CrossFit Discussion Board  

Go Back   CrossFit Discussion Board > In Sickness and In Health > Health and Medical Issues
CrossFit Home Forum Site Rules CrossFit FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Health and Medical Issues For other than injuries

Closed Thread
Thread Tools
Old 04-10-2008, 04:34 PM   #211
Derek Maffett
Member Derek Maffett is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Castle Rock  WA
Posts: 3,544
Re: Children's vaccinations

Originally Posted by Robert Pierce View Post
In your last sentence above, would you feel comfortable substituting the word "population" for "one?" What do you think about the statement, "Anything a population does with respect to this matter will probably turn out fine."? I'm wondering if approaching this from a public health, population-based perspective changes your conclusion at all.
Brandon addressed that early on regarding herd immunity. Please read it over. Also, his report only attempts to compare current MMR vaccine risk with current disease risk, not disease risk should all or most people decide not to vaccinate. I would say that current disease risk in the absence of any "herd immunity" would be impossible to calculate for sure without halting vaccinations.

And as long as we're talking about "what ifs," I still say that societal issues should be fixed before the true risk of disease for a massively unvaccinated U.S. population could be determined.
Old 04-10-2008, 05:05 PM   #212
Ryan Jones
Member Ryan Jones is offline
Ryan Jones's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Long Beach  CA
Posts: 527
Re: Children's vaccinations

Originally Posted by Dale Kimberlin View Post
The collective drug co. budget has averaged approx 13,000$ per doc annually in this country and thats a lot of lunch, light pens and other incentives to influence prescribing behavior.I recal way back in the year 2000
The promotion of drugs was 5+billion and I don't think it has gone down since then.

Are you saying that the doctors at the Insurance Co. (KP) dont see reps?

Do the doctors treat patients, review claims, both, other?
Kaiser is a different kind of HMO, besides being the largest, and only non-profit one to my knowledge, its also one of few that uses primarily its own facilities and doctors. Yes the doctors see patients, they're regular 'ole medical doctors working in your typical hospital. As far as insurance claims I can't say, but I would have thought that would be the job of a different department. And they see no reps, this was actually discussed at a meeting recently, though I don't remember why.....
my crossfit turned SS log
Old 04-10-2008, 05:44 PM   #213
Justin Shipley
Member Justin Shipley is offline
Justin Shipley's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Albany  Western Australia
Posts: 942
Re: Children's vaccinations

let's imagine a world in which vaccination never existed, but that's the only difference; do you seriously think that the 3 leading causes of death in western developed countries -CV disease, cancers, and medical malpractice- would lose their long-time standing at the top of the list to be replaced by measles mumps chicken pox polio etc? Come on...
the last time a communicable disease epidemic put the well-founded fear of god into people was the Spanish flu early last century. Sure, a sh*tload of people died worldwide and the total population of this planet had a mild dent put in it, but it sure as hell wasn't the advent of widespread vaccination, coming decades later, that put us on the up-and-up again. Yet this is the logic that pro-vaccinations arguments require us to accept.
Succeptibility to the worst ravages of communicable diseases is not due to a deficiency of the appropriate vaccines. Full stop.
Old 04-10-2008, 06:00 PM   #214
Bethany McCullough
Member Bethany McCullough is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hilo  HI
Posts: 19
Re: Children's vaccinations

As the one previous post stated - there is NO connection at all between vaccines and autism. I am a doctor of physical therapy currently working the school system with many autistic children - all of who have been vaccinated. Autism is a terrible disease as are measles, mumps, rubella, etc. If you do your research you will see that cases of autism have recently skyrocketed although no more children are getting vaccinated than in the past and potentially "harmful" agents have been removed from vaccines. The best guess as to why cases of autism and other diseases on the PDD (pervasive developmental disorder) spectrum are on the rise is that more medical perfessions are diagnosing these diseases. Many of the kiddos I work with are at the low end of cognitive function for autism and would have been classified as mentally retarded a few years ago. Just becuase we better understand a disease and diagnosis it more often does not mean that there are more cases occuring.

Please vaccinate your children. Vaccinations are the reasons serious childhood diseases such as polio are no longer casuing problems in our country. We should be greatful to live in a country where just a few shots can prevenet so much.
Old 04-10-2008, 07:36 PM   #215
Jared Buffie
Member Jared Buffie is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Winnipeg  MB
Posts: 106
Re: Children's vaccinations

Please vaccinate your children. Vaccinations are the reasons serious childhood diseases such as polio are no longer casuing problems in our country. We should be greatful to live in a country where just a few shots can prevenet so much.

Then explain Typhoid Fever and Scarlet Fever. No shots, but they are gone too.

As for under diagnosis for Autism.... Where are all the Autistic adults?
Old 04-10-2008, 11:21 PM   #216
Bethany McCullough
Member Bethany McCullough is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hilo  HI
Posts: 19
Re: Children's vaccinations

We can thank things like technology, nutrition, and proper hygiene for the eradication of certain diseases in developed nations that still ravage 3rd world nations where access to simple things like clean water do not exist.

There are plenty of autistic adults - do you think it just disappears? many higher functioning persons on the autistic spectrum go on to like "normal" lives - they hold jobs of all levels depending on their cognitive level and social skills just like "regular" people - many hold jobs that allow them to work more individually as team social skills are often not as well. Many autistic children learn social skills, academic skills, and daily living skills thanks to the help of many including parents, special education teachers and aids, PTs OTs speech therapists, skills trainers,etc - it truly does "take a village"
not all children with autism have the cognitive skills to live independent lives and often live in the same types of places that other severely disabled adults live: group homes, with relatives, etc

Last week was world autism day - there were many well written articles on highlighting autistic adults - i suggest anyone with questions take a look - i work with autistic kiddos every day of many different levels - autism is a terrible disease about which we know too little - one thing that is known however is that it is not caused by vaccines - just because we do not know about a disease does not mean we can accept the first and easiest scapegoat we find
Old 04-11-2008, 03:50 AM   #217
Steve Reggio
Member Steve Reggio is offline
Steve Reggio's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lorton  VA
Posts: 212
Re: Children's vaccinations

As a parent who saw my child regress in the days immediately after a flu shot I will respectfully disagree. Some children are genetically predisposed to not being able to handle the cumulative total of the vaccines along with all of the other factors that could be causes. Look a parent in the eye and tell them there is no link after their child stopped talking overnight after they got the MMR.

Each side has science that points to their belief and science and studies can be skewed any way you want them to be.
Old 04-11-2008, 04:38 AM   #218
Alex Rosch
Member Alex Rosch is offline
Alex Rosch's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sundre  Alberta
Posts: 301
Re: Children's vaccinations

Wow...22 pages already...this is one hot topic.
I will chime in, as a parent of two.
Are vaccinations completely safe? No. As Steve pointed out, some kids do react to the vaccine. Very, very few develop autism (a family recently recieved compensation for this). Very sad that this happens, and my heart goes out to families of those effected.
These illnesses that the vaccines are for do kill/harm children (and adults) in every part of the world. The reason that industrialized nations see less of this is partly due to hygine/sanitation, but also due to aggressive vaccination programs.
There is no easy answer...consider seat-belts and air-bags...generally considered life-saving...however, there are many case where harm was caused by them, or that they were better off without them. I'll give the case of my wife, who was in a roll-over MVC and was ejected. The roll bar broke during the rolling and penetrated the driver's seat. Had she been sitting there she would be dead. My sister-in-law didn't wear her seat-belt in a MVC and would have suffered grievious harm as the other vehicle penetrated the driver's side up to the arm-rests. Some kids were killed by air-bags...
Can seat-belts and air-bags be dangerous/injurious? Yes. Do they save lifes? YES!
Are risks assosiated with vaccines? There are (sadly). I vaccinated my kids...IMO, the risks of the vaccines were grossly over-shadowed by the risks of the diseases.
I'm going to wait before I say that the HPV vaccine is safe, however.
With respect to mercury derivatives in vaccines: in Alberta (where I live), they haven't given the vaccines preserved with thermosol to 'babies' for 10 years (as per health nurse).
If there is history of any adverse reactions to vaccines in the family, then be cautious.
Old 04-11-2008, 06:20 AM   #219
Brandon Oto
Member Brandon Oto is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Santa Cruz  CA
Posts: 3,001
Re: Children's vaccinations

Originally Posted by Robert Pierce View Post
In your last sentence above, would you feel comfortable substituting the word "population" for "one?" What do you think about the statement, "Anything a population does with respect to this matter will probably turn out fine."? I'm wondering if approaching this from a public health, population-based perspective changes your conclusion at all.
As Derek notes, I talked about this a little in the piece. Obviously, if everyone's making their decision arbitrarily, or there's a trend to not vaccinate, immunity levels will drop and the disease's frequency will increase. How much? Depends on the degree, but it wouldn't take THAT much of a decrease to return us to the pre-vaccination state... understand that even without vaccination, there's a certain level of immunity in the population (due to natural infections). I think this was around 60 something percent for at least one of these. So if vaccination drops to that point, there's no difference for you aside from the (significant) fact that everyone else people had to catch the disease to get immune rather than get a shot. (Well, I suppose also that in the process of having the disease and getting immune, those people are carrying and spreadng it, whereas the people who got the shot were not.)

I put up the numbers of infection rates pre-vaccination, so you can look at the numbers yourself. In most cases those were several decades ago, so would things be different now? Or if the infection rates were the same, would the pathology or mortality be different?

For the first, I would guess not much. I don't really know of any advances in the public sphere that would decrease chances of infection -- it's not like we all wear masks around now. Actually, morbidity might INCREASE due to higher rates of travel.

For the second, I doubt it. Treatment for these conditions and complications has probably improved, but unless the viruses themselves have mutated (or the patients have changed somehow -- nutrition?) I assume we'd see the same kinds of symptomology. Mortality might decrease, though.

The biggest difference between looking at this personally and looking at this publicly is the numbers. I'm only one person but the population is million, so something that's good odds for me, like .001% chance of catching a disease, is unacceptable for the population at large. .001% of 300 million (US population) is 3,000 people, and while they're probably not me they're going to be SOMEONE. So that's the outlook the public health folks take, and it's the only reason that some of these numbers (like some tiny fraction of people getting encephalitis, autism, or growing an extra eye) matter the slightest hoot. Hell, I'd take some of these odds in exchange for a good beer, but at the population scale that would be disastrous.

The two really important bits of the herd immunity issue are that 1) it protects people who CAN'T vaccinate, which is especially important when they're people for whom infections are especially bad (immunosuppressed, for instance), and (2) it usually needs a HIGH uptake rate to work at all. So while it's relevant to us individually (because it determines whether the disease is still endemic -- floating around here -- or not, and if so, how prolific it is), it's much more relevant to the larger population.


I want also want to apologize for some of the ways that my earlier comments came across. I think that I was somewhat frustrated by the amount of time I'd spent on something that didn't directly pertain to me -- but never mind why. If it came across as a "**** you" to everyone here, or all parents, that's not what I meant and I apologize.

I don't apologize for the general idea, however, which is that an accurate understanding of reality is difficult to come by, and simply going with some stuff that you learn second-hand is a very bad way to do it. In some cases, this works okay, particularly unimportant things (like trivia) and uncontentious things (like the fact that Australia exists -- I don't KNOW this but nobody disagrees, so it's probably true). But these vaccination issues are CLEARLY very contentious, as evidenced by the disagreement within this thread alone. So if you, say, read a book or an article online that says XYZ -- or especially, fifty articles that say XYZ, in loud and compelling rhetoric -- you KNOW that there's people on the other side of the fence that would disagree. How then can you trust that the article is right? Even if you assume the author is sincere (which I'm usually willing to assume), you're basically just accepting his judgment on the matter as gospel, and you don't even know this dude. Probably he seems as credible as the next man, or even has some good credentials and expertise, but again, so will the guy who disagrees.

That's what I was trying to illustrate here and that's why I did this. On any issue where there's a lot of people disagreeing over the facts, it is totally worthless to just go by interpretations made by people on either side. All you're likely to do there is agree with the side that has the most convincing rhetoric, or the loudest, or merely the most people espousing it. By going to actual facts observed in the world, you're collecting evidence which is based not on someone else's particular judgment, but on the world that the issue revolves around in the first place. Then YOU can make the judgment (and the next fellow can properly ignore it, and repeat the cycle).

On this particular issue (MMR risks/uses), the majority of the links and arguments made in this thread were of the kind I just called worthless. They're either "preaching to the choir" -- someone basically just venting, so you have to already agree with him to care at all -- or appeals to authority, such as large collections of "all of these people agree with us." This applies to both sides.

Maybe we've all got an extremely well-grounded understanding of this and related topics, but if the material posted in this thread was the basis of it, then it is not a well-grounded understanding. And if it wasn't, then it probably shouldn't have been posted at all, since it just confuses people and gives your opponents strawmen.

If, for instance, someone looked through all the data I posted and ended up with the same judgment they already had, then fine, nothing's changed. But if their judgment before was based on nothing but someone else's opinion, a roll of the dice, or an assumption, then something HAS changed, because now they're making a decision based on reality. This difference is more obvious when your views DO change -- you learn more and decide to do things differently -- but the same mechanism is in place when you coincidentally end up doing the same as you were before.

Sure, a lot of people disagree about this stuff. Probably the truth lies somewhere in between their extremes. But the fact that an issue is UNCLEAR or COMPLEX does not mean that it's UNIMPORTANT, which is something the pundits at the extremes understand but the confused moderates in the middle don't. If I give you two doors and tell you that going through the wrong one will kill you, and provide a pile of confusing evidence about which door is right, you might be pretty unsure, but that doesn't mean you can say "well, everyone's got an opinion" and wander through a random choice. Reality is not an opinion. Everyone's entitled to an "opinion" on issues like "who's the best guitar player," and even on issues like "how valid is this evidence." But strictly speaking, there are no opinions on issues like "how common is the measles?" So if that stat is relevant to your judgment, then you either know it or you don't, and knowing makes your judgment fit closer to reality. And our whole goal is for our judgments to fit reality as closely as possible, so that they're as useful as possible.

The strength of scientific data is that it can be used for predictions. Personal experience in the black box method is excellent for determining "is what I'm doing producing results I like?" But it's far, far less useful for determining what you should do next, or what another person should do. If I get a vaccination and have positive results, does that mean that if I get a different one next year, I'll have the same results? Or that if you get a vaccination, you'll have the same results?

No. It doesn't mean that at ALL. And it has NO power over irreversible effects, because while I can try doing dips and stop if it hurts, I can't try getting shots and undo autism if it happens. CONTROLLED data, however, helps tell us exactly these things. It won't be perfect, and it'll be a probability at best -- but it does have that predictive power, and by checking how it was collected we can decide how much weight to give it.

(If anyone's not familiar with the background, I can explain how scientific controls grant this power, compared to personal [anecdotal] experience; just ask.)

Hope this makes some sense.
Old 04-11-2008, 11:04 AM   #220
Jeffrey White
Member Jeffrey White is offline
Jeffrey White's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Edwardsville  IL
Posts: 161
Re: Children's vaccinations

wow interesting debate.

i've got a one year old. we do some vaccinations, we don't do others. I haven't seen (or remember through all these pages), someone suggesting that.

There seems to be an "all or nothing argument" going on.

I do wonder...of all the pro-vaccination people you or did you or do you plan on breastfeeding your child? I don't doubt whatsoever that the chemical and fake food of formula contributes to the varying problems with youth.

I find it interesting what many of us (meaning Americans or "westerners") pick and chose when it comes to health. Breastfeeding's benefits are well-documented, yet the majority of American's don't do it (mainly because they sexualize it, which is just weird), yet they place a priority on vaccines. That I find interesting.

All I will say is this: Our daughter has not had the MMR vaccination and a few others...she has been and still is breastfeed. We' don't use binkies or pacifiers. We make her own food...she doesn't eat Gerber baby food and all the other junk out on the market. It's boobjuice and veggies and fruit for her. And you know what? She seems so advanced for her age. I know, parental-bias right? But seriously these other kids her age are like lumps of coal. little zombies. She crawls/walks/runs around points at things and is always smiling and having the time of her life. I don't see that in the other one year olds we are around. I'm not trying to be on a soapbox or anything, its just that, while I think there are concerns over vaccinations...there are many many many other things more important that the majority of Americans pay no mind to when raising kids.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Children's CF Training Paul Zagaria Starting 10 06-29-2007 08:00 AM

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:32 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CrossFit is a registered trademark of CrossFit Inc.