First Person Dies of Measles in U.S. Since 2003

originally posted by: SubTruth

www.nvic.org...

a reply to: GetHyped





Good enough........

No, not "good enough". ALL medicine has the capacity to harm select individuals. This is common knowledge. Stop trying to move the goalposts. I asked, specifically:

1)

OP I wonder how many people have died from allergic reactions to the vaccine since 2003

You made an unsubstantiated claim. What, again, is the source for your claim?

2)

On average it is more than a death per year from allergic reactions.

[citation needed]

3)

Many more serious reactions happen that need medical treatment.

[citation needed]

4) I see you conveniently ignored my question:

And tell me, how many incidences were there 10 years ago?

5) And while you're at it, let's get a citation for this statement:

OP I wonder how many people have died from allergic reactions to the vaccine since 2003

I know having to substantiate your baseless claims is an alien concept to you but you're making yourself out to be rather silly the way you keep ducking questions.

originally posted by: FurvusRexCaeli

originally posted by: SubTruth
OK I will do just that I looked up the number of deaths from the measles vaccine.......329 deaths from 1990-2014. That is more than 1 a year right..........

Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that is true, that nigh-universal MMR coverage comes at a cost of 14 lives per year. In the decade before the measles vaccine, 400-500 people died of measles every year (in the US). Given the growth of the US population, that number would be what, double?

Which is preferable: Fourteen people dying, or hundreds of people dying?

We do not need to assume......Click the link above and read for yourself. If the number of cases were higher I would be arguing for getting the vaccine.....That being said you have the constitutional right to reject it.

a reply to: GetHyped

I posted the link with the actual statistics and that is not good enough........OP are you pushing this for some other reason you are not stating?



Your post revolved around someone dying from the measles......I posted proof more than 1 person dies per year on average from allergic reaction......YA. What I see is a group of people who only care if the numbers support their ideology.......I am willing to see both sides not just one.

a reply to: SubTruth

You posted an anti-vaccination website.

The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) is a public charity[1] anti-vaccination[2][3] advocacy group which questions the safety and efficacy of commonly used vaccines.[4] The group was founded in 1982 by parents who blamed routine vaccination for the illness or death of a child. Michael Specter has described the NVIC as "the most powerful anti-vaccine organization in America, and its relationship with the U.S. government consists almost entirely of opposing federal efforts aimed at vaccinating children."[2]

en.wikipedia.org...

Are you as incapable of evaluating sources as you are answering questions?

I asked you specific questions. Here they are again:

1)

OP I wonder how many people have died from allergic reactions to the vaccine since 2003

You made an unsubstantiated claim. What, again, is the source for your claim?

2)

On average it is more than a death per year from allergic reactions.

[citation needed]

3)

Many more serious reactions happen that need medical treatment.

[citation needed]

4) I see you conveniently ignored my question:

And tell me, how many incidences were there 10 years ago?

5) And while you're at it, let's get a citation for this statement:

OP I wonder how many people have died from allergic reactions to the vaccine since 2003

I can only assume you simply cannot substantiate your claims given the numerous opportunities you've had to do so.

a reply to: GetHyped

www.nvic.org...

This covers all cases since 1990-Dec 2014..........I am starting to think you might have an agenda going on here......Just saying. Did you even read the link OP.......Did you really?



I am not anti-vaccination......I am pro information.

originally posted by: SubTruth

www.nvic.org...

a reply to: GetHyped





Good enough........Take a good hard look.......I think I made my point. It also says over 1/2 of the deaths come from children under the age of 3.

Not even close to good enough.

The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) is a public charity anti-vaccination advocacy group...

This is what happens when you do a "simple" Google search. You get purposefully misleading information and slanted perspectives.

From the WHO:

- Measles is one of the leading causes of death among young children even though a safe and cost-effective vaccine is available.
- In 2013, there were 145 700 measles deaths globally – about 400 deaths every day or 16 deaths every hour.
- Measles vaccination resulted in a 75% drop in measles deaths between 2000 and 2013 worldwide.
- In 2013, about 84% of the world's children received one dose of measles vaccine by their first birthday through routine health services – up from 73% in 2000.
- During 2000-2013, measles vaccination prevented an estimated 15.6 million deaths making measles vaccine one of the best buys in public health.

a reply to: SubTruth

I'll add reading comprehension to your incompetence list. See my above post.

Of course, you can always do the gentlemanly thing and concede that you cannot respond to my questions regarding your claims.

a reply to: MonkeyFishFrog

www.nvic.org...

OK how many times do I need to post this..........Are you guys for real.

a reply to: SubTruth

You are still posting an anti-vaccination website. I can only conclude that you are incapable of reading.

Still no answers to my questions regarding your claims...

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: SubTruth

I'll add reading comprehension to your incompetence list. See my above post.

Of course, you can always do the gentlemanly thing and concede that you cannot respond to my questions regarding your claims.

Thank you.......When it devolves into this I know I have won. Why else would you make personal attacks instead of arguing the link information I posted.


Readers are smart and they know when it comes down to tactics like this they should take a harder look. I could post a million links and it would devolve into personal attacks because the information in the link does not fit into your agenda driven arguments.

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: SubTruth

You are still posting an anti-vaccination website. I can only conclude that you are incapable of reading.

Still no answers to my questions regarding your claims...

Really........The vaccine adverse events reporting database is a anti-vaccination website......Remember that is how they got the data.......YA nice try.



Oh wait I know......Spin it and make it personal........

a reply to: SubTruth

How many times do we have to reply that the information posted by the NVIC is purposefully misleading because they are an anti-vaccination organization?

The only agenda the WHO has is to save lives.

originally posted by: SubTruthWhen it devolves into this I know I have won.

Congratulations on making one of the most juvenile posts I've ever read on this website.

Readers are smart and they know when it comes down to tactics like this they should take a harder look.

Tactics such as "post up the sources to your claims"? I think the average reader is acutely aware of the tactics at play here.

I could post a million links and it would devolve into personal attacks because the information in the link does not fit into your agenda driven arguments.

Except you haven't posted any that substantiate your claims. I've asked, what, 5? 6? 7 times already? It's almost as if you're making stuff up.

a reply to: SubTruth

Posting links at the moment is not going to happen......It was a simple google search. If they are wrong please post the correct numbers........Maybe the OP should have included that info in the original write up.

Well, once you get a moment to post links to your claims I will spend a moment of my time to see if your claims are factual.

Also, I can't imagine how the OP could possibly be at fault for a lack of sourcing to your claims.

originally posted by: MonkeyFishFrog
a reply to: SubTruth

How many times do we have to reply that the information posted by the NVIC is purposefully misleading because they are an anti-vaccination organization?

The only agenda the WHO has is to save lives.

You guys need to split this argument up a little........It is kinda creepy and very telling.



Vaccine adverse events reporting database holds the data......All this website did was utilize the information and give it to the public.

originally posted by: SubTruth Really........The vaccine adverse events reporting database is a anti-vaccination website......Remember that is how they got the data.......YA nice try.

You mean the self-reporting database that is not in any way verified?

You mean the one that claims vaccines turn you into The Incredible Hulk?

Like other spontaneous reporting systems, VAERS has several limitations, including underreporting, unverified reports, inconsistent data quality, absence of a control group that is not vaccinated, and inadequate data about the number of people vaccinated. Indeed, an autism activist named Jim Laidler once reported to VAERS that a vaccine had turned him into The Incredible Hulk. The report was accepted and entered into the database, but the dubious nature thereof prompted a VAERS representative to contact Mr. Laidler, who then gave his consent to delete the report.[4]

en.wikipedia.org...

Another swing, another miss.

a reply to: grimpachi

www.nvic.org...

This is the 3rd time posting the link. And for the record I am not anti-vaccination I am pro information of all kinds. So we can figure out what is best for our personal health.

a reply to: SubTruth

And this is my third time pointing out that your source is an anti-vaccination website. See my above post.

And for the record I am not anti-vaccination I am pro information of all kinds.

Then you wouldn't mind citing a source that isn't an anti-vaccination website, right?

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: SubTruth

And this is my third time pointing out that your source is an anti-vaccination website. See my above post.

The vaccine adverse reaction events reporting database is anti-vaccination? All this website did was post the information from this website.......Am I wrong?


Seriously please just take the simple statement above and rip it apart if it is wrong.

I assume you did not read my response here.

Still no answers to my questions regarding your claims...