• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Congratulations to the anti-vaccination crowd!

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,598
154
106
I saw you made a post, prepared for the fail, and you didn't disappoint!

Sure, it's mathematically POSSIBLE for an infant to contract whooping cough if 100% of all other vaccination candidates have been fully vaccinated. However, the risk in that scenario is astronomically minute compared to the risk in a scenario where only 80% (arbitrary number, pick anything you like below 100% and the odds increase exponentially) are vaccinated.

You've made a bold claim regarding herd immunity and have been invited to share any science to back it up. Until you can provide this, we can only assume you're simply promoting your own opinions as fact.


What the FUCK are you talking about? You are arguing my points and then telling me im wrong?

HERD IMMUNITY is bullshit that ani-vaccination whackos spout as the reason why their kid should be safe if they dont vaccinate them, because of the immunity of the rest of the herd.

"Absolutely it decreases the odds a random individual will encounter a communicable infection of a particular disease.

What I am saying is that Herd immunity does not protect the indivual who is NOT vaccinated, nor will it ever eliminate the resevoir of disease. You can vaccinate people for thousands of years. Then stop vaccinating people, and the disease will absolutely return.


Amused is the moron who said these kids wouldnt have died if we achieved herd immunity. its a fallacy.
 

Vette73

Lifer
Jul 5, 2000
21,503
8
0
What the FUCK are you talking about? You are arguing my points and then telling me im wrong?

HERD IMMUNITY is bullshit that ani-vaccination whackos spout as the reason why their kid should be safe if they dont vaccinate them, because of the immunity of the rest of the herd.

"Absolutely it decreases the odds a random individual will encounter a communicable infection of a particular disease.

What I am saying is that Herd immunity does not protect the indivual who is NOT vaccinated, nor will it ever eliminate the resevoir of disease. You can vaccinate people for thousands of years. Then stop vaccinating people, and the disease will absolutely return.


Amused is the moron who said these kids wouldnt have died if we achieved herd immunity. its a fallacy.

AGAIN you made a statement and said "science" would support you. So put up or shut up.

All you keep doign is repaeting yourself with no proof. Same as the idiots that say vaccines cause autism.
 

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,598
154
106
Links to said science?
"Cannot contract the disease" should probably read as "cannot acquire the disease to a level of infection that would become contagious."

So perhaps you could then explain why people who have been vaccinated for varicella-zoster virus still get shingles throughout life?
 

child of wonder

Diamond Member
Aug 31, 2006
8,307
175
106
What the FUCK are you talking about? You are arguing my points and then telling me im wrong?

HERD IMMUNITY is bullshit that ani-vaccination whackos spout as the reason why their kid should be safe if they dont vaccinate them, because of the immunity of the rest of the herd.

"Absolutely it decreases the odds a random individual will encounter a communicable infection of a particular disease.

What I am saying is that Herd immunity does not protect the indivual who is NOT vaccinated, nor will it ever eliminate the resevoir of disease. You can vaccinate people for thousands of years. Then stop vaccinating people, and the disease will absolutely return.


Amused is the moron who said these kids wouldnt have died if we achieved herd immunity. its a fallacy.
Amused based that statement on the fact that if there were less anti-vaccination whackos properly vaccinating their kids the odds of these vulnerable infants being exposed to whooping cough would dramatically decrease and would likely have prevented their deaths.

"Herd Immunity" works that way -- it decreases the chances those who are too young to be vaccinated will be exposed to the disease. Parents who do not vaccinate their children are not only gambling with the lives of their kids, but the lives of others.

You said "herd immunity" has been proven to be a myth since the 1960s. Where is the science? Your "10 seconds" to disprove "herd immunity" has elapsed several fold. Where is the science?
 

child of wonder

Diamond Member
Aug 31, 2006
8,307
175
106
So perhaps you could then explain why people who have been vaccinated for varicella-zoster virus still get shingles throughout life?
Because of the font change I can only assume you copy and pasted that from somewhere. Where? Link?

Where is the science that debunks "herd immunity" in 10 seconds?
 

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,598
154
106
AGAIN you made a statement and said "science" would support you. So put up or shut up.

All you keep doign is repaeting yourself with no proof. Same as the idiots that say vaccines cause autism.

Again... you arent even reading what im saying.
IM NOT ANTI VACCINE.

Herd immunity will NEVER eliminate disease,

Smallpox: Not eradicated completey. Many avenues for possible return.
http://whqlibdoc.who.int/smallpox/9241561106_chp30.pdf


Does this bolded paragraph ring a bell?

http://scienceblogs.com/aetiology/2006/08/the_evolution_of_smallpox_1.php
A number of conditions must first be met to even consider an organism for eradication.

First, the organism must be a pathogen only of humans, and can't have a non-human reservoir. Imagine the difficulty of trying to eradicate something like E. coli or Salmonella, which have a practically endless reservoir in animals and the environment.

Second, the infection must induce long-lasting immunity. An organism that can re-infect a person multiple times, or has a number of different serotypes (such as influenza) is not a good candidate for eradication. Additionally, a vaccine that requires only a single dose for long-lasting protection is also ideal.

Third, to go along with #2, there must be a tool or intervention that stops the chain of transmission between individuals. Though this is often assumed to be a vaccine, it could be an antimicrobial drug, or even a physical quarantine, depending on the organism and its current distribution.

Fourth, there has to be a committment by multiple agencies and countries to organism eradication. This includes not only funds and time but a willingness to work with people in different countries and cultures to bring the eradication plan to fruition.

Fifth, and probably most critical, the disease must be considered important enough to justify the expenditure of time and money. A worldwide effort to eradicate, say, athelete's foot just ain't gonna cut it--it needs to be a disease that's serious in terms of morbidity and/or mortality.
 

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,598
154
106
Amused based that statement on the fact that if there were less anti-vaccination whackos properly vaccinating their kids the odds of these vulnerable infants being exposed to whooping cough would dramatically decrease and would likely have prevented their deaths.

Amused said that these kids got that disease because it hasnt been eradicated because herd immunity hadnt been reached. He said that if herd immunity was reached, it would be impossible for these kids to have obtained this disease,

Herd immunity does not eradicate disease, not does it prevent disease for the unvaccinated.

READING COMPREFUCKINGHENSION
 
Last edited:

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,164
0
0
For anyone who may be confused by Sao's comments, the following article should clarify where he has gone wrong. (Hint: he doesn't understand what "herd immunity" actually is.)

Herd immunity (or community immunity) describes a type of immunity that occurs when the vaccination of a portion of the population (or herd) provides protection to unprotected individuals.[1] Herd immunity theory proposes that, in diseases passed from individual to individual, it is more difficult to maintain a chain of infection when large numbers of a population are immune. The higher the proportion of individuals who are immune, the lower the likelihood that a susceptible person will come into contact with an infectious individual.

Vaccination acts as a sort of firebreak or firewall in the spread of the disease, slowing or preventing further transmission of the disease to others.[3] Unvaccinated individuals are indirectly protected by vaccinated individuals, as the latter will not contract and transmit the disease between infected and susceptible individuals.[2] Hence, a public health policy of herd immunity may be used to reduce spread of an illness and provide a level of protection to a vulnerable, unvaccinated subgroup. Since only a small fraction of the population (or herd) can be left unvaccinated for this method to be effective, it is considered best left for those who cannot safely receive vaccines because of a medical condition such as an immune disorder or for organ transplant recipients.

The proportion of immune individuals in a population above which a disease may no longer persist is the herd immunity threshold. Its value varies with the virulence of the disease, the efficacy of the vaccine, and the contact parameter for the population.[3] No vaccine offers complete protection, but the spread of disease from person to person is much higher in those who remain unvaccinated.[4] It is the general aim of those involved in public health to establish herd immunity in most populations. Complications arise when widespread vaccination is not possible or when vaccines are rejected by a part of the population. As of 2009[update], herd immunity is compromised in some areas for some vaccine-preventable diseases, including pertussis and measles and mumps, in part because of parental refusal of vaccination.
Herd immunity is not an absolute. When vaccinations thresholds are met, the probability of transmission is dramatically REDUCED. In this particular case, it is theoretically possible that these infants contracted these diseases from animals. However, it isn't very likely and hence the scientific conclusion is that reduced rates of vaccination are the cause of the deaths.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity

- wolf
 

child of wonder

Diamond Member
Aug 31, 2006
8,307
175
106
Amused said that these kids got that disease because it hasnt been eradicated because herd immunity hadnt been reached. He said that if herd immunity was reached, it would be impossible for these kids to have obtained this disease,

Herd immunity does not eradicate disease, not does it prevent disease for the unvaccinated.

READING COMPREFUCKINGHENSION
Who is saying Herd Immunity eradicates a disease? I suppose I shouldn't speak for Amused (he's quite capable of doing that on his own) but Herd Immunity decreases the risk of the vulnerable contracting a disease. In terms of eradication, Herd Immunity is a necessary condition but not sufficient.

The increase in whooping cough in California directly coincides with the "anti-vaccination" movement as new cases are at their highest levels since 1955. Had Andrew Wakefield's discredited study on the links of the MMR vaccine to autism never been authored at least one of the 9 children who perished from whooping cough in the article would have never contracted it to begin with.

EDIT:

Amused made no such claim. He said that because an acceptable level of Herd Immunity is not currently being maintained, there is a higher risk of the susceptible to contract pertussis. He said maintaining a sufficient level of Herd Immunity for a long enough period of time is essential in eradicating a disease, not that Herd Immunity alone will do the job.
 
Last edited:

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,598
154
106
For anyone who may be confused by Sao's comments, the following article should clarify where he has gone wrong. (Hint: he doesn't understand what "herd immunity" actually is.)



Herd immunity is not an absolute. When vaccinations thresholds are met, the probability of transmission is dramatically REDUCED. In this particular case, it is theoretically possible that these infants contracted these diseases from animals. However, it isn't very likely and hence the scientific conclusion is that reduced rates of vaccination are the cause of the deaths.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity

- wolf
I know what herd immunity is...

Herd immunity is the reason WHY anti-vaccinations people justify their actions of non-vaccination. AKA everyone around me is vacccinated...therefore my exposure will be NULL... AKA my child will still be safe.

If Marlin1975 & child of wonder want to believe that herd immunity works... and will keep their children safe... great.

My children do and will be vaccinationed for their own protection.
 

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,598
154
106
Who is saying Herd Immunity eradicates a disease? AMUSED. THIS IS WHAT I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO DISPUTE THIS WHOLE TIME.

I suppose I shouldn't speak for Amused (he's quite capable of doing that on his own) but Herd Immunity decreases the risk of the vulnerable contracting a disease. In terms of eradication, Herd Immunity is a necessary condition but not sufficient.

IVE BEEN FUCKING SAYING THAT ALL ALONG...AND YOU MORONS HAVE BEEN ATTACKING ME AS IF IM THE ANTIVACCINE PERSON.

READING COMPREFUCKINGHENSION AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The increase in whooping cough in California directly coincides with the "anti-vaccination" movement as new cases are at their highest levels since 1955. Had Andrew Wakefield's discredited study on the links of the MMR vaccine to autism never been authored at least one of the 9 children who perished from whooping cough in the article would have never contracted it to begin with.
see bolded.
 

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,164
0
0
I know what herd immunity is...

Herd immunity is the reason WHY anti-vaccinations people justify their actions of non-vaccination. AKA everyone around me is vacccinated...therefore my exposure will be NULL... AKA my child will still be safe.

If Marlin1975 & child of wonder want to believe that herd immunity works... and will keep their children safe... great.

My children do and will be vaccinationed for their own protection.
If you knew what herd immunity is, you wouldn't be claiming it is bunk. What you have done is misunderstand the term "immunity" as an absolute when in fact the entire concept is probabalistic. No one doubts that diseases can be contracted from animals, for example. That is a straw man.

- wolf
 

child of wonder

Diamond Member
Aug 31, 2006
8,307
175
106
I know what herd immunity is...

Herd immunity is the reason WHY anti-vaccinations people justify their actions of non-vaccination. AKA everyone around me is vacccinated...therefore my exposure will be NULL... AKA my child will still be safe.

If Marlin1975 & child of wonder want to believe that herd immunity works... and will keep their children safe... great.

My children do and will be vaccinationed for their own protection.
What's funny here is that you and I are both PRO-VACCINE. My children are vaccinated and I look down upon those who refuse to vaccinate theirs based on junk science.

What we're arguing about here is your claim that Herd Immunity is a myth and can be debunked by science in 10 seconds.
 

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,598
154
106
Amused made no such claim. He said that because an acceptable level of Herd Immunity is not currently being maintained, there is a higher risk of the susceptible to contract pertussis. He said maintaining a sufficient level of Herd Immunity for a long enough period of time is essential in eradicating a disease, not that Herd Immunity alone will do the job.
Really??

Herd immunity not only protects those who are immunized, but those who are not as well.

Period.
This is the definition of "herd immunity." Once a threshold is passed, the disease stops spreading completely, thus protecting the non-immunized as well.

Herd immunity can lead to the complete disappearance of a disease. Like Small Pox: Because herd immunity levels were maintained long enough, Small Pox was eradicated and we no longer even require the vaccine. We have that ability with many other diseases as well. But the anti-vaccination crowd is fucking that up completely.

Herd immunity does not protect un-immunized indivuals. It merely limits their chance for exposure. Exposed individuals WILL contract and suffer the disease. Zero protection.

Herd immunity will never eliminate a disease. Smallpox is not eliminated.
See above the 5 conditions for eradicating a disease. Herd immunity is only 1/5.
 

Howard

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
47,988
9
81
Whooping cough, as far as I know, is carried only by humans, so if everybody gets vaccinated, the disease ceases to exist, right?

EDIT: the kids die, whatever
 

JTsyo

Lifer
Nov 18, 2007
10,990
247
106
Probably the former, immunizations are cheap, if not free, but when you put it into perspective ...

"1.77% of the 7,174 public and private schools in California reported 2009 whooping cough immunization rates of 50 percent or less for kindergartners."

or

"0.88% of students in the 7,174 schools are not immunized."

Still bad, it just lacks the impact the original statement has.
You missing a part of it. Schools that have under 50% rates mean that if it breaks out in those schools, half the kids are at risk of getting it. It's a much bigger risk than have a scattered small population than having them in close proximity.
 

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,598
154
106
Whooping cough, as far as I know, is carried only by humans, so if everybody gets vaccinated, the disease ceases to exist, right?

EDIT: the kids die, whatever
I read all higher primates.
Cant remember where there.
 

child of wonder

Diamond Member
Aug 31, 2006
8,307
175
106
Really??

Herd immunity does not protect un-immunized indivuals. It merely limits their chance for exposure. Exposed individuals WILL contract and suffer the disease. Zero protection.

Herd immunity will never eliminate a disease. Smallpox is not eliminated.
See above the 5 conditions for eradicating a disease. Herd immunity is only 1/5.
READ YOUR OWN QUOTES.

HE DID NOT SAY HERD IMMUNITY ALONE ERADICATES A DISEASE.

Amused said:
Herd immunity not only protects those who are immunized, but those who are not as well.
This is the definition of Herd Immunity and is a supported theory.

Amused said:
This is the definition of "herd immunity." Once a threshold is passed, the disease stops spreading completely, thus protecting the non-immunized as well.
He is not claiming here that Herd Immunity is eradicating a disease. He is claiming that once a certain level of vaccination is established, the disease can stop spreading completely (of course, we assume he means among humans).

THIS DOES NOT MEAN THE DISEASE IS ERADICATED.

As you, yourself, have said the disease could persist in animal species. It could even evolve to find another means of infection.

NO ONE IS CLAIMING THAT 100% OF ALL PERTUSSIS ORGANISMS WOULD BE DESTROYED IF HERD IMMUNITY IS MAINTAINED.

All I am claiming (and, I assume, Amused) is that the disease can be held at bay because of Herd Immunity. By "held at bay" I mean that infection rates are so minute that it is more likely to contract the disease via the vaccine than it is to contract it "in the wild." Polio in the US has reached this level.

Amused said:
Herd immunity can lead to the complete disappearance of a disease.
Again, this means that Herd Immunity is a necessary cause of eradication but not sufficient.
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
Do you win money for being retarded or what? Seriously, if you don't understand something even after it's been explained in layman's terms, then you're better off just STFU.
I understand just perfectly, that doesn't change the fact that there's nothing in the article that says the parents, or handlers of the babies were "anti-vaccination crowd" loonies. I know you all get in a fervor and start foaming at the mouth when you see something you don't like, but it does make magic leaps real.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
67,523
4,198
126
Ten to one sao23 is an engineer. He has all of the pinheadedness required to be one, an narrow focus on a single tree and no notice at all of the forest.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
54,097
7,492
126
I understand just perfectly, that doesn't change the fact that there's nothing in the article that says the parents, or handlers of the babies were "anti-vaccination crowd" loonies. I know you all get in a fervor and start foaming at the mouth when you see something you don't like, but it does make magic leaps real.
Good gawd you are dense.

It doesn't MATTER if the parents or handlers are anti-vaccination. Do you understand how diseases are spread??? It ONLY matters that enough people in the general population are anti-vaccination for the disease to become epidemic. It IS now epidemic in CA. WHY is it epidemic??? Because the anti-vaccination movement has lowered the threshold enough for the disease to be FAR more widespread.

By the late 1970s, publicity about adverse reactions and deaths following pertussis vaccination caused the immunization rate to fall in several countries, including Great Britain, Sweden, and Japan. In many cases, a dramatic increase in the incidence of pertussis followed
From the wiki you refuse to read.

Pertussis is the only vaccine-preventable disease that is associated with increasing deaths in the U.S. The number of deaths increased from 4 in 1996 to 17 in 2001, almost all of which were infants under one year.[15] In Canada, the number of pertussis infections has varied between 2,000 to 10,000 reported cases each year over the last 10 years.[16] Australia reports an average of 10,000 cases a year, but the number of cases has increased in recent years.[17] In 2010 eight infants in California died and health authorities declared an epidemic.[18] Doctors had been misdiagnosing the infant's condition despite having seen infants on multiple visits.
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY