Re: [vaccination-respectful-debate] Re: Introducing myself

[Katie Brockie]

Hi
Contrary to what punter thinks, there is an excellent,free database available for people who are interested in this subject. It collated and organises all the weekly medical reports of deaths and illnesses made by doctors and public health officials in the USA since 1888. You can learn about it and search it here: http://www.mucho.Pitt.edu/about.php

It covers all the data for diseases like diphtheria, measles etc.

A useful source of information for anyone interested in public health.

Cheers

K



punter <trista...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Welcome Dave, I like science too. But I consider science to be about explaining stuff and replicability and falsifiability as opposed to obeying the authorities or risk being labelled a holocaust denier or flat earther or faked moon landing believer etc.

 

"I'm not claiming they are 100% safe, but they're surely better than the 40% mortality that diphtheria had."

 

That 40 per cent figure is meaningless. Nobody knows how many people had diphtheria in 1900 or 1800 or today so it is impossible to ascribe a mortality figure to it.

 

In 1900 for example, for every sore throat that saw a doctor there might have been 10 or 50 or 1000 that never bothered and just got better in a matter of days without drugs or even seeing a physician. And even if they did see the doctor the chance said doctor would bother notifying the authorities was minimal. It is probably reasonable to think that individual doctors - assuming they were the sort to ever bother to notify of a condition - would only do so if it was serious (or perhaps in the middle of a supposed epidemic).

 

So that mortality figure of 40 per cent is nonsense. It is way lower, it could be 0.1 per cent for all we know, or lower.

 

The same holds true for mortality rates of all conditions which are often temporary - such as smallpox or pertussis or measles. Without incidence data - which we simply don't have - we have no way of knowing the likelihood of dying from the disease or how many people had it and how many people have it.

 

We do, however, know that according to the government mortality data that deaths ascribed to these diseases had fallen massively (in some cases by over 99 per cent) before their respective vaccines came along. In addition, diseases which saw no widely used vaccine (such as scarlet fever) also saw their mortality rates plummet in the same fashion. Clearly whatever vaccines did, it certainly wasn't significant in terms of saving lives.

There is a plethora of discussion about this on this board but www.childhealthsafety.com/graphs has this data for you.

 

Some of the defenders of vaccines here have claimed that the lower mortality rates before vaccines (which they don't dispute) are due to the introduction of antibiotics. There are several problems with this - such as timing of their regular usage and the fact that deaths due to measles (which is supposedly a viral condition and can't be treated with antibiotics) had fallen by more than anything else, but even if it held water it would still show that vaccines are not what saved us.

 

 

So we have no useful data for this.

On Tuesday, 7 January 2014 12:09:02 UTC+11, Dave Croucher wrote:

Hi fellow humans.

I have joined this group as I am interested in the debate on vaccines. I tend to embrace science as without it my son would never have been resuscitated at birth, would never have had 2 open heart operations. My son also has Neutrophil immunodeficiency syndrome due to his Noonan Syndrome. This is very real for me and not some game to challenge authority and be controversial.

I look forward to reading and participating in educated and intelligent discussions regarding the pros and cons of vaccines (I'm not claiming they are 100% safe, but they're surely better than the 40% mortality that diphtheria had.

Cheers,
Dave (father of a vaccinated child)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Vaccination-Respectful Debate" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vaccination-respectf...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to vaccination-re...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/vaccination-respectful-debate.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[Katie Brockie]

I'm sorry, my link above is wrong. Here's the correct link:
http://www.tycho.pitt.edu/about.php

--
ph: 03 4728585
Mob: 021 1881282

[Katie Brockie]

Hi all,

after taking some time to think about it, I have decided to leave this forum. My reasons are as follows:

I know several people who are completely banned from taking part in this discussion. They have not been rude or offensive, but are banned, making this a very unbalanced "debate".

I would like to have a respectful debate on the more prominent AVN fora - the nocompulsory vaccination site and blog, and the FB page,  however I (and many people I know), are banned from both, and both are extremely heavily censored.

I have never been abusive or rude on any of these fora; it seems that posting studies or facts is enough to get one banned.

To me, this makes a mockery of the whole concept of " Respectful Debate", which (in my opinion), should only be monitored and censored for obscenity, threats and spam. The moderator/s should be open, transparent and available to answer any queries.

Thanks for some interesting discussions. Maybe I'll see you in a real Respectful Debate site somewhere. One that does not ban people for no good reason.

cheers

Katie

[Keith K.]

Katie, thank you for your input here. i have been hearing this to some extent about the bans. I'm hoping that there is a reasonable explanation. I am not for vaccinations personally but enjoy a robust respectful debate on such. i believe some individuals have gone over the line somewhat,(in other aeas) but cannot give you actual proof. Hopefully Meryl or one of the others can clear this querry up. Good luck in your personal ventures. Cheers.( Couldn't post it to her name)

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vaccination-respectful-debate+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[punter]

Contrary to what Katie thinks, I never once claimed there weren't any reports of diphtheria in all of human history I claimed that there was no way we could sensibly claim that those known reports in any way shape or form represented the total number of diphtheria cases - or even the majority of cases.

 

They might cover as little as 1 per cent of total cases. Or one year they might have covered 5 per cent of cases the next year 1 per cent and the year after that 0.01 per cent. Nobody has the slightest clue. We don't have this data for today and we don't have it for 150 years ago.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vaccination-respectful-debate+unsub...@googlegroups.com.