If only half of America is properly vaccinated, where are the epidemics?

Lord Coke

Silver Belt
@Silver
Joined
Aug 18, 2003
Messages
10,789
Reaction score
13,458
I don't know very much about medical science so I don't have the background to know whether this article is accurate or not. I am hoping that some of the posters with medical training can take a look at this. If so it makes some of the policy arguments behind mandatory mass vaccinations invalid. @Greoric @Lubaolong

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-b...-america-is-properly-vaccinated-where-are-the

In 2014, an outbreak of whooping cough (pertussis) broke out in the San Diego area. Of the 621 individuals who were infected, nearly all of them were completely up to date on all preventive vaccinations. If vaccines are given to protect from disease, how could this happen?

San Diego public health official Dr. Wilma Wooten argued that the cause was related to a decrease in the protection offered by vaccines after the first year. This answer is most revealing, in that it speaks to the actual efficacy of vaccines. It also shows that the concept of herd immunity is largely myth—and completely misunderstood.

The theory of herd immunity states that when a critical mass of the population (usually stipulated at 95%) is vaccinated against a disease, the possibility of outbreaks is eliminated. This is the main argument that is used to shame parents who wish to refuse certain vaccinations for their children: by not vaccinating, they put the health of the “herd” at risk.

However, if vaccines start losing effectiveness after the first year, as Dr. Wooten says, then constant revaccination would be required, since the immunity offered is only temporary for most vaccines. Achieving the required rate of protection is virtually impossible under this paradigm.

Of course, if we look back over the decades and note the lack of rampant epidemics in our nation, while remembering that vaccine protection is in perpetual decline, the myth of herd immunity quickly unravels. Our society has never achieved this level of herd immunity, yet not a single major outbreak of disease has occurred.

Noted author and neurosurgeon Russell Blaylock, MD, offers this analysis:

It was not until relatively recently that it was discovered that most of these vaccines lost their effectiveness 2 to 10 years after being given. What this means is that at least half the population, that is the baby boomers, have had no vaccine-induced immunity against any of these diseases for which they had been vaccinated very early in life. In essence, at least 50% or more of the population was unprotected for decades.

After a recent outbreak of measles at Disneyland, the state legislature in California took the extraordinary measure of rescinding religious and philosophical exemptions for vaccinations, even for children at higher risk of vaccine injury. State Sen. Richard Pan, who led the fight, argued that it was imperative to public health to maintain herd immunity among the general population, and that to ensure 95% compliance, vaccination had to be mandatory. The law he authored, which risks the health of many vulnerable children, accomplishes nothing—because herd immunity is a myth.

The argument for herd immunity was actually developed out of observations of natural immunity, not vaccination. Statisticians observed that populations were protected when sufficient members contracted the wild form of a disease, and subsequently acquired lifelong immunity. With vaccines, however, evidence shows that unvaccinated children may catch infectious diseases from vaccinated children. What is true of natural immunity is not true of vaccination.

The herd immunity argument has always been inconsistent. On the one hand, the theory goes, people who cannot receive vaccines for whatever reason are protected from the disease through a high level of vaccination in the rest of society. On the other hand, the theory continues, parents who don’t vaccinate their children put the health of wider society at risk. How can a handful of people not getting vaccinated be protected from getting sick, while at the same time being so disease-ridden that they make others sick? This doesn’t make sense.

While herd immunity may not exist, herd mentality most definitely does. Health authorities, media commentators, and schools and their parent–teacher associations waste no opportunity in perpetuating this myth. Proponents have done such a thorough job of convincing the public that a parent who questions it is treated like someone who thinks the earth is flat or believes climate change is a conspiracy. On the contrary: an unprejudiced view of the science about vaccines, and an examination of history, clearly show that the herd immunity theory is—and always has been—flawed.

Vaccines may have a place in our medical arsenal, but they are not the silver bullet they’re portrayed to be. Year after year the pharmaceutical industry, looking for lucrative new profit centers, churns out new vaccines. They use pseudo-science to convince the public that these products are safe and effective, and they use public shaming to convince the citizenry that non-compliance is a public health threat. This entire racket completely falls apart with a close examination of the herd immunity myth. Until we are honest in our assessment of both the safety and efficacy of vaccines, kids will continue to be hurt, rights will continue to be trampled, and mythology will continue to trump science.

Gretchen DuBeau is Executive Director of Alliance for Natural Health USA.
 
Last edited:
Yikes. This entire premise (unsurprisingly from a "natural medicine" figure), that a theory is not absolutely perfect and is therefore invalid, is silly and is unfortunately a philosophical staple of anti-vaxxers and basically any reactionary dissident. You can even see it in non-scientific political waves (such as: "this one article by NYT had an obscure factual inconsistency and therefore all of their findings can be dismissed without scrutiny.")

Likewise, the expectation that all of the laymen public should be able to converse on the issue with the nuance of a scientist, and not rely on scientific consensus through government agency, is silly.

Vaccines may have a place in our medical arsenal, but they are not the silver bullet they’re portrayed to be. Year after year the pharmaceutical industry, looking for lucrative new profit centers, churns out new vaccines. They use pseudo-science to convince the public that these products are safe and effective, and they use public shaming to convince the citizenry that non-compliance is a public health threat. This entire racket completely falls apart with a close examination of the herd immunity myth. Until we are honest in our assessment of both the safety and efficacy of vaccines, kids will continue to be hurt, rights will continue to be trampled, and mythology will continue to trump science.

Non-compliance is a public health threat. It just is. You can argue about the scope or size of the threat, but to deny the relationship between vaccination and herd immunity is kind of silly.


And protecting against pseudo-science-backed offerings by the pharmaceutical industry is what government agencies like the FDA are meant for: consulting impartial scientific professionals to properly vet medicine.

Also, the author's organization (Alliance for Natural Health) has recently taken a stance on the recent glyphosate revelations that was not particularly well received by the scientific community.
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/08/glyphosate-breakfast-controversy/567784/

Lastly, particularly relevant to this cross section (MMA fans and pseudo/science) I really like following this guy on Facebook. He goes after pseudoscientists, chemical alarmists, and naturalists pretty hardcore and is funny about it. And he's somewhat of a bro.
10931559_899143160117003_3359868305405169774_o.jpg

https://www.facebook.com/therealcrediblehulk/
40893076_2139254849439155_4103906302902665216_n.jpg

41202468_2140645019300138_8528177755467022336_n.jpg
 
Last edited:
@alanb Sorry to bombard you with pics/links in the first post - I know you're coming about this topic in good faith.

I likewise don't have a deep scientific pedigree and I can't speak all that insightfully on the science, as much as I can on some of the flaws in the author's reasoning (the failure to consider the social habits of senior citizens also comes to mind). I just happened to be perusing the above referenced outlet when I saw this thread and thought I'd throw some free advertisement his way. He's a pretty nonpartisan and humorous guy to follow.
 
If only half of America is properly vaccinated, where are the epidemics?

Not sure about your source, but it sounds like 'propaganda' bullshit to me:

"Vaccines may have a place in our medical arsenal, but they are not the silver bullet they’re portrayed to be. Year after year the pharmaceutical industry, looking for lucrative new profit centers, churns out new vaccines. They use pseudo-science to convince the public that these products are safe and effective, and they use public shaming to convince the citizenry that non-compliance is a public health threat. This entire racket completely falls apart with a close examination of the herd immunity myth. Until we are honest in our assessment of both the safety and efficacy of vaccines, kids will continue to be hurt, rights will continue to be trampled, and mythology will continue to trump science."

The efficacy, or performance, of a vaccine is dependent on a number of factors:
  • The disease itself (for some diseases vaccination performs better than for others).
  • The strain of vaccine (some vaccines are specific to, or at least most effective against, particular strains of the disease)..
  • Whether the vaccination schedule has been properly observed.
  • Idiosyncratic response to vaccination; some individuals are 'non-responders' to certain vaccines, meaning that they do not generate antibodies even after being vaccinated correctly.
  • Assorted factors such as ethnicity, age, or genetic predisposition.
In the United States, vaccine has pretty much eradicated the following diseases:
  • Smallpox
  • Rinderpest
  • Polio
  • Malaria
  • Lymphatic filariasis
 
@alanb Sorry to bombard you with pics/links in the first post - I know you're coming about this topic in good faith.

I likewise don't have a deep scientific pedigree and I can't speak all that insightfully on the science, as much as I can on some of the flaws in the author's reasoning (the failure to consider the social habits of senior citizens also comes to mind). I just happened to be perusing the above referenced outlet when I saw this thread and thought I'd throw some free advertisement his way. He's a pretty nonpartisan and humorous guy to follow.

The reason I am taking this article somewhat seriously is because it is from the Hill which I think is a legitimate publication. Or at least the Hill's blog. I'd like to think they would not publish something that is completely inaccurate. This is one of those threads where I am just throwing something out there to learn rather than taking a particular position on anything.
 
If only half of America is properly vaccinated, where are the epidemics?

By Gretchen DuBeau — 09/13/16 03:25 PM EDT
The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill

@alanb - read the underlined portion above. Sounds more like an editorial piece with a lot of bias to it.
 
The reason I am taking this article somewhat seriously is because it is from the Hill which I think is a legitimate publication. Or at least the Hill's blog. I'd like to think they would not publish something that is completely inaccurate. This is one of those threads where I am just throwing something out there to learn rather than taking a particular position on anything.

I think the piece is very flawed, just in terms of its reasoning and overall approach to the subject, but I wouldn't say it's completely inaccurate, nor is it from some per se bunk source. The woman is a notable figure in her...err, movement.

However, the big factual citation that underpins her position is from Russell Blaylock, so I would take it with a large dose of caution. That guy is a quack. He was one of the "OBAMACARE DEATH PANELS!" folks. So I wouldn't be surprised if his statement is inaccurate.

Russell L Blaylock (born 1945) is an alternative health promoting physician who lives in Jackson, Miss. Blaylock has appeared all over the food-related advocacy space and has been around the voodoo health claims circuit.

Among his earlier campaigns Blaylock opposed food additives like aspartame and MSG. He had a wagon-full of junk science claims in his book regarding ‘excitotoxins’–a term he helped coin that is found in several homeopathic and alternative health snake oil sales sites. [1] Blaylock also promotes chemtrail conspiracies alleging cancer-causing nanoparticles as being purposefully released into the atmosphere in a government-corporate scheme.[2] Skeptic’s Dictionary and QuackWatch call him an anti-vaxxer [3] while selling his own line of “Brain Repair Formula” supplements. He has been called “quack of the day” by The Vaccine Conspiracy Theorist.[4]

To herbal medicine and alternative treatment groups, he sells alternative treatments for neurological disorders that he claims stem from aspartame, MSG and other food additives.

Career
  • Retired from medicine to write and promote his products for ‘Surgical Neurology International, Theoretical Neuroscience Research, LLC, and Advanced Nutritional Research, LLC.
  • Assistant Editor-in-Chief, Surgical Neurology International, UCLA – Serves as editorial board journal under neuroscience section as editor in chief.[5]
  • Founder, Theoretical Neuroscience Research, LLC, 2011 – Present (4 years) Ridgeland, MS
  • Founder, Advanced Nutritional Research, LLC, 2009 – Present (6 years) Ridgeland, MS
Education
  • Medical University of South Carolina, M.D., Resident in Neurosurgery. 1971 – 1977
  • Louisiana State University School of Medicine in New Orleans, 1968 – 1971
Short biography
Russell L. Blaylock is an author and a retired U.S. neurosurgeon. Blaylock introduced a new treatment for a subset of brain tumors, as well as improving certain operations treating hydrocephalus, often called “water on the brain,” which causes babies’ or young children’s head to swell.

Blaylock was a clinical assistant professor of neurosurgery at the University of Mississippi Medical Center and is currently a visiting professor in the biology department at Belhaven College

icon-fill.png

. He is the author of a number of books and papers, including Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills (1994), Health and Nutrition Secrets That Can Save Your Life (2002), and Natural Strategies for Cancer Patients (2003), and writes a monthly newsletter, the Blaylock Wellness Report.


Advocacy
Blaylock has endorsed views inconsistent with the scientific consensus, including that food additives such as aspartame and monosodium glutamate (MSG) are “excitotoxic” to the brain in normal doses, that the H1N1 influenza (swine flu) vaccine carries more risk than swine flu itself, and that GMOs are dangerous to health at any dose.

Allegations of health dangers
Blaylock opposes the use of certain vaccines. He has urged avoidance of the swine flu (H1N1) vaccination, which he claims is more dangerous than the infection itself. He has also given advice on what he feels an individual should do if faced with mandatory vaccination,[6] although current research indicates that an effective vaccine is a vital tool in protecting the public and that the H1N1 vaccine is both safe and effective. Blaylock suggests that vitamin D, fish oil and antioxidants are effective against catching the flu. According to McGill University’s Joe Schwarcz, there is no evidence for these claims.

Blaylock also claims the supposed toxicity of numerous substances that according to scientific studies are safe at customary exposure levels. He has been quoted several times in media outlets regarding his position that MSG is toxic to the brain.[7] He also states that the widely used artificial sweetener aspartame is toxic and may be the cause of multiple sclerosis in his book Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills (Health Press, 1994. ISBN 0-929173-14-7). He has additionally cautioned against heavy use of the artificial sweetener Splenda (sucralose).[8] These positions are not supported by scientific consensus or regulatory bodies, as extensive studies support the safety of aspartame, sucralose, and MSG.

Advertisements selling the ‘Blaylock Wellness Report’ at newsmax.com contain claims of additional health dangers, including fluoridated drinking water, fluoridated toothpaste, vaccines, dental amalgam, cholesterol drugs, pesticides, and aluminum cookware.The following advertisements for The Blaylock Wellness Report include these: Mercury: Save Your Body From Nature’s Deadly Poison, Autism, Why Fluoride Is Toxic, and Food Additives. In April 2013, Blaylock entered his endorsement of the chemtrails conspiracy theory on an internet radio program called Linderman Unleashed Radio Show where he cited increased levels of aluminum in water bodies and nature with his common sense observations of the skies. He proposed the conspiratorial and criminal aircraft spraying by governments of nano toxins for some supposed global, emergency purpose.[9]

Views on politics
Blaylock has called the American medical system ‘collectivist’ and has suggested that health-care reform efforts under President Obama are masterminded by extragovernmental groups that wish to impose euthanasia. He blamed the purported collectivism of American medicine for the retirement of his friend Miguel Faria. According to Blaylock, the former Soviet Union tried to spread collectivism by covertly introducing illegal drugs and various sexually transmitted diseases into the United States. Schwarcz characterized these positions as “conspiracy theories.”

Regarding his political and philosophical influences, Blaylock wrote that he began “exploring for the first time some of the classics of liberty” while doing his internship at the Medical University of South Carolina, which he said was “deeply embroiled in a leftist-initiated war on Western Culture.” Among these works, Blaylock mentioned Frédéric Bastiat’s The Law, Friedrich Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom and The Constitution of Liberty, and works by Ludwig von Mises, and Murray Rothbard.[10] Blaylock has also been a longtime supporter of the Institute of World Politics, and has praised its founder, John Lenczowski, for his “…dedication to sound principles of transcendent law, moral absolutes and the teaching of these principles within the scope of statecraft…”

https://geneticliteracyproject.org/glp-facts/russell-blaylock/
 
The reason I am taking this article somewhat seriously is because it is from the Hill which I think is a legitimate publication. Or at least the Hill's blog. I'd like to think they would not publish something that is completely inaccurate. This is one of those threads where I am just throwing something out there to learn rather than taking a particular position on anything.

The article is somewhat sensational and the authors fall into the same trap many pro-vax folks do. They use a broad brush to paint all "Vaccines," the same, and in the process fail to consider very important nuances and risk/benefits.

Nonetheless, it seems that the underlying point of the article has some merit and I haven't seen a rebuttal to this important argument. It seems the theory of herd immunity needs to be adjusted, obviously. Regardless, for some diseases vaccination is obviously very important in stopping the spread, if that is your primary goal. For example, vaccination for measles, an airborne disease, is more critical in stopping spread than vaccination say for polio, which is spread by oral fecal transmission.

This topic is fascinating (epidemiology of diseases and vaccination), unfortunately it is difficult to find unbiased information. More than anything though, is the troubling lack of real objective information related to risk/benefit. The reality is that , people are harmed by vaccination at a rate almost certainty much higher than generally accepted. In my opinion, any scientifically minded person would have to admit that the vaccination program is a giant experiment. While this might be an acceptable risk to some, in my opinion the design and implementation of this experiment is very flawed and needlessly harmful.
 
Vaccines are not 100 percent effective. Waning immunity means vaccinated people might still get sick. A Google search tells me that 5 years after the last pertussis shot, about 30% of kids are susceptible again (probably why the tdap booster is given around this age). People who are not vaccinated are at way higher risk of getting pertussis than the vaccinated kids. Almost all kids in the US get the full series of pertussis vaccines, so it's not surprising that most pertussis cases occur in vaccinated people. Doesn't mean the vaccine doesn't work. It's just means that almost everyone is vaccinated but the vaccines don't offer guaranteed protection forever.
 
The reason I am taking this article somewhat seriously is because it is from the Hill which I think is a legitimate publication.

It's an opinion article by Gretchen Dubeau of the Alliance for Natural Health and formerly of the board of the Integrative Medicine Consortium.

Anti-vax headquarters in other words.
 
For some reason it has become controversial for some to mention this, but in many health books and even some TV programs discuss the great impact improved sanitation and improved food quality has had on eliminating many deadly infectious diseases of the past. Basically having improved natural immune systems has kept us from having a large disease outbreak.

We appear to be seeing this being played out in Venezuela now. With food becoming scares, starvation more common, people's immune systems are being hurt. With weakened immune systems, that has led to reports of increased infectious diseases spreading in Venezuela.

From a historical stand point this is a book that I enjoyed. It goes into detail on the rolls played with improved sanitation, food quality, vaccines, & antibiotics with infectious diseases.

https://www.amazon.com/Dissolving-I...preST=_SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch
 
My household has been vaccine-free for over 10 years. Some of these outbreaks we’ve seen first hand. It was an eye opener watching my kids’ vaccinated classmates and vaccinated teachers catch the mumps. The vaccines are weak (it is debatable whether they have always been weak or whether the newer ones are designed weaker deliberately). What is less debatable as that article mentions, is that plenty of fully vaccinated people are caught up in these outbreaks. One would naturally assume that the combination of weak vaccines and people not taking them would be a powder-keg, right?

1) Ask around. Take the most pro-vaccine people you know and GRILL them on the booster schedules. Are they all up to date? Very rarely are they up to date on DPT, MMR, and many totally ignore the flu shot.

2) Next casually ask all the doctors you meet, “off the record of course.....do you take all the boosters”? If they say, no, ask if they still take vaccines. In my experience about half of the doctors I’ve talked with do not take vaccines themselves.
 
For some reason it has become controversial for some to mention this, but in many health books and even some TV programs discuss the great impact improved sanitation and improved food quality has had on eliminating many deadly infectious diseases of the past. Basically having improved natural immune systems has kept us from having a large disease outbreak.

We appear to be seeing this being played out in Venezuela now. With food becoming scares, starvation more common, people's immune systems are being hurt. With weakened immune systems, that has led to reports of increased infectious diseases spreading in Venezuela.

From a historical stand point this is a book that I enjoyed. It goes into detail on the rolls played with improved sanitation, food quality, vaccines, & antibiotics with infectious diseases.

https://www.amazon.com/Dissolving-I...preST=_SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4108111/

Before the twentieth century, poor hygiene and sanitation meant that almost all children were exposed to poliovirus during infancy, which enabled natural immunity to build up in populations. The industrial revolution brought great sanitary improvements, including the separation of sewage from drinking water. While this proved vital in increasing public health standards in general, it initially had disastrous effects in relation to polio cases. It reduced childhood exposure to the virus and lowered immunity levels in communities, creating the perfect setting for epidemics to ignite
 
This a great thread. Yeah if the numbers are right 50% vaccination rate isn't enough to support herd immunity, which is around 90% vaccination rate or so. With that said we're an especially hygenic civilization as compared to historically, and we're still, at the moment, winning the battle against bacteria with antibiotics.

With that said, I just went to a conference talk with a Virologist mentioning we're set up for the next flu pandemic that could wreck shit for everyone (I'm more optimistic in person I sware). Happy sunday everyone!
 
Not sure how many here have children, or have ever had sex for that matter.

It makes me wonder, however, when doctors tell me that the guidelines they once prescribed to assist child developement are outdated, and should immediately be replaced with these “new” guidelines!

Walkers, for example...doctors swore by them only 10 years ago...now, they advise new parents to stay the hell away from those death traps!

C’mon, science!
 
I'm wondering why pro vax people get so pissed off at anti vaxxers. If you or your kid is vaccinated, arent unvaccinated people no threat? Otherwise what is the point of being vaccinated?
 
I'm wondering why pro vax people get so pissed off at anti vaxxers. If you or your kid is vaccinated, arent unvaccinated people no threat? Otherwise what is the point of being vaccinated?

Because lacking vaccinations kills people. Not surprised a lack of empathy is in your wheelhouse.
 
Back
Top