate to prevent people accessing this information. What gives you the right to deny other people the option of antibody titre testing?

  61. Lawrence says:

    @Chris – is she a Turing Test? Because I swear she’s said the exact same thing about 5 different times now….

  62. Chris says:

    Seems like she is. If you read the Bad Science forum thread you will see she ignores all responses and just does the same cut and paste. If you look at the last page the moderators are getting irritated with her, and I suspect they banned her.

    By the way, I looked up the US Vaccine Court case of the reason for New Jersey law, and it seems they were only awarded lawyer costs, I don’t think they proved the MMR caused the encephalitis. I also skimmed Ms. Stavola’s involvement in ACIP, it seems she only wanted to raise the stature of VAERS data.

    So, science is still not overturned by laws based on one case report. Especially when the family failed to prove it a very evidence lax court room.

    Ms. Hart, we are still not going to take medical advice from someone who does not understand the science and issues of MMR vaccination.

  63. Karen says:

    Chris,
    Have you seen the videos on Youtube of children getting shots? I was horrified, children in absolute, abject terror, screaming and begging for a reprieve, struggling and fighting, or sobbing and sadly pleading to their mother or father to not be tortured and betrayed like that by their parents. Of course, you will say that it’s may be for their own good in the unlikely event that they get a serious or fatal case of a VPD, but what will the parents tell themselves when the child reacts by losing his personality to autism for the rest of his life, or develops explosive and painful and permanent diarrhea, or suffocates in an asthma or peanut allergy attack? What will the parents feel when they remember how terrified their children had been just at the prospect of a painful experience of having a hypodermic needle stuck deep into their flesh and held there for a minute?

  64. Chris says:

    Karen, do you think sticking a larger needle and drawing blood would be better?

    “when the child reacts by losing his personality to autism for the rest of his life, or develops explosive and painful and permanent diarrhea, or suffocates in an asthma or peanut allergy attack?”

    Vaccines do not cause asthma nor peanut allergies. Go away, Ms. Parker. Get help.

  65. Chris says:

    Also, the MMR vaccine does not cause autism. If it did it would have been noticed in the 1970s and 1980s after it was introduced in the USA in 1971. Something Mr. Wakefield was probably not aware of when he was hired by a lawyer to provide “research” for a lawsuit for a different MMR vaccine in the UK.

  66. Lawrence says:

    @Ms. Parker – given the experience that my children had with their vaccines (barely felt it, cried for maybe a minute, or didn’t react at all), I’d say you are full of it.

    Take your false scare-mongering elsewhere.

  67. Chris says:

    “What will the parents feel when they remember how terrified their children had been just at the prospect of a painful experience of having a hypodermic needle stuck deep into their flesh and held there for a minute?”

    The MMR vaccine is subcutaneous. It does not go into the muscle, and definitely not for a minute. I just had one last week, Ms. Parker you are being totally delusional.

  68. ‘Chris’, re your comment February 13, 2015 at 12.13 am.

    You state that “since I was born after 1956 and have no record of getting any measles vaccine (even in my very extensive Dept. of Defense dependent shot record, which has listed both Yellow Fever vaccines). Also I had mumps twice, apparently “natural” immunity to some diseases is imperfect. We are planning a trip to California, and I do not want to get measles, nor do I wish to get mumps for a third time. So I got an MMR on Monday.”

    Can you provide evidence that you “got an MMR on Monday”? Did the healthcare provider inform you about the option of an antibody titre test to check your immune status?

    Also, when are you scheduled for the second dose?

  69. Chris says:

    Ms. Hart, we do not take medical advice, nor give our personal information to those who do not understand the science nor the issues.

    And as I said before, I hate blood draws, a small vaccine needle that barely pricks the skin is much better.

  70. ‘Chris’, who exactly are ‘we’? Are you part of an organised activist group?

    I’m interested to know if you or ‘Lawrence’ or ‘Gray Falcon’ or ‘novalox’ or ‘jgc56’ are in a position to influence vaccination practice or policy? In which case you are accountable for your views.

    Are any of you healthcare practitioners? Or academics or bureaucrats with influence on vaccination policy?

    ‘Chris’, as it appears you are arguing to actively withhold information on antibody titre testing from parents and other individuals, it’s important to clarify if you have any influence in this area.

    Also why won’t you say if you’re going to have two doses of MMR vaccine?

  71. Lawrence says:

    @elizabeth – is that a threat?

  72. Chris says:

    No, just the commenters who are entertained by your Turing act. Also, as someone who lives in Australia I sincerely doubt you would get on to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices in the USA.

  73. Chris says:

    Ms. Hart, did you also threaten those who posted on the Bad Science forum? Especially after this comment:

    Elizabeth, I’ve lost my patience with you. You’ve had ten months, and now you’ve got a week to answer the questions put to you by pipsqueak, on that thread, even if they’re “dunno”. If you answer them then the conversations around this can continue in good faith, which is good. If you don’t answer them then I’m going to ban you for being a spammer, which is bad, because we like engagement and open discussion here.

    I assume you either stopped posting before you were banned.

  74. Gray Falcon says:

    Elizabeth: We’re the people with the facts. That’s who.

  75. The ‘About Us’ section of the Shot of Prevention website states: “Shot of Prevention is a community blog where individuals, parents, medical professionals and others can gather to discuss current events regarding immunizations. Over the years we have heard many stories from parents, doctors and advocates about how confusing and frustrating it can be to find good information about vaccines and vaccine safety on the Internet. This inspired us to introduce a resource where different voices can come together to share their perspectives and personal stories. We hope you will find the resource to be beneficial, and we hope you will engage in these important conversations with us!” https://shotofprevention.com/about/

    It’s disappointing that medical professionals are not participating in this blog. ‘Chris’, and ‘Lawrence’ and ‘Gray Falcon’ are keen to stifle my legitimate questions about vaccination practice and policy, but it appears they have no authority in this area. Are there some medical professionals who can engage with my questions about vaccination outside the cloak of anonymity?

    Dr Jacks for example?

  76. Dr Jacks, you say “Maggie was diagnosed last August with ALL – acute lymphoblastic leukemia (blood cancer)”. I understand the cause for this disease remains largely unknown: http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/990113-overview#aw2aab6b2b2

    You say that Maggie “had been immunized fully”. By that I presume you mean she had been vaccinated in accordance with the US Schedule? Has Maggie had all the vaccinations recommended on this schedule for her age, including flu vaccines?http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/downloads/child/0-18yrs-child-combined-schedule.pdf

    You say that Maggie had been ‘immunized’? But is that the correct terminology? Has immunisation been verified in Maggie’s case? Or do you mean that Maggie had been vaccinated fully?

    When Maggie received all the vaccinations recommended by the CDC/ACIP, I presume she was well at the time? Her cancer became evident after these vaccinations?

  77. Gray Falcon says:

    Elizabeth: The sources we use were written by legitimate medical professionals, using standard scientific methodology. You have their names. Why aren’t you taking it up with them?

    What sources do you have?

  78. Gray Falcon says:

    Correction: Elizabeth: What source do you have that claims that an annual blood draw is more effective and less traumatic than a few vaccines?

    By the way, since you’re attacking us instead of our information, I can only conclude that you find no fault with our claims, and are now trying to discredit us dishonestly.

  79. Chris says:

    Ms. Hart: “‘Chris’, and ‘Lawrence’ and ‘Gray Falcon’ are keen to stifle my legitimate questions about vaccination practice and policy, ”

    How have we stifled you? I have merely pointed out that no one should take medical advice from someone who does not know the issues.

    Especially after you continue to badger Dr. Jacks about his children. Did you not read this sentence in the above article: “Maggie was diagnosed last August with ALL—acute lymphoblastic leukemia (blood cancer).” If you do not understand what happens with the immunity of a child who was vaccinated when they have cancer treatment, there is no reason to bow to your demands on policy changes.

    And what is even worse you have refused to answer my legitimate question on the relative costs of several titers versus two MMR doses. I’ll try again: “Redeem yourself and provide a real economic analysis that getting blood titres from every child is cheaper than a second MMR dose.”

    Until you come up with a real economic analysis, you will still come off as a sadistic vampire who wants to do unnecessary blood draws on children just like Andrew Wakefield.

  80. dingo199 says:

    Have you seen the videos on Youtube of children getting shots? I was horrified, children in absolute, abject terror, screaming and begging for a reprieve, struggling and fighting, or sobbing and sadly pleading to their mother or father to not be tortured and betrayed like that by their parents. Of course, you will say that it’s may be for their own good in the unlikely event that they get a serious or fatal case of a VPD, but what will the parents tell themselves when the child reacts by losing his personality to autism for the rest of his life, or develops explosive and painful and permanent diarrhea, or suffocates in an asthma or peanut allergy attack? What will the parents feel when they remember how terrified their children had been just at the prospect of a painful experience of having a hypodermic needle stuck deep into their flesh and held there for a minute?

    Over-emote much, Karen?

    Have you seen the videos on youtube of children with infections being terrorised and tortured by having needles and cannulas forcibly rammed into their innocent young flesh, while they flail about helplessly constrained by some anonymous thuggish doctor, invoking nightmarish screams and doubtless memories that will emotionally scar them and their parents for a lifetime?
    Have you seen the scenes where a tiny babies are descended upon by several faceless, masked ogres in the intensive care unit, and with the poor parent coerced into being a collaborator in this vile torture, metal needles are poked directly into their spines, and plastic tubes forced down their nose and windpipes as they struggle in vain to avoid this horrible abuse?
    No you probably haven’t because youtube won’t allow such graphic video material.
    Just be thankful that because others choose to vaccinate, they lessen the chances of your precious snowflake ending up in the ITU, or worse.

  81. jgc56 says:

    “I’m interested to know if you or ‘Lawrence’ or ‘Gray Falcon’ or ‘novalox’ or ‘jgc56’ are in a position to influence vaccination practice or policy?”

    The only means I have to influence any public policy is by voting, although i’d like to think ,y effects to post accurate information and to rebut false information about vaccine safety adn efficacy on forums like this one might prevent people who are on teh fence about vaccines to choose to pretect them by vaccinating.

    As for your complaint that many of us are posting under anonymous handles rather than “outside the cloak of anonymity”, I have to ask–did you have a point? The relevant question isn’t “Who said that?” but “What support did they offer for their position?”–an argument stands or falls on its own merit and not on the basis of who embraces it.

  82. jgc56 says:

    let’s try again:

    The only means I have to influence any public policy is by voting, although i’d like to think my effortss to post accurate information and to rebut false information about vaccine safety and efficacy on forums like this one might convince people who are on the fence about vaccines to choose to protect them by vaccinating.

    washed my hands and can’t do a thing with them…

  83. Still Shaking Mama says:

    What dingo199 describes is exactly what happened to our son – except he was too sick to fight back. He just laid there while they struggled to get an IV in (first his arm, then both feet, and finally his other arm). Thankfully, the antibiotic they delivered through the IV was one of the reasons he survived. They eventually intubated him because he was in respiratory distress (Pneumococcal Pneumonia) and had been lifelined to a children’s hospital. A Respiratory Therapist told me later that they could not get air into his lungs and he said they “were not being careful” during the intubation. His oxygen saturation level was 78 (for comparison, a child in the middle of an asthma attack is usually about 89).

    One article I read about Pneumococcal Pneumonia stated there are more deaths in the US from this disease than all other vaccine-preventable diseases combined.

  84. […] You cannot catch the infection from killed vaccine.  Children with weakened immune systems, such as children with cancer, can have problems from the live attenuated vaccines.  They rely on herd immunity for protection (as do children too young to receive vaccines).  (Added in 2015: Here is an example of this, a little girl with leukemia who was exposed to measles.) […]

  85. In regards to the recent measles outbreak in California, the CDC reports:

    “Among the 110 California patients, 49 (45%) were unvaccinated; five (5%) had 1 dose of measles-containing vaccine, seven (6%) had 2 doses, one (1%) had 3 doses, 47 (43%) had unknown or undocumented vaccination status, and one (1%) had immunoglobulin G seropositivity documented, which indicates prior vaccination or measles infection at an undetermined time. Twelve of the unvaccinated patients were infants too young to be vaccinated. Among the 37 remaining vaccine-eligible patients, 28 (67%) were intentionally unvaccinated because of personal beliefs, and one was on an alternative plan for vaccination. Among the 28 intentionally unvaccinated patients, 18 were children (aged <18 years), and 10 were adults. Patients range in age from 6 weeks to 70 years; the median age is 22 years. Among the 84 patients with known hospitalization status, 17 (20%) were hospitalized.”(1)

    So 13 people vaccinated with a measles-containing vaccine came down with measles. (And there may have been more in the group of unknown or undocumented vaccination status.)

    It appears two doses of measles vaccine, or even three, does not guarantee immunity for all. It would be interesting to know more about the people who had multiple doses of measles vaccine, e.g. how old they are, exactly how old they were when they were vaccinated, and what brand of vaccine was used (presumably Merck M-M-R II if they were born in the US).

    I’d also be interested to know how the 10 unvaccinated adults fared, as I understand the effects of measles can be more serious in older individuals; and some details of the deleterious effects that resulted in at least 17 people being hospitalized.

    Could there be a problem with the measles vaccine, a la the mumps component of the Merck M-M-R II, which is currently the subject of lawsuits in the US, ie: “Lawsuits claiming Merck lied about mumps vaccine efficacy headed to trial” http://www.fiercevaccines.com/story/lawsuits-claiming-merck-lied-about-mumps-vaccine-efficacy-headed-trial/2014-09-09

    Reference:
    1. Measles Outbreak – California, December 2014-February 2015. CDC Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), February 20, 2015 / 64(06); 153-154: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6406a5.htm?s_cid=mm6406a5_w

  86. Chris says:

    Ms. Hart, again there is no reason to take medical advice from someone who does not understand the basic issues pertaining to measles. You obviously do not understand that even though 1% were still vulnerable to measles because the American MMR vaccine is “only” 99% effective that thousands out of the eighty thousand of daily Disneyland visitors only a few were infected is quite remarkable.

    The Nirvana Fallacy does not play well here.

    You seriously did not know that kids under one year in age did not even get an MMR vaccine, nor that kids who go through cancer therapy lose all immunity!

    So why should we take medical advice from a someone whose political science science education and lack of basic knowledge on measles vaccine issues is so poor? Tell why we should care about what you think.

  87. ‘Gray Falcon’ (February 18, 2015 at 12:05 am)

    Re your comment: “The sources we use were written by legitimate medical professionals, using standard scientific methodology. You have their names. Why aren’t you taking it up with them?”

    I have raised the matter of antibody titre testing with ‘legitimate medical professionals’ and others.

    For example, I forwarded a letter on the subject to Dr Paul Offit in September 2013. My letter can be accessed via this link: http://users.on.net/~peter.hart/Letter_to_Paul_Offit_re_MMR_booster.pdf

    Paul Offit is on the Board and Scientific Advisory Board of Every Child By Two, with which this Shot of Prevention blog is associated: https://shotofprevention.com/about/

  88. Gray Falcon says:

    I’m guessing their reply was along the lines of, “That’s nice. Could you not bother the grown-ups while they’re talking?”

  89. Gray Falcon says:

    Well, more likely, they politely pointed out all the flaws in your logic, and thanked you for your time.

  90. Chris says:

    Ms. Hart, why do you think you know more about infectious diseases and vaccines than Dr. Offit? You did not know that children under age one do not get an MMR vaccine nor that those who are getting treated for cancer lose their immunity.

    I don’t need to click on your website to learn anything other than you are a very foolish woman who will not listen to anyone else because you are unwilling to open your closed mind to new information.

  91. Chris says:

    Also, Dr. Offit has not been a member of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices for at least a decade. He has no part now in making national vaccine policy.

  92. ‘Karen’(February 17, 2015 at 4:17 pm) and ‘Chris’ (February 15, 2015 at 11:57 am), I think we can agree that children don’t like needles. This is graphically depicted in the photograph of Dr Jacks’ son Eli being held down to have two shots of rubeola immune globulin (see Dr Jacks’ article above).

    ‘Chris’ it seems to me your antagonism towards antibody titre testing has more to do with the continued demonisation of Andrew Wakefield(1) rather than a genuine conversation about antibody titre testing to verify a response after MMR vaccination.

    Reference:
    1. See “Dr Andrew Wakefield – The Birthday Party Bloods”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBO_ZEGw8rY )

  93. ‘Chris’ (February 20, 2015 at 11.01 am)

    I understand the reason children under 12 months or so do not generally have measles vaccination is because they are likely to have passive immunity from their mothers, i.e. maternally derived antibodies.

    The CDC MMWR report I quoted earlier notes: “Twelve of the unvaccinated patients were infants too young to be vaccinated.”(1)

    So it seems likely that these 12 patients were vulnerable in the tricky period when maternally derived antibodies wane, before vaccination around 12-15 months.

    It appears to me there is much uncertainty about the duration of maternally derived antibodies, and optimum timing for vaccination. This is likely to vary between individuals and depend upon factors such as whether the mother was vaccinated or unvaccinated, and breast-feeding. (I don’t claim to have any expertise in this area, but I’m interested to learn more about the effect and duration of maternally derived antibodies, for both humans and animals.)

    See for example Waaijenborg et al: “…Infants typically receive the first dose of vaccine around the first year of age. Maternally derived antibodies provide the primary protection for infants prior to this first vaccine dose. The initial concentration of maternal antibodies in a newborn is highly correlated with the antibody concentration in the mother. Subsequently, there is waning of the maternal antibody levels in the infant, leaving the child susceptible to infections. Optimal timing of the first dose of vaccine can contribute to keeping this period as short as possible. This is important because, among European infants aged <1 year, measles risk and severity are greater than the risk and severity among those aged ≥ 1 year. The optimal timing of the first MMR vaccine dose depends on 2 main factors. First, the infant’s immune system should be sufficiently mature to respond to the vaccine antigens. Second, levels of maternal antibodies must be low enough to ensure that they do not neutralize the live, attenuated strains in the vaccine. Insight in the kinetics and determinants of maternal antibody concentrations is therefore very important.”(2)

    In the CDC MMWR measles outbreak report it’s also interesting to note that: “Patients range in age from 6 weeks to 70 years…” It would be useful to have more information on the cases at the extremes of the age range, e.g. why wasn’t a 6 week old baby protected by passive immunity, and why did a 70 year old (whom one might presume would be immune) succumb to measles, and how badly were these individuals affected?

    References:
    1. Measles Outbreak – California, December 2014-February 2015. CDC Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), February 20, 2015 / 64(06); 153-154:http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6406a5.htm?s_cid=mm6406a5_w
    2. Waaijenborg, Sandra et al. Waning of Maternal Antibodies Against Measles, Mumps, Rubella, and Varicella in Communities With Contrasting Vaccination Coverage. Journal of Infectious Diseases Advance Access, published May 8 2013: http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2013/04/29/infdis.jit143.long

  94. Chris says:

    Ms. Hart, you still do not have the appropriate background and expertise to dictate vaccine requirements, especially compared to that of Dr. Paul Offit. You are best ignored, especially if you keep insisting on unnecessary invasive blood tests.

  95. ‘Gray Falcon’ and ’Chris’, Paul Offit is on the record acknowledging that antibody titre testing is an option rather than an arbitrary second dose of live MMR vaccine.

    Refer to this ‘Expert Answer’ on the babycenter.com website: “Does my child still need a booster shot if a blood test shows that he’s already immune to a disease?” http://www.babycenter.com/404_does-my-child-still-need-a-booster-shot-if-a-blood-test-show_1463679.bc

    In his response, Paul Offit says: “Not having a booster is an option (although an expensive one) for the MMR booster…The first dose of the MMR vaccine, which your child should receive at 12 to 15 months successfully immunizes 95 percent of children against measles, mumps, and rubella…To find out whether your child has responded to the first MMR shot, you can have the doctor do a blood test called an “antibody titer”…If your child’s test shows that he has the MMR antibodies, he doesn’t need a booster shot…”

    In my letter to Paul Offit, I note that the CHOP Vaccine Education Center webpage on the MMR vaccine, reviewed by him, makes no reference to the option of antibody titre testing to verify a response to MMR vaccination: http://users.on.net/~peter.hart/Letter_to_Paul_Offit_re_MMR_booster.pdf

    It is my contention that the lack of advice to parents and other individuals about the alternative of antibody titre testing contravenes the Authorizing Legislation of the US National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program Sec. 300aa-26, as I outline in my letter to Sylvia Mathews Burwell, Secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services: http://users.on.net/~peter.hart/Letter_to_Sylvia_Mathews_Burwell_HHS_re_MMR_second_dose.pdf

  96. Gray Falcon says:

    I saw that “Expert Answer”. You omitted this section: “But the test is expensive (more than $100), and experts contend there’s no downside to a second shot.” In other words, don’t bother. Deceit by omission is still deceit.

  97. Chris says:

    Ms. Hart omitting bits of data is another reason why we should not take medical advice from her. She is irrelevant.

  98. Shelby Rose says:

    But she didn’t omit, “In his response, Paul Offit says: “Not having a booster is an option (although an expensive one) for the MMR booster”
    Which clearly states “expensive one”.

    Why would Elizabeth purposely omit “$100.00” but leave “expensive one” if she was trying to deceive you in some way? She wouldn’t.

    You are grasping at straws trying to discredit her. Grow up.

  99. Shelby Rose says:

    She also provided the link for all to read. So how is that deceit?

  100. Chris says:

    So what? Do you often get medical advice from random people on the internet, especially ones who question why a child under one year old and another getting cancer treatment is vulnerable to measles?

  101. Lawrence says:

    Because many people don’t bother to read the links & if she was being honest, she would have included the entire quote.

  102. Shelby Rose says:

    So what? My point had nothing to do with “getting medical advice from random people on the internet” did it?

    law: she included “although an expensive one” in her quote. You do know what expensive means don’t you? You are ridiculous. Really, why play the games? You think that is “Honest”? Playing games? It isn’t. Stop acting like babies.

  103. Shelby Rose says:

    And btw, if you don’t bother to read the link, that is no fault of the person providing it. And if you really want to know, you read the link. “doh”

  104. Lawrence says:

    @shelby – I’ve provided plenty of links that anti-vaxers don’t bother to read….like measles deaths, for instance.

  105. jgc56 says:

    “Why would Elizabeth purposely omit “$100.00″ but leave “expensive one” if she was trying to deceive you in some way?”

    My guess would be 1) to leave exactly how much more expensive the alternative is unstated and 2) to omit the additional information that “experts contend there’s no downside to a second shot”, which appeared in the same sentence.

  106. Gray Falcon says:

    Seeing as the shots are often given out for free, “more expensive” could mean five dollars or a hundred. The exact amount is imporant.

  107. lilady says:

    Elizabeth Marks, by her own admission, is totally qualified and lacks the education to discuss the CDC/AAP Recommended Childhood Vaccine in the United States. She is an Australian who fancies herself as an authority of vaccines that are recommended by veterinarians in Australia for animals:

    http://over-vaccination.net/

    “Elizabeth Hart – Independent Vaccine Investigator

    The ethical aspects of over-vaccination, especially mandated vaccination, are of particular interest to me. The potential conflicts of interests of academics working in the areas of vaccine development and promotion, and the influence of these academics on government policy, needs to be examined.

    I am not ‘anti-vaccination’. Rather, I am challenging the increasing number of questionable vaccines and repeat vaccinations being foisted upon children, adults and animals by the burgeoning and unfettered vaccine industry. There’s a ‘big picture’ on lucrative over-vaccination which needs to be examined.

    I have a degree majoring in politics and philosophy, and experience in scientific literature searching. This background has assisted me in researching and lobbying on over-vaccination.

    My interest in vaccination was initiated after I discovered companion animals were being unnecessarily revaccinated every year, and needlessly being subjected to the risk of an adverse reaction to vaccination.

    My experience in investigating over-vaccination of pets is informing my investigation into lucrative over-vaccination of people, as there are interesting comparisons to be made.

    Along with my colleague Bea Mies, I have undertaken extensive investigation and correspondence on unnecessary vaccination of pets.

    As a result of Bea’s and my work in this area, over-vaccination of pets has come under the spotlight in Australia, see for example the review by consumer watchdog CHOICE: “Pet vaccination: Over-vaccinating your pet could be harmful to their health as well as your own hip pocket“. The ABC has also investigated this issue i.e. “Questions raised over pet vaccination“. (See Over-vaccination.net’s web page on Over-vaccination of pets – an unethical practice for further background.)”

    Ms. Hart how does your education, your professional field and your personal research qualify you to speak out about the MMR II used exclusively in the United States?

    You do realize, don’t you, that the Edmonston-Schwarz attenuated measles strain used in Priorix MMR vaccine, which is used in Australia is not the measles strain that is used in the MMR II vaccine which is used in the United States, don’t you?

    Furthermore, according to your website, you are involved other anti-vaccine activities for vaccines which are administered to prevent other types of vaccine-preventable-diseases, such as the HPV vaccine…in collaboration with the quack anti-HPV Vaccine group, SaneVax

  108. Jack Russell says:

    This site is a gift to the anti vaxers.
    We come here looking for sound information and all we get is some blatant hollow “party line”.
    Legitimate questions are raised yet go unanswered, it’s not a good look.
    To ramble on about a $100 titre test, the cost of a pair of runners? Big deal.
    As for ‘loose cannon Chris’, they must groan every time he posts a comment.
    To continually claim there are little or no risks associated with vaccines when people personally know of kids and adults that have been damaged undermines your credibility. Can’t you see that?? People don’t care what studies you might present to demonstrate the contrary. What they actually see in front of them carries more weight.

    Lift your game.

  109. Chris says:

    Mr. Russell: “Legitimate questions are raised yet go unanswered, it’s not a good look.”

    And what were those?

    “As for ‘loose cannon Chris’, they must groan every time he posts a comment.”

    Oh, dear. I don’t want groans, I want evidence.

    “To continually claim there are little or no risks associated with vaccines when people personally know of kids and adults that have been damaged undermines your credibility.”

    So, Mr. Russell do you have the actual evidence that any vaccine on the American pediatric schedule causes more harm than the disease. Please give the actual evidence that the MMR causes more harm than measles.

  110. ‘lilady’, (February 26, 2015 at 9:28 am)

    Vaccination policy and practice in the United States can be influential in other countries. This is a matter of international interest.

    What qualifications do you have that privilege you to discuss vaccination policy and practice, and deny the right to other citizens?

    Do you think that citizens have no right to question medical interventions mandated by governments, e.g. vaccinations?

    Do you think parents and other individuals should be denied the opportunity to give their informed consent before medical interventions e.g. vaccinations?

    Do you think that any questioning of vaccine products should be censored?

  111. Chris says:

    Ms. Hart: “What qualifications do you have that privilege you to discuss vaccination policy and practice, and deny the right to other citizens?”

    She is a retired public health nurse who administered vaccines.

    “Do you think parents and other individuals should be denied the opportunity to give their informed consent before medical interventions e.g. vaccinations?”

    They get that already in the USA. By federal law they must be given a Vaccine Information Sheet. What you are doing is proposing something that is painful, expensive and quite unnecessary. Now if you were an American resident you have every right to apply to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Policies, just like the way John Salamone changed polio vaccination in the USA. But they also have a right to explain to you, exactly as we have, that you have no expertise other than bias to participate. Essentially, you will and should be ignored.

  112. lilady says:

    Ms. Hart:

    “What qualifications do you have that privilege you to discuss vaccination policy and practice, and deny the right to other citizens?”

    As Chris mentioned I am a retired public health nurse clinician-epidemiologist, who was employed at a large (1.2 million population catchment area) County health department where I investigated individual cases, clusters and outbreaks of vaccine-preventable-diseases…in addition to the ~ 60 other CDC “notifiable” infectious diseases.

    “Do you think that citizens have no right to question medical interventions mandated by governments, e.g. vaccinations?”

    Of course citizens (and non citizens who reside in the United States), have the right to question medical interventions (which are mandated for school children and for employment as a health care worker…not the general public). Could you point me to the United States Federal Code which mandates MMR II vaccines for everyone? I’m always willing to be educated by a U.S. Constitutional law expert.

    “Do you think parents and other individuals should be denied the opportunity to give their informed consent before medical interventions e.g. vaccinations?”

    Show me where parents and other individuals who reside in the United States have medical interventions forced on them, in the absence of their “informed consent”.

    “Do you think that any questioning of vaccine products should be censored?”

    Obviously, I don’t have that belief…nor does the Shot of Prevention blogger/moderator have than belief. She’s allowed you to post multiple comments.

  113. privatehc1 says:

    Good article and one that really touches my heart as a parent. I can understand the good docotors fear. I’m sure the parents who don’t vacinate their childern felt that they were doing what’s was best for their family. BUT we can’t forget that we also have a responsibility to everyone else on this planet.

  114. kamisturgeon92881.soup.Io

    Family’s Exposure to Measles Reveals Importance of Herd Immunity | Shot of Prevention

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.