General Discussion

DanTex

(20,709 posts)

18. The argument doesn't rely on 1950s data for anything except for

Sun Feb 8, 2015, 12:35 PM

Feb 2015

the endnote that the 0.3% fatality rate seems high, because it is so much higher than in the 1950s. If anything the lack of urbanization and access to hospitals should imply that the fatality rate would be higher in the 1950s than today. The 0.3% was from a study of ten or 15 years before 2000. I could use data from 2000 to the present, but of course in that case the fatality rate would be 0%.

You are right that I am only including fatalities as risk factors. If we include other outcomes, we have to do that both for the vaccine and for the disease. I find it odd that you listed non-fatal outcomes for measles but didn't complain that I didn't count non-fatal disabilities that resulted from the vaccine, including permanent complications, loss of work for the parent, hospital costs, etc.

You're welcome to do the full analysis for both, weighing all possible outcomes based on how bad they are.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

40 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Post removed [View all] Post removed Feb 2015 OP

The enormous fucking hole in that analysis: Spider Jerusalem Feb 2015 #1

I'm talking about the present. If the numbers change, so do the costs and benefits. Obviously. DanTex Feb 2015 #2

There was a measles outbreak in 1989-91 that infected 55k and killed 123. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2015 #3

Anectodal evidence, huh. Yes, I'm assuming that event was covered by that study which DanTex Feb 2015 #5

We lived in a society where "most" people were vaccinated, presumably, in 1989. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2015 #7

I don't think you understand what an "individual decision" is. DanTex Feb 2015 #12

The consequences of your "individual decision" can onecaliberal Feb 2015 #22

The overall historical fatality rate... Spider Jerusalem Feb 2015 #32

There are other holes as well Major Nikon Feb 2015 #14

The argument doesn't rely on 1950s data for anything except for DanTex Feb 2015 #18

Using data post 2000 would make even less sense Major Nikon Feb 2015 #36

Well, we live in 2015, so there's that... DanTex Feb 2015 #39

so do we live in a ME society... handmade34 Feb 2015 #4

You are right about that. Not vaccinating is a selfish act. But it is not an irrational one. DanTex Feb 2015 #9

Your reasoning is false jehop61 Feb 2015 #6

50 years ago, the risk of contracting measles was far higher than it was today. DanTex Feb 2015 #11

redo your math, marym625 Feb 2015 #8

What part? Mortality rate is mortality rate. DanTex Feb 2015 #10

baloney marym625 Feb 2015 #17

That's a societal argument, not an individual one. DanTex Feb 2015 #19

If the vaccination rates drop marym625 Feb 2015 #25

Yes, and if vaccination rates drop and measles rates go up, then at some point DanTex Feb 2015 #38

"That's a societal argument, not an individual one" OMFG shoot me up the ass right now, sibelian Feb 2015 #28

I'm not sure what you mean. Do you not understand the distinction between a societal DanTex Feb 2015 #34

Thank you! marym625 Feb 2015 #35

Not only is it irrational, it's plain stupid. Dr Hobbitstein Feb 2015 #13

Fair enough, but is there anything wrong with the math or the argument in the OP? DanTex Feb 2015 #15

Anti-anti-vax? Isn't that what the anti-vaxxers say to try and smear Dr Hobbitstein Feb 2015 #21

+1 marym625 Feb 2015 #27

Your "math" specifically avoids asking the relevant questions. sibelian Feb 2015 #37

What relevant questions? And can we do this without the personal attacks? DanTex Feb 2015 #40

Wow. Let's look at some materials from Europe for comparison... Bluenorthwest Feb 2015 #16

If you live in a country with highe measles rates the cost-benefit analysis will change. Obviously. DanTex Feb 2015 #23

145,000 deaths EVERY YEAR from measles -- and that's at current vaccination levels mainer Feb 2015 #20

That's worldwide, not in the US. I'm talking about the cost-benefit analysis for an individual in DanTex Feb 2015 #26

Yes, it is really irrational to skip the MMR vaccine. 99Forever Feb 2015 #24

Fair enough, just curious if there is any statistical or logical argument behind that sentiment. DanTex Feb 2015 #29

I generally don't argue with stupid. 99Forever Feb 2015 #33

+1 marym625 Feb 2015 #31

Wow, you just made the same debunked argument EVERY anti-Vaxxer makes. MohRokTah Feb 2015 #30