CNN Chief Dr Gupta boasts Herd Immunity but 4 in 10 Measles cases originated from Vaccine itself

The "Father of immunology":

Wiki: Edward Jenner

Jenner is often called "the father of immunology", and his work is said to have "saved more lives than the work of any other human".[5][6][7] In Jenner's time, smallpox killed around 10 percent of the population, with the number as high as 20 percent in towns and cities where infection spread more easily.[7] In 1821 he was appointed physician extraordinary to King George IV, and was also made mayor of Berkeley and justice of the peace. A member of the Royal Society, in the field of zoology he was the first person to describe the brood parasitism of the cuckoo. In 2002, Jenner was named in the BBC's list of the 100 Greatest Britons.

How is vaccination anything but a good thing?

a reply to: Artesia

How many days after receiving the vaccine did they develop symptoms?

a reply to: Phage

Infection

Attenuated

Vaccine reaction

herd immunity


Yeah we heard it all before


[ "herd immunity" ]

+
[ "blame it on the un-vaccinated" ]

=

[ but if you're vaccinated what is there to fear from the unvaccinated ]


Show me proof that batches of vaccines that are 100% right composition, consistentcy throughout batches, that do not have impurities blah blah

but we can always play with words and blame it on fake medicines

qz.com...

WHO called for increased vigilance at all levels of the supply chain—particularly in West Africa after it was discovered the meningitis vaccine’s batch number and expiry date did not correspond to genuine manufacturing records

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

So moving the goalposts.

Now you've gone from the vaccine itself does not work to blaming it on human error or corruption in the supply chain? The one is very different from the other.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: highvein

Not at all. It means to the untrained they will appear to be the same.
The fact is that most reactions abate within 24 hours while the actual disease will last a week to ten days.

A fake Gucci handbag that is virtually indistinguishable from a real one is still not a real one if that helps make the distinction.

Yes. That did help. Thx.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: dashen

A fever is not contagious. A rash is not contagious.
A reaction is not an infection.

you are wrong , A reaction is not a infection.
A fever , a rash ,a reaction are symptoms caused by a infection.

a reply to: dashen

I really don't know about the "1 in 4" are from the vaccine, but there are a lot of legit sources that will prove this does indeed happen, including a 2011 NYC outbreak that was traced back to a recently vaccinated 22 year old female. That fully vaccinated people continue to get the measles should be pretty obvious from just a scan of this year's measles outbreaks and is mentioned in this study:

LINK

And here is the obviousness that the virus is shed:

LINK

A lot of other studies where that one came from, and a piece in the Washington Post this year from a pro vax doctor saying the vaccine ain't working for measles.

What I do notice in the news recently is that when vaccinated people get the measles, shortly after vaccination, they call it "atypical measles" and ELIMINATE it as a reported measles case, completely bypassing the fact that it was vaccine derived.

I have noticed that since the Disneyland outbreaks, they have done a lot LESS testing of strains, and I suspect this is because they don't have a huge desire to find out how many people are infected with the vaccine strain. They don't deny people are in the literature and studies ,even by the CDC, but when pressing their message forth, it's "rare, one in a million." It just takes a glance at all the information, scientific OR anecdotal to see they're underreporting and sweeping under the rug a growing problem.

Yeah, so? That does not prove a single thing. Say that to someone who has full blown flu. Sure, "The fever is not" something you can catch. But you can catch the virus that gave it to them. MMR (measles vaccine) is a live virus vaccine, and it CAN be caught from those vaccinated with it, whether they react to it or not. While you may want to argue about how often this happens, and go with the mantra "hardly ever", and I might say, I think it's more often than anyone would like to admit, it's still documented knowledge.

Sorry, but this is just not true, absolutely not. It may be true a lot of the time, but it can NOT be stated as a blanket fact, not by a mile.

This is the reason you must donate. Too much of this going around. lol

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: oriondc

Allergic reactions are known to occur. That's a valid reason for avoiding vaccination. For people like you the more people who are vaccinated the better. It reduces your chances of being exposed to the disease.

Or actually, you could also say, the more people that get measles as children and recover from it, the less you might be exposed to measles by THEM since: the alarming amount of fully vaccinated people who GET the measles anyway, even when their titers tested fully could still get measles and give it to anyone, year after year - and they can reach adulthood and STILL get the measles, especially since even after both shots, immunity wanes in 3-10 years. So you could get measles as an adult, when it's more dangerous to get. Me? I had the measles and I can guarantee you I will NOT get it again and I will NOT give it to anyone. No vaccinated person can say that, and it's proven every year when vaccinated people get the measles.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: dashen

Attenuated viruses do reproduce, but they do not cause an infection because they reproduce slowly. Slowly enough for immunity to develop before they are widespread enough to cause disease.

Again, even if they were transmissible, they would still be an attenuated virus.

Well, that's the IDEA, yes, but it doesn't always play out that way, as everyone's bodies are different.

originally posted by: highvein

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: dashen

A fever is not contagious. A rash is not contagious.
A reaction is not an infection.

5% of recipients of measles virus-containing vaccine experience rash and fever which may be indistinguishable from measles

Doesn't indistinguishable me exactly the same?

Well this is my earlier point. There IS often a reaction to a vaccine that mimics a micro-version of the disease, and this is expected with certain vaccines. But yes, I take issue when the reaction lasts for and is as bad as, the actual infection. At that point, you've passed the cusp of what is a reaction or simply GETTING it.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: dashen

Vaccination reactions are not mistaken as outbreaks. If that were the case there would be no "wild" virus found.


The outbreak comes first but you are probably correct that outbreaks lead to more vaccinations, that would make sense but it's unfortunate that it takes an outbreak to spur action in some people. It does complicate things, which is what the article is about. Sorting them out.

Or actually I would say, vaccination reactions are not interpreted as outbreaks, even when they sometimes should be.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: highvein

In lieu of that, you can get an antibody test.

Or just take your chances, but immunization would be better. I'm old enough, I'm immune.

As I said before however, vaccinated people with supposed full immunity STILL get the measles, not sometimes, quite a bit actually.

It's everyone's choice however, because the vaccine can afford protection for SOME time. Personally, if it were airborne Ebola or some such thing, I could understand. But while measles can kill, let's be honest: in the western world it rarely does. If I could do it over again, I would get the measles as a child again. If you're talking risks of getting measles ONCE, and risking the vaccine multiple times and STILL not guaranteed not to get a disease that is a benign recovery for most, my route would be just get measles once and be done with it.

originally posted by: Azureblue
a reply to: Artesia


This is crap because they are acting on false information namely being the phrase "herd Immunity." They are either doing this willingly or unwillingly and I dont know which but the concept of herd immunity just does not exist in science.

Herd Immunity is not even a theory because it has no scientific substance whatsoever.

Actually the phrase “herd immunity” is even less scientific than that. Its genesis was in the 1950s - 1960s when it was used in bovine (cattle) TB testing terminology.

Herd Immunity was a phrase used by veterinarians and farmers to describe a bovine herd, that was free of TB (Tuberculosis) following herd a herd testing program for TB. Herd-immunity… meant each dairy farmer’s herd was free of TB.

A decade or so ago, some clown, or was that actually some very clever person highly skilled in marketing and media studies, applied this term to human immunity, deliberately using public ignorance back against the public for who knows what gain?

Immunity can only be individual.

How can somebody who is not immunised catch a a disease from a herd of animals or a group human beings and not from an individual animal or human? . Similarly, how can anyone who has been vaccinated against a specific disease, catch a disease from an un-vaccinated person if the vaccine works as claimed? Would not the vaccine stop the infection each and every time?

When I say “immunity” I say it with my fingers crossed because around 87% of current Pertussis victims are fully immunised and about 90% in mumps. Some immunity!

‘Herd immunity” is not even a legitimate medical or scientific theory as it has no scientific substance whatsoever.

I would tend to agree with you here. The fact that they even try to tell us what percentage "herd immunity will be achieved at" at is pretty ridiculous. They keep moving it up too, first it was 85%, oh no, didn't work, 90%, oh no, now it's 95%....

Before this, the phrase herd immunity meant enough people in a community had gotten and recovered from a disease with full lifetime immunity, enough to protect others etc. While that makes sense in a certain way (more sense than vaccine herd immunity which will inevitably wane), it's still more of a possibility or an observation than hard scientific data.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Sorry but this is just more vaccine lies and conspiracy.
The vaccines do not administer enough live virus to cause a contagious case of measles. EVER...
and vaccines do not cause autism.... EVER
So zero cases originated from people who got the vaccine. It just never happened. Its a lie.

pffft. Documented evidence of both exists. Can't Say EVER on this one I'm afraid. It's blanket denial like this that causes the "anti-vax" movement. If there were a true discussion between the sides, they might at least understand each other.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
Interesting article here:

Public Health: Vaccine Myths Debunked

Here in the UK Measles is on the increase largely due to an idiot who claimed the MMR jab caused autism. This caused a wave of anti-vax hysteria hence why we now have an increase in measles cases. Measles is a nasty illness and is highly infectious but is easily preventable by vaccination.

These people have a lot to answer for.

Right, blame it on Andrew Wakefield. That old chestnut of an explanation. The anti-vax movement was going strong before Andrew Wakefield. People are "vaccine hesitant" not so much from what they hear, but because they've seen a friend, or their child, or themselves, severely injured by one. They can and do cause crippling neurological damage to people. If that happened to you or someone you know, you might feel differently.

originally posted by: Wildbob77
BS

If people were getting measles from the vaccine then almost all of the kids that get the mmr shot would get the measles.

It takes a couple of weeks for the process to work once you get the immunization so if you get the measles shortly after the immunization, you were previously exposed.

Immunizations are not 100% effective but people who spread the anti vax information should really consider themselves pro plague.

Unless your child cannot get immunized do to medical conditions, then you are foolish if you don't vaccinate them.

This is not true. While most people might not get measles from the MMR, that a few can and do, does not mean everyone would. Vaccines and people's body's are not like A + B = C. There are different reactions for each body. It's just not that cut and dried or black and white.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
The "Father of immunology":

Wiki: Edward Jenner

Jenner is often called "the father of immunology", and his work is said to have "saved more lives than the work of any other human".[5][6][7] In Jenner's time, smallpox killed around 10 percent of the population, with the number as high as 20 percent in towns and cities where infection spread more easily.[7] In 1821 he was appointed physician extraordinary to King George IV, and was also made mayor of Berkeley and justice of the peace. A member of the Royal Society, in the field of zoology he was the first person to describe the brood parasitism of the cuckoo. In 2002, Jenner was named in the BBC's list of the 100 Greatest Britons.

How is vaccination anything but a good thing?

You should really read up on everything Jenner went through, and all that happened to him and his relatives to more fully understand. And no matter what one vaccine is capable of, does not mean they are ALL good and dandy, and more more MORE is better and better and better and EVERY SINGLE disease should have a vaccine, even minor diseases, and we should fear every single disease ever foisted. Some vaccines do not work very well. Some do cause problems, and some injure severely, especially the more you get. So while they can be considered a good thing, (not by me, but I certainly understand) in a lot of ways, the combination of many of them, more and more every few years, has GOT to be weighed against the mounting evidence that they are certainly not a cure all, can certainly harm people, and when we're talking about many (not all) of the diseases they're formulated to prevent, being minor and benign in most people, it's time to do some serious critical thinking. ONE vitamin C tablet might be a good idea, but it doesn't mean taking 20 a day is going to be a great thing.