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

91–100 of 119 posts

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

#91

Post by bipson »

dennis_jeeves wrote: post #89
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 bipson, Ever read of Vioxx or Thalidomide? Yes it was pulled, a tad late though. What is the point that you are trying to make that somebody doesn't already know?

1. Yes, I heard about them. And the point remains, as soon as their effects were discovered, they were pulled.

2. These are not vaccines, but medications. So this has virtually nothing to do with "known vaccine-induced ongoing illnesses"

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

#92

Post by leetcrew »

Rallen89 wrote: post #71
booblik wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

the same argument could be made for elderly care. how many people in {insert poor country} could have been saved for the cost of one day your grandma spent in a hospital?

most people have to work to accumulate money. once they've done so, they are a lot more likely to spend it on people and animals they know and love than some people on the other side of the world they've never met. I don't think this is inherently wrong.

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

#93

Post by tzs »

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.

That's a great argument for persuading someone in a population where measles is rampant that they need to get vaccinated (or get their kids vaccinated). The US in the 1950s, for example, was such a population. 95% of the population got measles by age 15 [1].

Given the numbers you give [2], as long as the measles rate is above 2500 per 100k in your population the probability of going deaf from measles in a non-vaccinated person is higher than the probability of something really bad happening to that person from vaccination.

For persuading someone in a population where measles is rare due to past eradication efforts and herd immunity it's not so great an argument. In the US, we are way below 2500 per 100k.

To make a persuasive case using that approach you are going to need to pull in all the possible bad outcomes of measles. Deafness, death, and whatever else it can do. That might do it.

The ideal way to deal with a diseases is universal vaccination (except for people who for medical reasons cannot be safely vaccinated) until the disease is completely eradicated, then stop vaccination people.

Near the end of that, though, you reach a stage where the disease has not been completely eradicated but is rare enough that for any given individual skipping vaccination may actually be lower risk for them personally provided that enough other people do get vaccinated.

At that point, you have to switch to arguments based on the good of the group as a whole instead of personal risk to individuals.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6878996

[2] I'm assuming 1:N means odds are 1 to N, meaning a probability of 1/(N+1).

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

#94

Post by corrigo »

MiroF wrote: post #46
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #30

I'll sound like a conspiracy theorist here but hear me out. The anti-vaxx movement is a successful underground propaganda attack by the Russians to weaken the population. They are also behind the election of unfit leaders and anti-European (read: anti-unity) sentiments, or more broadly speaking, making people argue about internal affairs so they're no longer a strong front against the outside world. Where's the state…

Evidence? I think most of these "Russian funded propo attacks" are vastly overstated. We have our own monied interests to do that for us

It's funny, this might be the one-in-a-million case where a conspiracy theorist actually hit the nail on the head.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Infektion

Of course this was in the 80's, and probably stopped now

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

#95

Post by tzs »

bluGill wrote: post #84
logicchains wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

No. If you hadn't added "she thinks" to your sentence you would be correct - but the if condition is false (the risk is worse than 1/40) and so she should get the vaccine.

Where are you getting the measles risk from?

All the numbers I can find put the risk of measles in the US at a couple of orders of magnitude lower than 1/40. About 1000 cases a year in a bad year, 320 million population, 80 year lifespan give about a 1/4000 chance of getting measles sometime over your lifespan.

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

#96

Post by [deleted] »

dennis_jeeves wrote: post #89
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 bipson, Ever read of Vioxx or Thalidomide? Yes it was pulled, a tad late though. What is the point that you are trying to make that somebody doesn't already know?

[deleted]

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

#97

Post by dennis_jeeves »

bipson wrote: post #91
dennis_jeeves wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>if it was so clear cut and widespread, these vaccines would be pulled from the market yesterday bipson, Ever read of Vioxx or Thalidomide? Yes it was pulled, a tad late though. What is the point that you are trying to make that somebody doesn't already know?

1. Yes, I heard about them. And the point remains, as soon as their effects were discovered, they were pulled . 2. These are not vaccines, but medications. So this has virtually nothing to do with "known vaccine-induced ongoing illnesses"

>Yes, I heard about them. And the point remains, as soon as their effects were discovered, they were pulled.

Then you have not read of Vioxx or Thalidomide in sufficient detail. There were also massive coverups (or being dismissive of reported negative effects) did you notice that when you read it?

> These are not vaccines, but medications.

bipson, what the point that you are trying to make? Is it that the production/administration of vaccines (but not medications) are not prone to incompetence and coverups by govt, pharma? It is not a rhetorical question.

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

#98

Post by scoutt »

andrepd wrote: post #75
booblik wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> The life of ten thousand sick pets does not reach the value of one human life.

At the same time complains like the OP is just hypocrisy, since we've spent a lot of money in things we don't need (a simple smartphone) while we can feed a family of the 3rd world for 1/2 year with the same money.

And (not trolling and not personal) I still prefer my pets' lives over yours, as many of the users here would prefer their pets over the life of a random dude on the internet (like mine).

But this doesn't mean that we should stop caring about our pets. I believe that the initial statement (human life > pet life) is wrong since we should all be caring about all living things (maybe?).

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

#99

Post by danharaj »

raxxorrax wrote: post #83
DanBC wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is incorrect, at least in the UK. WHO provides information about which strains to use based on recent data about which flu variants are circulating. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/vaccine-selection.htm https://www.who.int/influenza/vaccines/virus/recommendations...

Better than nothing but flu vaccines have a bad effectiveness compared to almost all other vaccines. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/vaccines-work/effectiveness-studies.... It still is a bit of a gamble.

For the vast majority of people, there is no downside to getting the flu vaccine. A gamble implies there's something to lose.

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

#100

Post by [deleted] »

raxxorrax wrote: post #69
lotsofpulp wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not difficult. There’s ample statistical evidence available, and super high quality resources online such as CDC if one wanted to educate themselves. It’s people being lazy and wanting to subject the world to their ego of “I’m so smart because I believe in something contrary to the mainstream or against the establishment”. There’s clear proof of fraud by the idiot that started the nonsense rumors of vaccine harm…

I think the inquisition against the ignorant is also in it to satisfy their egos, so we have two groups that are playing this game. We have public health care and you always get at least a vaccine against tetanus if you even hit your small toe and go to the doc. Slightly exaggerated but not by much. Nobody questioned it. And it wasn't esoteric moms on youtube that let people be skeptical, it was the pressure to enfor…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN