measles outbreaks ARE unvaccinated

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-25-2008
measles outbreaks ARE unvaccinated
50
Tue, 12-23-2008 - 8:55pm

skip to main | skip to sidebar






An Autism blog that discusses discrimination and factions within the Autism community. This blog has grown to cover mostly environmental issues that affect our ever-growing population of children with altered GI and Immune systems. Why is this happening to 1 out of every 6 of our kids? Copyright, Ashley Morgan









Thursday, August 21, 2008

Vaccine Refusals Fuel Measles Outbreak

REUTERS

Vaccine refusals fuel measles outbreak

Parents refusing to have their children vaccinated against measles have helped drive cases of the illness to their worst levels in a dozen years in the United States, health officials reported on Thursday.

In 2008 alone, 131 cases of measles have been reported, with 15 serious enough to be hospitalized, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported.

Most of those infected were not vaccinated and there is no reason for any cases to occur when vaccines can prevent them, the CDC said in a weekly report on death and diseases.

"Measles can be a severe, life-threatening illness" the CDC's Dr. Anne Schuchat said in a statement. "These cases resulted primarily from failure to vaccinate, many because of philosophical or religious belief."

Only 13 percent of the cases were imported, the CDC said, naming Italy, Switzerland, Belgium, India, Israel, China, Germany, Pakistan, the Philippines, and Russia. "This is the lowest percentage of imported measles cases since 1996," the CDC report reads.

At least 15 patients, including four children younger than 15, were hospitalized, although no one has died, the CDC said.

"In the decade before the measles vaccination program began, an estimated 3 to 4 million persons in the United States were infected each year. Of these, 400 to 500 died, 48,000 were hospitalized, and another 1,000 developed chronic disability from measles encephalitis."

Encephalitis is a life-threatening inflammation of the brain that can be caused by viral infections such as measles.

More than 90 percent of the patients were not vaccinated, the CDC said, had no evidence of having been vaccinated, or were babies too young to have been vaccinated.

"Of the 95 patients eligible for vaccination, 63 were unvaccinated because of their or their parents' philosophical or religious beliefs," the CDC said.

Some religious groups refuse vaccination but many parents have fears that vaccines are unsafe or may cause conditions such as autism -- fears the CDC says are unfounded.

"Increases in the proportion of the population declining vaccination for themselves or their children might lead to large-scale outbreaks in the United States," the CDC said.

Outbreaks of measles are being reported now in Israel, Switzerland, Austria, Italy and Britain among people who are declining the vaccine.

British health officials said in June that measles had again become endemic for the first time since the mid-1990s due to parents declining to get their children vaccinated.

The last serious U.S. outbreak was in 1989-1991, when 55,000 people got measles and 123 died. The CDC said 55 cases of measles were reported in 2006.

Measles kills about 250,000 people a year globally, mostly children in poor nations. The disease causes fever, coughing, irritation of the eyes and a rash. Serious complications include encephalitis and pneumonia that can be fatal.

"Measles knows no borders, but can be prevented for less than one dollar per child in a developing country. We must be steadfast in our efforts to reduce measles cases globally," the Measles Initiative, which includes the American Red Cross, CDC and United Nations agencies, said in a statement.

(Reporting by Maggie Fox; Editing by Michael Kahn)

Copyright © 2008 Reuters Limited.
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-09-2007
Wed, 12-31-2008 - 12:54am

And you can't have any longterm problems from vaccines if you never get one.

I think it's better to contract a disease naturally than be injected with it and who knows what else.

Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-09-2007
Wed, 12-31-2008 - 12:58am

I totally agree with everything you said. We are striving to keep our kids immune systems natural because we also believe that the immune system is designed to fight things off. When compared to other kids irl, my kids are healthier in general and take less time to fight off the common illnesses that go around.

We also do not use "antibacterial" soaps or liquids. IMO, the body needs to come into contact with germs in order to learn how to fight off the bad ones.

Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-13-2008
Wed, 12-31-2008 - 9:54am

I refuse to use antibacterial soaps/cleaners as well.

Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-09-2007
Wed, 12-31-2008 - 11:05am

lol, you and I would be pretty good friends irl! I always laugh to myself when I see people pulling out the antibacterial stuff and dousing their kids at the grocery store. Don't even get me started on things like paper plates! ;)

Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-24-2008
Wed, 12-31-2008 - 11:42am

I think it's better to contract a disease naturally than be injected with it and who knows what else.

** Except its probably not better to contract the disease if your child ends up in the ICU with meningitis because he or she did not receive the HIB vaccine .. before immunization against HIB -- it was the main cause of bacterial meningitis in children. Or when rubella is passed to a pregnant woman -- permanently handicapping the fetus (deaf / blind / MR / preterm labor / miscarriage, etc).. or any other number of serious complications from diseases that WOULD BE prevalent if we did not vaccinate on such a large scale in this country. :)



Photobucket





Photobucket




Photobucket











Lilypie Expecting a baby Ticker


Photobucket






Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-09-2007
Wed, 12-31-2008 - 12:04pm

1. It is a misnomer that the vaccines are to thank for the decline of certain diseases.

2. It is a fear tactic to talk about the complications from a disease and omit the complications from a vaccine.

It's probably not better for my child to end up with brain damage from a vaccine.

Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-24-2008
Wed, 12-31-2008 - 12:48pm
1. It is a misnomer that the vaccines are to thank for the decline of certain diseases.



Where is the proof of that? (peer-reviewed publications, please .. not blogs or one doctor / phd's opinion) Given the drastic decline in many of the diseases we now vaccinate against? When vaccine programs are started in developing countries there are drastic declines in the incidence of the diseases being vaccinated against. But, maybe it's just coincidence that at the same time the vaccine shows up, the disease runs to hide..



After 40 years of mass administration of oral and inactive poliovirus vaccines a pattern of impact is emerging. Both the vaccines have proved records of safety and efficacy, and there is now no doubt that applying oral polio vaccine over short periods and on a mass scale can control poliomyelitis in any country, irrespective of its geographical location or level of sanitation . . . From 1988 to 1994 the number of reported cases of poliomyelitis fell by 84%, from 25 711 to 4184. Cases from India in 1994 accounted for 93% of the regional total and 62% of the global total,7 but the disease has practically disappeared from many developed countries in the Americas, Europe, and Western Pacific regions.8 Most countries in southern and northern Africa have also recently achieved their eradication targets.4
BMJ 1996;312:1178-1179 (11 May)



2. It is a fear tactic to talk about the complications from a disease and omit the complications from a vaccine.



You can call it a fear tactic .. that is fine .. but it's true that the diseases vaccinated against can cause serious complications and / or death. There are adverse reactions to vaccines .. and you cannot predict who will or will not have them .. I'll acknowledge that. But with only anecdotal evidence to support many of the theories about the dangers of vaccinations.. its tough to convince me that the vaccine is more dangerous than the illness -- in most instances. The majority of people do not experience adverse vaccine reactions -- I'm not sure of any body of evidence that demonstrates the number of permanently disabling vaccine reactions vs. people who are not permanently disabled -- it would be a very difficult thing to study -- perhaps impossible -- given ethical constraints and the number of variables present in our environment.


Photobucket





Photobucket




Photobucket











Lilypie Expecting a baby Ticker


Photobucket






Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-09-2007
Wed, 12-31-2008 - 2:59pm

http://www.americanchiropractic.net/immunizations/Disease%20decline%20before%20introduction%20of%20immunization.pdf

"Fifty years ago, when the immunization schedule contained only four vaccines (for diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis and smallpox), autism was virtually unknown. First discovered in 1943, this most devastating malady, in what is now a spectrum of pervasive developmental disorders, afflicted less than 1 in 10,000 children.
Today, one in every 68 American families has an autistic child. Other, less severe developmental disorders, rarely seen before the vaccine era, have also reached epidemic proportions. Four million American children have Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). One in six American children are now classified as "Learning Disabled."

Our children are also experiencing an epidemic of autoimmune disorders: Type I diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, asthma and bowel disorders. There has been a 17-fold increase in Type I diabetes, from 1 in 7,100 children in the 1950s to 1 in 400 now. Juvenile rheumatoid arthritis afflicts 300,000 American children. Twenty-five years ago, this disease was so rare that public health officials did not keep any statistics on it. There has been a four-fold increase in asthma, and bowel disorders in children are much more common now than they were 50 years ago."

" The CDC has not done any studies to assess the long-term effects of its immunization schedule. To do that, one must conduct a randomized controlled trial, the lynchpin of evidenced-based medicine, where one group of children is vaccinated on the CDC's schedule and a control group is not vaccinated."

"the death rate for measles declined 97.7 percent during the first 60 years of the 20th century. The mortality rate was 133 deaths per million people in the U.S. in 1900, and had dropped to 0.3 deaths per million by 1960. Measles caused less than 100 deaths a year in the U.S. before there was a vaccine for this disease (in 1963)."

"In some countries cases of the diphtheria increased - in Germany from 64,138 cases in 1932 to 149,971 in 1936; in Copenhagen, Denmark from 41 cases in 1942 to 1,754 in 1944(24); in Holland from 1,273 cases in 1939 to 56,603 in 1943(25); in England and Wales there were 46,283 notifications in 1940, the next year (with a mass vaccination program) there were 50,797 cases(26).

The British Ministry of Health changed the rules for diagnosis of diphtheria - so the figures showed a "reduction" - in 1944 29,949 notifications(27) reduced to 23,199(28); 1945 25,246 notifications(27) reduced to 18,596(28); 1946 18,283 notifications(27) reduced to 11,986(28); 1947 10,464 notifications reduced to 5,596(29); 1948 8,035 notifications reduced to 3,560(29); 1949 4,982 notifications reduced to 1,881(30)."

"* In England and Wales, mortality fell from 100 per 100,000 children in 1860(31) to 40 per 100,000 children for the period 1861-70(32) - before the introduction of immunization.

* In Leicester, mortality per 100,000 fell from 17 in 1920, to 4 in 1923; and with practically no vaccination, continued to fall to 2 per 100,000 in 1932(33).

* In Nottingham, mortality per 100,000 fell from 34 in 1920, to 4 in 1923; and with practically no vaccination, continued to fall to 3 per 100,000 in 1932(33).

* In Northampton, mortality per 100,000 fell from 10 in 1920, to 4 in 1923; and with practically no vaccination, continued to fall to 1 per 100,000 in 1932(33). Dr Stephen Rowland, Medical Officer for Northampton, wrote in 1933 "Immunisation has not been practiced in this town, the marked decline in diphtheria during recent years having come about without any artificial means..."(34).

* In England and Wales, there were 18,566 cases of diphtheria in 1944, falling to 14,186 in 1945(35). Despite 56% of under 1 year-old children being unvaccinated, and 72% unvaccinated in 1951, cases of diphtheria fell to 155 in 1955, down to 51 cases in 1956(36)."

Complications from these diseases are usually listed as "rare" and IMO (as well as others) an immune system that has been uncompromised by vaccines will fight off the infections better and faster and with a less likely chance of secondary illness. I would much rather my child develop their immunity to a disease by naturally getting it (like I did, I should add).

Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-24-2008
Thu, 01-01-2009 - 12:28am

#1 Chiropractors are not doctors. Nor are they scientists.
#2 What does someone who cracks backs know about immunizations?
#3 There is a difference between morbidity and mortality. A decline in mortality from diseases can easily be attributed largely-in-part to medical advances and our understanding of how the body and the diseases work.



Photobucket





Photobucket




Photobucket











Lilypie Expecting a baby Ticker


Photobucket






Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-09-2007
Thu, 01-01-2009 - 3:13pm

It really doesn't matter what I post or where it's from. If it's not from the cdc or your husband then you won't take it into consideration at all. Honestly, I think it's nice having a civil discussion and you've been quite civil but I can see that you aren't here to open your mind to the possibility of anything other than what you believe. I'll just continue to use common sense and biological fact and know that my kids will have no risk of longterm effects from unknown injections.

Photobucket