Measles Outbreak

[Anonymous]

I think that person said that deaths attributed to vaccines, reported to VAERS, but not verified as attributable to the vaccine, should not count.

Hope this helps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think that person said that deaths attributed to vaccines, reported to VAERS, but not verified as attributable to the vaccine, should not count.

Hope this helps.

And how exactly could it be verified? Is there some NCIS-vaccine team or something?

Convince me it’s something other than “Nobody saw me do it, you can’t prove anything.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that person said that deaths attributed to vaccines, reported to VAERS, but not verified as attributable to the vaccine, should not count.

Hope this helps.

And how exactly could it be verified? Is there some NCIS-vaccine team or something?

Convince me it’s something other than “Nobody saw me do it, you can’t prove anything.”

DP. Yes, of course. The whole point of VAERS is to serve as an early warning system. Red flags go up all the time, but they are assessed and (if warranted) investigated to look for complications and patterns.

If you didn't know this, then that explains why you don't understand how vaccinations work int his country.

The information is available online, e.g.:

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccine-safety-systems/vaers/index.html
About the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)

At a glance

- The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is one of several different systems CDC uses to monitor the safety of vaccines.

- VAERS accepts and analyzes reports of adverse events (any side effect or health problem after vaccination that is concerning to you, even if you are not sure if the vaccine caused the event).

- Anyone — patients, family members, healthcare providers and vaccine manufacturers — can submit a report to VAERS. Healthcare providers and vaccine manufacturers are legally required to report certain events after vaccination.

- A report to VAERS does not mean that a vaccine caused an adverse event.

- If it looks as though a vaccine might be associated with a health problem, CDC and FDA investigate further and take action if needed.

...

The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is the nation's early warning system that monitors the safety of FDA-approved vaccines and vaccines authorized for use for public health emergencies. The system accepts and analyzes reports of possible adverse events after vaccination and is co-managed by CDC and FDA. The number of reports submitted varies each year. VAERS accepts reports regardless of seriousness or how likely the vaccine may have caused the adverse event.

...

CDC and FDA use VAERS reports to:

- Assess the safety of newly licensed or authorized vaccines.
- Detect new, unusual or rare adverse events that happen after vaccination.
- Monitor increases in known side effects, like arm soreness where a shot was given.
- Identify potential patient risk factors for particular types of health problems related to vaccines.
- Identify and address possible reporting clusters.
- Recognize safe-use problems and administration errors.
- Watch for unexpected or unusual patterns in adverse event reports.
- Serve as a vaccine safety monitoring system in public health emergencies.
- Add to and improve scientific literature and understanding of vaccine safety monitoring.

Signals
Patterns or an unusually high number of adverse events reported for a vaccine are called "signals." If they detect a signal, scientists may conduct further studies in VSD or CISA to find out if it represents an actual risk. CDC and FDA investigate further and act if needed.

Strengths and limitations of VAERS data

When evaluating VAERS data, it is important to understand the strengths and limitations.

Strengths

- VAERS accepts reports from anyone. This also allows VAERS to act as an early warning system to detect rare adverse events.
- VAERS collects information about the vaccine, the person vaccinated, and the adverse event. Scientists obtain follow-up information on serious reports.
- All data from the initial VAERS report (without identifying patient information) are available to the public.

Limitations
V
- AERS is a passive reporting system, meaning that reports about adverse events are not automatically collected. Instead, someone who had or is aware of an adverse event following vaccination must file a report.
Anyone can submit VAERS reports. Some reports can lack details or contain errors. After investigation, scientists find that most events reported to VAERS are not associated with vaccination.
....

VAERS data alone cannot determine if the vaccine caused the reported adverse event. Establishing a causal relationship requires rigorous scientific assessment and consideration of multiple factors beyond just VAERS reports alone.

[Anonymous]

More details on VAERS:

The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS): An In-Depth Analysis of its Role, Mechanics, Limitations, and Methodological Interpretation in Post-Market Vaccine Safety Surveillance

https://medtechnews.uk/research-reports/understanding-the-vaccine-adverse-event-reporting-system-vaers-purpose-operations-limitations-and-data-interpretation/

3.3. Data Analysis

The collected and processed data subsequently undergoes preliminary analysis, designed primarily to detect potential safety signals or trends rather than to establish causality:

Preliminary Screening: Automated tools and statistical algorithms continuously screen the incoming data for unusual patterns. This often involves comparing the observed frequency of specific adverse events after a particular vaccine to the expected background rate of those events in the unvaccinated population or to the frequency after other vaccines (see Section 5 for detailed methodologies). This initial screening is highly sensitive, aiming to detect any unusual increases or clusters of events.

Clinical Review of Serious Reports: All reports describing serious outcomes (e.g., death, life-threatening events, hospitalizations) are individually reviewed by a team of medical officers, epidemiologists, and clinical specialists from the FDA and CDC. This in-depth clinical review assesses the medical plausibility of the reported event, considers the patient’s medical history, and evaluates whether additional information or follow-up is warranted. For fatalities, medical records (e.g., autopsy reports, hospital discharge summaries) are often actively sought and reviewed to determine the most likely cause of death.
Descriptive Epidemiology: Basic descriptive analyses are routinely performed, including calculating frequencies of reported events by vaccine, age group, sex, and time since vaccination. While these descriptive statistics cannot yield incidence rates due to the lack of denominator data, they can highlight temporal associations and demographic concentrations.

3.4. Signal Evaluation and Validation

The identification of a ‘safety signal’ in VAERS data is merely the starting point for a more extensive and rigorous investigation. A signal, by definition, suggests a potential association, but it does not equate to confirmed causality. The subsequent phase involves a multi-pronged approach to evaluate and, if necessary, validate the detected signal:

Further Investigation: Once a signal is identified, the FDA and CDC initiate further investigation. This can involve reviewing all available clinical documentation associated with the reported events, consulting external medical experts, and conducting targeted literature reviews to assess existing scientific knowledge about the suspected association.

Epidemiological Studies: The most critical step in evaluating a signal involves designing and conducting additional, more robust epidemiological studies. These studies leverage larger, more controlled datasets and methodologies that can assess the strength, consistency, and causality of any observed association. Key examples include:

Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD): A collaborative project between the CDC and nine integrated healthcare organizations, the VSD monitors vaccine safety in populations of approximately 3% of the U.S. population (about 24 million people). The VSD provides access to comprehensive medical records, including vaccination dates, diagnoses, and demographic data, enabling rapid and robust epidemiological studies, such as cohort and case-control studies, with reliable denominator data (McNeil et al., 2014).

Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) Project: This CDC-funded network of vaccine safety experts at medical research centers conducts clinical research, evaluates complex cases of adverse events, and provides expert consultation to clinicians and public health officials on vaccine safety issues. CISA focuses on detailed clinical assessments of individuals who have experienced unusual or severe adverse events following vaccination (CISA Network, 2021).

Case-Control Studies and Cohort Studies: These traditional epidemiological designs are employed to compare the rates of adverse events in vaccinated versus unvaccinated (or differently vaccinated) populations, controlling for potential confounding factors (see Section 5 for further details).

Causality Assessment: The ultimate goal of signal evaluation is to move towards a causality assessment. This is a complex scientific endeavor that considers multiple lines of evidence, including the temporality of the event, biological plausibility, consistency with other studies, and the exclusion of alternative causes. International consensus on causality assessment, such as the Brighton Collaboration criteria, may be utilized for specific adverse events (Brighton Collaboration, 2017).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that person said that deaths attributed to vaccines, reported to VAERS, but not verified as attributable to the vaccine, should not count.

Hope this helps.

And how exactly could it be verified? Is there some NCIS-vaccine team or something?

Convince me it’s something other than “Nobody saw me do it, you can’t prove anything.”

So, in summary, "yes."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to interrupt this thrilling but completely irrelevant discussion of 1960s food but this is the actual problem.

The discussion of 1960s food was meant to refute a favorite anti-vaxxer talking point: that our “advancements” in food and sanitation led to the decline in measles deaths and complications, and not the fact that we started vaccinating people.

In short - the early 1960s was better in almost every way the crunchies value, and kids died. A lot of them. They didn’t stop dying en masse until we started vaccinating en masse. As we are seeing now, all the hygiene in the world isn’t moving the needle - we are seeing complications at the exact rate we’d expect from past experience.

Are you going to just pretend that measles deaths and infections weren't dropping going into the 1960s? What caused the death rate to go from 12/100k to 0.21/100k in the years prior to the vaccine? Why do you dismiss the 11.79/100k drop, while holding the 0.21 drop as some sort of miracle?

Why do you seem so determined to go back to where we had that many deaths? Were measles cases declining before the measles vaccine was introduced? Yes, they were—and that’s a fact worth acknowledging. But the rate of decline after vaccination dwarfed anything we saw before. While we saw gradual improvements over decades, the introduction of the vaccine in 1963 triggered a stunning 97% drop in just five years.

1. Measles was already heading towards elimination/near elimination without a vaccine. Maybe it would have taken to the 70s/80s to get there, but we would have gotten there.
2. The MMR vaccination is not without risk. Read the package insert. There may be additional risks that aren't covered in the insert that people are still trying to figure out.
3. It therefore becomes questionable if the measles vaccine actually results in a net increase in health over the long term.

One obvious side effect of measles vaccination is that it let idiots like you live long enough to say completely stupid, made up crap.

The short bus has rolled in, everyone. Point and laugh.

This is a bit of a taboo topic, in that its very possible that vaccines are substituting fitness based mortality of resisting disease with what is essentially random mortality from injections. This is letting people make it to adulthood and reproduce that never would have done so before. While at the same time killing/crippling kids who would otherwise make it to adulthood unharmed. Is that a good thing? I bet you and I are in agreement here.

Thank you for bringing this up.

Not a single person has been killed by the MMR vaccine, and I’d venture to say the ones who were “crippled” by a few strains of some dead virus weren’t long for this world anyway. In a bit of news that is surprising to no one except low IQ antivaxxers, dysfunctional immune systems are dysfunctional. Sorry if one of your kids was one of the unfit - it must be terrifying knowing a real live virus could kill them. Or worse - the kind of huge “viral load” a kid gets in an average elementary school classroom in January.

But yes, in the past when people have refused to take common sense measures, Nature has been relentless. One of Benjamin Franklin’s great regrets was that he never inoculated his son against smallpox because he thought the boy was too weak. You can guess what happened next. (He got smallpox for real and died.)

Hopefully you didn’t pay for the AI that told you that. There are reported deaths in VAERS. The drug companies also admit it killed immunocompromised people which is why they aren’t given it anymore.

Oh yes, VAERS. Where guilty moms can blame vaccines when they smother their children to death in unsafe cosleeping arrangements. VAERS, where no truth or medical substantiation is required to submit to the database. That VAERS?

If you have a better data source I'm all ears. If not VAERS, then on what can you make claims of safety for the MMR vaccine, or really any vaccine?

How about peer reviewed research? By real Ph.Ds?

According to VAERS, vaccines have caused opiate overdoses, many suicides (grown adults, 20+ years later), teen acne, preexisting cat allergies to flare up, and an allergy to Korean food. In addition to the previously cited Hulk-itis and SIDS that isn’t SIDS at all but mommy smothering baby in bed.

I could file a claim today asserting the Covid vaccine caused my high blood pressure and you’d probably accept it as truth. The timing lines up.

But a researcher could determine with about 2 minutes of questions that my high blood pressure is actually an inevitable complication of a genetic disease that I have, and that has been affecting generations of my ancestors for longer than vaccines have been a thing. They might also figure out that I got lucky that the high blood pressure didn’t start for me until when it did, since my direct relatives all experienced it much younger.

It’s important to have a monitoring system, but there is no filter on VAERS for truth. Correlation does not equal causation. Sometimes it’s just a coincidence. Or, like, an heartbreaking attempt to avoid accountability for raising a junkie or smothering an infant by engaging in unsafe sleep practices.

So what research by these Ph.Ds support the claim that no one has ever died from the MMR vaccine?

DP. If you research it (no...I mean real research, not listening to a blogger or a tik tok video), I don't think there are any verified DEATHS that have been directly attributed to the MMR vaccine. On the other hand, there are many deaths attributed to measles.

Now SDASU antivax loser POS.

So what you're saying is that if deaths in immunocompromised people don't count, and deaths reported to VAERS don't count, and then we don't look any further then we can conclude that the MMR vaccine didn't kill anyone? Is that correct?

Essentially the absence of evidence is evidence of absence then?

Immunocompromised people shouldn't be taking the vaccine. They are one of the groups that need to be protected by herd immunity. This is talking about deaths among healthy people cleared to take the vaccine. And reports in VAERS don't establish causality.

[Anonymous]

FYI, some vaccines are still indicated, even if someone is immunocompromised. It depends on the vaccine and the particular illness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to interrupt this thrilling but completely irrelevant discussion of 1960s food but this is the actual problem.

The discussion of 1960s food was meant to refute a favorite anti-vaxxer talking point: that our “advancements” in food and sanitation led to the decline in measles deaths and complications, and not the fact that we started vaccinating people.

In short - the early 1960s was better in almost every way the crunchies value, and kids died. A lot of them. They didn’t stop dying en masse until we started vaccinating en masse. As we are seeing now, all the hygiene in the world isn’t moving the needle - we are seeing complications at the exact rate we’d expect from past experience.

Are you going to just pretend that measles deaths and infections weren't dropping going into the 1960s? What caused the death rate to go from 12/100k to 0.21/100k in the years prior to the vaccine? Why do you dismiss the 11.79/100k drop, while holding the 0.21 drop as some sort of miracle?

Why do you seem so determined to go back to where we had that many deaths? Were measles cases declining before the measles vaccine was introduced? Yes, they were—and that’s a fact worth acknowledging. But the rate of decline after vaccination dwarfed anything we saw before. While we saw gradual improvements over decades, the introduction of the vaccine in 1963 triggered a stunning 97% drop in just five years.

1. Measles was already heading towards elimination/near elimination without a vaccine. Maybe it would have taken to the 70s/80s to get there, but we would have gotten there.
2. The MMR vaccination is not without risk. Read the package insert. There may be additional risks that aren't covered in the insert that people are still trying to figure out.
3. It therefore becomes questionable if the measles vaccine actually results in a net increase in health over the long term.

One obvious side effect of measles vaccination is that it let idiots like you live long enough to say completely stupid, made up crap.

The short bus has rolled in, everyone. Point and laugh.

This is a bit of a taboo topic, in that its very possible that vaccines are substituting fitness based mortality of resisting disease with what is essentially random mortality from injections. This is letting people make it to adulthood and reproduce that never would have done so before. While at the same time killing/crippling kids who would otherwise make it to adulthood unharmed. Is that a good thing? I bet you and I are in agreement here.

Thank you for bringing this up.

Not a single person has been killed by the MMR vaccine, and I’d venture to say the ones who were “crippled” by a few strains of some dead virus weren’t long for this world anyway. In a bit of news that is surprising to no one except low IQ antivaxxers, dysfunctional immune systems are dysfunctional. Sorry if one of your kids was one of the unfit - it must be terrifying knowing a real live virus could kill them. Or worse - the kind of huge “viral load” a kid gets in an average elementary school classroom in January.

But yes, in the past when people have refused to take common sense measures, Nature has been relentless. One of Benjamin Franklin’s great regrets was that he never inoculated his son against smallpox because he thought the boy was too weak. You can guess what happened next. (He got smallpox for real and died.)

Hopefully you didn’t pay for the AI that told you that. There are reported deaths in VAERS. The drug companies also admit it killed immunocompromised people which is why they aren’t given it anymore.

Oh yes, VAERS. Where guilty moms can blame vaccines when they smother their children to death in unsafe cosleeping arrangements. VAERS, where no truth or medical substantiation is required to submit to the database. That VAERS?

If you have a better data source I'm all ears. If not VAERS, then on what can you make claims of safety for the MMR vaccine, or really any vaccine?

How about peer reviewed research? By real Ph.Ds?

According to VAERS, vaccines have caused opiate overdoses, many suicides (grown adults, 20+ years later), teen acne, preexisting cat allergies to flare up, and an allergy to Korean food. In addition to the previously cited Hulk-itis and SIDS that isn’t SIDS at all but mommy smothering baby in bed.

I could file a claim today asserting the Covid vaccine caused my high blood pressure and you’d probably accept it as truth. The timing lines up.

But a researcher could determine with about 2 minutes of questions that my high blood pressure is actually an inevitable complication of a genetic disease that I have, and that has been affecting generations of my ancestors for longer than vaccines have been a thing. They might also figure out that I got lucky that the high blood pressure didn’t start for me until when it did, since my direct relatives all experienced it much younger.

It’s important to have a monitoring system, but there is no filter on VAERS for truth. Correlation does not equal causation. Sometimes it’s just a coincidence. Or, like, an heartbreaking attempt to avoid accountability for raising a junkie or smothering an infant by engaging in unsafe sleep practices.

So what research by these Ph.Ds support the claim that no one has ever died from the MMR vaccine?

DP. If you research it (no...I mean real research, not listening to a blogger or a tik tok video), I don't think there are any verified DEATHS that have been directly attributed to the MMR vaccine. On the other hand, there are many deaths attributed to measles.

Now SDASU antivax loser POS.

So what you're saying is that if deaths in immunocompromised people don't count, and deaths reported to VAERS don't count, and then we don't look any further then we can conclude that the MMR vaccine didn't kill anyone? Is that correct?

Essentially the absence of evidence is evidence of absence then?

Immunocompromised people shouldn't be taking the vaccine. They are one of the groups that need to be protected by herd immunity. This is talking about deaths among healthy people cleared to take the vaccine. And reports in VAERS don't establish causality.

Just to add, lay people shouldn’t be deciding who is “immunocompromised” for the purpose of skipping vaccines. If your child is truly immunocompromised, you’d know it, and you’d be doing everything in your power to protect them. You wouldn’t be feeding them raw milk or cavalier about “natural immunity.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to interrupt this thrilling but completely irrelevant discussion of 1960s food but this is the actual problem.

The discussion of 1960s food was meant to refute a favorite anti-vaxxer talking point: that our “advancements” in food and sanitation led to the decline in measles deaths and complications, and not the fact that we started vaccinating people.

In short - the early 1960s was better in almost every way the crunchies value, and kids died. A lot of them. They didn’t stop dying en masse until we started vaccinating en masse. As we are seeing now, all the hygiene in the world isn’t moving the needle - we are seeing complications at the exact rate we’d expect from past experience.

Are you going to just pretend that measles deaths and infections weren't dropping going into the 1960s? What caused the death rate to go from 12/100k to 0.21/100k in the years prior to the vaccine? Why do you dismiss the 11.79/100k drop, while holding the 0.21 drop as some sort of miracle?

Why do you seem so determined to go back to where we had that many deaths? Were measles cases declining before the measles vaccine was introduced? Yes, they were—and that’s a fact worth acknowledging. But the rate of decline after vaccination dwarfed anything we saw before. While we saw gradual improvements over decades, the introduction of the vaccine in 1963 triggered a stunning 97% drop in just five years.

1. Measles was already heading towards elimination/near elimination without a vaccine. Maybe it would have taken to the 70s/80s to get there, but we would have gotten there.
2. The MMR vaccination is not without risk. Read the package insert. There may be additional risks that aren't covered in the insert that people are still trying to figure out.
3. It therefore becomes questionable if the measles vaccine actually results in a net increase in health over the long term.

One obvious side effect of measles vaccination is that it let idiots like you live long enough to say completely stupid, made up crap.

The short bus has rolled in, everyone. Point and laugh.

This is a bit of a taboo topic, in that its very possible that vaccines are substituting fitness based mortality of resisting disease with what is essentially random mortality from injections. This is letting people make it to adulthood and reproduce that never would have done so before. While at the same time killing/crippling kids who would otherwise make it to adulthood unharmed. Is that a good thing? I bet you and I are in agreement here.

Thank you for bringing this up.

Not a single person has been killed by the MMR vaccine, and I’d venture to say the ones who were “crippled” by a few strains of some dead virus weren’t long for this world anyway. In a bit of news that is surprising to no one except low IQ antivaxxers, dysfunctional immune systems are dysfunctional. Sorry if one of your kids was one of the unfit - it must be terrifying knowing a real live virus could kill them. Or worse - the kind of huge “viral load” a kid gets in an average elementary school classroom in January.

But yes, in the past when people have refused to take common sense measures, Nature has been relentless. One of Benjamin Franklin’s great regrets was that he never inoculated his son against smallpox because he thought the boy was too weak. You can guess what happened next. (He got smallpox for real and died.)

Hopefully you didn’t pay for the AI that told you that. There are reported deaths in VAERS. The drug companies also admit it killed immunocompromised people which is why they aren’t given it anymore.

Oh yes, VAERS. Where guilty moms can blame vaccines when they smother their children to death in unsafe cosleeping arrangements. VAERS, where no truth or medical substantiation is required to submit to the database. That VAERS?

If you have a better data source I'm all ears. If not VAERS, then on what can you make claims of safety for the MMR vaccine, or really any vaccine?

How about peer reviewed research? By real Ph.Ds?

According to VAERS, vaccines have caused opiate overdoses, many suicides (grown adults, 20+ years later), teen acne, preexisting cat allergies to flare up, and an allergy to Korean food. In addition to the previously cited Hulk-itis and SIDS that isn’t SIDS at all but mommy smothering baby in bed.

I could file a claim today asserting the Covid vaccine caused my high blood pressure and you’d probably accept it as truth. The timing lines up.

But a researcher could determine with about 2 minutes of questions that my high blood pressure is actually an inevitable complication of a genetic disease that I have, and that has been affecting generations of my ancestors for longer than vaccines have been a thing. They might also figure out that I got lucky that the high blood pressure didn’t start for me until when it did, since my direct relatives all experienced it much younger.

It’s important to have a monitoring system, but there is no filter on VAERS for truth. Correlation does not equal causation. Sometimes it’s just a coincidence. Or, like, an heartbreaking attempt to avoid accountability for raising a junkie or smothering an infant by engaging in unsafe sleep practices.

So what research by these Ph.Ds support the claim that no one has ever died from the MMR vaccine?

DP. If you research it (no...I mean real research, not listening to a blogger or a tik tok video), I don't think there are any verified DEATHS that have been directly attributed to the MMR vaccine. On the other hand, there are many deaths attributed to measles.

Now SDASU antivax loser POS.

So what you're saying is that if deaths in immunocompromised people don't count, and deaths reported to VAERS don't count, and then we don't look any further then we can conclude that the MMR vaccine didn't kill anyone? Is that correct?

Essentially the absence of evidence is evidence of absence then?

Immunocompromised people shouldn't be taking the vaccine. They are one of the groups that need to be protected by herd immunity. This is talking about deaths among healthy people cleared to take the vaccine. And reports in VAERS don't establish causality.

PP claimed MMR never killed anyone, without any caveats about compromised immune systems. I think we agree that statement is false.

The entire medical establishment is built around preventing anyone from establishing causality with vaccines. Whether that be VAERS, the vaccine court or the refusal to do double-blind clinical trials.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to interrupt this thrilling but completely irrelevant discussion of 1960s food but this is the actual problem.

The discussion of 1960s food was meant to refute a favorite anti-vaxxer talking point: that our “advancements” in food and sanitation led to the decline in measles deaths and complications, and not the fact that we started vaccinating people.

In short - the early 1960s was better in almost every way the crunchies value, and kids died. A lot of them. They didn’t stop dying en masse until we started vaccinating en masse. As we are seeing now, all the hygiene in the world isn’t moving the needle - we are seeing complications at the exact rate we’d expect from past experience.

Are you going to just pretend that measles deaths and infections weren't dropping going into the 1960s? What caused the death rate to go from 12/100k to 0.21/100k in the years prior to the vaccine? Why do you dismiss the 11.79/100k drop, while holding the 0.21 drop as some sort of miracle?

Why do you seem so determined to go back to where we had that many deaths? Were measles cases declining before the measles vaccine was introduced? Yes, they were—and that’s a fact worth acknowledging. But the rate of decline after vaccination dwarfed anything we saw before. While we saw gradual improvements over decades, the introduction of the vaccine in 1963 triggered a stunning 97% drop in just five years.

1. Measles was already heading towards elimination/near elimination without a vaccine. Maybe it would have taken to the 70s/80s to get there, but we would have gotten there.
2. The MMR vaccination is not without risk. Read the package insert. There may be additional risks that aren't covered in the insert that people are still trying to figure out.
3. It therefore becomes questionable if the measles vaccine actually results in a net increase in health over the long term.

One obvious side effect of measles vaccination is that it let idiots like you live long enough to say completely stupid, made up crap.

The short bus has rolled in, everyone. Point and laugh.

This is a bit of a taboo topic, in that its very possible that vaccines are substituting fitness based mortality of resisting disease with what is essentially random mortality from injections. This is letting people make it to adulthood and reproduce that never would have done so before. While at the same time killing/crippling kids who would otherwise make it to adulthood unharmed. Is that a good thing? I bet you and I are in agreement here.

Thank you for bringing this up.

Not a single person has been killed by the MMR vaccine, and I’d venture to say the ones who were “crippled” by a few strains of some dead virus weren’t long for this world anyway. In a bit of news that is surprising to no one except low IQ antivaxxers, dysfunctional immune systems are dysfunctional. Sorry if one of your kids was one of the unfit - it must be terrifying knowing a real live virus could kill them. Or worse - the kind of huge “viral load” a kid gets in an average elementary school classroom in January.

But yes, in the past when people have refused to take common sense measures, Nature has been relentless. One of Benjamin Franklin’s great regrets was that he never inoculated his son against smallpox because he thought the boy was too weak. You can guess what happened next. (He got smallpox for real and died.)

Hopefully you didn’t pay for the AI that told you that. There are reported deaths in VAERS. The drug companies also admit it killed immunocompromised people which is why they aren’t given it anymore.

Oh yes, VAERS. Where guilty moms can blame vaccines when they smother their children to death in unsafe cosleeping arrangements. VAERS, where no truth or medical substantiation is required to submit to the database. That VAERS?

If you have a better data source I'm all ears. If not VAERS, then on what can you make claims of safety for the MMR vaccine, or really any vaccine?

How about peer reviewed research? By real Ph.Ds?

According to VAERS, vaccines have caused opiate overdoses, many suicides (grown adults, 20+ years later), teen acne, preexisting cat allergies to flare up, and an allergy to Korean food. In addition to the previously cited Hulk-itis and SIDS that isn’t SIDS at all but mommy smothering baby in bed.

I could file a claim today asserting the Covid vaccine caused my high blood pressure and you’d probably accept it as truth. The timing lines up.

But a researcher could determine with about 2 minutes of questions that my high blood pressure is actually an inevitable complication of a genetic disease that I have, and that has been affecting generations of my ancestors for longer than vaccines have been a thing. They might also figure out that I got lucky that the high blood pressure didn’t start for me until when it did, since my direct relatives all experienced it much younger.

It’s important to have a monitoring system, but there is no filter on VAERS for truth. Correlation does not equal causation. Sometimes it’s just a coincidence. Or, like, an heartbreaking attempt to avoid accountability for raising a junkie or smothering an infant by engaging in unsafe sleep practices.

So what research by these Ph.Ds support the claim that no one has ever died from the MMR vaccine?

DP. If you research it (no...I mean real research, not listening to a blogger or a tik tok video), I don't think there are any verified DEATHS that have been directly attributed to the MMR vaccine. On the other hand, there are many deaths attributed to measles.

Now SDASU antivax loser POS.

So what you're saying is that if deaths in immunocompromised people don't count, and deaths reported to VAERS don't count, and then we don't look any further then we can conclude that the MMR vaccine didn't kill anyone? Is that correct?

Essentially the absence of evidence is evidence of absence then?

Immunocompromised people shouldn't be taking the vaccine. They are one of the groups that need to be protected by herd immunity. This is talking about deaths among healthy people cleared to take the vaccine. And reports in VAERS don't establish causality.

PP claimed MMR never killed anyone, without any caveats about compromised immune systems. I think we agree that statement is false.

The entire medical establishment is built around preventing anyone from establishing causality with vaccines. Whether that be VAERS, the vaccine court or the refusal to do double-blind clinical trials.

That is literally not true. You don’t understand vaccines or how studies are conducted at all. This is conspiratorial nonsense and you are making this situation worse. Vaccines are so effective that people have the luxury of believing this nonsense you are spouting. Anyone who grew up when polio was still widespread would be angry with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to interrupt this thrilling but completely irrelevant discussion of 1960s food but this is the actual problem.

The discussion of 1960s food was meant to refute a favorite anti-vaxxer talking point: that our “advancements” in food and sanitation led to the decline in measles deaths and complications, and not the fact that we started vaccinating people.

In short - the early 1960s was better in almost every way the crunchies value, and kids died. A lot of them. They didn’t stop dying en masse until we started vaccinating en masse. As we are seeing now, all the hygiene in the world isn’t moving the needle - we are seeing complications at the exact rate we’d expect from past experience.

Are you going to just pretend that measles deaths and infections weren't dropping going into the 1960s? What caused the death rate to go from 12/100k to 0.21/100k in the years prior to the vaccine? Why do you dismiss the 11.79/100k drop, while holding the 0.21 drop as some sort of miracle?

Why do you seem so determined to go back to where we had that many deaths? Were measles cases declining before the measles vaccine was introduced? Yes, they were—and that’s a fact worth acknowledging. But the rate of decline after vaccination dwarfed anything we saw before. While we saw gradual improvements over decades, the introduction of the vaccine in 1963 triggered a stunning 97% drop in just five years.

1. Measles was already heading towards elimination/near elimination without a vaccine. Maybe it would have taken to the 70s/80s to get there, but we would have gotten there.
2. The MMR vaccination is not without risk. Read the package insert. There may be additional risks that aren't covered in the insert that people are still trying to figure out.
3. It therefore becomes questionable if the measles vaccine actually results in a net increase in health over the long term.

One obvious side effect of measles vaccination is that it let idiots like you live long enough to say completely stupid, made up crap.

The short bus has rolled in, everyone. Point and laugh.

This is a bit of a taboo topic, in that its very possible that vaccines are substituting fitness based mortality of resisting disease with what is essentially random mortality from injections. This is letting people make it to adulthood and reproduce that never would have done so before. While at the same time killing/crippling kids who would otherwise make it to adulthood unharmed. Is that a good thing? I bet you and I are in agreement here.

Thank you for bringing this up.

Not a single person has been killed by the MMR vaccine, and I’d venture to say the ones who were “crippled” by a few strains of some dead virus weren’t long for this world anyway. In a bit of news that is surprising to no one except low IQ antivaxxers, dysfunctional immune systems are dysfunctional. Sorry if one of your kids was one of the unfit - it must be terrifying knowing a real live virus could kill them. Or worse - the kind of huge “viral load” a kid gets in an average elementary school classroom in January.

But yes, in the past when people have refused to take common sense measures, Nature has been relentless. One of Benjamin Franklin’s great regrets was that he never inoculated his son against smallpox because he thought the boy was too weak. You can guess what happened next. (He got smallpox for real and died.)

Hopefully you didn’t pay for the AI that told you that. There are reported deaths in VAERS. The drug companies also admit it killed immunocompromised people which is why they aren’t given it anymore.

Oh yes, VAERS. Where guilty moms can blame vaccines when they smother their children to death in unsafe cosleeping arrangements. VAERS, where no truth or medical substantiation is required to submit to the database. That VAERS?

If you have a better data source I'm all ears. If not VAERS, then on what can you make claims of safety for the MMR vaccine, or really any vaccine?

How about peer reviewed research? By real Ph.Ds?

According to VAERS, vaccines have caused opiate overdoses, many suicides (grown adults, 20+ years later), teen acne, preexisting cat allergies to flare up, and an allergy to Korean food. In addition to the previously cited Hulk-itis and SIDS that isn’t SIDS at all but mommy smothering baby in bed.

I could file a claim today asserting the Covid vaccine caused my high blood pressure and you’d probably accept it as truth. The timing lines up.

But a researcher could determine with about 2 minutes of questions that my high blood pressure is actually an inevitable complication of a genetic disease that I have, and that has been affecting generations of my ancestors for longer than vaccines have been a thing. They might also figure out that I got lucky that the high blood pressure didn’t start for me until when it did, since my direct relatives all experienced it much younger.

It’s important to have a monitoring system, but there is no filter on VAERS for truth. Correlation does not equal causation. Sometimes it’s just a coincidence. Or, like, an heartbreaking attempt to avoid accountability for raising a junkie or smothering an infant by engaging in unsafe sleep practices.

So what research by these Ph.Ds support the claim that no one has ever died from the MMR vaccine?

DP. If you research it (no...I mean real research, not listening to a blogger or a tik tok video), I don't think there are any verified DEATHS that have been directly attributed to the MMR vaccine. On the other hand, there are many deaths attributed to measles.

Now SDASU antivax loser POS.

So what you're saying is that if deaths in immunocompromised people don't count, and deaths reported to VAERS don't count, and then we don't look any further then we can conclude that the MMR vaccine didn't kill anyone? Is that correct?

Essentially the absence of evidence is evidence of absence then?

Immunocompromised people shouldn't be taking the vaccine. They are one of the groups that need to be protected by herd immunity. This is talking about deaths among healthy people cleared to take the vaccine. And reports in VAERS don't establish causality.

PP claimed MMR never killed anyone, without any caveats about compromised immune systems. I think we agree that statement is false.

The entire medical establishment is built around preventing anyone from establishing causality with vaccines. Whether that be VAERS, the vaccine court or the refusal to do double-blind clinical trials.

That is literally not true. You don’t understand vaccines or how studies are conducted at all. This is conspiratorial nonsense and you are making this situation worse. Vaccines are so effective that people have the luxury of believing this nonsense you are spouting. Anyone who grew up when polio was still widespread would be angry with you.

The measles vaccine has prevented more than 15 million deaths over the past 25 years and you are obsessed over a handful of freak accidents where someone died due to an incredibly safe vaccine. It makes no sense and your misguided paranoia will kill millions if measles vaccination rates decline substantially.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to interrupt this thrilling but completely irrelevant discussion of 1960s food but this is the actual problem.

The discussion of 1960s food was meant to refute a favorite anti-vaxxer talking point: that our “advancements” in food and sanitation led to the decline in measles deaths and complications, and not the fact that we started vaccinating people.

In short - the early 1960s was better in almost every way the crunchies value, and kids died. A lot of them. They didn’t stop dying en masse until we started vaccinating en masse. As we are seeing now, all the hygiene in the world isn’t moving the needle - we are seeing complications at the exact rate we’d expect from past experience.

Are you going to just pretend that measles deaths and infections weren't dropping going into the 1960s? What caused the death rate to go from 12/100k to 0.21/100k in the years prior to the vaccine? Why do you dismiss the 11.79/100k drop, while holding the 0.21 drop as some sort of miracle?

Why do you seem so determined to go back to where we had that many deaths? Were measles cases declining before the measles vaccine was introduced? Yes, they were—and that’s a fact worth acknowledging. But the rate of decline after vaccination dwarfed anything we saw before. While we saw gradual improvements over decades, the introduction of the vaccine in 1963 triggered a stunning 97% drop in just five years.

1. Measles was already heading towards elimination/near elimination without a vaccine. Maybe it would have taken to the 70s/80s to get there, but we would have gotten there.
2. The MMR vaccination is not without risk. Read the package insert. There may be additional risks that aren't covered in the insert that people are still trying to figure out.
3. It therefore becomes questionable if the measles vaccine actually results in a net increase in health over the long term.

One obvious side effect of measles vaccination is that it let idiots like you live long enough to say completely stupid, made up crap.

The short bus has rolled in, everyone. Point and laugh.

This is a bit of a taboo topic, in that its very possible that vaccines are substituting fitness based mortality of resisting disease with what is essentially random mortality from injections. This is letting people make it to adulthood and reproduce that never would have done so before. While at the same time killing/crippling kids who would otherwise make it to adulthood unharmed. Is that a good thing? I bet you and I are in agreement here.

Thank you for bringing this up.

Not a single person has been killed by the MMR vaccine, and I’d venture to say the ones who were “crippled” by a few strains of some dead virus weren’t long for this world anyway. In a bit of news that is surprising to no one except low IQ antivaxxers, dysfunctional immune systems are dysfunctional. Sorry if one of your kids was one of the unfit - it must be terrifying knowing a real live virus could kill them. Or worse - the kind of huge “viral load” a kid gets in an average elementary school classroom in January.

But yes, in the past when people have refused to take common sense measures, Nature has been relentless. One of Benjamin Franklin’s great regrets was that he never inoculated his son against smallpox because he thought the boy was too weak. You can guess what happened next. (He got smallpox for real and died.)

Hopefully you didn’t pay for the AI that told you that. There are reported deaths in VAERS. The drug companies also admit it killed immunocompromised people which is why they aren’t given it anymore.

Oh yes, VAERS. Where guilty moms can blame vaccines when they smother their children to death in unsafe cosleeping arrangements. VAERS, where no truth or medical substantiation is required to submit to the database. That VAERS?

If you have a better data source I'm all ears. If not VAERS, then on what can you make claims of safety for the MMR vaccine, or really any vaccine?

How about peer reviewed research? By real Ph.Ds?

According to VAERS, vaccines have caused opiate overdoses, many suicides (grown adults, 20+ years later), teen acne, preexisting cat allergies to flare up, and an allergy to Korean food. In addition to the previously cited Hulk-itis and SIDS that isn’t SIDS at all but mommy smothering baby in bed.

I could file a claim today asserting the Covid vaccine caused my high blood pressure and you’d probably accept it as truth. The timing lines up.

But a researcher could determine with about 2 minutes of questions that my high blood pressure is actually an inevitable complication of a genetic disease that I have, and that has been affecting generations of my ancestors for longer than vaccines have been a thing. They might also figure out that I got lucky that the high blood pressure didn’t start for me until when it did, since my direct relatives all experienced it much younger.

It’s important to have a monitoring system, but there is no filter on VAERS for truth. Correlation does not equal causation. Sometimes it’s just a coincidence. Or, like, an heartbreaking attempt to avoid accountability for raising a junkie or smothering an infant by engaging in unsafe sleep practices.

So what research by these Ph.Ds support the claim that no one has ever died from the MMR vaccine?

DP. If you research it (no...I mean real research, not listening to a blogger or a tik tok video), I don't think there are any verified DEATHS that have been directly attributed to the MMR vaccine. On the other hand, there are many deaths attributed to measles.

Now SDASU antivax loser POS.

So what you're saying is that if deaths in immunocompromised people don't count, and deaths reported to VAERS don't count, and then we don't look any further then we can conclude that the MMR vaccine didn't kill anyone? Is that correct?

Essentially the absence of evidence is evidence of absence then?

Immunocompromised people shouldn't be taking the vaccine. They are one of the groups that need to be protected by herd immunity. This is talking about deaths among healthy people cleared to take the vaccine. And reports in VAERS don't establish causality.

PP claimed MMR never killed anyone, without any caveats about compromised immune systems. I think we agree that statement is false.

The entire medical establishment is built around preventing anyone from establishing causality with vaccines. Whether that be VAERS, the vaccine court or the refusal to do double-blind clinical trials.

Among otherwise perfectly healthy children infected with measles, 1 in 20 will get pneumonia; about 1 in 1,000 will have brain swelling that can cause deafness and intellectual disability; and nearly 3 in 1,000 will die. https://www.idsociety.org/ID-topics/infectious-disease/measles/know-the-facts/

The irony is that any of the rare immunocompromised children whose death might have been associated with measles vaccination almost certainly would not have survived measles infection. That's how it works.

Schrödinger's child: the hypothetical child who exists simultaneously in two competing states -- both too fragile to survive measles vaccination without injury, but also so strong and stalwart and vigorous from fresh fruit and clean living and modern plumbing that they laugh off any side effects from the virus itself. This, despite the fact that the vaccine IS just a weakened form of the virus, so you'd think that ... nah, logic has no business here.

[Anonymous]

I am pro-vaccines, as they get, and used to be infuriated with the antivaxxers. Yet, one instance made me kind of get where they may be coming from. After the mandatory covid vaccine, my sister developed heart complications (I forget which kind, specifically). She was dismissed in the ER repeatedly by different doctors and made feel like a conspiracy theorist until the last visit, when a doctor paid attention. I can imagine that when parents are repeatedly mocked and dismissed when they bring up concerns regarding their children's reactions to the vaccine, they stop trusting the medical system altogether.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am pro-vaccines, as they get, and used to be infuriated with the antivaxxers. Yet, one instance made me kind of get where they may be coming from. After the mandatory covid vaccine, my sister developed heart complications (I forget which kind, specifically). She was dismissed in the ER repeatedly by different doctors and made feel like a conspiracy theorist until the last visit, when a doctor paid attention. I can imagine that when parents are repeatedly mocked and dismissed when they bring up concerns regarding their children's reactions to the vaccine, they stop trusting the medical system altogether.

My child had and has heart issues from contracting the COVID virus. Multiple trips to the ER in multiple locations. That virus is a little monster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am pro-vaccines, as they get, and used to be infuriated with the antivaxxers. Yet, one instance made me kind of get where they may be coming from. After the mandatory covid vaccine, my sister developed heart complications (I forget which kind, specifically). She was dismissed in the ER repeatedly by different doctors and made feel like a conspiracy theorist until the last visit, when a doctor paid attention. I can imagine that when parents are repeatedly mocked and dismissed when they bring up concerns regarding their children's reactions to the vaccine, they stop trusting the medical system altogether.

My child had and has heart issues from contracting the COVID virus. Multiple trips to the ER in multiple locations. That virus is a little monster.

I am sorry you have to go through this, and I wish your child a full recovery. My point is that people's concerns need to be heard, documented, and investigated. Dismissal breeds distrust.