Vaccinations; recent developments

[joel321]

Look what the dumbo of sarkeizen said when I posted this link...

http://www.wired.com/2015/03/artificial-light-may-be-unhealthy/

He said...

"Did you read the paper? Nope.
Would you understand it if you did?  Nope.
Are you qualified to talk about this then?.....Nope."

That's all he said. Now that can only go two ways...

1- he is 100% here being bias.
2- he is a fortune teller and know my every move. lol

He is one of those judges in a court of law that will give you the death penalty based on his only will with out looking at the evidence...-= Hitler mentality. Which I hope people don't fall for his mentality and the TRUTH should come out about him.

Peoples lives/health are nothing to play around with....no one has told the dodo bird of sark that he is 100% wrong. Well, that needs to change soon!

[sarkeizen]

You are giving the readers a lot to get confused about = you are only thinking about yourself and not regard what other people read. = all of your followers are confused as confused as you are!

So according to you my followers aren't confused at all.  I mean I know what I'm talking about, I make pretty clear posts and I'm happy to clarify any questions people have and I have set out pretty plainly what's required to change my mind and what's required to elicit a detailed analysis from me.
You on the other hand just write long, careless and deliberately poorly worded posts.  You never seem to check your facts and you almost never seem capable of correcting yourself.
I very much doubt there are many people following this thread for the medical advice. So I'm not that worried.

You have nothing worth learning from....your mind is closed.

Clearly wrong on both counts.  a) I've clearly stated what is required to change my mind and b) I clearly understand ID and research methodology better than you.

I'm already tired of you telling me "English" please because you can't understand.

Then stop pretending you have worse English than you do .   Dude, seriously.  You misspelled "strain" about a dozen times.  Even after seeing it written correctly by people responding to your posts.  You would refuse to use a correct word (i.e. serotype) even when you've been corrected a good dozen times.  I could easily go on but it's not unreasonable to believe that you are affecting poor English.

The evidence shows like a female having a period.

I'd report this for misogyny but as this board doesn't have a problem with racism I'm sure they don't have a problem with misogyny.

[sarkeizen]

"Did you read the paper? Nope.
Would you understand it if you did?  Nope.
Are you qualified to talk about this then?.....Nope."

That's all he said. Now that can only go two ways...

1- he is 100% here being bias.
2- he is a fortune teller and know my every move. lol

False dichotomy.

I simply interpreted the evidence that you provided. If you had read the paper you would have realized a few things that entirely undermine your post.  Since you did not realize these things you either did not read the paper OR you did not understand it.  So your opinion on this subject is worth less than shit. 

He is one of those judges in a court of law that will give you the death penalty based on his only will with out looking at the evidence.

I did look at the evidence.  The paper and your post.

Peoples lives/health are nothing to play around with.

...says the person who is cool with people dying needlessly of measles because of some postulated effect that is so low in probability that it can not be observed in research.

[Tink]

Dissolving Illusions About the Measles Vaccine
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2015/03/24/dissolving-illusions-measles-vaccine.aspx

[sarkeizen]

Dissolving Illusions About the Measles Vaccine
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2015/03/24/dissolving-illusions-measles-vaccine.aspx

His first point is that VAERS contains more deaths following vaccination than the number attributed to measles.  The first question anyone with a brain would ask is "How do you differentiate between what is sequla and expected events?"

With people with measles it's easy - there are well known sequla: Meningitis, pneumonia,etc..  With vaccination you would have to compare the group against the expected number of deaths in a population that size.  You would also have to adjust for the selection bias in VAERS. Not even counting the fact that VAERS data is not controlled.

It's interesting that he picks two different time scales 2003->2015 and 2005->2015 for NVS.  When you normalize those two his cases drop to 83.  When you select events that occurred within 14 days or less of vaccination it drops to 9.  When you restrict the search to require hospitalization - which means there's at least a chance that a real doctor looked at this person.

It drops to 1.

As is typical of sites like Mercola and Natural News - their articles meander and struggle to make a cogent point.  The next one that I can see is a claim about herd immunity and some manufactured shock about measles outbreaks occurring in specific populations.  Herd immunity is related to the R0 of a disease.  Diseases which are not very infectious do not require a large amount of coverage to confer immunity to the unvaccinated.  Measles as everyone knows is a highly infectious disease - which means you need 90-95% coverage to achieve.  The article he references knowingly looks at populations with coverage as low as 71% where we would not expect to see herd immunity.  It also looks at 1 dose vaccinations which in and of themselves only have a VE in the 80% range.