General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsForget about Ebola. Look what the anti-vaxxers are doing to California
Almost 8,000 cases of pertussis, better known as whooping cough, have been reported to California's Public Health Department so far this year. More than 250 patients have been hospitalized, nearly all of them infants and young children, and 58 have required intensive care. Why is this preventable respiratory infection making a comeback? In no small part thanks to low vaccination rates, as a story earlier this month in the Hollywood Reporter pointed out.
Who is choosing not to vaccinate? The answer is surprising. The area with the most cases of whooping cough in California is Los Angeles County, and no group within that county has lower immunization rates than residents living between Malibu and Marina Del Rey, home to some of the wealthiest and most exclusive suburbs in the country. At the Kabbalah Children's Academy in Beverly Hills, 57% of children are unvaccinated. At the Waldorf Early Childhood Center in Santa Monica, it's 68%, according to the Hollywood Reporter's analysis of public-health data.
These are the kind of immunization rates that can be found in Chad or South Sudan. But parents in Beverly Hills and Santa Monica see vaccines as unnaturalsomething that conflicts with their healthy lifestyle. And they have no problem finding fringe pediatricians willing to cater to their irrational beliefs.
These parents are almost uniformly highly educated, but they are making an uneducated choice. It's also a dangerous choice: Children not vaccinated against whooping cough are 24 times more likely to catch the disease. Furthermore, about 500,000 people in the U.S. can't be vaccinated, either because they are receiving chemotherapy for cancer or immune-suppressive therapies for chronic diseases, or because they are too young. They depend on those around them to be vaccinated. Otherwise, they are often the first to suffer. And because no vaccine is 100% effective, everyone, even those who are vaccinated, is at some risk.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/paul-a-offit-the-anti-vaccination-epidemic-1411598408
bluestateguy
(44,173 posts)I have friends who live in these yuppie enclaves of California. They are scared shitless of how the anti-vaxxers have put everybody else's children at risk with their junk science and New Age garbage.
barbtries
(28,798 posts)is how proud they are of their imbecilic choice and how unmoved they are by how many other people (not to mention their own children) they endanger with their imbecilic choice.
CaptainTruth
(6,592 posts)RandySF
(58,884 posts)Most anti-vaxxers I know come from the left.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)pnwmom
(108,979 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)The antibiotic is used because it reduces transmission of the disease - the sick person has a harder time spreading it thanks to the antibiotic. It has very little effect on the disease in their body.
So it's entirely up to the sick person's immune system to fight off pertussis. A healthy 8-year-old will do so in about 3 months. An infant has a good chance of suffocating, thanks to the coughing. An immunocompromised 8-year-old....let's just say they will have a very unpleasant time.
pnwmom
(108,979 posts)And it very quickly ended the cough in my niece who had it at age 10 (the old vaccine couldn't be given to older children and her infant vaccines had worn off).
Also, up to 90% of people will spontaneously clear pertussis even without treatment. It is deadly, however, for infants, which is why we need the vaccines.
From the CDC:
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtmL/rr5414a1.htm
Maintaining high vaccination coverage rates among preschool children, adolescents, and adults and minimizing exposures of infants and persons at high risk for pertussis is the most effective way to prevent pertussis. Antibiotic treatment of pertussis and judicious use of antimicrobial agents for postexposure prophylaxis will eradicate B. pertussis from the nasopharynx of infected persons (symptomatic or asymptomatic). A macrolide administered early in the course of illness can reduce the duration and severity of symptoms and lessen the period of communicability (35). Approximately 80%--90% of patients with untreated pertussis will spontaneously clear B. pertussis from the nasopharynx within 3--4 weeks from onset of cough (36); however, untreated and unvaccinated infants can remain culture-positive for >6 weeks (37). Close asymptomatic contacts (38) (Box 3) can be administered postexposure chemoprophylaxis to prevent secondary cases; symptomatic contacts should be treated as cases.
Erythromycin, a macrolide antibiotic, has been the antimicrobial of choice for treatment or postexposure prophylaxis of pertussis. It is usually administered in 4 divided daily doses for 14 days. Although effective for treatment (Table 1) and postexposure prophylaxis (Table 2), erythromycin is accompanied by uncomfortable to distressing side effects that result in poor adherence to the treatment regimen. During the last decade, in vitro studies have demonstrated the effectiveness against B. pertussis of two other macrolide agents (azithromycin and clarithromycin) (57--64). Results from in vitro studies are not always replicated in clinical studies and practice. A literature search and review was conducted for in vivo studies and clinical trials that were conducted during 1970--2004 and used clarithromycin or azithromycin for the treatment and prophylaxis of pertussis (Table 3). On the basis of this review, guidelines were developed to broaden the spectrum of macrolide agents available for pertussis treatment and postexposure prophylaxis and are presented in this report to update previous CDC recommendations (71). Treatment and postexposure prophylaxis recommendations are made on the basis of existing scientific evidence and theoretical rationale.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)The antibiotic makes it less contageous, "lessen the period of communicability".
It has little effect in the patient - "can reduce the duration and severity of symptoms". The qualifier "can" is in there because it has been shown to reduce symptoms in a small number of patients, but not in most patients.
Yes. Over about 3 months. It used to be called "the 100 day cough".
pnwmom
(108,979 posts)Also, you're ignoring the fact that it is most useful early in the course of the illness and is often given as a preventative measure in people who have been exposed to someone with pertussis. Thanks to the antibiotic, they are much less likely to come down with pertussis themselves.
You haven't demonstrated that it's comparable to Ebola, which has been killing 70% of the people infected with it. They're not clearing it from their systems in 3 months or ever.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Here's my go-to write up for antivaxxers. Myth 7 covers your belief that whooping cough is just like a common cold. Enjoy.
http://www.mamamia.com.au/news/vaccination-myths-busted-by-science-cheat-sheet-on-immunisation/
pnwmom
(108,979 posts)with antibiotics, and a cold doesn't last nearly as long as pertussis, or carry the same risk to an infant.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Golly, who wrote this then?
Or this:
You haven't demonstrated that it's comparable to Ebola, which has been killing 70% of the people infected with it. They're not clearing it from their systems in 3 months or ever.
Huh....odd that apparently it's perfectly OK to insist I'm claiming it's like ebola, despite never typing "ebola" until now. Yet pointing out you are claiming it's a minor disease that goes away quickly in all but infants thanks to miracle cures is somehow a bad thing.
pnwmom
(108,979 posts)but pertussis can.
Your reading skills leave something to be desired.
The initial post I was responding to -- before you decided to jump in the thread -- was about Ebola. If you're going to jump in, at least take the time to figure out what the thread is about.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)you should have good enough reading skills to realize that similes are not literal. When discussing severity, using a simile "It's like the common cold" would mean comparing severity. Ya know, the subject at hand. Not the literal cause of the disease, which is an lovely attempt to divert away from your claims that whooping cough is a minor disease that clears up quickly.
Secondly, if you want to talk about your massive reading skills, you should probably also have noticed that the OP was saying we should stop freaking out so much about ebola, and instead discuss these other, much more common diseases. In fact, your superior reading skill should have noticed that "Ebola" appears exactly once in the OP. Thus absolutely nowhere in this thread was anyone saying whopping cough is as bad of a disease as ebola. Until you attacked me claiming I did.
In other words, you are now attacking me for something I didn't do with an air of superiority in an attempt to disguise that you were wrong.
And I'm done wasting my time with you.
pnwmom
(108,979 posts)In case you can't figure it out, by eb, the person was obviously referring to Ebola, and making the comparison to pertussis.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5621553
abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)They are rich, educated and dumb as rocks on this subject.
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)Jenny McCarthy must be very good at persuasive speaking to convince so many people she knows more about medicine than doctors all over the world.
Arkansas Granny
(31,517 posts)How do they get around that?
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Arkansas Granny
(31,517 posts)Mariana
(14,857 posts)Maybe they'll even go so far as to claim it would have been even worse if the child had had the vaccine. These aren't rational people.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)RandySF
(58,884 posts)Ironically, my son's Catholic School will not let any kid though the doors with updated vaccinations.
abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)That one of the students has the measles warning to look out for symptoms and that any kid who gets them will be sent home. Can someone who has been vaccinated get the measles?
It's rare but it can happen. All there more reason everyone needs to be vaccinated.
barbaraj
(80 posts)against pertussis during every pregnancy. That is the current CDC statement.
whooping cough vaccine is too weakened to work for more than a short period of time
if you are a duggar that could mean every year..
http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/bestoftv/2014/10/03/cnn-tonight-parents-decline-vaccination.cnn.html
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)he's a leading proponents of childhood vaccination, and an outspoken critic of anti-vaxxers.
His credentials are impeccable. This is a man that should be listened to, on the topic of vaccines.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Offit
Anti-vax asshat RFK Jr calls Paul Offit a "biostitute" (rhymes with prostitute), and said "I would do a lot to see Paul Offit and all these good people behind bars, he said, ... They should be in jail and the key should be thrown away.
Thanks for posting the article.
Sid
freshwest
(53,661 posts)moriah
(8,311 posts)Archae
(46,328 posts)DebJ
(7,699 posts)My daughter and her husband are very well-off, and of course then so is the rest of their neighborhood...
and the daycare children's parents... and everyone is constantly getting on a plane... bringing back germs.
I figure either my grandchildren will end up immune to most everything... or something will kill them first.
They are vaccinated.
Auggie
(31,172 posts)according to the S.F. Chronicle (June 13, 2014)
More than 900 new cases of the illness, also known as pertussis, were reported in both April and May, well above normal, officials said in a statement. Overall, 3,458 cases and one death have been reported this year, they said.
Whooping cough is a highly contagious bacterial disease that primarily affects infants and children.
Marin, Sonoma and Napa counties have the state's highest infection rates. San Francisco County's count is at 36, with two school outbreaks, no hospitalizations and no infant infections to date.
http://www.sfgate.com/health/article/State-declares-whooping-cough-epidemic-5551631.php
progressoid
(49,991 posts)WTF???
Quixote1818
(28,943 posts)because fucking idiot, ass-holes like him misinform the public for financial gain.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)yet they ignore profit as a motive in their movement. Wakefield would have made hundreds of millions of dollars off of his replacement for the MMR vaccine.
alphafemale
(18,497 posts)Widely available at cost or in many cases if you count that they supply this worldwide it is a loss.
Big Pharms are corporate whores but vaccines are not a part of that.
Quixote1818
(28,943 posts)You got me interested in the topic and I found this: http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/24/3/622.full
alphafemale
(18,497 posts)Even if he'd have asked just one tenth on a penny off every vaccine he and his progeny would have had wealth beyond imagination.
There are people that give their best efforts for things other than monetary profits.
We are not all motivated by greed.
Quixote1818
(28,943 posts)I actually got a bit of a tear in my eye from what you just said. Thanks for that! Wonder what he would want to say to someone like Mercola who is killing people with bad advice and making a lot of money doing so?
alphafemale
(18,497 posts)Jonas Salk is a hero of mine.
Can you imagine the reception anti-vaxers would have received in 1962?
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Let's say they make the same profit off one dose of a vaccine, or one dose of a treatment medication. A fairly reasonable assumption for anything that isn't extremely new.
Children get something like one to three doses of a vaccine. Treating the condition that the vaccine prevents would take dozens of doses of medication. So yes, profit motive favors treatment instead of vaccination.
But my point was the same people that insist profit is driving evil companies to push vaccines turn around and ignore profit when discussing their prophets.
Quixote1818
(28,943 posts)for the most part. You both made really excellent points.
TorchTheWitch
(11,065 posts)Funny, I just watched it a few minutes ago, and it's the first I've heard of it. I always figured whooping cough was like polio - something that people only got long before I was born.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)It used to be....
Sedona
(3,769 posts)Her step daughter's infant son went into respiratory arrest, had to be rushed to the hospital and nearly died. Her four other sons all under ten years old were sick with it too.
My sister and niece were coughing for near six months. She lied to my whole family (including my elderly parents) about what they had, exposing them and who knows how many other people in their South Florida mega church.
No remorse, none. It's all Gawd's will. The Flat Earth Society is alive and well.
(hey 2000th post)
RandySF
(58,884 posts)I read that deep blue Malibu has seen a developing-world level increase in these preventable diseases.
Mister Nightowl
(396 posts)I got authorization in the Lounge.
defacto7
(13,485 posts)to be a person who is above the rest. One that knows the truth especially when the majority disagree. To be a person who has that warmth in their heart that their personal science can save the world because... because... they just know so. And no one can change their mind because they're right, period. And they just wanna do it their way because everyone else is lying. They'll show the world the right way.
(sarc~~~~)
Quixote1818
(28,943 posts)There is no reasoning with them period! I could drill how hardcore the peer review process is into her head for a year, have Nobel winning scientists cite paper after paper and it would not make a dent in the ignorance, lack of understanding and stubborn attitude that she was born with. Reminds me of this video:
barbaraj
(80 posts)with something that should be cleared up quickly with scientific facts...yet can't be...maybe they should consider each other as partially right..instead of being so certain they own the truth.
Archae
(46,328 posts)Just try using that tactic with Global Climate Change deniers.
Or creationists.
Or germ theory deniers like Bill Maher.
These people are 100% dead wrong.
They have no evidence, just a blind belief.
Are they "partially right?"
Obviously, no.
Anti-vaxxers are not "partially right" either.
They are 100% dead wrong.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)They're completely, and totally, fucking wrong.
Sid
jeff47
(26,549 posts)And the scientific facts back up vaccinations.
That isn't the answer the antivaxxers want. So they reject scientific facts in favor of their personal beliefs.
barbaraj
(80 posts)and has gotten worse since the dtap..
Why are reported cases of pertussis increasing?
A: Since the early 1980s, there has been an overall trend of an increase in reported pertussis cases. Pertussis is naturally cyclic in nature, with peaks in disease every 3-5 years. But for the past 20-30 years, we've seen the peaks getting higher and overall case counts going up. There are several reasons that help explain why we're seeing more cases as of late. These include: increased awareness, improved diagnostic tests, better reporting, more circulation of the bacteria, and waning immunity.
When it comes to waning immunity, it seems that the acellular pertussis vaccine (DTaP) we use now may not protect for as long as the whole cell vaccine (DTP) we used to use. Throughout the 1990s, the US switched from using DTP to using DTaP for infants and children. Whole cell vaccines are associated with higher rates of minor and temporary side effects such as fever and pain and swelling at the injection site. Rare but serious neurologic adverse reactions including chronic neurological problems rarely occurred among children who had recently received whole cell vaccines. While studies have had inconsistent results that the vaccine could cause chronic neurological problems, public concern in the US and other countries led to a concerted effort to develop a vaccine with improved safety. Due to these concerns, along with the availability of a safe and effective acellular vaccine, the US switched to acellular pertussis vaccines.
underthematrix
(5,811 posts)dangerous on so many levels