Home > General Info, In the News, Preventable Diseases, Science & Research > Preventing Childhood Diseases Requires a Community Commitment

Preventing Childhood Diseases Requires a Community Commitment

This post is part of a blog relay sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in recognition of National Infant Immunization Week (NIIW).  You can follow the conversation on social media using hashtag #NIIW and join the #VaxQA Twitter Chat Wednesday, April 20th at 4 p.m. ET

 

niiw_web-banner_468x60_english

 

Protecting kids from disease requires more than just getting them their recommended childhood vaccinations.  It requires the commitment of an entire community.  

Thanks to an abundance of evidence based research, we’re constantly learning new and improved ways to protect our children; from safer rear-facing car seats with five-point harnesses, to wearing bike helmets and recommending that babies sleep on their backs.  Thankfully, advancements in medical science have also led to safe and effective vaccines that can protect today’s children from as many as 14 potentially deadly diseases.

eBookImageNAPNAP

This commitment to scientific research has provided us with the safest, most effective vaccine supply in history.   Today’s vaccines not only contain less antigens than they did years ago, but they have fewer side effects. There is even a system in place to continually evaluate vaccine safety and a process to update and improve vaccine recommendations as new information and science becomes available.

The impact of infant immunizations is monumental.  

20-year-infographicIt is estimated that vaccines administered to American children born between 1994-2013 will prevent an estimated 322 million illnesses, 21 million hospitalizations, and 732,000 deaths.  In looking at the incidence of specific diseases like measles, we can see how beneficial childhood vaccines have been.  For instance, before the U.S. measles vaccination program started in 1963, about 3–4 million people in the U.S. got measles each year.  In comparison, last year we had 189 cases and even that seemed like a lot.

While these successes are to be applauded, there’s still more that can be done to protect today’s children and future generations from dangerous diseases.

Timely childhood vaccinations are critical.

HepB112315

The recommended childhood vaccination schedule is specifically designed to provide immunity at a time when infants and young children are at the greatest risk of contracting potentially life-threatening diseases.

Take Hepatitis B for example.  If a child contracts this disease before the age of one, there is a 90% probability that they will develop chronic symptoms later in life.  However, only 30% of children who contract hepatitis B between the ages of one and five will go on to develop these chronic issues.

This is one reason why the birth dose of the HepB vaccine is so important. Since the U.S. started routine HepB vaccination, new cases have declined by more than 80%, and mostly among children.

 

 

But vaccinating babies isn’t enough to ensure children will grow to be healthy adults.

Keeping children safe from preventable disease requires community immunity.

Because widespread vaccination programs have been so effective in preventing diseases in the U.S., many parents don’t realize that diseases like polio and diphtheria still exist.  Some don’t consider diseases like whooping cough, varicella or measles to be a serious threat to their children.  This miscalculation of risk can lead to vaccine complacency or refusal.

But the fact is that vaccine-preventable diseases are still circulating in the U.S. and around the world.  Even when diseases are rare in the U.S., they can still be commonly transmitted in many parts of the world and brought into the country by unvaccinated individuals, putting entire communities at risk.

This explains the recent resurgence of measles cases in the U.S. , despite measles having been declared eliminated from the U.S. in 2000.  Today’s outbreaks are often the result of unvaccinated individuals who contract the disease oversees and then return to the states where they spread it to others.  But unvaccinated individuals don’t just put themselves at risk; their choices impact the health of our communities as a whole.

For instance, in 2014 668 people in the U.S. were diagnosed with measles.  Most of these people were not vaccinated and 60 of these people were responsible for bringing measles into the U.S. after getting infected in other countries.  Then in 2015, 189 measles cases were reported in the U.S. Again, most of those infected were not vaccinated.  Sadly, almost one in ten of those infected were babies too young to have received the first of two recommended doses of MMR vaccine (measles, mumps, rubella) that is administered beginning at one year of age.

It’s important to remember that not all individuals can be vaccinated.

Some are too young for certain vaccines.  Others have severe allergies, weakened immune systems or other medical conditions.  Therefore, the best way to reduce the risk of disease among children is to ensure that a large majority of the community has adequate immunity.   This community immunity concept depends on the vaccination of everyone who is able to get vaccinated, which then helps provide protection to those who can’t be vaccinated.  So, for community immunity to be effective, we need everyone to be up-to-date on their vaccines, not just children.

vaccines-protect

For some vaccines, the immunity that we receive from childhood vaccines may wane during our adolescence or adult years.

In these cases, booster shots are recommended to extend immunity.  This is especially critical in helping to prevent outbreaks of diseases like pertussis (also known as whooping cough).

VYF_Full-Infographic-2Every Child By Two has recently launched a new program initiative called Vaccinate Your Family in which they emphasize the need for vaccinations throughout the lifespan.  By offering resources such as those found in the Grandparent Toolkit, Every Child By Two is helping to explain how vaccinating people of all ages can help to reduce the incidence of disease among children.  

For instance, while whooping cough can be a nuisance to adults, it is often life-threatening to infants.  In fact, 90% of pertussis associated deaths have been among infants who are less than one year old.  But research indicates that 85% of infants who have contracted the disease will get it from a member of their immediate or extended family when a source of infection could be identified.

This is why pertussis infection is a prime example of how vaccines for adolescents, adults, pregnant women and people over the age of 50 are critical to protecting the youngest and most vulnerable members of our community.

Childhood immunizations help keep us all healthy.

An added bonus of childhood immunizations is that they can also help to reduce the incidence of disease among people of all ages.  We can use invasive pneumococcal disease as an example.  Following the introduction of the PCV7 vaccine in 2000, we’ve seen a dramatic decline of disease among children under the age of five, but also a 64-77% reduction in incidence of disease among older children and adults.

This pneumococcal example illustrates that the benefit of many childhood vaccines extends beyond the individual child being vaccinated. 

Protecting children before they are born.

It’s comforting to know that we’re discovering exciting new ways to help protect babies from diseases like whooping cough and influenza by vaccinating women during pregnancy.  Vaccines don’t just help keep expectant moms healthy and disease free, they protect the unborn baby as well.  Research indicates that infants born to mothers who received the influenza vaccine during pregnancy have a lower risk of contracting flu or being hospitalized due to flu.

A mother’s immunity to whooping cough and influenza transfers to the baby through the placenta and provides added protection to the baby after birth and before they are old enough to receive their own recommended vaccines. 

Immunization is a shared responsibility.

During the 2016 National Infant Immunization Week we want to highlight the value of childhood vaccines and the role that the community plays in ensuring the health of our children.  We hope that families, healthcare professionals, public health officials and policy makers will continue to work together to ensure that community vaccination rates remain high across the nation to help keep our children healthy.

For learn more about the benefits of vaccines, be sure to visit Vaccinate Your Family and the CDC website.

To learn more about National Infant Immunization Week (NIIW), be sure to follow the other #NIIW relay participants’ blogs and check out tomorrow’s post hosted by March of Dimes.

  1. David M
    April 20, 2016 at 1:40 pm

    I respect that you made some effort to fix your error after I posted the comment that you deleted. I do not believe that you are attempting to encourage open dialogue or shed light as you claim in introductory post:

    “There have been several recent events that have prompted both confusion and curiosity for me, and I hope to reveal them to you on Shot of Prevention .Through the exposure of this blog and other social media venues, I will hopefully encourage an open dialogue where I can not only address various questions of mine, but shed light on a multitude of questions that you may have. Therefore, please always feel free to leave a comment on my entries or submit questions for future discussion. I promise to read each and every one of them.”

    I think that it is important to be transparent about the statistic that the GSK funded image displays:

    The number of cases studied were 1,306.
    Source of Infection – “SOI was collected during patient interview and was defined as a suspected pertussis case in contact with the infant case 7 to 20 days before infant cough onset.”
    Of the 1,306 cases, in 737 of the cases a parent did not suspect that it was a direct or indirect family member or believe that they knew any other possible source of infection.

    A truthful sentence would say: “When a parent or guardian was interviewed, 37% of the time they thought that a direct or extended relative may have been the source of their infant’s Pertussis infection.”

    This is not representative of science or an ethical representation of research. It is a grotesque misrepresentation of a survey to promote an agenda.

    Like

  2. MI Dawn
    April 26, 2016 at 2:24 pm

    Hey, David M. How about, “When a parent or guardian was interviewed, 56% of the time they did not think that a direct or extended relative may have been the source of their infant’s Pertussis infection.” That’s just as truthful.

    Like

  3. David M
    April 26, 2016 at 4:14 pm

    Not to nit-pick too much, but 7% of the time that parents were interviewed they thought it was someone who was not a direct or extended relative. It breaks down like this:

    56% of the time the parent/guardian did not think it may have been a direct or indirect relative.
    7% of the time the parent/guardian thought it may have been a particular person who was not a direct or indirect relative.
    37% of the time the parent/guardian thought it may have been a direct or indirect relative.

    So, the sentence you suggested would truthfully be “When a parent or guardian was interviewed, 63% of the time they did not think that a direct or extended relative may have been the source of their infant’s Pertussis Infection.”

    Because, clearly they don’t think that a direct or extended relative is the source of infection if they think that it was a particular person who was not a direct or indirect relative.

    The study itself is very weak carries no significant scientific weight. I wouldn’t use it to justify that infants are less likely to be infected from contact with a stranger. I would be strongly and rightfully rebuked by people who support cocooning as a vaccination strategy if I did. The presentation of this number speaks large volumes toward the ethics and intentions of the initiative supported and referenced in this article. It says GSK funded right at the bottom of the image and it is a fear-campaign with the intention of increasing their profits through increasing vaccinations sold regardless of the warrant or need for them.

    Unfortunately, this is just the tip of the iceberg and there is no grant money available for fighting against unethical multi-billion dollar vaccination companies.

    Like

  4. David M
    April 26, 2016 at 4:17 pm

    Quick fix to the above comment:

    “I wouldn’t use it to justify that infants are less likely to be infected from contact with a stranger”

    Should be:

    “I wouldn’t use it to justify that infants are more likely to be infected from contact with a stranger.”

    Like

  5. sickofthelies
    April 27, 2016 at 11:41 am

    “But vaccinating babies isn’t enough to ensure children will grow to be healthy adults.”
    Vaccinating babies ensures that children will grow to be sick adults with autoimmune diseases.

    “Keeping children safe from preventable disease requires community immunity.”
    It’s amazing that all of the thousands and thousands of adults walking around without having vaccine boosters for years and years haven’t taken us all down with “vaccine preventable diseases” (sarcasm).

    Like

  6. Lawrence
    April 27, 2016 at 1:30 pm

    Because most vaccines do last at least decades, if not life-long….Pertussis is an outlier.

    Like

  7. sickofthelies
    April 27, 2016 at 3:14 pm

    If that is true lawrence, then I better not hear about the vaccine campaigns being ramped up towards adults – right?
    Which one is it? Adults need their boosters or “vaccines do last at least decades, if not life-long”??
    One of those statements is a lie.

    Like

  8. Chris
    April 27, 2016 at 3:28 pm

    How long does immunity against pertussis, tetanus and diphtheria last after you get, and survive, the actual disease? Then explain why the vaccine is expected to be better.

    Like

  9. Lawrence
    April 27, 2016 at 4:15 pm

    Let’s see, the majority of vaccines do give decades-long, if not life-long immunity, but new vaccines have become available since most adults (now) received their pediatric vaccines, therefore, it behooves adults to make sure they are up to date on the current set of vaccines.

    Seriously, open a book. This isn’t rocket science.

    Like

  10. Lawrence
    April 27, 2016 at 4:19 pm

    Not to mention vaccines that are currently in development for a variety of cancers as well – I would certainly be interested in vaccine that could prevent colon cancer, for instance – or women who would be very interested in a vaccine which could prevent breast cancer….

    With advances in immunology, it now appears that using vaccines to target cancerous cells and tumors is quite possible and practical – meaning that vaccines just might be the cure for cancer that we’ve been waiting for.

    Like

  11. Bill buttlicker
    April 27, 2016 at 4:22 pm

    Or they can give you cancer like the polio vaccine.

    Like

  12. Gray Falcon
    April 27, 2016 at 4:33 pm

    Bill: Why should we believe you?

    Like

  13. sickofthelies
    April 27, 2016 at 5:31 pm

    “but new vaccines have become available since most adults (now) received their pediatric vaccines”

    And yet, the world hasn’t ended with a mass apocalypse of diseases that the “new vaccines” apparently protect you from.

    Like

  14. sickofthelies
    April 27, 2016 at 6:01 pm
  15. sickofthelies
    April 27, 2016 at 6:02 pm

    Maurice Hilleman (one of the Grandfather’s of vaccines) Merck, talks about cancer in the vaccine.

    Like

  16. sickofthelies
    April 27, 2016 at 6:05 pm

    Hmmm that video doesn’t belong to the link I posted on Maurice. Here is the correct link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWj3okitO7Q&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PL3404C86AFC6DDAED

    Like

  17. Chris
    April 27, 2016 at 6:22 pm

    You have not answered my questions: How long does immunity against pertussis, tetanus and diphtheria last after you get, and survive, the actual disease? Then explain why the vaccine is expected to be better.

    Also I would like you to provide verifiable documentation to support your answer in the form of PubMed indexed studies, not YouTube videos.

    Like

  18. Lawrence
    April 28, 2016 at 9:31 am

    Basing your evidence off of a site that promotes the idea of FEMA camps & the NWO?

    As to SV40 – not one human cancer has ever been linked to it, ever.

    Rotavirus used to kill hundreds of babies each and every year in the US – should we consider that “acceptable?” It takes a long time to research a new vaccine – and in the meantime, these diseases do kill people.

    Like

  19. Bill buttlicker
    April 28, 2016 at 10:44 am

    Rotavirus doesn’t kill anyone. If you’re that paranoid than ban 2 story houses and bathtubs. Those kill far more. The benefit of that vaccine will never outweigh the risk. If you believe differently, than by all means give it to your kids.

    Like

  20. sickofthelies
    April 28, 2016 at 11:14 am

    No idea what you are talking about Lawrence. This was right from the CDC website….

    “More than 98 million Americans received one or more doses of polio vaccine from 1955 to 1963 when a proportion of vaccine was contaminated with SV40; it has been estimated that 10–30 million Americans could have received an SV40 contaminated dose of vaccine.
    SV40 virus has been found in certain types of cancer in humans, but it has not been determined that SV40 causes these cancers.
    The majority of scientific evidence suggests that SV40-contaminated vaccine did not cause cancer; however, some research results are conflicting and more studies are needed.”

    And this is an interview on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWj3okitO7Q&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PL3404C86AFC6DDAED

    Like

  21. sickofthelies
    April 28, 2016 at 11:17 am

    Chris,
    “You have not answered my questions: How long does immunity against pertussis, tetanus and diphtheria last after you get, and survive, the actual disease? Then explain why the vaccine is expected to be better.”

    So you are making my point. Vaccine’s don’t “last at least decades, if not life-long” and yet all of these adults are walking around and no apocalypse. Where are all of the measles and whooping cough pandemics etc etc??

    Like

  22. sickofthelies
    April 28, 2016 at 11:27 am

    The MMR vaccine is failing again. Merck is being sued by their own virologists because their MMR vaccine doesn’t work. This is going to become a giant epidemic of VACCINE induced mumps. In the news today…

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/27/health/harvard-university-mumps-outbreak/index.html?sr=fbCNN042716harvard-university-mumps-outbreak1200PMStoryLink&linkId=23908604

    Like

  23. Chris
    April 28, 2016 at 11:38 am

    I’m sorry. You still have not answered my question, here it is for the third time: How long does immunity against pertussis, tetanus and diphtheria last after you get, and survive, the actual disease?

    There is a different space of time associated with each of those three diseases. Please tell us what that is. Please support your answer with PubMed indexed papers, not news stories nor YouTube videos.

    Like

  24. sickofthelies
    April 28, 2016 at 1:14 pm

    The length of natural immunity is irrelevant Chris. My point has been made.
    You can’t have it both ways. You can’t say vaccines last for decades/life long and then turn-around and push vaccines on adults, that doesn’t make any sense. And if vaccines don’t last for decades/life long, then there really is no need for vaccines. The proof is that there are millions of adults walking around right now and yet no disease apocalypse.

    Like

  25. Chris
    April 28, 2016 at 1:50 pm

    So you don’t know. Interesting. You are trying to play the “Nirvana Fallacy” and being much too lazy to find out the very well known time span for immunity after actually catching and surviving the three bacterial diseases that can be prevented with the DTaP series and Tdap boosters. You are just parroting the nonsense we have seen for years from close minded websites that are pushing an agenda of ignorance based on deliberate lies.

    This pretty defines you as an anti-science troll. But I’ll just keep asking you that question as a way to demonstrate that you do not have a clue, and are the actual liar.

    So really, how long does immunity last if you actually catch and survive pertussis, tetanus and/or diphtheria? Be sure to support your answer with real PubMed indexed publications.

    Like

  26. sickofthelies
    April 28, 2016 at 2:03 pm

    Chris, are you crazy? Why don’t you say what you want to say instead of speaking in riddles? Nothing I said came from any sites, it’s just pure and simple logic. If you disagree with what I said, then feel free to correct me.

    Like

  27. Chris
    April 28, 2016 at 2:11 pm

    How long does immunity against pertussis, tetanus and diphtheria last after you get, and survive, the actual disease?

    Like

  28. sickofthelies
    April 28, 2016 at 3:05 pm

    Apparently, you are nuts.

    Like

  29. Chris
    April 28, 2016 at 4:03 pm

    Well, I am also sick of lies, especially the one that pertains to my question. Show us how honest you are by answering it: How long does immunity against pertussis, tetanus and diphtheria last after you get, and survive, the actual disease?

    Like

  30. Denabra
    April 28, 2016 at 4:04 pm

    sickoflies – you are correct, the students at Harvard (with the mumps) have all been vaccinated. MMR a big FAIL http://www.cambridgepublichealth.org/news/article.php?id=171

    Like

  31. sickofthelies
    April 28, 2016 at 4:15 pm

    Denabra, Thanks! The article says the students were all “fully immunized”, I think they meant vaccinated, as they obviously weren’t immunized by the MMR vaccine.

    Like

  32. Chris
    April 28, 2016 at 4:23 pm

    Please prove that you are totally truthful, tell us how long immunity against pertussis, tetanus and diphtheria last after you get, and survive, the actual disease.

    Like

  33. Lawrence
    April 28, 2016 at 4:45 pm

    Funny, because i don’t see those same students getting measles or rubella…tell us again how the MMR is a failure?

    Like

  34. sickofthelies
    April 28, 2016 at 5:12 pm

    That proves nothing of the MMR. I have never gotten the measles or rubella.

    Like

  35. Denabra
    April 28, 2016 at 6:03 pm

    The CDC admits that the flu vaccine only works 50% of the time at best.
    http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/vaccineeffect.htm

    Like

  36. Nathan
    April 28, 2016 at 9:19 pm

    50-60%. Which means it cuts your rate of influenza by half or more. That’s a good thing. Also the majority of pediatric deaths from influenza are in the unvaxed.
    http://www.cdc.gov/flu/spotlights/children-flu-deaths.htm

    Regarding mumps, sometimes the mumps component of the MMR can wear off in some people, hence the occasional outbreak. Still, there used to be over 100,000 cases of mumps per year before the vaccine. Now it’s in the hundreds.

    Liked by 1 person

  37. Gray Falcon
    April 28, 2016 at 11:31 pm

    sickofthelies- Are you familiar with the concept of “statistics?”

    Like

  38. Lawrence
    April 29, 2016 at 8:45 am

    And neither have hundreds of thousands of people who used to contract measles, mumps and rubella since the advent of mass vaccinations….

    Like

  39. sickofthelies
    April 29, 2016 at 4:42 pm

    “since the advent of mass vaccinations…”
    Those diseases were all in a downward decline before vaccinations.

    Like

  40. Nathan
    April 29, 2016 at 4:55 pm

    “Those diseases were all in a downward decline before vaccinations.”

    No, they weren’t. The death rate of them was, because of advancements in nutrition, hygiene, and medical care, but the rate of the diseases themselves was not declining. And the diseases were still killing plenty of people before vaccines eliminated (or near-eliminated) the disease altogether.

    Like

  41. Chris
    April 29, 2016 at 5:06 pm

    sickoflies: “Those diseases were all in a downward decline before vaccinations.”

    Hmmm, are you sure about that? The following is US Census data from the 20th century on the reported incidence of measles. Please tell us why the measles rates dropped 90% in the USA between 1960 and 1970. Please no not mention deaths (morbidity is not the same as mortality). Do not mention any other decade. Do not mention any other disease. And definitely do not mention any other country (England and Wales are not American states). Make sure you provide verifiable documentation of what great thing happened to cause the rates of the measles incidence to drop:

    From http://www.census.gov/prod/99pubs/99statab/sec31.pdf
    Year…. Rate per 100000 of measles
    1912 . . . 310.0
    1920 . . . 480.5
    1925 . . . 194.3
    1930 . . . 340.8
    1935 . . . 584.6
    1940 . . . 220.7
    1945 . . . 110.2
    1950 . . . 210.1
    1955 . . . 337.9
    1960 . . . 245.4
    1965 . . . 135.1
    1970 . . . . 23.2
    1975 . . . . 11.3
    1980 . . . . . 5.9
    1985 . . . . . 1.2
    1990 . . . . .11.2
    1991 . . . . . .3.8
    1992 . . . . . .0.9
    1993 . . . . . .0.1
    1994 . . . . . .0.4
    1995 . . . . . .0.1
    1996 . . . . . .0.2
    1997 . . . . . . 0.1

    By the way, you have not answered my question on how long immunity lasts after one actually gets and survives the bacterial diseases of pertussis, diphtheria and tetanus. Have you even bothered to look them up?

    Like

  42. Lawrence
    April 29, 2016 at 5:08 pm

    No, they weren’t in decline…deaths from those diseases were in decline, as Nathan stated, because of advances like Iron lungs, for instance.

    Unfortunately, the actual rate of infection stayed the same…..because “sanitation” doesn’t prevent the spread of airborne diseases.

    Like

  43. sickofthelies
    April 29, 2016 at 5:51 pm

    So you are stating that vaccines lowered the number of people getting the disease, but had no effect on the mortality rate, which was already declining before the vaccine was introduced? Fair enough.

    Like

  44. Lawrence
    April 29, 2016 at 5:59 pm

    What? You are dense aren’t you….

    Actually, mortality rates, which were declining due to modern medical interventions, dropped to nearly zero after mass vaccinations.

    If people aren’t getting infected, they don’t die.

    Like

  45. sickofthelies
    April 29, 2016 at 6:02 pm

    Vaccines lowered the morbidity rate.
    Sanitation, nutrition, clean water, etc. lowered the mortality rate.

    Got it!

    Like

  46. sickofthelies
    April 29, 2016 at 6:05 pm

    Lawrence, you can’t tell me that good nutrition, clean water, food, better health, better care, better immune system, etc. doesn’t contribute to the morbidity rate as well, airborne or not.

    Like

  47. Chris
    April 29, 2016 at 6:10 pm

    “So you are stating that vaccines lowered the number of people getting the disease, but had no effect on the mortality rate”

    Really? This is not an original excuse I have seen to avoid asking my question. Which is why I have another version. This involves data from the CDC Pink Book Appendix of morbidity/mortality values. Please tell us why reported deaths from measles from hundreds to less than a hundred between 1960 and 1970, then finally to less than a dozen by 1980:
    Disease: Measles in the USA
    Year__Cases____Deaths
    1950__319,124__468
    1951__530,118__683
    1952__683,077__618
    1953__449,146__462
    1954__682,720__518
    1955__555,156__345
    1956__611,936__530
    1957__486,799__389
    1958__763,094__552
    1959__406,162__385
    1960__441,703__380
    1961__423,919__434
    1962__481,530__408
    1963__385,156__364
    1964__458,083__421
    1965__261,905__276
    1966__204,136__261
    1967___62,705___81
    1968___22,231___24
    1969___25,826___41
    1970___47,351___89
    1971___75,290___90
    1972___32,275___24
    1973___26,690___23
    1974___22,690___20
    1975___24,374___20
    1976___41,126___12
    1977___57,245___15
    1978___26,871___11
    1979___13,597____6
    1980___13,506___11

    Like

  48. Chris
    April 29, 2016 at 6:14 pm

    sickoflies: “Lawrence, you can’t tell me that good nutrition, clean water, food, better health, better care, better immune system, etc. doesn’t contribute to the morbidity rate as well, airborne or not.”

    That is up to you to prove to us. Provide the PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers that was the real reason that morbidity and mortality to measles in the USA plummeted during the 1960s and 1970s.

    Like

  49. Lawrence
    April 29, 2016 at 7:31 pm

    No, it doesn’t.

    Because morbidity of these diseases did not go down until after mass vaccination.

    For instance, HiB rates decreased by 95+ percent after vaccination…..in the early 1990s.

    So what miracle of sanitation occurred during that period in the US?

    Like

  50. Chris
    April 29, 2016 at 8:28 pm

    Lawrence, is that first sentence supposed to say “Because morbidity of these diseases did not go down until after mass vaccination.”?

    Like

  51. Nathan
    April 30, 2016 at 1:50 am

    “So you are stating that vaccines lowered the number of people getting the disease, but had no effect on the mortality rate, which was already declining before the vaccine was introduced? Fair enough.”

    Nope, I’m saying that the vaccine eliminated, or near-eliminated, the morbidity rate and the remaining mortality rate, which was still significant. Measles still killed 450 or so per year, for a full decade before the vaccine came out. And that’s not counting underreporting.

    “Lawrence, you can’t tell me that good nutrition, clean water, food, better health, better care, better immune system, etc. doesn’t contribute to the morbidity rate as well, airborne or not.”

    We can confidently say that those things didn’t affect the disease incidence of measles, which was near universal before the vaccine came out. Nearly every child had measles sometime in their childhood prior to the vaccine. After the vaccine, nearly every child didn’t have measles.

    Like

  52. Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH
    May 9, 2016 at 11:17 pm

    Many of the childhood diseases when caught naturally do confer lifetime immunity, whereas some of the vaccines do require boosters. However, the natural diseases also come with risks. Measles, for instance, ended with over 50,000 hospitalizations per year, 400-500 deaths, and 1,000 to 2,000 permanent disabilities, e.g. seizure disorders, mental retardation, blindness, and deafness. In addition, all the other kids missed a week of school and nowadays with both parents often working just to make ends meet, one parent had to stay home with the sick kid. And the casualties from measles had significantly declined because of better nutrition and antibiotics (most measles related deaths were caused by secondary bacterial pneumonias); but then the above statistics did not decline over a decade. So, given that the overwhelming research shows the measles vaccine to be much safer than the actual measles, getting the vaccine is the wise choice and any risk of adverse events from the vaccine is close to zero for adults getting a booster.

    If one then were to add up all the usual childhood diseases, I got them all, the amount of school missed, hospitalizations, deaths, long-term disabilities, etc. compared to the risk from the vaccines makes vaccination the smart choice. Yes, there are risks from vaccines; but one has to ask: “compared to what?”

    Obviously, good nutrition, clean water, etc. contribute to overall health; but numerous studies have shown vaccinations to independently play a major role in our increased longevity. And all of the above play little into survival with certain diseases. For instance, tetanus is just as deadly regardless of ones overall health.

    As for the SV-40 virus found in some batches of polio vaccine, numerous studies have found no association with cancer. Yes, it has been found in some people with cancers; but we have numerous viruses in our bodies. In addition, studies have found it in those who didn’t receive the batches of vaccine that contained it. It is, in fact, ubiquitous in the environment.

    Like

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: