I get a LOT of weird emails at work. Like, on a daily basis, probably 5 or so that would require the writer to have a quick lil’ mental evaluation if they were saying these things NOT behind a veil of secrecy (strange email addresses etc.). I could quote them for hours. Most are insane right off the bat, sometimes they lure you in with a normal introduction before BAM! the crazy person comes out. We got one last week telling men to PURPOSEFULLY harass/assault women at work because if all men are guilty, it will “expose the foolishness of women.” Seriously. That was in my inbox first thing in the morning. Safe to say I could have used a little something extra in my coffee that day.
There are also some mailings we receive from various organizations, pushing different legislation one way or the other…using facts or twisted truths to get their point across. Generally the second I see a typo or something that is blatantly false, it goes in the trash. If its factual, I’ll save it in case we get a call or a letter from someone about that issue or if it comes up in a bill or whatever. (Not whatever but I don’t need to bore you with how I keep mail).
ANYHOW…we got something in the ol’ mailbox over the weekend that reaaaaaallllly makes my blood boil. Because they take the word “freedom” and apply it to vaccines. Say it with me folks-VACCINES SAVE LIVES YOU NINCOMPOOPS. I’ll save us all from wanting to scratch our heads at why this is even still an argument being made by educated adults and also will save you from my list of reasons why I think people who don’t vaccinate their children are some of the worst in this world (harsh? Sorry, went there) and stick to the facts in what was delivered to us and how MANIPULATIVE the language of it all is. Because that’s what they’re doing. Manipulating people into seeing correlations between completely unrelated things in order to instill fear about something that saves lives. I’m going to be a little controversial today, I’m feeling spicy.
“vaccines are not required to undergo long-term double-blind inert-placebo controlled trials to assess safety. In fact, not a single one of the clinical trials for vaccines given to babies and toddlers had a control group receiving an inert placebo.”
Lets chat, shall we? One of the main arguments against childhood vaccines is the sheer number of injections that the child receives. I’ll give it to you-its a lot. The current CDC vaccine schedule for children is 56 injections of 73 doses of 30 different vaccines, of which multiple doses of 10 vaccines are given before the age of one. So, yes, that’s a lot of pokes for a tiny little human. Lot’s of parents feel like its cruel to subject their child to so many in such a small amount of time, sometimes they spread them out a little bit more than normal, and some idiots think that a 0.2 second pinch is worse than their child getting the measles. Either way, if there were to be double-blind inert-placebo controlled trials to assess safety for infant and toddler vaccines….your kid would still be getting a lot of injections. And, if they’re in the control group, then your SOL if they actually do get the measles, or they’re getting pricked twice as much as if they had just received the vaccines on schedule, also they’re late to the game and are therefore susceptible to more infections before they finish their doses. Are there currently safe and effective trials for vaccines that don’t involve babies being needlessly pricked with sugar water only to then be pricked AGAIN with the actual vaccine? Yes.
“In 2016, the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) received 59,117 reports of adverse vaccine events, including 432 deaths, 1,091 permanent disabilities, 4,132 hospitalizations, and 10,284 emergency room visits…However only a tiny fraction of adverse vaccine events are reported to VAERS…..fewer that 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported.”
“Assuming VAERS captures a full 1 percent of adverse events-which is more than is estimated- the VAERS data from 2016 may reflect that in that year alone there were 5,911,700 adverse vaccine events, including 43,200 deaths, 109,100 permanent disabilities, 413,200 hospitalizations, and 1,028,400 emergency room visits.”
OH GOOD GOD. Where do I even begin? 43,200 people did NOT die from vaccines administered in 2016. They simply did not. This is a scare tactic to get you to think that vaccines are more dangerous than they are. You cannot scale up the numbers to show what you want to show-that is not a sound research method! Some things to consider with this data-it is not specifically about childhood vaccines. A number of these “adverse events” occurred in elderly patients receiving their annual flu shot. Sorry folks, old people get the flu a lot worse than younger ones, and NEWS FLASH, lots of them have the flu in their system before they are vaccinated. If they come down with the virus soon after receiving the vaccine, their “adverse event” could be attributed to the vaccine rather than the virus that is actually causing their symptoms. Also lets define what an adverse event is. Are we talking a little redness at the injection site? If so, grow up. I want the nitty gritty about what the events actually are.
This particular document then took a turn towards the vaccine/autism connection and I really had to stop reading. I’m writing this post though, because it scared me how convincing this group is. They cited sources, they have sound research based findings interwoven with their far-fetched science. They almost convinced me, ME-someone who knows enough about vaccines to laugh at the first sight of vaccines and autism in the same sentence, to look into things further. No, they scare me because they make it LOOK like they’re right.
“The CDC has not addressed a study which found a 300% increased rate of autism among newborns receiving the hepatitis B vaccine at birth compared to those that did not.”
The number of infants who do not receive the Hep B vaccine is low. Much lower than the percentage who do receive the vaccine. So, take a pool of 1,000 fish and a pool of 10 fish. In the pool of 10 fish, 3 of them have spots and 7 of them do not. In the pool of 1,000 fish….if only NINE of them have spots that is 300% more than the smaller pool. Of course there are going to be more fish with spots in a pool that has more fish! Same goes for children with autism who did receive the vaccine versus those who did not; numbers people. You can skew ’em however you want.
So, I write this not to say that you need to listen to my viewpoints on vaccines, I would love it if you did but you’re free to make your own decision and I am free to forever call you an idiot if you don’t vaccinate. I write this to say that there is some VERY convincing pseudo-science out there, stuff on .edu and .gov websites with footnotes to government sites and broad research organizations. What is important-in every scientific position piece, regardless of what side you are on-is digging into the numbers they are using and the bits and pieces that they are pulling from their reputable sources to fully understand just what exactly they are trying to make you see.
Read with your brain, not with your heart.