Live data from Hacker News

How an Amish missionary caused 2014's massive measles outbreak

vox.com

101–110 of 142 posts

Re: How an Amish missionary caused 2014's massive measles outbreak

#101
post #3

it breaks my heart to see so many "adults" making "informed decisions" about NOT vaccinating their children. They should really go live in undeveloped countries where vaccines are scarce and unavailable to experience first hand what lack of vaccinations actually means, what the implications are for the general population. I grew up, fortunately with out any problems, seeing so many kids suffering from polio, handicap…

Defecting on vaccination is perfectly rational if you expect everyone else to cooperate and never meet another defector. You get all the benefits of herd immunity while taking on none of whatever slight risk of complications there may be.

It's pretty straight-forward game theory, which must be met with equally straight-forward strategies: defectors must be punished.

Re: How an Amish missionary caused 2014's massive measles outbreak

#102
The problem might very well be that our level of scientific education isn't in step with the realities of the world we live in.

If someone wants to get a good grasp for the entire "story" of vaccination they have to have a basic understanding of evolution by natural selection. Fully 42% of the US population does not "believe" in evolution, which is further proof of the level of ignorance we are dealing with. I put "believe" in quotes because evolution by natural selection is not something one believes, that's nonsense. It is something one accepts or rejects based on over 150 years of evidence across a range of scientific disciplines.

Perhaps this might help:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RfdZTZQvuCo

Re: How an Amish missionary caused 2014's massive measles outbreak

#103
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't opposed to an experience changing them. And most things are guidelines to make choices, not absolutes. In this case, going on a mission was a higher priority, and the most effective way to get to the target was via air travel. If there was an alternative then they would take it. This decision matrix isn't unique to the Amish -- people do it every day. For example, I want to save money. But I also want to…

>They aren't opposed to an experience changing them. And most things are guidelines to make choices, not absolutes. In this case, going on a mission was a higher priority, and the most effective way to get to the target was via air travel. If there was an alternative then they would take it. It's not so much the experience change I'm pointing out, rather that that will bring foreign influence from outside (and obviou…

Minimizing outside influence is only a portion of the decision matrix. They want to maintain their community and their religion. Minimizing outside influence might be part of that, or it might not. As said above, there is no absolute rule - the community decides are a group which technologies/changes they want to use or discourage.

Yes, that does lead to some oddities.

Re: How an Amish missionary caused 2014's massive measles outbreak

#104
I don't think anybody's against vaccines, but against vaccines made with compromises to lower costs, allow for mass production, and cheaper administration. Having cheaper ingredients with the premise "What could possibly go wrong?" is what most people are against and also giving many at the same time and not ensuring health status is also a cost-lowering move and not a science-based one. So, the anti-vax movement has some wins like removing ethylmercury (actually, I assume that as it could just be a coincidence), which, as far as I know, is still in the pretty useless flu vaccines. My kids get vaccinated, but they don't get more than a shot at a time and no two shots without at least 2 months of space between them. Also, we always pushed to have them as late as possible and, thankfully, our pediatrician was okay with this schedule.

Re: How an Amish missionary caused 2014's massive measles outbreak

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. And it should explain herd immunity very clearly, a bit like this demo: http://op12no2.me/toys/herd/ People need to stop believing that it's a personal choice for them alone. That is no more true than if they were to go around blowing cigarette smoke into the faces of other people. It's anti-social behaviour and even worse, the consequences are potentially deadly.

People must always have a choice to vaccinate or not, forcing it upon them will do nobody any good because it will only increase the distrust of government. That said, if you don't vaccinate, you are a threat to the public and I do think you should be banned from public schools, public transportation, public gatherings and should have to explain to anyone you physically interact with that you are a risk to them and t…

>People must always have a choice to vaccinate or not, forcing it upon them will do nobody any good because it will only increase the distrust of government.

>That said, if you don't vaccinate, you are a threat to the public and I do think you should be banned from public schools, public transportation, public gatherings and should have to explain to anyone you physically interact with that you are a risk to them and their family.

Not following what you're proposing. You don't want people forced to be vaccinated, yet you want to forcibly confine them to their homes? What if they don't comply and get on a bus/subway/train/plane or go shop at a supermarket? Forcibly throw them in some special jail just for them?

Re: How an Amish missionary caused 2014's massive measles outbreak

#106
I still rarely see an accurate representation of the thought process of those who don't vaccinate. There is this impression that it is ignorant people who don't understand how they work, or don't understand herd immunity. There is also an impression that it is all or nothing - people either take all vaccinations, or none.

While there are extreme cases when parents think like this, for the vast majority, that is not a true picture. Most parents I know who skip vaccinations do so in a much different manner. I know of almost nobody who skips the polio vaccine. I do know people who delay it, though, not wanting to put it into an infant. MMR is taken by many. Chicken pox... not so much. HPV... not so much. But many parent simply want to let the kids grow up a couple years before doing the vaccines.

It is a risk calculation. Polio is devastating, and clearly worth the small risk presented from a vaccine. As the diseases get less and less damaging, more parents decide that the risk is greater than the potential reward, and do not choose to get that specific vaccination at that specific time.

And while the percentages of children who have adverse reactions to vaccines is small, they do exist. As a purely anecdotal story, my neighbor's child developed shingles after getting the chicken pox vaccine. They were told he may have lifelong problems because of it. Now, the doctors were astounded, and said it is an extremely rare case, practically never heard of before. But it did happen, as do other rare cases, so flat out denials that problems never happen come off as ignorant, and destroy trust between the two sides of these arguments.

So the problem with most of the comments I am seeing here is that they are bypassing the actual thought process of people who skip vaccinations, and killing avenues for potential discussion. If you want people to engage in honest discussion, you need to engage them on the risk/reward basis, providing education on the actual risks of vaccines vs. not.

The whole attitude of "If you don't vaccinate, you are an ignorant idiot." is not a good mechanism to improve communication, and does not produce positive results for anybody.

Re: How an Amish missionary caused 2014's massive measles outbreak

#107
post #48

The media is filtering out the logic from this debate. I would have hoped HN would be more informed. Its well established that no vaccine has an effect that lasts longer than seven years. This is the reason for booster shots. Every vaccine researcher and pharma company will tell you this. The reason we immunize children is because their hygiene practices are poorer than most adults and they are a marginalized class.…

Your claim about no vaccine being effective past seven years is 100% nonsense. http://www.immune.org.nz/duration-protection-efficacy-and-ef...

Your claim is completely worthless. My claim makes perfect sense and is backed up by the existence of booster shots as well as CDC recommendations.

I sincerely hope people who work harsh environments don't disregard tetanus boosters every seven years because of unfounded claims of longer effect.

The reason some studies may claim a longer immune term is more likely due to reinfection than vaccine induced immunity. For example, polio is often present, even in first world environments. So its only normal for people to have a testable immune response that would look like immunization response. Clear double-blind studies can not be done because there is no way to differentiate at this time.

Re: How an Amish missionary caused 2014's massive measles outbreak

#108
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading the article, the community backed off from vaccination following two kids having a bad reaction to an MMR vaccine. It wasn't "personal choice" or "religious exception." They had a bad experience and were scared away.

I think you point out the problem of dialog. It is assumed anti-vaxers are anti-science, religious, uneducated or anti-gov. Although this may apply to some, it doesn't explain the majority and the rapid growth. There is no shortage of educated doctors, former employees of drug companies, and data from CDC etc that is used for the anti vax argument. To convince someone of a point, one needs to not start from the posit…

I've never seen an anti-vax argument that was supported by real data. What I have seen are things like:

1. They cause autism.

2. They contain nasty, toxic chemicals.

3. They are unnecessary.

4. They are unsafe (in some unspecified way) and are just pushed for profit by big pharma.

The only one that comes even close to being supported by data is #1, and that's completely fake data.

Re: How an Amish missionary caused 2014's massive measles outbreak

#109
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And this is why i find the whole economics idea, that multiple entities doing their thing for individual profit will produce general social improvements, questionable at best.

Yet one of the issues presented from the anti-vax argument is that there are safety issues with vaccines. The companies producing them are protected by law from the consumer if there are any damages. In a free market, the manufactures would have to improve the product to the degree that the consumers are convinced it is safe, and if injury is proven in court they would be held liable. Therefore there would be a profi…

Right now, we have vaccines that are perfectly safe, but some people think they are unsafe. In a completely free market, economic forces would create a profit incentive to fix the perception of safety, while weakening the incentive to provide actual safety, so we'd have vaccines that are less safe but everybody thinks are safe. This is not an improvement.

Re: How an Amish missionary caused 2014's massive measles outbreak

#110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People must always have a choice to vaccinate or not, forcing it upon them will do nobody any good because it will only increase the distrust of government. That said, if you don't vaccinate, you are a threat to the public and I do think you should be banned from public schools, public transportation, public gatherings and should have to explain to anyone you physically interact with that you are a risk to them and t…

>People must always have a choice to vaccinate or not, forcing it upon them will do nobody any good because it will only increase the distrust of government. >That said, if you don't vaccinate, you are a threat to the public and I do think you should be banned from public schools, public transportation, public gatherings and should have to explain to anyone you physically interact with that you are a risk to them and…

If people who knowingly infect you with AIDS get thrown in jail, why should it be any different with people who knowingly decide to increase your chances of contracting any other disease?

I say supervised interactions with society is a very sane compromise for people who pose a danger, but may still have something to offer. As opposed to outright killing them.

Post reply on HN