User Tag List

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 34

Thread: Measles Parties: Then and Now

  1. #1
    Over 5000 post club elohiym's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    In Christ
    Posts
    5,875
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 112 Times in 95 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    421649

    Measles Parties: Then and Now

    In The Clinical Significance of Measles: A Review we read:
    "Before the introduction of measles vaccines, measles virus infected 95%98% of children by age 18 years [14], and measles was considered an inevitable rite of passage. Exposure was often actively sought for children in early school years because of the greater severity of measles in adults."
    A medical doctor in 1915 wrote:
    "There are several reasons for this, chief of which is the existence of a widespread belief that they are both comparatively mild and harmless diseases and that the sooner children have them and are done with them, the better it is for all concerned.

    This belief, I regret to say, is held by not a few physicians and by a majority of the laity. Indeed, so deeply seated is it, that in some communities, when measles is present in a neighborhood, it is customary to have what are locally known as 'measles teas,' where the mothers get afternoon tea and the children get the measles."

    It is not surprising that 95%98% of children by age 18 years had been infected with measles virus when the popular culture for a time considered it a mild and harmless disease and intentionally exposed children to infection. When you think about the high incidence of measles infection in the early 20th century, remember it was largely caused by people intentionally infecting children.

    Today we have the modern measles party: vaccination.



    Personally, I wouldn't intentionally allow my child to be infected with either wild-type measles or vaccine-strain measles; but lately it seems the pressure is on for everyone to join in the modern measles party. In my opinion, it's an asinine strategy if you want to eliminate measles.
    "It is easier to contend with evil at the first than at the last." - Leonardo da Vinci

  2. #2
    Over 5000 post club elohiym's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    In Christ
    Posts
    5,875
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 112 Times in 95 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    421649
    In the table, virulence of infection describes infectivity not necessarily disease severity.
    "It is easier to contend with evil at the first than at the last." - Leonardo da Vinci

  3. #3
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    84
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2325
    When I was in grade school, I was convinced that the real purpose of kindergarten was to get measles, mumps, chicken pox and rubella out of the way before we actually had to start learning stuff.

    Our mothers didn't actually have teas, though - they just sent us over to the sick kid's house to watch television.
    The 5 best things in life begin with "G:" God, Guns, Gold, Girls and Guitars.

  4. #4
    Over 2500 post club
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    By the sea
    Posts
    2,873
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 1,069 Times in 693 Posts

    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    385682
    Quote Originally Posted by elohiym View Post
    In The Clinical Significance of Measles: A Review we read:
    "Before the introduction of measles vaccines, measles virus infected 95%98% of children by age 18 years [14], and measles was considered an inevitable rite of passage. Exposure was often actively sought for children in early school years because of the greater severity of measles in adults."
    A medical doctor in 1915 wrote:
    "There are several reasons for this, chief of which is the existence of a widespread belief that they are both comparatively mild and harmless diseases and that the sooner children have them and are done with them, the better it is for all concerned.

    This belief, I regret to say, is held by not a few physicians and by a majority of the laity. Indeed, so deeply seated is it, that in some communities, when measles is present in a neighborhood, it is customary to have what are locally known as 'measles teas,' where the mothers get afternoon tea and the children get the measles."

    It is not surprising that 95%98% of children by age 18 years had been infected with measles virus when the popular culture for a time considered it a mild and harmless disease and intentionally exposed children to infection. When you think about the high incidence of measles infection in the early 20th century, remember it was largely caused by people intentionally infecting children.

    Today we have the modern measles party: vaccination.



    Personally, I wouldn't intentionally allow my child to be infected with either wild-type measles or vaccine-strain measles; but lately it seems the pressure is on for everyone to join in the modern measles party. In my opinion, it's an asinine strategy if you want to eliminate measles.
    Based on your extensive knowledge of medicine. Sorry for the ad hom but you are simply a moron.

  5. #5
    Over 2000 post club
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,471
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 289 Times in 247 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    249351
    I can't contribute much because I don't remember much being six at the time I went to a measles party. My mother told me where we were going and why. She said the rational was that getting the disease as a child was much less dangerous than getting it as an adult. I guess that in doing this you are choosing which risk/benefit level you prefer.

    1. Deliberately expose your child to the live virus in the hope all would be well and avoid more serious consequences down the road and acquire a stronger, more long last immunity.

    2. Get vaccinated and get a milder form of the disease and a lesser immunity to it hoping all will be well.

    3. Do nothing and take your chances.
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge, others just gargle.

  6. #6
    Over 5000 post club elohiym's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    In Christ
    Posts
    5,875
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 112 Times in 95 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    421649
    Quote Originally Posted by swanca99 View Post
    When I was in grade school, I was convinced that the real purpose of kindergarten was to get measles, mumps, chicken pox and rubella out of the way before we actually had to start learning stuff.

    Our mothers didn't actually have teas, though - they just sent us over to the sick kid's house to watch television.
    It seems the practice was en vogue throughout the twentieth century prior to vaccination but still occurred to some extent after vaccination was available.

    Is your recollection before or after the licensing of the measles vaccine?
    "It is easier to contend with evil at the first than at the last." - Leonardo da Vinci

  7. #7
    Over 5000 post club elohiym's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    In Christ
    Posts
    5,875
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 112 Times in 95 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    421649
    Quote Originally Posted by fzappa13 View Post
    I can't contribute much because I don't remember much being six at the time I went to a measles party. My mother told me where we were going and why. She said the rational was that getting the disease as a child was much less dangerous than getting it as an adult. I guess that in doing this you are choosing which risk/benefit level you prefer.
    That rational is consistent with the claims made by researchers and the physician in the OP; although the physician doesn't appreciate the idea of vaccination through a measles party. I wonder if he would have been critical of physicians selling "mild" measles infections, as they do today.

    Is your recollection before or after the licensing of the measles vaccine?

    Quote Originally Posted by fzappa13 View Post
    1. Deliberately expose your child to the live virus in the hope all would be well and avoid more serious consequences down the road and acquire a stronger, more long last immunity.
    I like to call it primitive vaccination. While I can understand the rationale, and can appreciate how people who had lived generations with measles outbreaks saw with their own eyes that it was a mild and harmless infection in healthy children, it unfortunately perpetuates measles infections in the population.

    Quote Originally Posted by fzappa13 View Post
    2. Get vaccinated and get a milder form of the disease and a lesser immunity to it hoping all will be well.
    Instead of thousands of natural infections we get millions of intentional infections with an attenuated virus that can, according to scientific consensus and evidence, mutate and become virulent. A friend gets a vaccine she believes will prevent infection; it becomes virulent and she becomes infectious, infecting a number of other people. Instead of eliminating the virus, the vaccine spreads strains of virus far and wide for financial gain; the strains can mutate and do, and people are left wondering why measles hasn't been eradicated. The PR machine of those selling the infection tries to convince people it's the fault of those who refuse to be vaccinated.

    Quote Originally Posted by fzappa13 View Post
    3. Do nothing and take your chances.
    Since the testimony of the generations who experienced natural measles infection is that it is a mild and harmless disease in healthy children, and since the known relative risk of certain complications from vaccination-strain measles infection is high, it follows it would be better to do nothing and take my chances. The researchers assessed the relative risk so I could make an informed choice.

    Of course, I wouldn't "do nothing." There are steps I would take and steps I wouldn't. Intentional infection isn't a step I would take to prevent another potentially worse measles infection.
    "It is easier to contend with evil at the first than at the last." - Leonardo da Vinci

  8. #8
    Over 2500 post club
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    By the sea
    Posts
    2,873
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 1,069 Times in 693 Posts

    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    385682
    Quote Originally Posted by elohiym View Post
    That rational is consistent with the claims made by researchers and the physician in the OP; although the physician doesn't appreciate the idea of vaccination through a measles party. I wonder if he would have been critical of physicians selling "mild" measles infections, as they do today.

    Is your recollection before or after the licensing of the measles vaccine?



    I like to call it primitive vaccination. While I can understand the rationale, and can appreciate how people who had lived generations with measles outbreaks saw with their own eyes that it was a mild and harmless infection in healthy children, it unfortunately perpetuates measles infections in the population.



    Instead of thousands of natural infections we get millions of intentional infections with an attenuated virus that can, according to scientific consensus and evidence, mutate and become virulent. A friend gets a vaccine she believes will prevent infection; it becomes virulent and she becomes infectious, infecting a number of other people. Instead of eliminating the virus, the vaccine spreads strains of virus far and wide for financial gain; the strains can mutate and do, and people are left wondering why measles hasn't been eradicated. The PR machine of those selling the infection tries to convince people it's the fault of those who refuse to be vaccinated.



    Since the testimony of the generations who experienced natural measles infection is that it is a mild and harmless disease in healthy children, and since the known relative risk of certain complications from vaccination-strain measles infection is high, it follows it would be better to do nothing and take my chances. The researchers assessed the relative risk so I could make an informed choice.

    Of course, I wouldn't "do nothing." There are steps I would take and steps I wouldn't. Intentional infection isn't a step I would take to prevent another potentially worse measles infection.
    The medical doctor from 100 years ago?

    And a citation to the "relative risk of certain complications ... is high" from the scientific literature, please.

    Or I can, and did, ask my kid who is an infectious disease MD. When I asked the question about whether or not kids should be vaccinated against measles and other child hood diseases she wanted to know what I was smoking and said "Of course, who are you Jenny McCarthy in disguise?"

  9. #9
    Over 5000 post club elohiym's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    In Christ
    Posts
    5,875
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 112 Times in 95 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    421649
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonahdog View Post
    Based on your extensive knowledge of medicine.
    Do you want to complete that sentence?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonahdog View Post
    Sorry for the ad hom but you are simply a moron.
    I accept your apology for the logical fallacy.
    "It is easier to contend with evil at the first than at the last." - Leonardo da Vinci

  10. #10
    Over 5000 post club elohiym's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    In Christ
    Posts
    5,875
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 112 Times in 95 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    421649
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonahdog View Post
    The medical doctor from 100 years ago?
    Do you want to complete that sentence so I can answer the question?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonahdog View Post
    And a citation to the "relative risk of certain complications ... is high" from the scientific literature, please.
    Vaccines for measles, mumps and rubella in children.

    The highest risk of association with aseptic meningitis was observed within the third week after immunisation with Urabe-containing MMR (risk ratio (RR) 14.28; 95% confidence interval (CI) from 7.93 to 25.71) and within the third (RR 22.5; 95% CI 11.8 to 42.9) or fifth (RR 15.6; 95% CI 10.3 to 24.2) weeks after immunisation with the vaccine prepared with the Leningrad-Zagreb strain. A significant risk of association with febrile seizures and MMR exposure during the two previous weeks (RR 1.10; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.15) was assessed in one large person-time cohort study involving 537,171 children aged between three months and five year of age. Increased risk of febrile seizure has also been observed in children aged between 12 to 23 months (relative incidence (RI) 4.09; 95% CI 3.1 to 5.33) and children aged 12 to 35 months (RI 5.68; 95% CI 2.31 to 13.97) within six to 11 days after exposure to MMR vaccine. An increased risk of thrombocytopenic purpura within six weeks after MMR immunisation in children aged 12 to 23 months was assessed in one case-control study (RR 6.3; 95% CI 1.3 to 30.1) and in one small self controlled case series (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 5.38; 95% CI 2.72 to 10.62). Increased risk of thrombocytopenic purpura within six weeks after MMR exposure was also assessed in one other case-control study involving 2311 children and adolescents between one month and 18 years (odds ratio (OR) 2.4; 95% CI 1.2 to 4.7).

    Do you understand what relative risk means? If not, here:

    When a treatment has an RR greater than 1, the risk of a bad outcome is increased by the treatment; when the RR is less than 1, the risk of a bad outcome is decreased, meaning that the treatment is likely to do good. For example, when the RR is 2.0 the chance of a bad outcome is twice as likely to occur with the treatment as without it, whereas an RR of 0.5 means that the chance of a bad outcome is twice as likely to occur without the intervention. When the RR is exactly 1, the risk is unchanged. For example, a report may state ‘The relative risk of blindness in people given drug T was 1.5’. This shows that the drug increased the risk of blindness.

    Now read those risks of complication from MMR vaccine again.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonahdog View Post
    Or I can, and did, ask my kid who is an infectious disease MD.
    Ask her to come on here and debate me. I welcome it. What facts are in dispute?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonahdog View Post
    When I asked the question about whether or not kids should be vaccinated against measles and other child hood diseases she wanted to know what I was smoking and said "Of course, who are you Jenny McCarthy in disguise?"
    What a compassionate, open-minded doctor you raised. She obviously isn't interested in treating wealthy, well-educated people who are critical of vaccines for good reasons. Does she talk down to her patients when they question vaccine necessity, safety or efficacy?
    "It is easier to contend with evil at the first than at the last." - Leonardo da Vinci

  11. #11
    Over 2000 post club
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,471
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 289 Times in 247 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    249351
    Quote Originally Posted by elohiym View Post
    That rational is consistent with the claims made by researchers and the physician in the OP; although the physician doesn't appreciate the idea of vaccination through a measles party. I wonder if he would have been critical of physicians selling "mild" measles infections, as they do today.

    Is your recollection before or after the licensing of the measles vaccine?
    Summer of '62.



    I like to call it primitive vaccination. While I can understand the rationale, and can appreciate how people who had lived generations with measles outbreaks saw with their own eyes that it was a mild and harmless infection in healthy children, it unfortunately perpetuates measles infections in the population.
    A calculated risk by any accounting.


    Instead of thousands of natural infections we get millions of intentional infections with an attenuated virus that can, according to scientific consensus and evidence, mutate and become virulent. A friend gets a vaccine she believes will prevent infection; it becomes virulent and she becomes infectious, infecting a number of other people. Instead of eliminating the virus, the vaccine spreads strains of virus far and wide for financial gain; the strains can mutate and do, and people are left wondering why measles hasn't been eradicated. The PR machine of those selling the infection tries to convince people it's the fault of those who refuse to be vaccinated.
    A lot of ideas here worthy of their own thread much less post. Remember Typhoid Mary? One person's immunity is another person's infection. PR? I have learned to view the latest weekly call to fear with something of a jaundiced eye.

    Since the testimony of the generations who experienced natural measles infection is that it is a mild and harmless disease in healthy children, and since the known relative risk of certain complications from vaccination-strain measles infection is high, it follows it would be better to do nothing and take my chances. The researchers assessed the relative risk so I could make an informed choice.
    All any of us can do is access the info and make our best choice. We will all no doubt be judged but I have come to believe that intent is at least as important as outcome as it concerns said judgement.

    Of course, I wouldn't "do nothing." There are steps I would take and steps I wouldn't. Intentional infection isn't a step I would take to prevent another potentially worse measles infection.
    That's the neat thing about life ... we all get one to show everyone else how it ought to be done.
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge, others just gargle.

  12. #12
    Over 2500 post club
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    By the sea
    Posts
    2,873
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 1,069 Times in 693 Posts

    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    385682
    Quote Originally Posted by elohiym View Post

    What a compassionate, open-minded doctor you raised. She obviously isn't interested in treating wealthy, well-educated people who are critical of vaccines for good reasons. Does she talk down to her patients when they question vaccine necessity, safety or efficacy?
    I'll check when she gets back from a medical trip to Central America.

  13. #13
    Over 5000 post club elohiym's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    In Christ
    Posts
    5,875
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 112 Times in 95 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    421649
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonahdog View Post
    I'll check when she gets back from a medical trip to Central America.
    Check what specifically? Do you have anything to say about the high relative risk of certain complications from measles vaccination? You asked me to prove that claim and now you seem to have nothing to say about it.
    "It is easier to contend with evil at the first than at the last." - Leonardo da Vinci

  14. #14
    Over 2000 post club
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,471
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 289 Times in 247 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    249351
    Quote Originally Posted by elohiym View Post
    Check what specifically? Do you have anything to say about the high relative risk of certain complications from measles vaccination? You asked me to prove that claim and now you seem to have nothing to say about it.
    Well, when you start off with invective anything good seldom follows.
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge, others just gargle.

  15. #15
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    84
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2325
    Quote Originally Posted by elohiym View Post
    Is your recollection before or after the licensing of the measles vaccine?
    According to info I've just found "googling," it was before the development of the measles vaccine.

    I suffered all four of those ailments I mentioned in 1957-58.

    Had a vaccine been available, I'm sure my parents would have had us vaccinated. They believed in vaccinations - I even had to suffer through the polio vaccine when it was still a series of shots. If those shots prevented me from getting polio, they were darn well worth it.
    The 5 best things in life begin with "G:" God, Guns, Gold, Girls and Guitars.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us