Please answer my stupid question about vaccination

Hashem_Yaazor

Wed, Mar 11 2015, 3:01 pm

amother wrote:

Ahh, I understand now. Baboons require (I think) 10^9 to 10^10 CFU to infect. Humans require a whole lot less -humans with bacterial loads that high are very sick. So, monkeys can be colonized at 10^7 without disease. 10^7 is a lot! 10^7 can be more readily transmissible. People don't tend to be colonized without infection with such a bacterial burden. Yes, people with aP can transmit but probably not with high efficiently. This is purely hypothesis driven based on evidence. Little to nothing has been shown in humans.

But it has not been ruled out, has it? Is it something that is still undergoing further study?

(Please let me know if I am coming across as a baboon who has no intelligence whatsoever for understanding scientific studies. I would like to think I have slightly more critical thinking skills than I am accused of.)

Quote:

Antibodies and T-cell function in prevention of colonization has not been worked out. A person I work with sees antibodies in combination with T-cells can prevent colonization.

So basically there is a lot still unknown (which is what my research showed as well), and it seemed from me that this is something that the scientific research community desperately wants to learn more about, because they are striving for a better aP vaccine. Is there a lot of focus on pertussis vaccine advancement?

I don't know why there is such vehemence by certain posters against my posts on this subject. I would like to think I am posting pretty reasonably, based on information, and not based on what I want to be true. The only reason I am posting on this topic at all is to encourage more respect and tolerance to others so people can realize that you can't necessarily have someone to blame for everything.

Dolly Welsh

Wed, Mar 11 2015, 3:08 pm

Hashem_Yaazor wrote:

I never said more. It can be spread by both. But you cannot blame the unvaccinated for someone getting sick.

Of course you can.

Listen to Barbara.

Yes, non-vaxxers create conditions that affect vaxxers negatively.

Yes, non-vaxxers can be blamed for someone getting sick.

Who can get sick? Those too young to vaccinate, those too old to still have protection, those whose protection didn't take, those with reduced immunity from cancer treatments, and pregnant women.

That is a lot of people.

That is more or less everybody. Everybody was once little, most will get old, everybody was once a fetus.

And with every case, the diseases get yet another chance to mutate into something the vaccines don't handle.

I class non-vaxxers with people who eat live puppies.

I think they are bad people.

That they mean well does not change my view of them. Meaning well does not mean anything. It is air. Especially when good explanations are available for all their objections.

I like puppies. I would not be friends with anybody like that.

Last edited by Dolly Welsh on Wed, Mar 11 2015, 3:16 pm; edited 1 time in total

Think1st

Wed, Mar 11 2015, 3:36 pm

chaiz wrote:

How is pertussis spread by vaccinated individuals? And what is the source for your statement?

This research suggests that although individuals immunized with an acellular pertussis vaccine may be protected from disease, they may still become infected with the bacteria without always getting sick and are able to spread infection to others, including young infants who are susceptible to pertussis disease.

http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/.....7.htm

Animals that received an acellular pertussis vaccine had the bacteria in their airways for up to six weeks and were able to spread the infection to unvaccinated animals. In contrast, animals that received whole-cell vaccine cleared the bacteria within three weeks

So the newer TDaP can infect others for 2x as long as the older DTP . but it's ok to infect others if the vaccine is better for you Rolling Eyes

Scrabble123

Wed, Mar 11 2015, 3:40 pm

Think1st wrote:

So think1st, if I can get my hands on a whole-cell DTP shot will you allow the administration of the entire series to yourself and your children? Can you convince your friends to do so as well? I will definitely try my hardest to get it and this is not a joke. I mean it seriously. I definitely think that it may be possible to obtain under such circumstances. Of course, your MD will administer the vaccines..

amother

Wed, Mar 11 2015, 7:01 pm

Hashem_Yaazor wrote:

But it has not been ruled out, has it? Is it something that is still undergoing further study?
(Please let me know if I am coming across as a baboon who has no intelligence whatsoever for understanding scientific studies. I would like to think I have slightly more critical thinking skills than I am accused of.)

It has not been ruled out and my guess is that vaccinated people can transmit but at low rates -inefficient but there. A baboon could not have a discussion with a human.

Hashem_Yaazor wrote:

So basically there is a lot still unknown (which is what my research showed as well), and it seemed from me that this is something that the scientific research community desperately wants to learn more about, because they are striving for a better aP vaccine. Is there a lot of focus on pertussis vaccine advancement?
I don't know why there is such vehemence by certain posters against my posts on this subject. I would like to think I am posting pretty reasonably, based on information, and not based on what I want to be true. The only reason I am posting on this topic at all is to encourage more respect and tolerance to others so people can realize that you can't necessarily have someone to blame for everything.

I think most is unknown. Basically, the way whole cell came about is some people got lucky when the whole cell vaccine worked. But, it was too reactogenic. With the advancement of science, toxins and colonization factors were identified and tested as a vaccine. The vaccine appeared to work. Unfortunately, not too well... Now, we have a situation where pertussis rates are rising and some strains are decreasing their expression of PRN. I think a strong hypothesis is successful colonization today is due to down regulation of PRN but that is a giant area of research.

I don't understand the anger. But, I do get frustrated with the lack of vaccination presumably due to religious reasons. But, our religion is interpreted by rabbanim and not individuals. Our generation's biggest poskim agree on this matter. You have to make yourself into Torah in order to interpret it. I also get nervous because I can get sick to and these diseases are dangerous. It only takes a plane ride to see these diseases active and killing and killing. Have you ever seen these kids? Many people I work with have helplessly watched young children dying. Vaccines based on evidence along with clean water and sanitation are one of the biggest preventative measures for disease.

Hashem_Yaazor

Wed, Mar 11 2015, 8:03 pm

Except for the fact that I am not posting here anti-vaccination. I am just posting pro-tolerance of people who make different decisions and trying to explain it doesn't *always* affect other people, which posters continue to deny and call me as intelligent as a baboon for saying. Everything I have said on this thread has been based on scientific study, nothing has said not to vaccinate, and yet posters refuse to read my posts for what they are saying. Confirmation bias at its finest. I find that interesting that I am the one blamed for not having critical thinking skills Wink

black sheep

Thu, Mar 12 2015, 1:39 am

vaccinating vs. not vaccinating are not "equal decisions." you are equating things that are not similar. making a statement like "vaccinated individuals also spread disease" is false in the fact that it is very misleading, equating the spread of disease from unvaccinated people and from vaccinated people. they are not close.

perhaps you are sensing frustration from me and some other posters. I admit that I don't think it is "critical thinking" to misinterpret the findings of clinical trials on apes. I don't think it is open minded to agree that "vaccinated also spread disease" when the circumstances for this happening must be a perfect combination of unusual factors and is rare, while unvaccinated individuals very easily and readily spread the diseases they come into contact with.

and I am someone who delays and selectively vaccinates! yet I am finding your "open mindedness" and "critical thinking" to be rather dishonest.

Last edited by black sheep on Thu, Mar 12 2015, 11:18 am; edited 1 time in total

Heyaaa

Thu, Mar 12 2015, 2:15 am

black sheep wrote:

vaccinating vs. not vaccinating are not "equal decisions." you are equating things that are not similar. making a statement like "vaccinated individuals also spread disease" is false in the fact that it is very misleading, equating the spread of disease from unvaccinated people and from vaccinated people. they are not close.

perhaps you are sensing frustration from me and some other posters. I admit that I don't think it is "critical thinking" to misinterpret the findings of clinical trials on apes. I don't think it is open minded to agree that "unvaccinated also spread disease" when the circumstances for this happening must be a perfect combination of unusual factors and is rare, while vaccinated individuals very easily and readily spread the diseases they come into contact with.

and I am someone who delays and selectively vaccinates! yet I am finding your "open mindedness" and "critical thinking" to be rather dishonest.

Is that what you meant to say?

Hashem_Yaazor

Thu, Mar 12 2015, 8:58 am

I am taking many things into account when I am asking for tolerance to others.

First of all, there are hundreds of diseases not protected by vaccination. You cannot blame sickness of any of those things on someone because of their vaccination status.

Secondly, for whatever reasons, certain illnesses are not prevalent. Sometimes it is because of efficient vaccination. Sometimes it is for other reasons. But if an unvaccinated person is not exposed to such a disease (and please don't get into the whole argument about them not being exposed because of vaccination status, because for the purposes of this discussion, it's irrelevant; they didn't necessarily choose not to vaccinate because they are relying on others. I have never met anyone who thinks this way. They would be fine with everyone not vaccinating!) they are not that much more likely to spread that disease than a vaccinated individual. Only if they were exposed to such a disease, and it's not likely.

Thirdly, different diseases are transmitted in different ways. I don't buy that it is extremely rare for diseases that vaccinated individuals can spread to be transmitted by them. Every single disease is different. Amother is essentially giving theories why she doesn't think pertussis is easily spread (not that she said it would be incredibly rare; close contact does happen in schools, and I do think that kids who are less ill due to their vaccine working actually may be in school more) but none of this has been quantified enough yet to say I am misinterpreting data (it's not just me who is extrapolating from this study that perhaps better vaccine development is necessary to prevent transmission; science researchers in vaccine development have used this study in many of their writings, actually) and being "rather dishonest". I am not making up anything. I am taking what we know (which is not a whole lot) and using it to pose further questions that will hopefully lead to better answers. That is how science makes progress.

Fourthly, a huge chunk of the population no longer has immunity for many of the diseases we vaccinate for due to waning immunity. Vaccination rates are higher than what the CDC expects for herd immunity, yet diseases are still prevalent, and in many cases, it is thought this is a contributing factor. If your kids are going to go to the store or to a restaurant or shul or a relative's house or anywhere, they are going to be exposed to people who were fully vaccinated, but don't realize their immunity has waned. Said adults are also easily carriers of diseases.

Basically, there are so many ways a kid can get sick. Sometimes sickness is actually a good thing (yay, another thing to flame me over!) We do our personal hishtadlus and daven Hashem keep our children well. But if He sees fit that something else is in the plans for the child, it's going to happen no matter how much we try to control things. Just let it go. Not everything is in our control, and that includes other people.

Scrabble123

Thu, Mar 12 2015, 11:04 am

Think1st wrote:

Please explain why would it be ok to put others @ risk for 3 weeks ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7XEW2XHwIg

I don't have time to watch that video, but is putting yourself and others at risk constantly forever and always acceptable? I'm not getting you, Think1st. I would like to know you IRL though.

Furthermore, I really think that it is inappropriate for HY to continue to discuss a comment that was erased. I also do not know which posters HY is referring to, but what I do know is that I have nothing against HY or her posts, although I do not always agree with them.

black sheep

Thu, Mar 12 2015, 11:52 am

I am not labeling you as dishonest. I am calling your comment that vaccinated individuals spread disease as easily as nonvaccinated to be dishonest. you are playing around with words, saying "well, certain diseases spread just as easily, not all, and in clinical trials they found apes to be able to colonize a virus even after vaccination..." all things which are not in itself dishonest, because of course the stomach flu can be carried and transmitted by someone vaccinated for measels, and the flu shot is not always effective, and clinical studies did show colonization of the virus in vaccinated apes, but the dishonesty is in the point you are making with these facts and in the way you are saying them and then concluding "so don't blame unvaccinated for the spread of disease."

the truth is that vaccines do prevent the spread of disease.

and that tolerance doesn't mean putting your children in danger. and tolerance doesn't mean encouraging others to put their children in danger.

it is good to be tolerant and it is good to be open minded. however, please don't confuse open-mindedness with ignorance and dishonesty.