Are Vaccine Preventable Diseases Really That Serious?

Nothing lights up the argument channel than a difference of view on the vaccination issue! I’ve actually lost friends because they couldn’t give me enough solid information to make me even consider not providing my children with all the available help in the world. Unfortunately, few people will bother to read the article or take into serious consideration the documented facts included.

There is a complacency in the anti-vaxx people of that world that childhood diseases are not really that bad and certainly don’t need the ‘dangers’ involved with vaccinations to stop them from happening. The article:
should put a lot of these fears and misconceptions to rest . . . but it probably won’t until one of the seriously anti-vaxx people have a child who is seriously impacted by catching one of these ‘minor’ diseases. The following excerpt from the article shows exactly how much impact the pre-vaccination years were in the world.

Vaccine-Preventable Diseases Aren’t Really That Serious

This is one of the more dangerous ideas of the anti-vaccine movement.

The only reason that they get away with it is because vaccines have done such a good job! Since vaccines have eliminated and reduced most vaccine-preventable diseases, few people actually remember just how devastating these life-threatening diseases can be.

It is important to remember that in the pre-vaccine era:

there were regular outbreaks of polio in the United States causing 13,000 to 20,000 cases of paralytic poliomyelitis each year and about 1,000 deaths. In even larger polio epidemics in the 1940s and 1950s, there were up to 3,145 deaths.

there were about 500,000 cases of measles in the United States, with at least 500 to 1,000 deaths and 500 cases of measles encephalitis. As late as 1989-1991, there were 55,622 cases and 123 deaths in the US.

there were up to 200,000 cases of diphtheria and 15,000 deaths each year.
the Haemophilus influenzae type b bacteria caused life-threatening infections, including meningitis, epiglottitis, and pneumonia, in up to 20,000 young children each year. Many were infants, and up to 5 percent died. Among those who survived their Hib infection, up to 30 percent had hearing impairment or neurologic complications.

there were about 270,000 cases of pertussis and 10,000 deaths each year in the United States.
20,000 babies were born with congenital rubella syndrome during a severe epidemic of rubella in 1964 (12.5 million cases). An additional 2,100 newborns died and there were at least 11,250 surgical and spontaneous abortions in women with rubella while pregnant. The 1964 rubella epidemic is thought to have affected at least 1 percent of all pregnancies. These severe rubella epidemics were thought to have occurred every six to nine years, with smaller epidemics in two to four-year cycles.

Even today, about 200,000 children die each year from pertussis, and at least 122,000 die from measles around the world.

Vaccine-preventable diseases are clearly serious. We should also not overlook the fact that they would be just as deadly today if we stopped vaccinating our children and allowed them to come back in the United States.


There still will be arguments

A few months ago, Donald Trump was on the Hannity Show and the subject of vaccinations came up and Mr. Trump said that although he would prefer the vaccinations be given at an older age, he seemed to indicate that there might yet be a connection to autism. Hannity looked shocked and asked Mr. Trump if he had not been following the proven medical reports and studies that did not show a link between the MMR Vaccine and autism. Mr. Trump said he knew two children who had gotten the injections and developed autism. For a gentleman of such amazing financial smarts, it was shocking to see him resort to anecdotal conclusions meaning because he knew two cases that matched up to his assumption, it must be true. This latest study should put to rest the worries of parents that there is a link between vaccines and autism . . . but it probably won’t as so many will stand by their anecdotal conclusions regardless of medical facts and years of medical studies.

A sad note to the article was the mention of all the money that went to again prove the lack of a link, money that could have gone to more serious problems with children.

Anecdotal evidence – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia// // //

The expression anecdotal evidence refers to evidence from anecdotes. In cases where small numbers of anecdotes are presented, there is a larger chance that they may be unreliable due to cherry-picked or otherwise non-representative samples of typical cases.[1][2] Anecdotal evidence is considered dubious support of a generalized claim; it is, however, within the scope of scientific method for claims regarding particular instances. Anecdotal evidence is no more than a type description (i.e., short narrative), and is often confused in discussions with its weight, or other considerations, as to the purpose(s) for which it is used. This is true regardless of the veracity of individual claims.[3][4][5]

The term is often used in contrast to scientific evidence, such as evidence-based medicine, which are types of formal accounts. Some anecdotal evidence does not qualify as scientific evidence because its nature prevents it from being investigated using the scientific method. Misuse of anecdotal evidence is an informal fallacy and is sometimes referred to as the “person who” fallacy (“I know a person who…”; “I know of a case where…” etc. Compare with hasty generalization). Anecdotal evidence is not necessarily representative of a “typical” experience; in fact, human cognitive biases such as confirmation bias mean that exceptional or confirmatory anecdotes are much more likely to be remembered. Accurate determination of whether an anecdote is “typical” requires statistical evidence