In Vermont, 90% of children who were vaccinated got whooping cough anyway

  1. 0
    90% whooping cough in Vermont http://www.vaxchoicevt.com/wp-conten...-pertussis.jpg

    So going by this data, the more doses a child recieves, the more likely they are to contract whooping cough.

    So the unvaccinated children do much, much better having recieved no vaccinations compared those who have been, is how I'm reading it.

    This is why the whole idea of vaccination needs to be challenged.

    Nurses need to promote childrens health, not destroy it.
  2. 15 Comments so far...

  3. 9
    The Tdap is mandated in Vermont for all children who attend public school, so then by definition, a very high percentage of children who get pertussis will have received a vaccination at some point. The vaccine does wear off and it is 80% (not 100%) effective. You could also say that more than 90% of kids who get pertussis have hair on their head, does having hair increase you risk of pertussis?

    By you same logic, you could also say that more than 90% of children who get pertussis drink water, therefore drinking water causes pertussis. And because most cases occur in children 10-14 years old (which also means they've typically had more boosters than a younger child), we could also say the water related pertussis risk is dose related; the more water you drink the more likely you are to get pertussis from water, since a 12 year old will have drunk much more water over their lifetime than a 4 year old.
  4. 4
    Why have they not banned water drinking yet??? Scary.
    kmarie724, nursel56, MandaRN94, and 1 other like this.
  5. 2
    Interesting,

    So, in Vermont, if 10 children were vaccinated (with pertussis vaccine), then 9 of them developed whooping cough? That's what your title says to me. Is this what you intended to say? Or did you mean that 90% of pediatric pertussis cases happened in children who had been vaccinated (for pertussis). If so, that's a dramatically different statistic. One implies a dangerously contaminated injection, the other implies a dangerously ineffective injection.

    This could possibly be an example of how statistics can be manipulated. I tried to read the article myself but the link just brought up a page of mixed symbols.
    scrubsandasmile and kabfighter like this.
  6. 0
    Quote from MunoRN
    The Tdap is mandated in Vermont for all children who attend public school, so then by definition, a very high percentage of children who get pertussis will have received a vaccination at some point. The vaccine does wear off and it is 80% (not 100%) effective. You could also say that more than 90% of kids who get pertussis have hair on their head, does having hair increase you risk of pertussis?

    By you same logic, you could also say that more than 90% of children who get pertussis drink water, therefore drinking water causes pertussis. And because most cases occur in children 10-14 years old (which also means they've typically had more boosters than a younger child), we could also say the water related pertussis risk is dose related; the more water you drink the more likely you are to get pertussis from water, since a 12 year old will have drunk much more water over their lifetime than a 4 year old.
    You've lost me with the whole water thing and hair things.

    It's very simple. The data indicates clearly that the more doses a child recieves, the more likely they are to contract whooping cough compared to a unvaccinated child.

    Other than that, I have no more time to waste on you.
  7. 8
    Actually it doesn't. The data shows the number of vaccines received by confirmed pertussis cases. It says nothing about vaccinations in the children in Vermont who did not get pertussis.

    Have you taken a statistics class yet?
    kmarie724, llg, Silverlight2010, and 5 others like this.
  8. 7
    Quote from Garethaus
    You've lost me with the whole water thing and hair things.

    It's very simple. The data indicates clearly that the more doses a child recieves, the more likely they are to contract whooping cough compared to a unvaccinated child.

    Other than that, I have no more time to waste on you.
    That's actually not what it shows. Your chart reflects the normal vaccination schedule for Tdap, not more immunizations increases your risk for pertussis; the first three doses are prior to 1 year, the 4th is at 15-18 months, the 5th is by 6 years, and the 6th is between 10 and 12 years old, which is why the percentages of kids with those particular number of doses correlating with those age is so high. Taken any random group of kids as a sample and you'll find the same relationship between age and #of doses. To establish some sort of causation you'd have to show some difference between a random sample and your study group, otherwise your just showing that something has no effect on the regular data than can be found in a random sample.

    In other words, if your chart shows a causative relationship between vaccinations and pertussis, it should look different that what a randomly sampled group of kids would look like, but it doesn't. Well it does a little bit, the 11 cases of pertussis in the 11-18 year age group is more than in doses 1-4 combined, it only goes up when you hit doses 5 and 6, where the vast majority of 11-18 year olds are, suggesting a correlation between no vaccination and increased risk of pertussis.
    Last edit by MunoRN on Jan 16, '13
    llg, kabfighter, psu_213, and 4 others like this.
  9. 3
    Quote from Garethaus
    90% whooping cough in Vermont http://www.vaxchoicevt.com/wp-conten...-pertussis.jpg

    So going by this data, the more doses a child recieves, the more likely they are to contract whooping cough.

    So the unvaccinated children do much, much better having recieved no vaccinations compared those who have been, is how I'm reading it.
    How many children living in Vermont between 0 and 18 years of age who were vaccinated as scheduled did not develop pertussis between January and September 2012? Without knowing that your conclusion is meaningless.

    The way you wrote that title you'd expect there to be thousands of cases of pertussis in Vermont.
    Last edit by nursel56 on Jan 16, '13 : Reason: returned a missing letter
    psu_213, MandaRN94, and hiddencatRN like this.
  10. 6
    Consider the source- an anti-vaccine organization. They only support vaccine choice for people who don't want to vaccinate.

    I live in Vermont. The state declared a whooping cough epidemic last fall.

    Vaccinated people got whooping cough due to lack of herd immunity. If a high enough percentage of people in an area is vaccinated, disease can't take hold. Not everyone can be vaccinated (too young, reactions, immunocompromised), and vaccination isn't perfect, so herd immunity protects everyone.

    Unfortunately, the vaccination rate has been falling for years because of groups like this and "experts" like Jenny McCarthy. So now we have an outbreak pf vaccine-preventable disease.
    kmarie724, NellieRN10, llg, and 3 others like this.
  11. 2
    Quote from Garethaus
    You've lost me with the whole water thing and hair things.

    It's very simple. The data indicates clearly that the more doses a child recieves, the more likely they are to contract whooping cough compared to a unvaccinated child.

    Other than that, I have no more time to waste on you.
    In other words, you have now basically said "you used logic to counter my arguments. I do not understand your logic. Therefore, you arguments should just be ignored." So who is the one who does not have time to waste?
    Not_A_Hat_Person and llg like this.


Top