The Australian Vaccination-skeptics Network

[bluecat*dancing]

Good.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-18/australian-vaccination-skeptics-network-banned-from-charity-st...

''The Australian Vaccination-skeptics Network has been stripped of its registered charity status because potential misinformation could impact on children's health.

The controversial anti-immunisation group was last week forced to change its name from the Australian Vaccination Network because it was considered misleading.

The group actively campaigns against vaccinating children.''

[superscanner4]

Anti-vaccine beliefs and their effect on public health:

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0089177

Here is the Australian database for looking up adverse events.  You can put in the generic name or the brand name for vaccines and all drugs.  .  http://www.tga.gov.au/daen/daen-entry.aspx

Why the passive adverse event reporting system is not evidence of adverse reactions “Although vaccines are subject to rigorous pre-licensure evaluations, with many thousands of subjects in clinical trials, these trials are never powerful enough to detect rare adverse events, such as those that occur in less than one in several thousand vaccinated people. Systematic whole of population analyses, such as the current one, overcome the inherent limitations of passive surveillance systems for assessing adverse events after immunisation. In a passive surveillance system, it is up to individuals or their healthcare providers to report details of adverse health events that occur in the period after vaccination. Reporting can be haphazard and evaluable information is not guaranteed. Such reporting forms the basis for evaluating cases with similar diagnoses and assessing whether there is any indication that such cases are occurring at higher than background rates. Formal epidemiological assessment then follows using a rigorous systematic approach.”  “http://www.bmj.com/content/347/bmj.f5631?ijkey=xLeywfgogB0BxDW&keytype=ref

[superscanner4]

Here is the best herd immunity demonstration.  There are 8 different scenarios and you run them one at a time.  Be sure to read the text explanation for what is going in in each one.  You can adjust the speed, and replay each one. use the before and next arrows to navigate to the next scenario.  Eg. the first one is population with no disease.  The second scenario is the uprotected population with 1 infection introduced.  Watch the transmission of the disease through the population.  Scenarios nos. 4 and 5 are very important.   In all of these they have the disease running through the population with infections then recovery and no deaths, to keep it simple.  It would vary of course in real life according to the disease, for which we have predicted mortality rates.  This graphic is good because each time you play it the computer generates random patterns every time.

http://op12no2.me/toys/herd/

Here's another one that is quite good but don't pay too much attention to the sarcasm!  It's still a great teaching tool.  http://www.shanekillian.org/apps/herd.html

[bluecat*dancing]

Unless there is a medical reason, I believe that all children should be vaccinated. It is selfish to not do so.

[superscanner4]

Here's another simulator, this one is easy to use and uses deaths this time (the black squares). The link to the simulator is within the text. thttp://www.techydad.com/2010/09/a-vaccination-simulation/

[azureline**]

I stoppedf reading after your accusation that I read anti vax websites......not so at all.

All decisions made not to vaccinate are medical ones. (in my experience)

[bluecat*dancing]

Not so in my experience. Some decided not to vaccinate due to medical diagnosis, others due to perceived medical reasons, others due to misinformation provided by anti-v advocates, others due to hearsay and others because they put their faith in alternative medicine. If there is a medical diagnosis, then, it is fair enough to not proceed with vaccinations. These children are, however, at a greater risk of catching and/or spreading these potentially fatal diseases.

[azureline**]

I think it's been established that unvaccinated children are not at any greater risk of spreading a disease than a vaccinated child is.

I don't know anyone who chose to not vaccinate for any reason other than medical risk.

[polksaladallie]

The bottom line is that there is a much greater risk of death or permanent disability from the diseases than from the vaccinations.

[azureline**]

---

@polksaladallie wrote:

The bottom line is that there is a much greater risk of death or permanent disability from the diseases than from the vaccinations.

---

which is all well and good, unless it is your child who is adversely affected.

What I believe we need is tests to determine if a child has immunity, not repeated vaccines (just in case)

[bluecat*dancing]

Well, that's good then that that has been established.

I knew one woman who believed that giving her children onion infused milk would immunise her children. Her son contracted whooping cough and rather than keep him home, she sent him to school, believing that he couldn't spread it. About 80 percent of the kids ended up with whooping cough. Because they had been vaccinated, the whooping cough was less severe but none the less, it took months before the cough cleared up completely. Selfish and foolish. She was ordered to remove both of her children from school and needed a medical certificate giving the all-clear before they were allowed to return.