California Measles Outbreak + Anti-Vaccination

[TheGlyphstone]

I just don't get this, really.

For the international E-ers, a measles outbreak hit California last month - specifically, an un-vaccinated woman who contracted measles, then visited Disneyland, creating an infection vector that's up to over 100 cases.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2015/02/02/more-than-100-cases-measles-now-confirmed-in-us/
http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/02/health/cdc-january-measles-report-disney/index.html

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

A significant child-killer before they developed a vaccine in 1963, and officially 'eradicated' from the US in 2000. But now, if Slate.com is to be believed, there are third-world countries with higher vaccination rates than us- not measles specifically, but in general.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/02/03/if_it_happened_there_how_would_we_cover_anti_vaxxers_if_they_were_in_another.html

And it's not just a left or right phenomenon, either - a lot of GOP/right-wing figures decry vaccination, but Jenny McCarthy is one of the biggest names in the anti-vaccine movement and she's apparently fairly liberal. I don't expect to find many, if any, anti-vaxxers here on E, seeing as how we are smart people. But how can anyone be this clueless/ignorant/selfish,considering the historical record of disease cases before and after their respective vaccines were developed?

https://www.behance.net/gallery/2878481/Vaccine-Infographic

[Dimir]

As someone who has high-functioning autism, I've never believed that that vaccines are the cause of my disability, nor the cause or many other medical conditions. The study suggesting that was debunked and proven to be false.

Is the anti-vaccine camp suggesting that the Polio Vaccine should never have been developed for example? I have no issue getting my yearly flu shot and yes there will be instances of side effects which are medically impossible to 100% prevent, but these aren't destroying humanity.

[Zakharra]

  I'm all for vaccines and vaccinations. Some diseases should be eradicated. I think those who are against vaccinations should have to listen to a tape or watch a film of a child suffering from whooping cough, read the statistics of how many people used to die because of measles and those diseases, then be asked again if they believe not having vaccinations  is a good thing, or if they think their children would be better off in a disease rich environment.

[Inkidu]

It can all be blamed on Jenny McCarthy and Oprah Winfrey. McCarthy wrote a book about her belief that the specific vaccine that treats three childhood diseases gave her child Autism, and because Oprah generally has incredible (nigh on megalomaniacal) sway with large demographics of the world. McCarthy's book got a lot more traction than it probably ever should have.

Let's face it, it's a book written by Jenny McCarthy, a woman with no credentials in the field and I'm sure it's lacking in research as well.   

EDIT: That being said, I knew a kid in high school who was on the Autism spectrum and he had been highly vaccinated as an infant, however, it should be noted he was not just getting the standard suite of childhood vaccinations, he was getting the whole suite of travel prophylactics, every time his family moved to a new country, which because of his father's job, was a lot all over the world.

It has some credence because he was an identical twin, but looked drastically different from his brother (he was short and squat and his brother was much taller and not nearly as squat). That being said again, he received well over what any child would ever receive, and vaccines that a child would probably never receive. You shoot anyone up with enough of anything and bad thing are going to happen.

[Lustful Bride]

As someone who has high-functioning autism, I've never believed that that vaccines are the cause of my disability, nor the cause or many other medical conditions. The study suggesting that was debunked and proven to be false.

Same! Im right with you buddy.

It can all be blamed on Jenny McCarthy and Oprah Winfrey. McCarthy wrote a book about her belief that the specific vaccine that treats three childhood diseases gave her child Autism, and because Oprah generally has incredible (nigh on megalomaniacal) sway with large demographics of the world. McCarthy's book got a lot more traction than it probably ever should have.

Let's face it, it's a book written by Jenny McCarthy, a woman with no credentials in the field and I'm sure it's lacking in research as well.   

Isnt that the lady who also says her kid is an "Indigo Child" (supposedly some new step in evolution) or some such bullshit?...or am I thinking of another woman who totes the same message as her?

I first heard it from this clip with this man (Samuel 'Kage' Conway, a chemist, comedian and more)

at around the 10:40 minute mark.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQUSSNx2s2c

[Beguile's Mistress]

I can sympathize with parents who are frightened - rationally or irrationally - about having their children vaccinated.  However, if you choose not to vaccinate your children you are obligated to keep an eye on them and not only keep them away from others when they are contagious but also keep them away from sick people as well.  You are risking their well-being by exposing them to disease without protection.  I think it is careless and criminal to let sick children come in contact with vulnerable people.

[Callie Del Noire]

It's all fun and games till someone famous loses their kid to measles. Isn't one of the hazards to measles death by swelling of your brain?

[Oniya]

Yes - that's how Roald Dahl's daughter died.

http://www.people.com/article/roald-dahl-vaccine-measles-letter-daughter-olivia-death

At the time, there wasn't a reliable measles vaccine.

[Callie Del Noire]

Yes - that's how Roald Dahl's daughter died.

http://www.people.com/article/roald-dahl-vaccine-measles-letter-daughter-olivia-death

At the time, there wasn't a reliable measles vaccine.

Yeah.. I'm thinking if somoen dies during this outbreak there will be a metaphorical skid mark in the political thruways as all the polical hacks we call elected officals do a bootlegger 180 to get behind 'protect the herd' instead of being 'pro-'informed' choice.'

I don't disagree that you have a choice to (or not) the right thing.. but you risk more than yourself.. so I figure it's safe to say.. you don't immunize your kids, you can home school them. But then I'm an utter tool who thinks that you shouldn't blindly buy the BS that Jenna McCarthy and Andrew Wakefield sown.

[Dimir]

Five babies at an Illinois daycare now have measles. Poor minis.

http://www.cbs12.com/template/inews_wire/wires.national/2222e7a8-www.cbs12.com.shtml

[la dame en noir]

Oh god, its getting too close to Michigan >.> I need to get my shot immediately. I'm not sure if I'm still immune.

[Dimir]

New story out of here in Southern Ontario, Canada. A three-year old heart transplant recipient can't have the measles vaccine since he's on immune suppressing drugs, and a measles infection could kill them. So congrats anti-vaccine crowd founders, you've indirectly put this little boy's life at risk.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/measles-infections-worry-mom-of-vulnerable-3-year-old-1.2946697

[Beguile's Mistress]

According to a news report there are 4 million children too young to be immunized and it is estimated that 9 out of 10 them may contract measles.                                                                   

[Callie Del Noire]

According to a news report there are 4 million children too young to be immunized and it is estimated that 9 out of 10 them may contract measles.                                                                 

It's stuff like that that makes me want to have a 'conversation' with folks like Andrew Wakefield. Preferably with a 4 pound sledge. My nephew is 10 months away from being old enough to have the shot and his mom is terrified right now.

[Caela]

Oh god, its getting too close to Michigan >.> I need to get my shot immediately. I'm not sure if I'm still immune.

Actually, it's already been in Michigan. A man in Oakland County was diagnosed and has since recovered. The last article I saw on it said it was inconclusive if there was any link to the whole Disney outbreak and I've not heard anything about any further cases, so am hopeful it was contained to just him. As a parent living in MI I a very glad my child is vaccinated and need to go have my own titre checked to see if I need a booster myself.

[Caela]

It's stuff like that that makes me want to have a 'conversation' with folks like Andrew Wakefield. Preferably with a 4 pound sledge. My nephew is 10 months away from being old enough to have the shot and his mom is terrified right now.

I know this feeling! I have a niece and nephew that are both too young to have their MMR yet and, maddeningly, the niece's mother actually refuses to vaccinate ANY of her three children. The nephew will, thankfully, have his once he's old enough...now I just have to pray that none of D's kids catch anything before C's can get their shots because if that woman endangers any other children in my family I will shred her mercilessly!

[Valthazar]

I agree with everyone else in this thread - obviously vaccination is important for such things.

But I know some people who take vaccinations to the max.  I have some friends who go in every flu season to get their "flu vaccine" even though they are not at high risk or within a high risk population.  Very unnecessary in my opinion.

[Caela]

I and my daughter do get our flu shots every year, BUT I work in a hospital so I come into contact with high risk populations even though I myself am not a part of one. I also am a bit militant about the importance of vaccines but that's because I have babies in my family as well as a dear friend and a grandmother who are immune compromised due to cancer treatments and another friend who is, literally, deathly allergic and can't be vaccinated so the importance of it is just too large a reality in my world.

[Hemingway]

People who for various reasons can't be vaccinated are the reason ( or at least a reason ) why those of us who can, should. I believe that's what's referred to as herd immunity - minimizing the chances of someone becoming infected, by minimizing the number of people who can transmit a disease.

I mean, if the only issue were people refusing to get vaccines and getting sick as a result of their own choice, it wouldn't really matter. Unfortunately, they're not just making a choice about their own health, but about the health of their children, and of others.

[Deamonbane]

I had measles when I was a tyke... it's a childhood disease, and each one of my brothers and sisters caught it before we were old enough to get the Vaccination. And... they're all alive. And... so am I, obviously. I wonder what changed.

[Kythia]

Yeah, I was in a car crash a few years ago and I'm still alive. Why the fuck are we trying to prevent car crashes?

[Caela]

I had measles when I was a tyke... it's a childhood disease, and each one of my brothers and sisters caught it before we were old enough to get the Vaccination. And... they're all alive. And... so am I, obviously. I wonder what changed.

Nothing changed, your family was lucky. Measles doesn't kill in large percentages (though it's ridiculously contagious) but in very small ones. Most people do survive it. We vaccinate against be because, unlike something like a cold, not ALL people survive it. A small percentage will develop measles pneumonia which can kill them, another small percentage will develop encephalitis (swelling in the brain) which can not only kill, but leave patients mentally or physically (usually deaf or blind in this case) disabled as well. There is also NO viral therapy for the measles, no stop gap. Once a person has it, all you can do is treat the symptoms, try to keep them comfortable, and hope that none of the nastier complications that can occur do. As with most diseases the most likely to end up dead are the very young, the elderly, or those who are already sick and have their immunity compromised in some fashion.

People have this idea that just because something is a "childhood" disease, it's not dangerous...that's not the case.

[Deamonbane]

That wasn't what I meant, Kythia, although reading back on my post I realize it was what could have been implied. I was just wondering if the mortality rate has risen since then, and looking over Google, I saw that it has in fact decreased, thanks to worldwide vaccination drives.

[Ebb]

Yeah, I was in a car crash a few years ago and I'm still alive. Why the fuck are we trying to prevent car crashes?

This one's for you, Kythia:

http://robertmoorejr.tumblr.com/post/110101466091/im-an-anti-braker

[Kythia]

This one's for you, Kythia:

http://robertmoorejr.tumblr.com/post/110101466091/im-an-anti-braker

Lovely stuff. Nice find

[Beguile's Mistress]

I recall hearing about a person whose daughter came down with chicken pox and sent her to school when she was contagious because "the kids are going to get it anyway so they should get it over with." 

I kinda hope the woman gets shingles.  I know that mean but she's set a lot of people for that.

[Caehlim]

It has some credence because he was an identical twin, but looked drastically different from his brother (he was short and squat and his brother was much taller and not nearly as squat).

Autism Spectrum is not associated with any alterations to a person's outward physical appearance.

Monozygotic twins also only have a 60% concordance rate for Autism Spectrum. (source)

[Kythia]

Also, an identical twin that looked drastically different from his sibling?  Is that possible?

[Chaosfox]

Also, an identical twin that looked drastically different from his sibling?  Is that possible?

It is Depending on the choices of the twins. I had a college professor who had  twins they where Identical up until they hit puberty  due to one using weight at an early age  made him a bit stouter and had more muscle than his brother. Out side of that they looked  the same. Don't know if that is what you would call drastic but it's a difference.

As to the topic Yes I think that people should get there kids vaccinated. On the other hand I say if they don't then they need to keep there kids away from others because of the risk to the other kids and the risk's to their own kid's though personally I think if a parent does not want to do something that could help their child the parent deserves the suffering they have to go through when dealing with what happens. NO the kid does not deserve what happens but the parent deserves what ever suffering happens to themselves.  (That may or may not sound cruel but hey if you want to do something you should be able to accept the consequences)

[ReijiTabibito]

Vaccination is absolutely important.  As the son of a physician AND a nurse, the brother of a medical student, and a science teacher myself, I feel I can state that with knowing quite a bit about how vaccines work.  Of course, the crazier anti-vaccination speakers out there would probably say that that just makes me complicit in the conspiracy.

The idea behind a vaccine is simple: you take a very small sample of a deactivated (IE: dead) virus and inject it into the body of a human being.  While the virus itself poses no threat to the person (it being dead and incapable of replication), the body recognizes the presence of the virus and produces antibodies against that specific virus, so that if you do catch it in the future, then you already have a pre-prepared first line of defense to help you fight it.  When had, this vaccination ranges from being helpful when the time comes around (such as for chicken pox) to highly necessary for survival (see smallpox).

Jon Stewart was actually talking about the anti-vaccination movement this week, and how it's seemingly brought elements of both sides of the political spectrum together in their stand against the practice.  And that's because the rhetoric against vaccination has components that can appeal to both sides.

For the right, you've got the 'I Hate You, Big Government' angle.  The government tells us to vaccinate our kids, to do this and do that, well I'm not gonna do it because it's Big Brother and all of that.

For the left, it's more the 'I Hate You, Big Business' angle.  One of the more common things you hear in the anti-vaccination movement is about how Big Pharma is making money hand over fist over all these vaccinations that we don't need anymore because we wiped out the diseases and they're not around anymore so why are we still putting money in their pockets?

Both sides ignore one simple fact.  When you stop vaccinating your kids, and you do it on a large scale, you lose herd immunity - which is the thing that prevents big-scale outbreaks from pulling a Black Plague.  One of the major concerns by the Continental Army during the Revolution was the presence of smallpox - Jenner hadn't invented his cowpox vaccine yet (and wouldn't for a full decade until after it was over) - so all that was available was inoculation, which still incapacitated people.  It just had the more generous benefit of them mostly not dying.  Washington himself had the pox (pre-Revolution), and he was looking for the right opportunity to inoculate his army because he knew that one errant smallpox outbreak could wreck the colonials.

The British regulars, on the other hand, had no such problems, their armies were largely immune to the pox - most people who needed inoculation were Loyalists who had grown up in the colonies rather than the UK proper.  During the siege of Boston, for example, the citizens were wracked with smallpox, but the British dismissed it because most of their troops weren't susceptible to the disease.  Herd immunity.

In medicine today you hear a lot about 'preventative medicine' - ounce of prevention worth a pound of cure and stuff like that.  Herd immunity, and vaccination, are probably the ultimate examples of that - stop a disease before it starts, before it becomes a full-blown outbreak like at Disney.

And as for Jenny McCarthy and her stupid idea about how a vaccine caused her kid's autism?  Autism is a neurological disorder.  While the exact cause remains unknown, research shows that there is a strong component of genetics involved, and there might be a handful of environmental factors involved.  Some of the environmental factors claimed to cause autism include chemicals like phthalates and phenols, which are used in the manufacture of plastic water bottles; diesel exhaust; and alcohol.

But I'm not hearing Jenny McCarthy campaigning against disposable water bottles, the use of diesel fuel, and drinking.

[Lustful Bride]

Vaccination is absolutely important.  As the son of a physician AND a nurse, the brother of a medical student, and a science teacher myself, I feel I can state that with knowing quite a bit about how vaccines work.  Of course, the crazier anti-vaccination speakers out there would probably say that that just makes me complicit in the conspiracy.

The idea behind a vaccine is simple: you take a very small sample of a deactivated (IE: dead) virus and inject it into the body of a human being.  While the virus itself poses no threat to the person (it being dead and incapable of replication), the body recognizes the presence of the virus and produces antibodies against that specific virus, so that if you do catch it in the future, then you already have a pre-prepared first line of defense to help you fight it.  When had, this vaccination ranges from being helpful when the time comes around (such as for chicken pox) to highly necessary for survival (see smallpox).

Jon Stewart was actually talking about the anti-vaccination movement this week, and how it's seemingly brought elements of both sides of the political spectrum together in their stand against the practice.  And that's because the rhetoric against vaccination has components that can appeal to both sides.

For the right, you've got the 'I Hate You, Big Government' angle.  The government tells us to vaccinate our kids, to do this and do that, well I'm not gonna do it because it's Big Brother and all of that.

For the left, it's more the 'I Hate You, Big Business' angle.  One of the more common things you hear in the anti-vaccination movement is about how Big Pharma is making money hand over fist over all these vaccinations that we don't need anymore because we wiped out the diseases and they're not around anymore so why are we still putting money in their pockets?

Both sides ignore one simple fact.  When you stop vaccinating your kids, and you do it on a large scale, you lose herd immunity - which is the thing that prevents big-scale outbreaks from pulling a Black Plague.  One of the major concerns by the Continental Army during the Revolution was the presence of smallpox - Jenner hadn't invented his cowpox vaccine yet (and wouldn't for a full decade until after it was over) - so all that was available was inoculation, which still incapacitated people.  It just had the more generous benefit of them mostly not dying.  Washington himself had the pox (pre-Revolution), and he was looking for the right opportunity to inoculate his army because he knew that one errant smallpox outbreak could wreck the colonials.

The British regulars, on the other hand, had no such problems, their armies were largely immune to the pox - most people who needed inoculation were Loyalists who had grown up in the colonies rather than the UK proper.  During the siege of Boston, for example, the citizens were wracked with smallpox, but the British dismissed it because most of their troops weren't susceptible to the disease.  Herd immunity.

In medicine today you hear a lot about 'preventative medicine' - ounce of prevention worth a pound of cure and stuff like that.  Herd immunity, and vaccination, are probably the ultimate examples of that - stop a disease before it starts, before it becomes a full-blown outbreak like at Disney.

And as for Jenny McCarthy and her stupid idea about how a vaccine caused her kid's autism?  Autism is a neurological disorder.  While the exact cause remains unknown, research shows that there is a strong component of genetics involved, and there might be a handful of environmental factors involved.  Some of the environmental factors claimed to cause autism include chemicals like phthalates and phenols, which are used in the manufacture of plastic water bottles; diesel exhaust; and alcohol.

But I'm not hearing Jenny McCarthy campaigning against disposable water bottles, the use of diesel fuel, and drinking.

Give us more of your wisdom oh wise one!

Spoiler: Click to Show/Hide

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3sOuEv0E2I

[TaintedAndDelish]

From a parent's perspective, when you have a small child that means everything to you and you are hearing all this scary talk about vaccinations possibly causing harm to your child, being "forced" to make a choice that you are ignorant about (vaccinate) is rather unsettling. You are put in a situation where you feel like you must blindly comply and put your child at risk. If you are not well read on the matter, it can be difficult to know who to believe and trust. 

I'm saying this over a decade or so after my first child needed to be vaccinated. Over time, I've come to realize that McCarthy's nonsense about Thimerisol causing autism was rubbish and that she was just a pretty puppet who was paid to repeat and endorse this bullshit. At the time though, we knew nothing about all of this, were younger and were not as wise. Neither of us had any medical background at the time and to be honest, we were not very good at separating bs from truth. Being more inclined now to check and question the sources, I think the choice to vaccinate would be have easier.

That said, I don't think its sheer stupidity that drives parents to want a choice in whether or not they should vaccinate, but rather it may come partly from their desire to protect their child given what limited knowledge they have and from their need to feel in control about protecting their child.

[ReijiTabibito]

From a parent's perspective, when you have a small child that means everything to you and you are hearing all this scary talk about vaccinations possibly causing harm to your child, being "forced" to make a choice that you are ignorant about (vaccinate) is rather unsettling. You are put in a situation where you feel like you must blindly comply and put your child at risk. If you are not well read on the matter, it can be difficult to know who to believe and trust.

Not necessarily as difficult as some people want it to be.  The issue with 'who to trust' ultimately comes down to things that have nothing to deal with the matter at hand a good number of times.  I'm sure there are plenty of MDs out there to refute the naysayers who decry vaccinations and that they can explain how vaccinations work and the risks associated with not having them.  The issue is that the naysayers simply cry "Of course they'd say that, they make money off of it!" or some other ridiculous garbage to cast doubt on the motives of the medical profession.  If the matter was purely one of expertise and information, the docs would win.  Because they go to 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school, and then a residency before professional practice.  Whereas a lot of the naysayers probably have...high school biology under their belt, in which they got a C.

I'm saying this over a decade or so after my first child needed to be vaccinated. Over time, I've come to realize that McCarthy's nonsense about Thimerisol causing autism was rubbish and that she was just a pretty puppet who was paid to repeat and endorse this bullshit. At the time though, we knew nothing about all of this, were younger and were not as wise. Neither of us had any medical background at the time and to be honest, we were not very good at separating bs from truth. Being more inclined now to check and question the sources, I think the choice to vaccinate would be have easier.

Causes have been using celebrities for years.  Years to gain traction for their particular ideologies.  Tom Cruise and Scientology is perhaps the best known example, but this was going on at least as far back as the 80s.  The problem with most celebrities is that they don't necessarily understand the field as well as the experts, who are far less-well known.  And when you involve personalities who are charismatic enough to have their own cult (which is technically what all those screaming fans are) of personality, the experts tend too get drowned out.

That said, I don't think its sheer stupidity that drives parents to want a choice in whether or not they should vaccinate, but rather it may come partly from their desire to protect their child given what limited knowledge they have and from their need to feel in control about protecting their child.

It never is.  People on the whole don't knowingly make stupid decisions.  They make stupid decisions because they lack information and understanding on the subject.  That said, though, it does become the parent's responsibility to learn what they can on the subject so that they can make an informed decision about matters like this.  The problems comes in when either the parent knows about the problems associated with not vaccinating your child - which are quite real and much less made up - and choose not to vaccinate anyways, or they refuse to learn about the subject while professing to want the best for their child.

[AndyZ]

a lot of GOP/right-wing figures decry vaccination

If you don't mind an odd question, which ones?

I haven't spent a lot of time looking into what various GOP figures are saying, but I've only heard talk against forcing vaccinations.  The only ones I've heard actually decry vaccinations themselves are Jenny McCarthy, Jim Carrey and other such celebrities.

Granted that if we wanted to point out celebrity idiocy, we could go every week.

Spoiler: Click to Show/Hide

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsG_yPKAor4

[Ebb]

If you don't mind an odd question, which ones?

I haven't spent a lot of time looking into what various GOP figures are saying, but I've only heard talk against forcing vaccinations.  The only ones I've heard actually decry vaccinations themselves are Jenny McCarthy, Jim Carrey and other such celebrities.

I'm not sure if I'd call it "a lot", but the anti-vax stuff seems to be on the verge of becoming a political issue in the next round of US presidential elections. Chris Christie and Rand Paul, two of the more prominent GOP presidential candidates, recently made public statements that at best were ambivalent about the science behind vaccinations and at worse were actively anti-vaccination, referring to unknown and unspecified health risks that were generally tied to the sort of autism scares commonly used by anti-vaxxers.

Personally I think it's unclear how strongly these two men hold these opinions or whether (my guess) this is just more of a test to see how much support can be drawn from a general anti-establishment / libertarian segment of the electorate at the cost of general credibility. In other words, running to the right in the primary, which is often considered to be a winning tactic for GOP politicians.

Luckily it seems that there's been a fair bit of backlash to both of these statements, which might have the nice effect of removing this as a football in the next election.

Here's a quick summary of opinions from the major GOP candidates (declared and undeclared): http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/ted-cruz-vaccinations-114862.html

The line you want to look for here, which most of the candidates are unwilling to cross, is a flat-out declaration that vaccinations for children should be mandatory (potentially with religious or other rare exceptions). Note the difference between Ben Carson's response, which is very reasonable and very clear on the fact that vaccinations ought to be mandatory, with the response from Scott Walker, who comes out strongly in favor of his own family getting vaccinations (a subject no-one was raising), but leaves completely unanswered the question of whether the government should mandate them for other people. That's the landmine that many of these politicians are unwilling to touch, for fear that they'll lose a big segment of people who are reflexively against any exercise of government power.

[AndyZ]

On Monday, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a likely White House hopeful, said parents “need to have some measure of choice” on vaccinating their children. The comments sparked backlash as public health officials are trying to contain a recent outbreak of measles, one believed to be fueled in part by many parents opting against vaccines.

Christie’s team quickly issued a statement that he “believes vaccines are an important public health protection … there is no question kids should be vaccinated.”

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) also weighed in Monday, saying vaccines should be “voluntary” and, defending that position on CNBC, added: “I don’t understand the point of why that would be controversial.” On Tuesday, Paul insisted he wasn’t alleging any causation between vaccines and disorders.

Seems like they're saying that they're useful and important but shouldn't be mandated.  That's very different from either being ambivalent behind the science or anti-vaccination.

[Ebb]

Seems like they're saying that they're useful and important but shouldn't be mandated.  That's very different from either being ambivalent behind the science or anti-vaccination.

I think that's true if you look at the letter of what they're saying. But in practice, the public debate isn't about whether vaccines work, it's about whether the benefits outweigh the costs to the extent that their use should be mandatory, and therefore enforced by the government. In this situation a statement to the effect of "Well, vaccines are great and I use them, but it should be up to parents to decide for their own children" ends up being a nice-sounding but ultimately weak middle ground position that doesn't do anything to advance the discussion. It's dodging the question, essentially.

The science that they're ignoring here is the phenomenon of herd immunity, not the efficacy of a particular person getting vaccinated.

[AndyZ]

Wait, is there actually a debate going on right now about that vaccines should be mandatory?

[Ebb]

Wait, is there actually a debate going on right now about that vaccines should be mandatory?

Yes, for certain vaccines (currently measles), and with certain exceptions. That's the context here.

Although in some cases it's not exactly a question of vaccinations being mandated as much as enforced. Policies such as "you can't send your unvaccinated child to public school" are an example of the latter.

[AndyZ]

First off, thank you for the clarifications ^_^ I would have been using enforced and mandated interchangeably otherwise.

If we're already talking about whether or not vaccines should be mandatory, I would hardly consider it fair to claim a double meaning if they're directly responding to that particular question.

There are lots of things that should be done but I don't want to be enforced or mandated by the government, and there are things I think shouldn't be done but I don't want to be criminalized (or other appropriate synonyms) by the government.

As a ridiculous example, there are a plethora of good reasons for living indoors, but if someone really wanted to live outside, good for them.  Similarly, if I ever get married, I intend never to cheat on my spouse, but I wouldn't want jail time or fines for swingers.

Now, measles is a little different in that it can affect others, but it only affects others who aren't vaccinated.  Compare that to smoking, where we allow others to smoke near people out on the street despite knowledge of the dangers of secondhand smoke.  (We do ban smoking in some places, but we're far from consistent there.)

Let's take the pros and cons of  "you can't send your unvaccinated child to public school" :

The pro would be that people who had no good reason not to get vaccinated but who definitely want kids to go to public school would do so.

I can think of quite a few cons:

Either the poor who couldn't afford to do so would be forced to scrounge up the money by cutting back on other necessities, or the government would attempt to give out "free" vaccinations, which we can expect to go about as well as George W. Bush giving out "free" cell phones.

Kids who can't get the vaccine will either not be allowed to go to public school or will have to go through lengthy processes to prove to the government's satisfaction that they can't get the vaccine in order to be allowed to go to school.

Kids who don't want to go to school and parents who don't want to send them there can abuse the system by just not getting them vaccinated, providing more of an incentive not to vaccinate if you want to get around having to send your kid to school.

Already underfunded schools will have to go through a process of either verifying which children have been vaccinated, or just trust parents when they nod and say that the kids were vaccinated and tell their children to lie about it.

We'll have to find a way to educate the poor kids whose parents actually believe that vaccines cause autism and who choose not to send their kids to public school if it means having to vaccinate them.

There may well be other pros and cons that I can't think of off the top of my head; people can feel free to add if they so choose.

Furthermore, school is not a unique place where it's the only time that children could catch measles.  In order to be consistent, we'd have to try to ban the unvaccinated from all public places.

Now, the idea arises: what if Disneyland banned the unvaccinated?  I'm not sure how I feel about it.  You'd have to prove who was and wasn't vaccinated, which would be an unnecessary complication in the present.  (It's more feasible in a possible future, though more terrifying to think that all our medical records could be so easily available.)

I could see a thing where Disneyland sets up a medical center in the lines for the unvaccinated, but that would set up all sorts of a PR nightmare and inevitably lead to a lawsuit in our current society.

But at this point I'm just rambling.  I really feel like I want to agree, though: you should get vaccinated if at all possible, but you shouldn't force people to get vaccinated.  Feel free to try to convince me otherwise.

[Ebb]

Now, measles is a little different in that it can affect others, but it only affects others who aren't vaccinated.  Compare that to smoking, where we allow others to smoke near people out on the street despite knowledge of the dangers of secondhand smoke.  (We do ban smoking in some places, but we're far from consistent there.)

...

But at this point I'm just rambling.  I really feel like I want to agree, though: you should get vaccinated if at all possible, but you shouldn't force people to get vaccinated.  Feel free to try to convince me otherwise.

If you're not familiar with the concept of "herd immunity" then I would encourage you to read up on it. It's really impossible to discuss this topic without that bit of important background. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity

The short story is that by not vaccinating your children (the greater 'you' here, not you personally) you are putting innocent lives at risk. People, mostly children, are dying from a disease which is almost entirely preventable. (More on measles from the World Health Organization: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs286/en/) Over 145,000 people died from measles in 2013.

So no, we do not agree. In my opinion, vaccination should be mandatory unless excused for health reasons. Some people can't get vaccinated, such as those with compromised immune systems, infants and pregnant women. The only way to protect them from measles is to eliminate it in those around them. Which is the entire point.

[Inkidu]

I don't think this whole anti-vaccine brouhaha can be placed at the feet of either side of the political spectrum. This tends to be a more intimate form of strangeness. You could see both the liberal hippies and the conservative Christian Scientists and whatnot going for it. :|

[TheGlyphstone]

I don't think this whole anti-vaccine brouhaha can be placed at the feet of either side of the political spectrum. This tends to be a more intimate form of strangeness. You could see both the liberal hippies and the conservative Christian Scientists and whatnot going for it. :|

Yeah, I tried to point that out in the OP - it's a phenomenon of ignorance, willful or otherwise, that is pervasive along the extreme ends of both political factions.

[Syene]

I don't think it's as much that these people are ignorant as that they're letting their emotions and fears cloud their ability to accurately analyze risks. 

I once considered not vaccinating my cats after reading an article that suggested rabies vaccinations were causing tumors. My rationale was that my cats were indoor cats and thus extremely unlikely to be exposed. Eventually, I realized that I was being pretty hypocritical to consider it given how strongly I feel about people declining vaccinations for their children, but I think it really goes to show how easy it can be for a normally smart and well-educated person to focus on a small risk associated with vaccination instead of the good it does in the great majority of cases.

[AndyZ]

If you're not familiar with the concept of "herd immunity" then I would encourage you to read up on it. It's really impossible to discuss this topic without that bit of important background. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity

The short story is that by not vaccinating your children (the greater 'you' here, not you personally) you are putting innocent lives at risk. People, mostly children, are dying from a disease which is almost entirely preventable. (More on measles from the World Health Organization: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs286/en/) Over 145,000 people died from measles in 2013.

So no, we do not agree. In my opinion, vaccination should be mandatory unless excused for health reasons. Some people can't get vaccinated, such as those with compromised immune systems, infants and pregnant women. The only way to protect them from measles is to eliminate it in those around them. Which is the entire point.

I am familiar with the concept (but thank you for checking ^_^), and don't have any issue with the idea that people absolutely should get them.  It's kinda like, I think you should help someone if you see them getting mugged on the street, but I'd be against laws forcing you to do that.

I meant that I agree with the aforementioned concept of encourage but don't enforce.  We can agree to disagree, though ^_^

I don't think this whole anti-vaccine brouhaha can be placed at the feet of either side of the political spectrum. This tends to be a more intimate form of strangeness. You could see both the liberal hippies and the conservative Christian Scientists and whatnot going for it. :|

If you can point out which conservative Christian Scientists, I'd appreciate it.  I kinda want to lay specific names at somebody's feet.

Oh, and stupid question but I'm curious: why is it okay to say Christian Scientist but not Islamic Extremist?

[Caehlim]

why is it okay to say Christian Scientist but not Islamic Extremist?

That's an official term, rather than a description of the group. It's a reference to the Christian Science Reading Room practitioners.

They are a sect of people who believe that special techniques of reading the bible and prayer have healing properties and have a tendency to reject modern medical practice.

[Oniya]

Christian Scientists (which are a separate religious group) have a belief that all illness can be cured by prayer alone.  You have cancer?  Forget chemotherapy - get prayed over.  You have diabetes?  Forget insulin - get prayed over.  There have been a number of contentious cases where children with treatable conditions have died because of this practice.

[AndyZ]

Thank you ^_^

[TaintedAndDelish]

"Christian Science" is a bit of an oxymoron, isn't it?

Given some of the stuff Hubbard's posse has pulled off, it should be "Christian Pseudo-science"

[Ebb]

I am familiar with the concept (but thank you for checking ^_^), and don't have any issue with the idea that people absolutely should get them.  It's kinda like, I think you should help someone if you see them getting mugged on the street, but I'd be against laws forcing you to do that.

I meant that I agree with the aforementioned concept of encourage but don't enforce.  We can agree to disagree, though ^_^

The correct analogy isn't "there should be a law forcing you to help someone who is getting mugged on the street."
The correct analogy is "there should be a law preventing you from mugging people on the street."

People who do not vaccinate their children are actively harming other people.

The principle of individual freedom from government coercion is a fine thing. It's not more important than the principle of not killing other peoples' children. Not by a long shot.

If you can't see that, then I don't think there's much point in continuing the conversation. I'm going to bow out here.

[Oniya]

"Christian Science" is a bit of an oxymoron, isn't it?

Given some of the stuff Hubbard's posse has pulled off, it should be "Christian Pseudo-science"

Hubbard's posse is a completely different group than the Christian Scientists (although I wouldn't be surprised if the Scientologists were also anti-vax).  As far as old L. Ron is concerned, I believe in the clear separation between Church and Science Fiction.  ;)

[Lustful Bride]

Christian Scientists (which are a separate religious group) have a belief that all illness can be cured by prayer alone.  You have cancer?  Forget chemotherapy - get prayed over.  You have diabetes?  Forget insulin - get prayed over.  There have been a number of contentious cases where children with treatable conditions have died because of this practice.

As a Christian I have to say that's the dumbest fucking thing ever. These idiots give the rest of us a badname >_< Seriously I know our god is supposed to be all loving and mercyfull but he don't hand out miracles like candy. I wish I could tell these people the story of the old man and the flood and remind them we are expected to handle thins on our own.


**Old man and the flood.

Spoiler: Click to Show/Hide

Story goes an old man was in the middle of a flood zone when the tide was rising, in the beginning a family with a cart shows up near his home and asks if he wants a ride but he tells them god will keep him safe.

Then the flood waters are up to his knees and a man on a horse stops and offers the man a chance to escape with him but the old man says that god will keep him safe.

Finally the flood is so high that the old man has to stay on his roof to survive and a man on a boat comes by, tellin him to jump on but the old man again says god will keep him safe.

The old man drowns and when he meets god he curses god and asks him why he was allowed to drown. To which God replies.

"I sent you a family with a cart, a man on a horse and a man with a boat. What more did you want from me?"

[Oniya]

As a Christian I have to say that's the dumbest fucking thing ever. These idiots give the rest of us a badname >_< Seriously I know our god is supposed to be all loving and mercyfull but he don't hand out miracles like candy. I wish I could tell these people the story of the old man and the flood and remind them we are expected to handle thins on our own.

You mean the one with 'I sent you two boats and a helicopter'?

[Lustful Bride]

You mean the one with 'I sent you two boats and a helicopter'?

Yes, but the one I heard had a horse, a family with a cart and a boat.

So pretty much when I get sick I will not be praying I wil be getting my lazy ass to a doctor and letting God do his own business. Only time im praying for health is when im terminal and even then im just begging for extra time.  :P

[Caehlim]

Hubbard's posse is a completely different group than the Christian Scientists (although I wouldn't be surprised if the Scientologists were also anti-vax).

To the best of my knowledge Scientologists aren't as systematically against most modern medicine, only modern psychology and psychiatry. There have been a few cases of abuses within the history of the church of people being declined medical attention, however it's not really a major part of their doctrine.

[TaintedAndDelish]

Apologies, I confused Christian Science with Scientology. (Neither of which are science)

[Oniya]

To the best of my knowledge Scientologists aren't as systematically against most modern medicine, only modern psychology and psychiatry. There have been a few cases of abuses within the history of the church of people being declined medical attention, however it's not really a major part of their doctrine.

I'll be honest, I haven't read a lot of their doctrine.  (I lost interest somewhere around the 'clouds' and the 'clears'.)  It's vaguely encouraging that they don't decry modern medicine, though.

[Inkidu]

"Christian Science" is a bit of an oxymoron, isn't it?

Given some of the stuff Hubbard's posse has pulled off, it should be "Christian Pseudo-science"

Only in the case of that one particular group. Remember we owe a Augustinian friar for laying the groundwork for the concept of modern genetic (and by extension several modern virological fields). :) 

[AndyZ]

Apparently, where I live, it's already a thing where you have to have it to be able to go to school.  The reasoning for schools and not other public places is because schools can have a lot of need for students' medical records to begin with, as opposed to getting changed at, say, Disneyland.  The various concerns I've had, like keeping poor kids out if they couldn't afford vaccinations, have apparently been handled.

Ultimately, while I absolutely believe in personally getting them, I'm torn on the idea of requiring people to get them.  The school thing is probably the best sort of compromise that one can manage if you don't want the government to have access to your medical files, though.


So, my next dumb question: why is it all starting up again?  If the disease was eliminated in America in the year 2000, why would it pop up again nearly a decade and a half later?

Edit: The last question wasn't clear, so I'll try a little better.

Eliminated diseases are completely gone, right?  Kaput.  Zero.  This is no longer a thing in America, right, from 2001 to 2014?  Do we not check people who come in if they have it, or do diseases spontaneously resurface?

[Oniya]

The disease was eliminated in the US.  It wasn't eliminated world-wide.  If I remember right, smallpox is only found in laboratories these days, and polio cases are numbering in the 'under 100 world-wide' - those are the closest to extinct diseases.

So, the problem is someone crossing the border with it, especially in the stage before symptoms occur.  Think of it - you've booked a trip to Disney, probably non-refundable, and you've been looking forward to it for weeks.  Time comes to drive up there, and one of your kids has a slight fever.  Nothing too serious, right?  Let 'em sleep in the car, and they'll be right as rain.  Unknown to you, your child is in the contagious stage of measles.

[AndyZ]

Gotcha.  Thank you.

If we want to make it mandatory to have vaccinations, then, we should likewise have it mandatory to have vaccinations before coming to America, right?

[Oniya]

Nice in theory, but impossible in practice.  What you're basically suggesting is that all people crossing the border would need to present their vaccination records or be subject to a quarantine period.  This is already done with pets (as I've heard that people moving with animals have to have the pet quarantined for a number of weeks/months), but imagine the uproar if it happened with humans.

[AndyZ]

Isn't that what we used to do with Ellis Island and such?  I may be wrong on that one...

[Kythia]

Also, as mentioned above, some people can't have the vaccine for various reasons.

[AndyZ]

Also, as mentioned above, some people can't have the vaccine for various reasons.

I realize ^_^

Right now I'm looking into all the feasibility of if we attempted to mandate vaccinations for everyone who wasn't stopped from having it for one reason or another.  I can stop if I'm derailing things or if the OP prefers.

[Oniya]

Isn't that what we used to do with Ellis Island and such?  I may be wrong on that one...

Not sure if vaccinations were as much of a 'thing' back in the days of mass immigration (although quarantine is a distinct possibility), but consider how many people enter the country through routes other than Ellis Island or the modern equivalent.  Tourists on vacation, by both plane and automobile.  People who just choose to run the border instead of going through legal channels.

[Caela]

The other problem you have isn't necessarily immigrants but American travelers. Say adult A had their shots as a child but, unbeknownst to them, their immunity has worn off (sometimes the body just doesn't keep the antibodies up if it doesn't use them) and they go to a country where there happens to be a measles outbreak. With measles you are contagious DAYS before you actually start to show any symptoms and this traveler then hops on another plane, appearing perfectly healthy, and breaths all that lovely recycled air with his fellow passengers on the way back to the States. If the vast majority of the are vaccinated, you probably don't have much of a problem. If you have a few anti-vaxxers ready to take that lovely virus back to all their little anti-vaxxer friends and their kids....you can see where this is going.

And that doesn't even take into consideration all the people this one person might come into contact with through various restaurants, airports, taxis, etc.

Which is why it's also good to have titres (immune levels) checked as an adult to find out if you may need a booster, particularly if you are planning to travel.

[Caela]

Apparently, where I live, it's already a thing where you have to have it to be able to go to school.  The reasoning for schools and not other public places is because schools can have a lot of need for students' medical records to begin with, as opposed to getting changed at, say, Disneyland.  The various concerns I've had, like keeping poor kids out if they couldn't afford vaccinations, have apparently been handled.

Ultimately, while I absolutely believe in personally getting them, I'm torn on the idea of requiring people to get them.  The school thing is probably the best sort of compromise that one can manage if you don't want the government to have access to your medical files, though.


So, my next dumb question: why is it all starting up again?  If the disease was eliminated in America in the year 2000, why would it pop up again nearly a decade and a half later?

Edit: The last question wasn't clear, so I'll try a little better.

Eliminated diseases are completely gone, right?  Kaput.  Zero.  This is no longer a thing in America, right, from 2001 to 2014?  Do we not check people who come in if they have it, or do diseases spontaneously resurface?

Just my thoughts on the bolded part...It's starting again because people feel safe (and sometimes safety just makes you stupid) enough to doubt the masses of scientific evidence saying they need to be vaccinated. They feel safe because they have never (many of them) actually had to see the devastating effects that these diseases can have not just on a child but on whole families. Yes, many people recover from the measles none the worse for having had it. It's not the majority that we vaccinate for. We vaccinate to keep that small, statistical minority from the ravages of measles pneumonia or encephalitis, both of which can kill you and the latter can also cause brain impairments, deafness and blindness as well. These people feel safe thinking, "It's not a problem here so why bother?" or "It's just a rash," or "The possible risk of a reaction isn't worth it since MY child won't get this disease in AMERICA" and it never occurs to them how incredibly selfish and short-sighted any of those thoughts are.

[Caela]

A Mother's anguish is why we vaccinate. The link goes to a timeline photo and a letter on FB written by a Mother who is now under quarantine with her two children (only a couple months old) while they wait to find out if their exposure to the measles will pass them over or if her baby will become ill with a disease that could have been prevented if those around him had been vaccinated.

[AndyZ]

Not sure if vaccinations were as much of a 'thing' back in the days of mass immigration (although quarantine is a distinct possibility), but consider how many people enter the country through routes other than Ellis Island or the modern equivalent.  Tourists on vacation, by both plane and automobile.  People who just choose to run the border instead of going through legal channels.

I meant to say quarantine.  Sorry about that.

I want to clarify to everyone that I have been vaccinated, would have my kids vaccinated if I had any, and encourage vaccinations.  Just in case that's in doubt.

However, apparently we don't vaccinate for smallpox anymore, because it's been eliminated.

Routine vaccination of the American public against smallpox stopped in 1972 after the disease was eradicated in the United States.

Maybe we should start to consider some better methods of quarantine.  I mean, Ebola got to the USA, and the only reason that it hasn't spread to everyone is because it doesn't spread very easily.

Even though you're more likely to catch something when others aren't vaccinated, it's still a danger, right?

[Oniya]

Smallpox has been eliminated world-wide and that's why we don't vaccinate against it.  Polio is almost gone, so we still vaccinate against it (IPV at 2, 4, and 6 months).  The only other disease I could find that has been eliminated world-wide (in the wild - there are still lab samples) is an animal disease called 'rinderpest'.

As for quarantine.  Back during the 'Ebola news epidemic' (as opposed to the epidemic of the disease itself, which is still going on), there was an attempt to quarantine people coming back to the US after spending time in those areas.

The response was that those measures were draconian.  That they caused stress for health-care workers.  Despite the outcry, there were only four cases confirmed in the US by the CDC, compared to the spread in the hot zone itself.  Only one of those involved transmission from another US patient.

[Inkidu]

It might have been draconian, but until there's a vaccine for disease the only option is to make sure that it doesn't spread. You can't outrun a virus that just makes things worse. I feel bad for the draconian quarantine measures, but there's often little to no other choice.

[Oniya]

Oh, I agree, Inkidu.  I worked in an actual viral research lab for a while (tech support), and then worked for a company that translates lab reports about disinfectants into EPA jargon (which is how I knew that Vaccinia is still found in labs).  And the low number of confirmed cases shows that those methods worked.

I'm just saying that if the gummint tried to enforce quarantine for a disease that is perceived as 'the stuff of horror movies' and got that kind of backlash, then imagine the reaction to enforcing quarantine for something that is perceived as much less dangerous.

[Inkidu]

Oh, I agree, Inkidu.  I worked in an actual viral research lab for a while (tech support), and then worked for a company that translates lab reports about disinfectants into EPA jargon (which is how I knew that Vaccinia is still found in labs).  And the low number of confirmed cases shows that those methods worked.

I'm just saying that if the gummint tried to enforce quarantine for a disease that is perceived as 'the stuff of horror movies' and got that kind of backlash, then imagine the reaction to enforcing quarantine for something that is perceived as much less dangerous.

Yeah, you're right. I just feel bad that the only option is often the roughest.

[AndyZ]

I respectfully disagree.

Although I've never been a parent, I've seen parents who allow tantrums and the like to allow them to permit bad behavior, and I can't help but be reminded of the analogy.

We're paying the CDC $6.9 billion dollars to keep us safe from these diseases.  Quarantines may seem draconian but they're an obvious necessity, and given the Internet and things like that, they're no longer nearly as isolating.

I almost want to point to the Star Trek episodes of what happens when people break quarantine.

Even if we had 100% of people immunized in the USA, you'd still have to protect your newborns from everyone who came in from other countries, isn't immunized and may have brought the disease with them.

My dad told me a story about how someone caught measles from being in an elevator a week after someone else who already had it.

If we accept that people who don't vaccinate are killing people via negligence, then we can easily apply that same negligence to the people who enter without vaccinating.  However, once you eliminate the problem from a country, it can only be started by the latter.

If smallpox made a resurgence, we'd blame people at the labs who let it out, not the people who didn't vaccinate.  I'm a bit more concerned with the people who brought measles back into America instead of the people who didn't vaccinate.  Yes, they exacerbated the problem, but they didn't originate it.

Amusingly, if you eliminate a disease from a country, vaccinations for it should no longer be even necessary.  I'd still get them, though, just in case one got through the cracks.

If public opinion isn't there, we should use times like this, Ebola and others to remind people why it should be there.

[Caehlim]

We're paying the CDC $6.9 billion dollars to keep us safe from these diseases.  Quarantines may seem draconian but they're an obvious necessity, and given the Internet and things like that, they're no longer nearly as isolating.

Given that we're paying them this quantity of money (although it is actually relatively small), we should listen to their opinion. Many of the quarantines implemented during the Ebola outbreak were against the recommendation of the CDC.

Even if we had 100% of people immunized in the USA, you'd still have to protect your newborns from everyone who came in from other countries, isn't immunized and may have brought the disease with them.

85% of children globally are vaccinated. It's pretty much only extremely remote areas of the developing world where the vaccine is not available (from which travel is difficult), people who are medically unable to receive the vaccine and people in the developed world who have chosen not to be vaccinated for inaccurate reasons.

My dad told me a story about how someone caught measles from being in an elevator a week after someone else who already had it.

This is not likely to be true. Measles is a virus, spread through coughs and sneezes. Baring rare viruses that can form a spore-like outer coating, they do not usually survive longer than periods of time measured in minutes outside of the human body or other similar incubating environment. Elevators are not generally conducive environments to the transmission of disease. A week would be an extraordinary time period for this to occur. Far more likely is that some other contact occurred with an asymptomatic infected person, since with measles people can be infectious four days before symptoms are displayed.

If we accept that people who don't vaccinate are killing people via negligence, then we can easily apply that same negligence to the people who enter without vaccinating.

Doesn't matter where you're from, choosing not to vaccinate when you otherwise could is taking action that can lead to people's death. Some people don't have that option, in which case it's hardly negligence.

Amusingly, if you eliminate a disease from a country, vaccinations for it should no longer be even necessary.  I'd still get them, though, just in case one got through the cracks.

In the modern world this isn't really an option. There's too much interconnectivity to think of any country as being isolated.

[Oniya]

According to the CDC, the measles virus has a survival time of less than two hours on environmental surfaces.

[TheGlyphstone]

The CDC doesn't get nearly enough credit. They have an honest-to-god completely serious page on their website about the necessary preparations to survive a zombie apocalypse. http://www.cdc.gov/phpr/zombies.htm

[Oniya]

It actually started out as a training exercise, because the progression of a 'zombie apocalypse' has a lot in common with the progression of real-world epidemics, without the baggage of 'Oh, well we know what works against that disease.'

[TheGlyphstone]

Pretty much.  But keeping it around shows they have an actual sense of humor, which is quite unusual for government.


EDIT: And speaking of humor, here's a humor break with something completely absurd.

http://news.yahoo.com/anti-vaccine-book---melanie-s-marvelous-measles---tells-children-to-embrace-disease-164812457.html

Here's the actual Amazon link. The feedback comments are comedy gold.
http://www.amazon.com/Melanies-Marvelous-Measles-Stephanie-Messenger/dp/1466938897/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top?ie=UTF8

[Valthazar]

My impression is that the "zombie apocalypse" CDC plan describes how the government plans to respond to mass rioters and widespread unrest and disorder (such as the Ferguson debacle on a national scale).

[TheGlyphstone]

My impression is that the "zombie apocalypse" CDC plan describes how the government plans to respond to mass rioters and widespread unrest and disorder (such as the Ferguson debacle on a national scale).

Yeah, it's the same reason the US Military has CONPLAN 8888-11; you can do a lot of preparation/planning for a real-world scenario or epidemic without causing political fallout or unnecessary panic if you wrap the whole thing in a blatantly fictional wrapper, and that same blatantly fictional wrapper is a big help for plan-writers trying to get out of a rut in their thinking. Plus, if the unthinkable happens and we actually get a zombie plague, there actually is a plan ready to dust off and handle it.

[Inkidu]

Max Brooks himself has said he has a bag called his "earthquake bag" and he says there's nothing in there that he wouldn't need for any disaster. So it's more about getting people to be proactive and not panic.

[Lustful Bride]

Max Brooks himself has said he has a bag called his "earthquake bag" and he says there's nothing in there that he wouldn't need for any disaster. So it's more about getting people to be proactive and not panic.

Same, though I mostly plan for mass rioting and people losing their shit. @_@ Which shares many similarities with my "US invaded by outside power" plan along with my zombie plan.

A lot of disaster preparation stuff works well with one another.

[Caehlim]

Hank Green with sci-show news talking about the outbreak.

http://youtu.be/kjFPUoIXd80

[Cassandra LeMay]

The British The Independent had an article on the topic of vaccination a few days ago. To quote the parts I find most interesting and relevant:

That’s why the difference between parents and health organisations is one of perspective: governments’ vaccine programmes are ... “population driven”... . Parents, meanwhile, are child-focused.

For most vaccines, there's around a 1 per cent chance of an adverse reaction, and even less of a chance of this being serious. But for the parents I spoke to, this fractional possibility is more than just a number. If your child was unlucky you would live with the guilt forever.

Many sneer at the anti-vaccination movement, but this won't help solve the problem. We need to bring the doubting parents back on board. This means having better information for parents, better data collection on adverse vaccine reactions, and improved training for healthcare professionals on dealing with vaccination queries. Telling unsure parents that the vaccine decision isn’t theirs to make is only going to alienate them further.

As someone here has pointed out earlier, people (in general) don't make stupid decisions because they want to. They take the wrong decisions for reasons that seem right to them at the time.

That said, I do have a question for those here who have children: How much time do doctors take to explain what they are doing, and why they are doing it? Could it help if they had more time (or took more time) to explain to parents why vaccination might be a good idea? Are doctors under too much time pressure to provide more than just a "I'm a doctor so I know what's best for your child"?

[Oniya]

We went through the whole vaccination thing with the little Oni  - They really don't do much explaining other than 'you have to get this done'.  At the time I got pregnant, I had a friend whose daughter was diagnosed with 'Pervasive Development Disorder', which made its appearance shortly after she got the MMR.  Coincidence does not imply causality, but as a new mother a couple years later, seeing my friends with a daughter who was going to require caretakers for the rest of her life, I will admit I was concerned. 

In addition, if you look at the recommended vaccination chart, the doctors were sometimes wanting to administer upwards of 5 shots at a time.  Five or more.  If one of them caused a reaction, be it an allergy or something else, determining which vaccine caused it (so that alternatives could be investigated) would be a nightmare.  We ended up spacing them out so that she only had two at any given visit, and had to explain our reasoning every single time.

[Inkidu]

Vaccinations should always be spaced out. I don't like that doctors are willing to do that. :|

[Oniya]

I can see logic for both sides of the situation.  From the doctors' point of view, they want to minimize the window in which the child could be at risk of contracting the disease, as well as reducing the amount of office time that gets chewed up by multiple visits.  While the actual injections take barely a moment, there's the intake and the situating of the child to take into account.

[TheGlyphstone]

For humor, education, and great justice.

Spoiler: Click to Show/Hide

[Caela]

I've had that going around my facebook recently and absolutely LOVE it every time I see it!

[Caehlim]

Hank Green from Sci Show explaining why the anti-vaccine movement exists from a scientific/psychological point of view.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rzxr9FeZf1g

[AndyZ]

Personally, if the CDC is going to do zombie stuff for a training exercise, there's no reason to take it down.  I mean, the website for the movie Space Jam is still up: http://www2.warnerbros.com/spacejam/movie/jam.htm

From a government accountability perspective, it's nice to know what they're using money on, and from a writer's perspective, I like that I could pull that file if I wanted to run a zombie game.