

U.S. measles cases in 2013 may be most in 17 years - tcoppi
http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/12/health/worst-measles-year/index.html

======
dobbsbob
[http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-
columbia/story/2013/08...](http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-
columbia/story/2013/08/08/bc-abbotsford-measles-threat.html) .. 31 kids
could've died because 1 religious zealot refused vaccinations.

For fuck's sake, get your vaccinations, and while I'm ranting stop drinking
un-Pasteurized milk from dirt hippy stores illegally too. There is no
elaborate conspiracy to keep nature down, it's to protect you from Salmonella,
E. coli, and Listeria

~~~
Alex3917
> 31 kids could've died because 1 religious zealot refused vaccinations.

What about the 30 million people who have died of the AIDS epidemic, which is
thought to have been started because of government vaccination programs?[1]

Similarly, what about the fact that the US government has been repeatedly
caught giving out fake vaccinations?[2] Or the fact that the safety standards
for medicine in the US are generally abysmal?[3]

All in all I think getting vaccinated is generally a good bet, but the idea
that there are no rational arguments against vaccination is completely
disingenuous.

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_HIV/AIDS](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_HIV/AIDS)

[2] [http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/jul/11/cia-fake-
vaccin...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/jul/11/cia-fake-vaccinations-
osama-bin-ladens-dna)

[3] [http://www.amazon.com/Bad-Pharma-Companies-Mislead-
Patients/...](http://www.amazon.com/Bad-Pharma-Companies-Mislead-
Patients/dp/0865478007/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1379046906&sr=8-1&keywords=bad+pharma)

~~~
nostrademons
Reading the Wikipedia article you cite for [1]:

1\. That is hardly consensus theory: it is one hypothesis postulated by a
small group of scientists, which is somewhat plausible but is very far from
having a compelling body of evidence in support of it.

2\. The theory is that vaccinations _in the 19th century_ may have caused HIV
due to unsterile injections given to many natives. Vaccination practice in the
21st century is _much_ different from vaccination practice in the 19th
century, and unsterile injections will cause all sorts of other problems.

~~~
Alex3917
Regarding point 1, I haven't read the book(s) so I can't speak to the extent
of the evidence. It seems to be the primary theory at this point though; most
of the alternative theories are just different variations on the vaccine
theme, e.g. the version proposed by the book Down The River.

Regarding point 2, the lesson to be learned I think is that with vaccines
there is a relatively large chance of black swan type issues coming up. And
even if there were a way to catch these sorts of problems, the medical system
isn't designed to even look for them.

------
rdl
It seems difficult to fight this directly -- prosecuting anti-vaccinators
would be viewed by supporters as persecution, and might actually make them
more reluctant to vaccinate.

Publicizing deaths due to lack of vaccination can work, but that lags -- by
the time enough of the population is unvaccinated for the disease to spread
and kill babies, it's too late.

I'm in favor of quarantining Napa/Marin and certain LA suburbs, since that
seems to be ground zero, at least in California, for this insanity.

Andrew Wakefield should have been forced to personally meet every parent of a
measles-infected baby as part of his punishment for fraud.

~~~
noonespecial
I've been thinking we should treat it as a free-rider problem. Given that
eradicating diseases like this really comes down to herd-immunity, what we
really have is free-riders unfairly benefitting from the slight risk that
others are taking through a certain medical intervention.

What gives a certain person the right to benefit from everyone else's
vaccinations while refusing to subject their own children to the minimal risk?
We don't need to prove that vaccines are "safe", just safer than a frikken
measles epidemic... and then tax the snot out of everyone who choses to forgo
that risk and expense by pushing it off onto others. Internalize that external
cost and I bet you'll see a whole lot of zealotry dry right up in the cold
face of monetary reality.

~~~
fitzhume
I agree that if medical treatment for measles was put in a more punitive price
range (depending on vaccination status, and economic background of course), I
could imagine a significant drop in people who choose not to vaccinate. Use
that extra money to immunize people who actually want it, but can't pay for
it. Use it for programs that teach about the dangers of letting your child go
unvaccinated, both for them and for other children.

~~~
rdl
The problem is the kind of fucktards who don't get their child vaccinated
might then delay or avoid treatment of their highly contagious child...

~~~
noonespecial
This is why this cost must be front-loaded. There should be a penalty paid
when the vaccine is refused, much like the penalty we're contemplating now for
people who refuse to enroll in the pending national health system. The logic
would be the same. By refusing this preventative treatment, you're likely to
incur a public cost in the future. We'd just like you to pay for that up
front.

------
zedpm
Given that this is caused almost entirely by anti-vaccination hysteria, and
that this in in turn caused mostly by a combination of ignorance and bizarre
religious beliefs, it's hard to imagine an effective response. It's been said
that you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves
into, and that seems apt here. Perhaps an attempt to shame people by
presenting the young, innocent victims is best (e.g. little 8-month old Suzy
died because XYZ Church members refused to vaccinate their children).

~~~
abstractbill
_...this in in turn caused mostly by a combination of ignorance and bizarre
religious beliefs..._

It's actually better/worse than that (depending on your perspective). People
were mislead by a _fraud_. And not fraud with any kind of a noble purpose - it
was for money.

~~~
rdl
Yeah - if it were just religious beliefs, those would be rare (although
concentrated) enough to preserve herd immunity, I think. It's Jenny McCarthy
and Andrew Wakefield who have turned this into a matter of national security.

------
wbeckler
Let me play devil's advocate here. The article says nothing about how many
people died of measles, it just gave an estimate of how dangerous some doctors
think measles is. Maybe none died and that's why they don't give a solid
number? If so, the danger of measles was overstated in that estimate.
Meanwhile, there's nothing in the article mentioning the danger of the
vaccine, which nobody claims is nonzero. Maybe the vaccine's danger is 1 in a
million. So with several million refusers 1 or 2 kids' lives were saved. At
the expense of how many kids dying of measles? Zero? We need more information
here.

~~~
grannyg00se
Pre-vaccine, measles would kill or seriously mess up about 1500 people yearly
in the U.S. I think the vaccination rate now is in the 70% range and deaths
from vaccination are hard to find. So it seems like vaccination is a win
there.

[http://www.cdc.gov/measles/vaccination.html](http://www.cdc.gov/measles/vaccination.html)

On the other hand, 1500 serious cases out of 300+ million people every year is
a pretty low percentage. Seems like the entire threat is highly overstated.

~~~
davidw
> 1500 serious cases out of 300+ million people every year is a pretty low
> percentage

You're using the number of cases _then_ with the population _now_ if I'm not
mistaken.

~~~
grannyg00se
I didn't realize it started in the 70s. Still, 1500 serious cases out of 200+
million is low.

------
ibejoeb
Just a week ago there was an outbrak of mumps in NJ:
[http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/05/health/new-jersey-mumps-
outbre...](http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/05/health/new-jersey-mumps-
outbreak/index.html)

If you only give your child one vaccine, make it the MMR. It's a lot safer
that measles, mumps, or rubella.

------
qq66
It's interesting that the vast human intelligence that created all of these
vaccines may be neutralized by vast human stupidity.

~~~
noonespecial
It seems like stupidity but I suspect its actually greed. If _everyone_ else
is vaccinated and there is zero latent disease in a given area, it makes sense
_personally_ not to get the vaccine. If there is indeed _zero_ chance of
contracting the disease, then any risk at all associated with the vaccine is
unnecessary. Bonus points for crackpot beliefs causing misestimation of the
actual risks, but the fundamental equation is unchanged.

Refuse to get vaccinated? Congrats, you're the betrayer in the prisoner's
dilemma. Your train stops at the tragedy of the commons.

