Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DR Congo measles: More than 6k dead in world's worst outbreak

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 119 posts

Re: DR Congo measles: More than 6k dead in world's worst outbreak

#71

Post by Rallen89 »

booblik wrote: post #66
ganzuul wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yesterday I read about someone paying 4000 USD for an operation for their old cat. People have strange priorities. Perhaps it would be good to see what poverty is like.

I am sorry, what is the point of your comment? Are you saying people are not allowed to love their pets and should let them die, and not care for them when they are sick?

U don't think anyone said to " let them die" just spending that much money on a cat when other people could benefit much more with a fraction of that amount.

Re: DR Congo measles: More than 6k dead in world's worst outbreak

#72

Post by pbhjpbhj »

cmsj wrote: post #35
baq wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

risk of something really bad happening after a measles vaccine is something like 1:40 000. risk of going deaf after measles is 1:1000. she's absolutely right, that's why she should be begging for the vaccine.

To be very clear, I fully support vaccination, my kids are vaccinated, as am I. Having said that, when people hear the risk of a bad reaction is 1:40000, I believe that what they think is "my kid's chances of getting this disease are lower than that, so I am making the smart choice by picking the lower risk and avoiding the vaccine risk".

And in some cases that's probably the rational position; even then it's still rational (and right) for the medical community to advise vaccination as they "don't care" about that one person, they care about the billions.

This dichotomy lies at the heart of this issue IMO.

Re: DR Congo measles: More than 6k dead in world's worst outbreak

#73

Post by loriverkutya »

codingdave wrote: post #36
lolc wrote: post #2

And here I am with a sister who thinks that vaccination for a newborn should be "weighed against the risk". The reason we don't know measles as a deadly disease anymore is because vaccination works so well!

She also is not wrong because not even the CDC recommends the measles vaccine until 12 months of age. Hepatitis B is the only vaccine recommend for newborns. The rest are staged out over time, starting at 2 months.

This is false information. If you are in the risk group BCG is also recommended for newborns. Source: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vaccinations/bcg-tuberculosis-...

In the UK MMR is given to babies around age 1. The reason is that if their mother is vaccinated, they have the antibodies, but "These maternal antibodies decline with age and are almost all gone by the time MMR is normally given – around the age of 1 year." Source: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vaccinations/mmr-vaccine/

Please, read before you are posting false information.

Re: DR Congo measles: More than 6k dead in world's worst outbreak

#74

Post by pbhjpbhj »

DanBC wrote: post #28
lolc wrote: post #2

And here I am with a sister who thinks that vaccination for a newborn should be "weighed against the risk". The reason we don't know measles as a deadly disease anymore is because vaccination works so well!

She's right though, vaccination for anyone should be weighed against the risk. We spend considerable amounts of money ensuring that vaccinations are safe and effective, and we only recommend vaccination if they are safe and effective and if the very small risks (and all interventions have risks) make sense against the disease being vaccinated against. In the case of measles there are considerable risks of death or li…

I broadly agree: I think part of the problem is those in government, including on issues of healthcare, have lied in the past. Trust is easily lost and very hard to win back.

You can win people back by lying more (Brexit!), short termist (advertisers, politicians) need not worry about that, but it creates even more harm down the road.

Re: DR Congo measles: More than 6k dead in world's worst outbreak

#75

Post by andrepd »

booblik wrote: post #66
ganzuul wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yesterday I read about someone paying 4000 USD for an operation for their old cat. People have strange priorities. Perhaps it would be good to see what poverty is like.

I am sorry, what is the point of your comment? Are you saying people are not allowed to love their pets and should let them die, and not care for them when they are sick?

The life of ten thousand sick pets does not reach the value of one human life. I think the point of that comment was simply how some people have no access to basic medicine, while at the same time a team of highly trained people are dedicating their time and effort to saving a cat. Of course, this can be said of many things: jewelers, yacht - builders, sports car engineers.

Re: DR Congo measles: More than 6k dead in world's worst outbreak

#76

Post by bipson »

SamPatt wrote: post #25
bipson wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point here is the limitation " apparently ". Huge part of the needless discussion about the risks of vaccines happening in well educated parts of the population are misattributed effects of vaccines. Everyone I know apparently knows someone that has a child that has a serious condition because of a vaccination. Yeah, right, if it was so clear cut and widespread, these vaccines would be pulled from the market yest…

>if it was so clear cut and widespread, these vaccines would be pulled from the market yesterday That argument is empirically false, as there have been multiple medications and vaccinations which did widespread harm. Granted, nearly all of them occurred 30+ years ago. However I don't think we should ever claim we've advanced to the point where we _know_ that there are _no_ medications or vaccinations that are causing…

Yes, and those vaccines were pulled.

Once a vaccine has shown to be just remotely as dangerous as the illness it is trying to prevent, it becomes pointless and is no longer available. The respective regulative bodies in either country are rather strict about which vaccine is allowed to circulate.

Re: DR Congo measles: More than 6k dead in world's worst outbreak

#77

Post by andrepd »

Sarki wrote: post #8
lolc wrote: post #2

And here I am with a sister who thinks that vaccination for a newborn should be "weighed against the risk". The reason we don't know measles as a deadly disease anymore is because vaccination works so well!

This mostly comes down to the irrationality regarding risks when you're having kids. Out of my own experience, and given the worst cases scenarios you hear from it's difficult not to fear for your loved ones (and I mean you literally feel it in your loins) especially when YOUR decision can have even the slightest chance of ruining their lives. -- Edit: Please don't get me wrong, I have kids, and their vaccines are up…

No, I think this is a dangerous excuse for unacceptable behaviour. Caring "irrationally" about your kids is taking them to the doctor a small cough that is probably zero cause for concern. It's zealously taking them for their shots and for their medicine, etc.

Re: DR Congo measles: More than 6k dead in world's worst outbreak

#78

Post by bipson »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #68
bipson wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point here is the limitation " apparently ". Huge part of the needless discussion about the risks of vaccines happening in well educated parts of the population are misattributed effects of vaccines. Everyone I know apparently knows someone that has a child that has a serious condition because of a vaccination. Yeah, right, if it was so clear cut and widespread, these vaccines would be pulled from the market yest…

Hmm, I don't know anyone whose personally got an ongoing condition attributed to a vaccine. Scarlett fever vaccine (decades ago) made me very ill. Flu vaccine this year seemed (it could be coincidental) to make one of my children ill enough to be off school. These are expected consequences. It's also expected that some few people will die and others will have life altering conditions. These vaccines should still be u…

Why adding the last paragraph, in particular the first sentence of it?

Although I can't prove the sentence incorrect as such, it is stated in such a vague and alarmist way, that it could easily taken as an example of fueling the FUD?

Re: DR Congo measles: More than 6k dead in world's worst outbreak

#79

Post by logicchains »

baq wrote: post #15
lolc wrote: post #2

And here I am with a sister who thinks that vaccination for a newborn should be "weighed against the risk". The reason we don't know measles as a deadly disease anymore is because vaccination works so well!

risk of something really bad happening after a measles vaccine is something like 1:40 000. risk of going deaf after measles is 1:1000. she's absolutely right, that's why she should be begging for the vaccine.

By those numbers, if she thinks the chance of getting measles is less than 1/40, then if acting purely selfishly she'd prefer not to get the vaccine?

Re: DR Congo measles: More than 6k dead in world's worst outbreak

#80

Post by bluGill »

bipson wrote: post #21
beagle3 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It IS a prisoner’s dilemma of sort. If everyone around you is vaccinated, you mostly enjoy herd immunity, so the benefit is much smaller. The risks are small, and most definitely worth it from society’s point of view, and likely from a personal point of view - They are, however, harder to assess from a personal point of view. I am somewhat familiar with a case where a serious underlying autoimmune condition was appar…

The point here is the limitation " apparently ". Huge part of the needless discussion about the risks of vaccines happening in well educated parts of the population are misattributed effects of vaccines. Everyone I know apparently knows someone that has a child that has a serious condition because of a vaccination. Yeah, right, if it was so clear cut and widespread, these vaccines would be pulled from the market yest…

Most "Vaccine injured" children have a no vaccine related cause to their problems. It has become hip to blame autism on vaccines even though there is no relation.

Something like 1 in million do have a serious side effect of the vaccine. This is far less than the 6000 dead in Congo because they don't have the vaccine, but it isn't zero. The fact that it is far less is reason to vaccinate anyway - but if doctors can determine that your child is one of that 1 in a million before hand (they normally cannot!) it would be wise to skip vaccination for just those kids.

Post reply on HN