Articles

Measles

It looks like the H1N1 pandemic is fading fast. I am amazed at how lucky we were, at least in the hospitals where I work. A month ago all the ICU beds were full, most of the ventilators were in use and we were wondering how we were going to triage the next batch of patients who needed advanced life support and we had none to offer. Then, right as we reached maximum capacity and had no more wiggle room, the rates plummeted. We skated right up to the edge of the precipice, looked down, and did not have to jump.

The pandemic has not been as bad as expected, but it was still no walk in the park. Nationwide H1N1 killed maybe 10,000, with 1,100 in children and 7,500 among young adults (ref). Oregon has had 1200 hospitalizations and 68 deaths. We had about 8 deaths from H1N1 in my hospital system. We would have had twice that number, but one of our hospitals is a trauma center and offers ECMO (Extra Corporeal Membrane Oxygenation) and we managed to save a number of people who would have died if they had been in a lesser hospital. The national statistics mirror our experience. None of the deaths were in the elderly. Pity the vaccine was slow to be produced as it could have prevented the majority of those deaths.

Are we done with H1N1? Will it become part of seasonal flu? Will it have a third comeback, fueled by holiday travel? Will it mutate and increase virulence? Will it recombine with avian flu to generate a new strain? Is this THE pandemic that comes every 30 years or so, and we will not see another until after I am long dead?

How am I supposed to know? I can’t see the future. Or can I? Mr. Randi, listen up: I am thinking I will be eligible for that million dollar prize. I am receiving future information from the Large Hadron Collider, curiously delivered inside a baguette. I think I can predict the next infection to sweep the US.

Measles.

Easy call, huh?

I have seen a grand total of one case of measles in my career. It was in an unimmunized young male who picked up measles traveling to Africa. I had not expected to see another case thanks to immunization. I am no longer certain that will be the case.

Measles, due to the rubeola virus, is a typical virus, with the usual fever, cough, runny nose, red eyes and a generalized, maculopapular, erythematous rash. One of many childhood infections that have plagued mankind. Measles is very infectious, with 90% of household contacts exposed developing the disease. It is one of those infections that is easy to acquire in the waiting area of a doctors office.

Case fatality rates in the West are low, about 0.3%, while in the third world it kills up to a third of infected children. About one in a thousand get encephalitis.

In the old days, everyone developed measles with about 3 million cases a year, with relatively little, but devastating, morbidity and mortality.

“Before measles vaccine, nearly all children got measles by the time they were 15 years of age. Each year in the United States about 450 people died because of measles, 48,000 were hospitalized, 7,000 had seizures, and about 1,000 suffered permanent brain damage or deafness.”

Much of this is preventable by the vaccine. No vaccine is perfect, and the measles vaccine is no different. Measles vaccine is about 90-97% effective in preventing infection, depending on the population studied. Or to think of it another way, 3 to 10% of the population would remain susceptible to the disease even if we had 100% of the population vaccinated.

Thanks to Dr. Andrew Wakefield, fear of MMR induced autism is highest in Great Britain and as a result measles vaccination rates have fallen. Perhaps it should now be Mediocre Britain, at least where vaccines are concerned.

Vaccination rates have fallen in England, and at one point 20% of children were susceptible to measles, mumps and rubella. Since the English refer to vaccination as ‘the jab’ I am surprised they get anyone to take the vaccine. It’s like referring to colonoscopy as riding the python. Who would want that?

“A particularly significant decline was observed between 2000 and 2004, which can arguably be attributed to deterioration in public confidence about the safety of the MMR (Reference).”

vaccination rates

As a result, measles boomed.

measles rates

All due to Dr. Wakefield’s report in the Lancet, which evidently should have been published as work of dark humor in Punch.

“More importantly, the controversy appeared to affect parental decision-making. Uptake rates for MMR in England fell from 87.4% in 2000-01 to 79.9% in 2003-04, the lowest figure at any time since the widespread introduction of the triple vaccine in 1990-91. The decrease was especially significant given that the single vaccines alternative was only available from private medical clinics, at a cost of around £200.

The Wakefield study has been widely discredited, and MMR uptake has recovered to an extent: in 2007 vaccination rates stood at 84.6%. Meanwhile, measles notifications in 2006 and 2007 were the highest for almost a decade. (Reference)”

I wonder, as an aside, about responsibility. One of the refrains of the antivax crowd is that big pharma is protected from any liability from vaccine injury. Big pharma cannot be held responsible. I wonder, when the causes of autism are finally elucidated and vaccines are definitely exonerated as we have the answers to the etiology of autism, if Dr. Wakefield, AoA and Ms. McCarthy will assume the responsibility and liability for all the morbidity and mortality their actions caused. I am sure they will happy to step up to the plate and offer restitution to the affected families.

There was, of course, another paper out of Poland, “Lack of Association Between Measles-Mumps-Rubella Vaccination and Autism in Children,” this month exonerating the MMR as a cause of autism. Poland has an interesting history with regards the measles vaccine:

“The MMR vaccine was introduced in Poland later than in most other European countries. For the past 10 years, the MMR vaccine has been gradually replacing the single-antigen measles variety. When it was first introduced, MMR was not covered by the national health service of Poland. Parents who wished to vaccinate their children with MMR, as opposed to the single mandatory measles vaccine, had to pay extra. For this reason, few children were immunized with MMR. The Polish mandatory vaccinations schedule did not include MMR for all children until 2004.”

As a result,

“Poland’s heterogeneous population (ie, vaccinated with MMR, vaccinated against measles only, nonvaccinated) serves as a unique sample group for studying the debated association of these vaccines with autism in children.”

In comparing the three groups they found no association between MMR and autism. None. In fact, they found “a lower risk of developing autism for children vaccinated against measles, with the lowest risk being found for children vaccinated with MMR.”

This finding is dismissed by the authors as perhaps

“the decreased risk of autism among vaccinated children may be due to some other confounding factors in their health status. For example, health care workers or parents may have noticed signs of developmental delay or disease before the actual autism diagnosis and for this reason have avoided vaccination.”

Dr. Gorski also thought the finding was a fluke. Part of the argument against MMR being protective being that having one child in the family with autism would make it unlikely for other children in the family to get the vaccine out of fear of the vaccine causing autism when, in fact, it is due to perhaps inherited causes. The lack of vaccination actually being a marker for families with other predispositions to developing autism.

I am not certain that is true. As the authors report:

“This serves as evidence that, despite extensive media coverage of the debated association between MMR and autism, public acceptance of this vaccine remains very high. The situation in Poland is different to that of many European countries, where MMR vaccinations by age 2 years fell more than 10% and were followed by measles outbreaks. In this time, Poland’s already high rate of measles immunization even slightly increased.”

Seems that the Poles were immune to the anti-MMR hysteria, although I cannot say with certainty. If so, then the finding of the protective effect of vaccination, given the study population, may be valid.

Me? I think everything is due to an infectious disease. Infections are the One True Cause of All Disease. While this is the first study to demonstrate the protective effect of the MMR, remember that measles, mumps and rubella are neurotropic viruses with encephalitis a known complication. There has long been a suspicion of viral infections altering the brain to unmask schizophrenia and there is an association between borna virus and OCD. Could a subtle neurologic infection exacerbate a predilection towards autism? I do not think it is out of the question. But that is my delusion.

Vaccination rates have fallen in some segments of the US population as well. In the US, low vaccination rates are found primarily in the children of the well-to-do and often are clustered in alternative schools. There are dozens of schools with vaccination rates under 80%, with some schools having vaccination rates of 5% (reference).

Well, fine, you may say to yourself: they can get the measles or other vaccine preventable diseases. At least it will stay in the those enclaves of unvaccinated children. My kids are vaccinated and in schools where vaccine rates are high. My kids are safe. I would have thought the same thing.

Herd immunity and the models that try and predict what levels of immunity are needed to protect a population are based on the assumption that unimmunized people are randomly distributed in a population, not clustered in alternative schools.

In the Journal of Infectious Diseases this month is a description of a measles outbreak in Canada where clusters of unvaccinated populations helped perpetuate a measles outbreak even though overall community vaccination rates were high (“Long-Lasting Measles Outbreak Affecting Several Unrelated Networks of Unvaccinated Persons”):

“Despite a population immunity level estimated at ∼95%, an outbreak of measles responsible for 94 cases occurred in Quebec, Canada. Unlike previous outbreaks in which most unvaccinated children belonged to a single community, this outbreak had cases coming from several unrelated networks of unvaccinated persons dispersed in the population. No epidemiological link was found for about one-third of laboratory-confirmed cases. This outbreak demonstrated that minimal changes in the level of aggregation of unvaccinated individuals can lead to sustained transmission in highly vaccinated populations. Mathematical work is needed regarding the level of aggregation of unvaccinated individuals that would jeopardize elimination.”

The graphic shows how schools acted to magnify the epidemic:

outbreak

The isolated measles virus was genotyped and almost all isolates were identical, demonstrating how infectious measles can be with what was presumptively minimal contact.

As the discussion said:

“An important assumption of mathematical models predicting elimination, however, is the random distribution of susceptible persons in the population. In reality, unvaccinated individuals are not distributed at random. Religious groups opposed to vaccination are often tightly knit communities. Our outbreak involving 2 unrelated alternative schools attended by children whose parents were resistant to vaccination on philosophical ground demonstrated that these persons also aggregate. The spontaneous interruption of this outbreak, despite the current level of aggregation in unvaccinated children, suggests that endemicity was not likely to be reestablished in this population. The continued propagation throughout many generations of cases, however, raised the possibility that a minimal change in the overall vaccine coverage in the population or in the level of aggregation of unvaccinated individuals can lead to sustained but protracted transmission despite an immunity level near 95%.”

Lest you think this outbreak epidemiology is limited to measles, the US northeast experienced a similar outbreak with mumps, where clusters of unvaccinated populations help magnify the spread of disease.

A child with mumps came to the US from, hey, I’ll be damned, England, thank you Dr. Wakefield, where, thanks to low uptake of the MMR (the second M standing for mumps) there is a mumps epidemic. The index case went to a religious camp and gave it to the other campers, who in turn went to other collections of unvaccinated people to start their own epidemic and so on. In this case there was little spread into the wider community that “might be attributable to generally high vaccination levels and little interaction between members of the affected religious community and persons in surrounding communities.”

It appears that collections of unvaccinated people may serve to magnify the ability of diseases to spread in a community. Those unvaccinated children in the alternative schools may be unlikely to keep their infections to themselves.

My million-dollar prediction? Measles will be imported into the US in a student from Mediocre Britain. That student will visit an alternative school and start an epidemic in the school. Measles will be spread from school to school and into the community and will be difficult to control.

It will occur in 2012. The Mayans, along with the other indigenous peoples in North and South America, were killed by the millions by vaccine preventable illnesses like measles, pertussis, mumps and smallpox. The real reason the Mayan calendar ends in 2012 is the end of the world will be due to the return of vaccine-preventable diseases.

Posted in: Science and Medicine, Vaccines

Leave a Comment (234) ↓

234 thoughts on “Measles

  1. npgite says:

    You may want to make a brief comment on the reasons for the 1-3 year lag between vaccination rates and disease rates even though it should be obvious.

    I can already guess how the anti-science crowd will use these graphs, since I’ve seen it before. They’ll start the graph at 2001 or 2002, and say, the incidence of measles went down as vaccination rates came down and then started to skyrocket just as vaccination rates increased.

  2. windriven says:

    Do antivaccinationists also eschew smallpox and polio vaccines? Or do they oppose only vaccines for diseases they believe to be minor? Just wonderin’.

    And yes, the world does need more Mark Crispin. So how about picking up the frequency of QuackCast now that swine flu has gone back to play with the swine and the birds?

    And finally, your observation about a possible link between viral infections and mental disease is intriguing. Can you suggest a brief reading list?

  3. windriven says:

    Crap. Crislip. Crislip. Crislip. I’m infected with the evil Crispin virus.

  4. provaxmom says:

    <>

    I’ve heard that polio was decreasing anyway…..it’s just coincidental that it happened when we started vaxing, as it would have been eradicated anyway. Ugh, I can’t even type that without throwing up in my mouth a little.

  5. skepticat says:

    Superb article, thank you very much.

  6. shawmutt says:

    @Mark Crislip

    Regarding H1N1, according to Vincent Racanielloover at the TWiV blog/podcast, he is predicting a return of H1N1 based on past pandemic strains:

    http://www.virology.ws/2009/12/01/swine-origin-influenza-h1n1-as-of-now/

    “The wording suggests that the pandemic is over, but I would not agree. Based on the patterns of previous pandemics, it’s likely that a third wave of infections will occur later this winter. ”

    @windriven

    Anti-vaxxers hate all vaccines and keep the bottom of their goalpost well greased for easy movement. The can be compared to creationists, who slip-slide their language and stances to get their foot in the door. Unfortunately, as evidenced by the uptick in measles, whooping cough, and other previously rare diseases, these folks have a tangible effect.

  7. Archangl508 says:

    “English refer to vaccination as ‘the jab’ I am surprised they get anyone to take the vaccine. It’s like referring to colonoscopy as riding the python. Who would want that?”

    I actually laughed out loud sitting here at work reading that. That was too funny!

  8. Jojo says:

    “English refer to vaccination as ‘the jab’ I am surprised they get anyone to take the vaccine.”

    That reminds me of a time when I needed to have blood work done when I was younger. The women in the lab had me waiting while they talked business among themselves. It was the first time I had encountered the use of “stick” for the work they do. They spent a good 10 -15 minutes talking about sticking this and that. Then they got around to doing my stick. After they revived me I suggested that they may want to reconsider their terminology around their patients.

  9. Calli Arcale says:

    Since the English refer to vaccination as ‘the jab’ I am surprised they get anyone to take the vaccine. It’s like referring to colonoscopy as riding the python. Who would want that?

    I dunno — we Americans call them “shots”, and I think I’d much rather be jabbed than shot. :-P (Insert standard Americans-and-their-guns joke here.)

    I wonder, as an aside, about responsibility. One of the refrains of the antivax crowd is that big pharma is protected from any liability from vaccine injury. Big pharma cannot be held responsible.

    I’ve always been baffled at the persistence of this claim. I can understand a newbie falling for it, but it’s fairly easy to debunk. Big Pharma has some protection from liability, but it’s not zero. You’d think the recalls that seem to happen every year or so would be enough evidence to put that claim to bed, but apparently it’s not.

    Note for anyone reading this thread: manufacturers are not free of liability for the vaccines they manufacture. Their financial risk is mitigated by requiring all claimants to go through the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program first (which is funded from a small tax on each vaccine dose), but if you don’t get adequate satisfaction there, you can still sue the manufacturer.

    windriven:

    Do antivaccinationists also eschew smallpox and polio vaccines?

    Smallpox isn’t worth discussing; the only people who will get that vaccine are military personnel, and they really don’t have much say in the matter. (You can decline on medical grounds, but having a personal objection is generally prohibited on principle in the military.) But polio? Some antivaxxers will accept that one, on the basis that it’s “bad enough” to warrant vaccinating. But many won’t. Some feel that it’s too rare to be worth vaccinating against (oblivious to the fact that it’s only mass vaccination that keeps it rare). Others believe it wasn’t that bad a disease in the first place. (Seriously.)

  10. DevoutCatalyst says:

    Yes, people eschew the polio vaccine today. The human rabies vaccine, too. I don’t think there are too many polio or rabies parties, however. But you can Google around to find the lorem ipsum of a doctor of chiropractic advocating vitamin C against polio and rabies — with no vaccine. Not that a chiropractor would recognize a case of rabies if it up and bit him on the hindquarters.

    In the career of an alternative doctor, how many of their patients will come down with rabies or polio? Alternative medicine is nothing if not irresponsible, the relative few people sacrificed in the service of staying true to one’s ideals should provoke nary a shrug. Hey, when you’re infallible, it’s hard to be humble. A preventable outbreak of measles warrants less than a shrug. Woof, woof.

  11. apteryx says:

    A very fine article, Dr. Crislip, except for one little thing: the suggestion that MMR is actually protective against autism. Your talk of “subtle neurologic infections” does not compare well to your prior description of measles as an overt “typical virus” whose sufferers were readily recognized as such during epidemics. Is there any evidence that many of the autistic children in Poland (or anywhere else) had actually been ill with measles, mumps, or rubella, or that any of these diseases can infect (only?) young children and cause brain damage even while they show no typical signs of a viral infection, or that MMR is partly protective against any other mystery viruses? If not, you pulled this idea out of your *ahem* hat, and it’s no more scientific than the countervailing claim that MMR causes autism. If you likewise offer up unproven and unlikely ideas that, if adopted, would happen to support your preferred course of action, it weakens your appearance of greater objectivity.

  12. daedalus2u says:

    One of the most characteristic features of people with autism is a larger brain with more neurons and in particular a larger number of minicolumns (the smallest structures that neurons are aggregated in). The number of minicolumns is fixed at ~8 weeks gestation, around the time that the teratogens that cause autism-like symptoms also have their effects (thalidomide is somewhat earlier).

    Maternal infections do have effects on the in utero environment, and these do have neurodevelopmental effects, in particular there appears to be excess schizophrenia in children exposed to flu in utero (which is why maternal vaccination against flu is so important).

    What Wakefield published was fraud not just a mistake. One of the people working with him had used PCR on each and every sample that Wakefield tested and found only false positives and told Wakefield before the Lancet paper was published. PCR was many orders of magnitude more sensitive and more specific than the immunological tests Wakefield got positive results with. To report positive results using tests that are less sensitive and less specific on samples where more sensitive and more specific tests have found nothing is fraudulent.

    It was fraud, Wakefield lied and people died. Not a close call.

  13. windriven says:

    @ apteryx

    Huh? Crislip was pretty clear that the observation that MMR vaccination appeared to have something of a protective effect vis a vis autism was interesting but speculative.

    “Could a subtle neurologic infection exacerbate a predilection towards autism? I do not think it is out of the question. But that is my delusion.”

    I don’t see how this detracts in any way from his blog. Dr. Crislip did not offer his conjecture as something to “be adopted.” Neither do I believe that his “preferred course of action” is to ramp up MMR vaccination as part of an autism prevention campaign. MMR vaccination stands on its own.

    I share your concern that definitive assertions of fact be backed by clear and compelling data. But I reject the notion that speculation has no place in the discussion.

  14. wales says:

    Dr. Crislip: I am a bit mystified by your comment regarding 1,100 pediatric deaths attributable to H1N1. Is this your extrapolation/estimate? The CDC says 212 pediatric deaths so far for all influenza types combined.

  15. windriven says:

    @wales

    Go here: http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/pdf/december10.pdf

    I have no idea if this is where Dr. Crislip got the information but it is consistent with his numbers.

  16. Harriet Hall says:

    Re the use of the word “jab” in the UK: I found a cartoon where a nurse is standing under a measles vaccination poster and the doctor is asking her what the government is doing about the “jabless.” :-)

  17. curt cameron says:

    Mark, your second paragraph says that H1N1 has killed “maybe 10,000″ nationwide, but the NY Times article from Nov 30 puts the number at around 3,900.

    I was at a party a week ago, where a friend told me he had heard 10,000 in the US, and I told him that I thought that number sounded too high, so I’d want to see it sourced. After seeing your intro here, I was ready to email him that he was right, but then I followed the link from your article to the Virology Blog to the NY Times article, and found the 3,900 number.

    That’s a big difference – which is it?

  18. Sid Offit says:

    The 10,000 number was recently invented by the CDC. 4,000 was their previous estimate. Apparently 4,000 dead were not scary enough to move all the unwanted vaccine off the shelves

  19. Chris says:

    Curt, see the link provided by windriven.

  20. Sid Offit says:

    So with all these infectious diseases having disappeared due to vaccination, shouldn’t autism (always, according to the AAP, present as mental retardation or geekiness) have disappeared as well?

  21. Chris says:

    Sid, did you miss this bit in the comment above:

    Dr. Gorski also thought the finding was a fluke. Part of the argument against MMR being protective being that having one child in the family with autism would make it unlikely for other children in the family to get the vaccine out of fear of the vaccine causing autism when, in fact, it is due to perhaps inherited causes. The lack of vaccination actually being a marker for families with other predispositions to developing autism.

    Vaccination does not prevent genetic conditions (for instance many of the genes associated with autism, Down Syndrome, Rett’s Syndrome, Prater William Syndrome, etc). It does, however help prevent mental retardation due to getting the diseases. See Impact of Specific Medical Interventions on Reducing the Prevalence of Mental Retardation, which says:

    Approximately 1 in 1000 children with clinical measles develops encephalitis.36, 39 Although most children with encephalitis recover without sequelae, approximately 15% die and 25% of survivors develop complications such as MR.39 We assumed that approximately 1 in 5000 cases of measles leads to MR.

  22. Dawn says:

    @Sid Offit: no, Sid, as long as there are those of us who are willing to reproduce with the geeks instead of the trolls, autism will always be around.

  23. Sid Offit says:

    I was responding to this:

    measles, mumps and rubella area neurotropic viruses with encephalitis a known complication. There has long been a suspicion of viral infections altering the brain to unmask schizophrenia and there is an association between borna virus and OCD. Could a subtle neurologic infection exacerbate a predilection towards autism? I do not think it is out of the question

  24. joline says:

    It sure looks like you are making the case that measles is way less worrysome than H1N1.

    “Nationwide H1N1 killed maybe 10,000″

    and

    ““Before measles vaccine, nearly all children got measles by the time they were 15 years of age. Each year in the United States about 450 people died because of measles”

  25. Calli Arcale says:

    Yeah; he was speculating that maybe the mild correlation isn’t purely coincidental (as Orac suggested some time ago) but might actually be causal (if perhaps some people developed autism as a result of having a genetic predisposition and then developing a viral infection at a critical juncture). While the speculation is interesting, I don’t personally think it’s very likely. I think it’s coincidental for the reasons that Orac described. Families with one autistic child are less likely to vaccinate the second, but if autism is genetic, then the second child has an elevated risk of autism to begin with — ergo, we should expect to see slightly more unvaccinated autistic children than we’d expect if anti-vaccinationism were randomly distributed.

    So I personally doubt that Crislip is right about that.

  26. @Sid: You wrote, “So with all these infectious diseases having disappeared due to vaccination, shouldn’t autism … have disappeared as well?”

    Not. Nothing Dr. Crislip wrote suggests that, not even close. I can see a vague relationship between the passage you cited and your question, but the link is tenuous indeed. Dr. Crislip was hypothesizing a “not out of the question” link between autism and an unspecified/unknown viral infection, not a link with a known viral infection that has been eliminated by vaccination.

  27. apteryx says:

    Paul Ingraham – Okay, but he was also hypothesizing that the MMR vaccine could be directly protective against autism. No “unspecified/unknown viral infection” is included in the MMR shot, so how could that vaccine protect babies from it? That’s like saying that the polio vaccine might reduce the risk of deafness because a virus (mumps) may cause deafness. You guys would line up to go bananas if an anti-vaccine activist offered a hypothesis this weak and unlikely as being worthy of anyone’s consideration. Authors here really need to abide by the standards they set for others.

  28. Mark Crislip says:

    I got my death rates from

    http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/estimates_2009_h1n1.htm

    and added a reference in the text.
    In future, instead of numbers for vaccine, since different studies can give different estimates, I am going to use, representing increasing amounts: lots, gobs, buckets, tons and a real shit load. We had buckets of deaths from H1N1 with gobs in children.

    I was speculating re: how the vaccine could be protective. I alluded to the fact it was probably not the case (it is my delusion). I do not practice medicine or give medical advice based on speculation with no biologic plausibility: meridians, water memory, subluxations, etc.

    I speculated that MMR prevents neurotropic infections that ’cause’ autism, not that the vaccine itself prevents autism.

    But it is fun to speculate.

  29. The Blind Watchmaker says:

    Excellent article, Mark.

    Thank you.

  30. backer says:

    i will just have to bite my lip on this one. I see no reason to beat the vaccine horse AGAIN.

    I do however want to start another fire here. I cant wait to see what gets throw at me this time. What do any of you know about Silver Sol?

    I have seen many sites promoting it, it is FDA approved and has a US patent to cure malaria. The CDC also lists it as an agent that will kill the swine flu.

    so go ahead start throwing stuff, i just can’t seem to find much negative info on it, and i am sure if i ask here, someone will act like a bigshot and pretend to know all about its negative effects.

  31. Chris says:

    Hi Ho Silver

    Hi Ho Silver, the audio version

    Because the world needs more Mark Crislip.

  32. Chris says:

    Proof that a sucker is born every minute. A quick search for “silver sol fda” brings up a Warning Letter:

    http://www.guardian-silver-health-supplements.com on May 1, 2009. The FDA has determined that your website offers products for sale that are intended to diagnose, mitigate, prevent, treat or cure the H1N1 Flu Virus in people. This product has not been approved, cleared, or otherwise authorized by FDA for use in the diagnosis, mitigation, prevention, treatment, or cure of the H1N1 Flu Virus. This product is Guardian Silver Sol Supplement. The marketing of this product violates the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDC Act). 21 U.S.C. §§ §§ 331, 351, 352. We request that you immediately cease marketing unapproved, uncleared, or unauthorized products for the diagnosis, mitigation, prevention, treatment, or cure of the H1N1 Flu Virus.

  33. Mark Crislip says:

    Silver Sol is the star in the Deneb system around which the planet Zenn-La is found, home of Norrin Radd.

    Or am I missing something?

  34. backer says:

    chris

    it isnt collidal silver

    here you go FDA approval

    http://www.bioportfolio.com/search/silver_sol_32_ppm_FDA_approved_drug.html

    oh BTW it was the same search you did

    silver sol fda

    i guess you just missed these? it was the first result.

    there is tons of studies on this stuff…

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19945827?dopt=Abstract

  35. Chris says:

    Have you actually read either of those pages. If you have, I really suggest you work on your reading comprehension. Be sure to download and listen to Dr. Crislip’s podcast on colloidal silver.

    The first link is just a web search dump, and none of the pages show that the FDA has approved the Silver Sol product. The FDA has extensive lists of approved drugs that are easily found and read (one is a 136 page pdf file). I checked, there is no Silver Sol listed, the only product with “silver” in its name is silver sulfadiazine (mentioned in Dr. Crislips posting here called “Hi Ho Siler”, it is not taken internally).

    Now you went and posted a study on a film coated with silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) titled Fabrication of porous chitosan films impregnated with silver nanoparticles: A facile approach for superior antibacterial application. Compare that study with what is on the Silver Sol webpage (first link when you search)….

    The study description of the subject: porous chitosan-silver nanocomposite films

    The website description of the subject: Silver Sol, in essence, is simply silver particles dispersed in purified water.

    Now, you do understand that there is a difference between a solution in water and a film? Surely the engineering college you went to made sure you could tell the difference between a solid and a liquid. If you listen to the Hi Ho Silver podcast you will learn that silver is commonly used as a surface antiseptic, but not ingested.

    Now, let us continue comparing the two things:

    The study claim for the silver coated film: the examined antibacterial activity results of these films revealed that porous chitosan-silver nanocomposite films exhibited superior inhibition.

    Now the Silver Sol website: Broad-spectrum antimicrobial (some silvers have been shown in vitro to destroy bacteria, both forms of viruses, fungus and other significant diseases including the following: MRSA, SARS, malaria, anthrax poisoning, gram-negative bacteria, gram-positive bacteria, Hepatitis C, AIDS, and influenza

    Hmmmm, perhaps it is time to write a letter to the FDA informing them of these claims. Especially with claims like these:

    From the page titled “Silver Sol’s Attack Strategy: Chemical Structure”:

    Silver Sol particles are tiny enough to be absorbed into a single red blood cell. Pure silver is supercharged and surrounded by a chemical shell that is missing two electrons (called ionic because it carries a charge.) This means the tiny silver particle wants to attach to the thin cell walls of pathogens and remove one or two electrons. This leaves a hole in the cell membrane and kills the pathogen. Normal cells have thicker, more protective cell membranes that have a balanced charge, resulting in selective protection from the silver’s oxide coating that kills bacteria on contact.

    From the page titled “Silver Sol’s Attack Strategy: Resonance”:

    here are healthy and unhealthy resonances. For example, imagine a vibrating back massager compared to the jolting frequency of a jackhammer. In a similar way, silver resonates at a frequency selectively destructive to pathogens. In fact, it has been measured to resonate at 890 to 910 terahertz. This is the same frequency at which germicidal ultraviolet light resonates. Imagine now tiny silver particles that are small enough to be absorbed into the red blood cells, and resonate at the perfect frequency to destroy bacteria, viruses, and yeast. These tiny “flashlights” circulate throughout every capillary in the body, disinfecting from the inside.

    From the page titled “Silver Sol’s Attack Strategy: Magnetic Disruption of Viral DNA” (you claimed to be an engineer, did you not take freshman physics or chemistry?):

    The new supercharged silver acts like a magnet that attracts the charged DNA particles. The DNA binds so tightly to the silver that it makes a chaotic tangle of incomplete genetic material that can never lengthen out, so it can never go through replication. This inactivates the virus and prevents replication of viral disease. Normal cells have thicker, more protected cell membranes with a balanced charge, which protects them from the silver’s magnetic attraction.

    Oh, and this is a real knee slapper on the page titled “Silver Sol’s Attack Strategy: Cellular Communication”:

    Most cells communicate through a sugary coating. This coating lets the cell know friend from foe. Silver has a “friendly” sugar coating that allows it to positively communicate with cells. This way, silver nano-particles can enter into an abnormal cell and attack pathogens before they have a chance to replicate.

    Sugars are carbohydrates, molecules that consist of carbon, hydrogen and oxygen atoms in specific shapes. The shapes determine what kind of sugar it is, like fructose, lactose, glucose, ribose, and even cellulose (plant fiber). Silver particles do not have a coating of sugar. Now there is such thing as sugar made to look like silver, they are often used to decorate cookies during the holidays.

    Really, backer, take a basic course in biology. Reality is much more interesting than the fairy tales you get from those colloidal silver websites.

  36. backer says:

    ah! found it, the FDA approval is for a topical creme that kills MRSA

  37. Chris says:

    Then post it the link! Also post the FDA website link of its approval.

  38. Chris says:

    Also I bet the stuff is really silver sulfadiazine, which is an effective topical antibacterial. MRSA is a bacteria, it is not a virus.

  39. backer says:

    chris –

    you REALLY need to do more research before you open your mouth. First of all i am not touting this stuff, just trying to get differing opinions on it. Second “silver sol” seems to be a generic term. apparently you think, that i think that silversol.org is the end all on information about the stuff.

    And then there is this….

    A preliminary malaria trial occurred at the Air Force Hospital in Ghana where the Medical Officer in Charge was Dr. Evelyn Kwabiah. The five patients treated by Dr. Kwabiah all had positive outcomes. Dr. Kwabiah reported that patients with malaria who had received the ASAP 10 (silver sol): recovered faster than those re-ceiving conventional treatments; recovered where conventional treatments had failed; or, that the ASAP 10 (silver sol) functioned as a prophylactic preventing the recurrence of malaria.

  40. backer says:

    chris –

    you REALLY need to do more research before you open your mouth. First of all i am not touting this stuff, just trying to get differing opinions on it. Second “silver sol” seems to be a generic term. apparently you think, that i think that silversol.org is the end all on information about this stuff.

    And then there is this….

    A preliminary malaria trial occurred at the Air Force Hospital in Ghana where the Medical Officer in Charge was Dr. Evelyn Kwabiah. The five patients treated by Dr. Kwabiah all had positive outcomes. Dr. Kwabiah reported that patients with malaria who had received the ASAP 10 (silver sol): recovered faster than those re-ceiving conventional treatments; recovered where conventional treatments had failed; or, that the ASAP 10 (silver sol) functioned as a prophylactic preventing the recurrence of malaria.

  41. Chris says:

    Why no linkies?

    Pubmed search on “malaria silver sol” brings up a total of two papers. These are the titles: “Functional and biochemical modifications in skeletal muscles from malarial mice” and “Preconquest Peruvian neurosurgeons: a study of Inca and pre-Columbian trephination and the art of medicine in ancient Peru.”

    No papers on either PubMed or Google Scholar by anyone with the name “Kwabiah” with a first initial “E.” (patent applications are not peer reviewed science)

    Five whole patients is underwhelming. Also, you do know that malaria is also not caused by a virus? Right?

  42. Chris says:

    Got a hit with “silver malaria ghana” on PubMed: Seasonal malaria attack rates in infants and young children in northern Ghana. It is a from the Naval Research Center, and none of the authors are “Kwabiah.”

    This is amusing. You really do not know how to distinguish reality from fantasy.

  43. Chris says:

    Also, looking around for some kind of information on Ghana malaria trial with silver, I saw someone flogging that study in 2005, only it had a different name (Silver BioticsTM). Truly, if there was really anything to it, something in the real medical liturature would have shown up in almost five years.

    Also, you now claim it is a gel that works on MRSA. How is that supposed to work on malaria? Make up your mind on what it really is.

    I am pretty sure I am not the one who needs to learn how to do “research.”

  44. backer says:

    chris

    you never cease to amaze me…didnt i distinctly say i am not touting this stuff?

    trust me i am more skeptical about these products than anyone. that is why i am asking, but obviously you arent qualified to answer these questions

    here is the link to an article about the FDA approval.

    http://news.biocompare.com/News/NewsStory/270294/American-Biotech-Labs-Obtains-FDA-Approval-For-New-Wound-Care-Gel-Product.html

  45. Chris says:

    Reading comprehension fail. I said “Also post the FDA website link of its approval.” That would be a link that includes “fda.gov” in the URL.

    Since that press release is dated April 2009, I went to the list of additions and deletions of FDA approved drugs and looked. Tell me where it is here:
    http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/InformationOnDrugs/UCM163758.pdf

  46. Chris says:

    Since you fail at research, here you go:
    http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf9/K092826.pdf

    It is an antibacterial cream for wound dressings. Which is a known use for silver. Again, not for malaria for viruses. You really should listen to Dr. Crislip’s Quackcast, “Hi Ho Silver.”

  47. Chris says:

    Review: backer you said:

    I have seen many sites promoting it, it is FDA approved and has a US patent to cure malaria. The CDC also lists it as an agent that will kill the swine flu.

    So far we have seen:

    1) That a product is a gel, a coating on a film or even a cream is being discussed. That was not really made clear.

    2) a warning letter from the FDA about Silver Sol claiming to kill H1N1

    3) That the malaria study has been mentioned with same researcher name, same country (though occasionally differnt hospitals), but with different product names in the past five years, and the research has not made it to the standard scientific literature. It looks more like an urban legend, not real scientific evidence.

    4) The FDA approval is for a wound dressing cream, which is a traditional use of silver compounds for the last several decades. That is nothing new, and was discussed by Dr. Crislip on this blog and on his podcast, both with the title “Hi Ho Silver.”

    4) This discussion of silver has nothing to do with measles, which is a virus. There has been absolutely no evidence that any silver compound works “in vivo” on a virus, and definitely not on measles.

  48. backer says:

    chris-

    You obviously cannot read, and for some reason you continue to berate me even though i have made it clear that i am not touting the product. I am simply wanting QUALIFIED people to look at it. like i have said before THIS ISNT YOU. I wouldnt cheat off of you in an elementary school math quiz.

    Really what i want is for people to be open to new ideas, if they don’t hold up fine. But again you wouldnt be in that group since you have no apparently have no discernment skills. I have been told countless times that things were impossible only to figure out how to do them myself and improve upon them.

    But just to let you know i have found (no thanks to you since you apparently just want to work against people) that it was listed by the CDC to kill the flu virus as a disinfectant, NOT in vivo. So those claims made by the makers were initially misleading. i does however have more studies on malaria. Not just the one i mentioned. it seem to have potential for some sort of medical application, but until people swallow their pride and try new thins we simply will never know. THIS is why i do not trust allopathic medicine, because it seems to be more about pride, than progress.

    And BTW i did read the hi ho silver blog, maybe you should berate Dr. Crislip about being a proponent of honey, I am sure you think it is nothing more than snake oil too.

  49. Chris says:

    backer:

    But just to let you know i have found (no thanks to you since you apparently just want to work against people) that it was listed by the CDC to kill the flu virus as a disinfectant, NOT in vivo.

    Why are you reluctant to post links?

    I only found stuff going on the very little information you gave. You said it was FDA approved, so I searched the FDA website, which clearly confirmed Dr. Crislip’s posting “Hi Ho Silver”, that silver has been used as a antiseptic on wounds, but not injested.

    Now I will search the CDC website. Nope, mostly find stuff on a rabies virus transmitted a silver haired animal, or virus research in Silver Springs, MD, something involving a Dr. Silver … nothing much. I did find a disinfection guide, http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/pdf/guidelines/disinfection_nov_2008.pdf … it has this to say about silver:

    Comprehensive reviews of antisepsis 759, disinfection421, and anti-infective chemotherapy 760 barely mention the antimicrobial activity of heavy metals761, 762. Nevertheless, the anti-infective activity of some heavy metals has been known since antiquity. Heavy metals such as silver have been used for prophylaxis of conjunctivitis of the newborn, topical therapy for burn wounds, and bonding to indwelling catheters, and the use of heavy metals as antiseptics or disinfectants is again being explored 763. Inactivation of bacteria on stainless steel surfaces by zeolite ceramic coatings containing silver and zinc ions has also been demonstrated 764, 765.

    Which is only against bacteria, and only on surfaces or skin, exactly echoing the same comments made by Dr. Crislip in his Hi Ho Silver posting made last October.

    I would suggest that any further comments you make on “Silver Sol” and its wonderful uses be done on that page, and you make a real effort to include the links to the wonderful pages that reveal all that wonderful information to you.

    Because there is no way to intelligently discuss this if you leave out critical information.

  50. weing says:

    backer,
    Sounds like it’s a disinfectant or a topical antibacterial compound. I have no idea how it compares to other disinfectants. The burden of proof is on the company producing it to do comparison studies with known disinfectants or topical antibacterials to show non-inferiority or superiority. Until I see such studies, I cannot tell you what I think of it. I wouldn’t use it unless there was nothing else available.

  51. windriven says:

    @ moderator

    backer is apparently delusional. S/he seems to make stuff up and throw it out as coming from CDC or FDA. Might someone explain that CDC and FDA are elements of the United States government and that their documents are not transmitted to people via their dental fillings?

    @ Chris

    a valiant effort but ultimately a waste of time and talent. It astounds me that backer claims to have FDA citations but offers only links to bizarre or tenuously related sites. It is impossible to comprehend his/her object in these posts. Grenade thrower? Dung stirrer? Certainly neither explaining a cogent point of view nor attempting to understand your clearly stated argument is on the menu.

    @ Dr. Crislip

    It is not you who is missing something. Apparently Norrinn Radd is not the only inhabitant of Zenn-La.

  52. Chris says:

    Thank you, windriven. Though last evening I was biding my time while waiting for teenage daughter to let me shovel out her room. Dealing with backer was the lesser of two evils.

    We still need to deal with daughter room (we are attempting to move her into bigger room being vacated by brother who now lives at college).

  53. AllTheKingsHorses says:

    @ backer

    The silver issue seems to be pretty well put to rest but I wanted to put in my 0.2 on honey.

    If you think this is some kind of magical cure for a dirty wound you need only take a basic course that involves concepts such as tonicity and osmosis and you will find that its based on a well understood biological phenomena. Just because it “comes from nature” doesn’t make mystical. You can do the same thing with sugar, or just about any other benign water soluble molecule.

    On another note, first time reader and poster. Pretty excited to have found a site like this.

    Cheers!

  54. backer says:

    windriven, chris

    how many times do i have to mention that i am not touting this stuff? you both seem to think i believe it works without question.

    i am EXTREMELY skeptical about things like silver sol. however when i present it as a new possibility i am faced with animosity. I cannot figure out why? oh wait, i know it is because you are all followers, and you have no creative initiative, you have no vision, and you will never be a leader. It is helpful to have dissenters though since it is a motivating factor. Sadly, however dissenters are the ones that get stepped on while leaders are heading to the top, then they bitch that they got passed over.

    these links are the reason i posted the subject in the first place, i am trying to push you lemmings into getting out of line and do something useful, like these people are.

    http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008NRL…..3..129R
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18505176
    http://www.physorg.com/news124376552.html
    http://www.physorg.com/news7264.html
    http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/151947.php

  55. backer says:

    All the kings horses-

    If you think this is some kind of magical cure for a dirty wound you need only take a basic course that involves concepts such as tonicity and osmosis and you will find that its based on a well understood biological phenomena. Just because it “comes from nature” doesn’t make mystical. You can do the same thing with sugar, or just about any other benign water soluble molecule.

    it is funny that you say this because i have a friend who is an orthopedic surgeon. I asked him once if they ever used honey in wound dressing. I have been using it for years on cuts and scraps, and thought he would know about it as well. Instead he laughed at me, and actually thought i was joking, after assuring him i was quite serious, he just thought i was crazy. He would poke fun at me almost every time he saw me about the honey, that is until his hospital ordered honey impregnated bandages. So apparently they don’t teach the…”basic course that involves concepts such as tonicity and osmosis” in medical school or in residency.

  56. weing says:

    “So apparently they don’t teach the…”basic course that involves concepts such as tonicity and osmosis” in medical school or in residency.”

    Maybe he slept through or skipped that class?

  57. backer says:

    weing-

    It does seem like a disinfectant and from what i have been able to dig up it seems middle of the pack. i saw on chart comparing it to alcohol, bleach, etc. (i just can’t seem to find it again) and it was middle of the pack behind the usual suspects. I however am more interested in things like these…

    http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008NRL…..3..129R
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18505176
    http://www.physorg.com/news124376552.html
    http://www.physorg.com/news7264.html
    http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/151947.php

    it seems as though it might hold promise for something more

  58. Chris says:

    More appropriate discussion at Hi Ho Silver.

  59. windriven says:

    @ backer et al

    Give me a frigging break. Do you ever do honest research or do you just regurgitate stuff that you pick up on wacko-loon sites? Or do you just make this stuff up?

    Serious researchers have investigated the use of honey as a wound dressing – an age old remedy. In one recent blinded RCT studying honey in wound care, no advantages were found and: “More patients in the honey-treated group reported ≥1 adverse event and ulcer pain than in the usual care group (table).”

    Evid Based Nurs 2008;11:87 doi:10.1136/ebn.11.3.87

    As even Yogi Berra reputedly noted, “you could look it up.”

    Now isn’t it time for your thorazine?

  60. backer says:

    chris-

    I have a post “awaiting moderation” i guess if you provide links it goes into moderation? But while we are waiting i would like to ask you this. If you or one of you family members were to catch the flu would you take tamiflu or would you consider an “alternative medicine” like sambucol?

    sambucol- no known side effects

    Tamiflu-(listed below)

    I have first hand experience with this one…

    Torsade de pointes (a serious rapid heart rhythm/”ventricular tachycardia” accompanied by an EKG abnormality)

    After taking tamiflu as a prophylaxis last year when my wife and child had the flu, I experienced this. This is what lead me to distrust allopathic medicine. I do still think doctors, for the most part, do a great job and are a good sources of knowledge. However they are simply too busy to research all of the “remedies” out there so most often you get prescribed the en vouge prescription.

    Tamiflu-
    Dry mouth occurs from 4% to 36% of cases
    Nausea occurs from 15% to 36% of cases
    Increased sweating occurs from 5% to 34% of cases
    Ejaculation problems occurs from 13% to 28% of cases
    - in males
    Urogenital malformations (birth defects involving the reproductive organs and urinary tract) occurs from 13% to 28% of cases
    Headache occurs from 15% to 27% of cases
    Drowsiness occurs from 9% to 24% of cases
    - in men and women
    Insomnia and other sleep problems occurs from 8% to 24% of cases
    - in men and women
    Muscle weakness occurs from 14% to 22% of cases
    Diarrhea occurs from 6% to 19% of cases
    Constipation occurs from 5% to 16% of cases
    Decreased sex drive occurs from 3% to 15% of cases
    - in men and women
    Dizziness occurs from 7% to 14% of cases
    - in men and women
    Stomach/upper abdominal discomfort occurs from 2% to 13% of cases
    Loss of appetite occurs from 2% to 12% of cases
    Mania (an emotional disorder with an exagerated feeling of well-being and hyperactivity – can cause racing thoughts; distraction; increased sexual urges; sleeplessness; irritability; anger; delusions; hyper-religiosity; talkativeness; rapid speech; buying sprees; grandiose plans; abnormally elevated mood) occurs in 11% of cases
    Tremor (shakiness that has a regular “back-and-forth” rhythm) occurs from 4% to 11% of cases
    - in men and women
    Impotence (inability to achieve an erection or to ejaculate) occurs from 2% to 9% of cases
    - in males
    Nervousness (easily excited or agitated) occurs from 2% to 9% of cases
    - in men and women
    Accidental injury occurs from 3% to 8% of cases
    Gas/gassiness occurs from 4% to 8% of cases
    Infection occurs from 6% to 8% of cases
    Sinusitis (infection/inflammation of the sinuses) occurs from 4% to 8% of cases
    Abdominal pain occurs from 4% to 7% of cases
    Breathing problems occurs in 7% of cases
    Lung damage/destruction occurs in 7% of cases
    Lung diseases occurs in 7% of cases
    Agitation/excitation occurs from 2% to 5% of cases
    Anxiety (fear or dread out of proportion to situation – often with restlessness, tension, pounding/rapid heartbeats, or rapid breathing) occurs from 2% to 5% of cases
    Back pain occurs from 3% to 5% of cases
    Distortion of vision occurs from 2% to 5% of cases
    Muscle pain/soreness occurs from 2% to 5% of cases
    Yawning occurs from 2% to 5% of cases
    Abnormal dreams occurs from 1% to 4% of cases
    - in men and women
    Blurred vision occurs in 4% of cases
    Burning, prickling, tickling or tingling occurs from 1% to 4% of cases
    - in men and women
    Inability to concentrate occurs from 2% to 4% of cases
    - in men and women
    Inflammation of the nasal passages (rhinitis) occurs from 3% to 4% of cases
    Numbness or tingling (“pins and needles”) occurs from 1% to 4% of cases
    - in men and women
    Sore throat/throat irritation occurs in 4% of cases
    Vasodilation/widening of the blood vessels (may cause a drop in blood pressure) occurs from 2% to 4% of cases
    Chest pain or tightness occurs in 3% of cases
    Depersonalization (“unreal” feeling, or loss of sense of identity) occurs in 3% of cases
    Extreme muscle tension occurs from 2% to 3% of cases
    - in men and women
    Heart palpitations (irregular rapid beating or pulsations of the heart) occurs from 2% to 3% of cases
    Increased appetite occurs in 3% of cases
    Muscle spasms occurs from 1% to 3% of cases
    - in men and women
    Skin rash occurs from 2% to 3% of cases
    Urinary tract infection occurs in 3% of cases
    Vomiting occurs from 2% to 3% of cases
    Weight gain occurs in 3% of cases
    Abnormal accommodation (adjustment of lens shape to achieve proper focus) occurs in 2% of cases
    Abnormal menstrual bleeding (in females) occurs in 2% of cases
    Allergic reaction to drugs occurs in less than 2% of cases
    Bronchitis (inflammation/infection of the upper airways – may cause cough; sputum) occurs from 1% to 2% of cases
    Change in taste sensation occurs in 2% of cases
    Cough occurs from 1% to 2% of cases
    Depression occurs in 2% of cases
    Distortion of taste/abnormal taste occurs in 2% of cases
    High blood pressure occurs in 2% of cases
    Joint pain occurs in 2% of cases
    Lack of emotion occurs in 2% of cases
    Mania (an emotional disorder with an exagerated feeling of well-being and hyperactivity – can cause racing thoughts; distraction; increased sexual urges; sleeplessness; irritability; anger; delusions; hyper-religiosity; talkativeness; rapid speech; buying sprees; grandiose plans; abnormally elevated mood) occurs in less than 2% of cases
    - especially in people with bipolar disorder (psychiatry diagnosis with rapidly changing moods – from depression to abnormal mood elevations)
    Memory loss occurs from 1% to 2% of cases
    - in men and women
    Muscle destruction/damage (“myopathy” – can cause muscle pain/achiness, weakness or tenderness; and abnormal blood test for creatine kinase) occurs in 2% of cases
    Shaking chills occurs in 2% of cases
    Skin sensitivity to sunlight (photosensitivity) occurs in 2% of cases
    Vaginitis (inflammation of the vagina) occurs in 2% of cases
    Vertigo (dizziness, loss of balance, feeling that the room is spinning) occurs in 2% of cases
    - in men and women
    Fast pulse/rapid heart rate (frequent)
    Itching (common)
    Sleep disturbances (frequent)
    - in men and women
    Torsade de pointes (a serious rapid heart rhythm/”ventricular tachycardia” accompanied by an EKG abnormality called “QT prolongation” – almost always caused by a medication) (common)
    Paxil CR has sometimes caused these symptoms, but the percentage of occurrences is unknown. Please note: no drug should be ruled out as causing symptoms, even if the symptom is not listed.
    Abdominal bleeding
    Abnormal blood tests – hypophosphatemia (a decrease in phosphorus levels – when severely low may cause muscle weakness, tingling sensations, tremors, and bone weakness, confusion, memory loss, seizures, and coma)
    Abnormal blood test – high “alkaline phosphatase” levels (usually due to liver, bone or kidney condition)
    Abnormal blood test – high CPK (creatine phosphokinase) levels
    Abnormal blood tests – increased number of gamma globulins (proteins in the blood involved in the immune response)
    Abnormal breaths sounds – stridor (high-pitched, noisy breathing sound heard with a stethoscope when airways are narrowed or blocked)
    Abnormal increase in blood levels of ketones (usually occurs in people with diabetes when blood sugar is very high)
    Abnormal kidney blood test – elevated “BUN”
    Abnormal lymphocytes (type of infection-fighting white blood cell – may predispose to infections)
    Abnormal production of breast milk (without nursing or having given birth)
    Abnormal thinking
    Abnormal walk
    Abnormally low blood sugar
    Abnormally sensitive/increased hearing due to nerve irritation
    Abscess (collection of pus) that starts in a hair follicle
    Acne
    Acute kidney failure
    Aggressive/violent behavior
    - when the drug is stopped or dose is decreased
    Agranulocytosis (a severe sudden deficiency of white blood cells – may cause serious infections, sudden fever, chills)
    Alcohol/drug-related problems
    Alcoholism
    Allergic reactions (may include a sudden severe drop in blood pressure; rapid heart rate; skin rash, itching, hives; itchy, runny, congested nose; red itchy, watery eyes; shortness of breath, wheezing, cough, hoarseness, chest tightness; nausea, vomiting, abdominal cramps, diarrhea; irritation of the stomach and esophagus)
    Amblyopia – decreased vision in one eye (due to such large differences in the two eyes that the brain cannot process images coming from both) – may occur due to drugs or when eyes point in diferent directions
    Anaphylaxis (a severe allergic reaction – that usually occurs quickly and includes flushing or reddening, rapid heart rate, chest tightness, difficulty breathing, or faintness)
    Anemia (low levels of “hemoglobin” – a substance in red blood cells which carries oxygen)
    Anemia (low red blood cell count)
    Anemia due to iron deficiency
    Angioedema (an allergic reaction that can involve sudden hive-like swelling of the skin, face, lips, tongue, throat; swollen arms and legs; difficulty breathing)
    Antisocial behavior
    Aphasia (inability to speak or to understand speech – usually due to a stroke or other brain condition)
    Aplastic anemia (anemia due to decreased bone marrow function)
    Arthritis (joint inflammation)
    Asthma
    Behavior changes (2 case(s))
    - when the drug is stopped or dose is decreased
    Bipolar disorder (psychiatry diagnosis with rapidly changing moods – from depression to abnormal mood elevations)
    Bladder infection
    Bleeding between menstrual periods/spotting (in females)
    Bleeding from stomach ulcer
    Bleeding gums
    Bleeding into the retina (light-sensitive lining at the back of the eyeball)
    Bleeding problems
    Blistering rash
    Blockage of the intestines (may cause severe spasms of pain, abdominal distention, vomiting, absence of bowel movement, fever and dehydration)
    Blood abnormality – high eosinophil count
    Blood clot in lung
    Blood clots
    Blood clots in the lungs
    Blood in stools
    Blood test abnormalities – Increased bleeding time
    Bloody diarrhea
    Bloody or black stools
    Bloody urine
    Body spasm
    Bone marrow problems (with abnormal white or red blood cell counts)
    Breast atrophy/wasting away or decrease in size
    Breast enlargement
    Breast inflammation
    Breast pain/tenderness
    Bruising
    Bruxism (clenching or grinding of teeth)
    Bulimia (eating disorder with binge eating, often followed by self-induced vomiting)
    Bundle branch block (condition in which the electrical impulses in the heart are blocked to delayed – may cause fainting, near-fainting, or slowed heart rate)
    Burning, or tingling sensation around the mouth (perioral paresthesias)
    Burning, prickling, tickling or tingling (single study)
    - when the drug is stopped or dose is decreased
    Burping/belching/gassiness
    Bursitis (inflammation of the joint lining)
    Canker sores
    Cataracts
    Changes in electrical activity in the heart – “heart block” (may cause slow heart beat; dizziness; faintness/fainting; light-headedness; weakness; shortness of breath; chest pain)
    Changes/problems with sexual performance
    Chest discomfort/angina
    Cholinergic side effects (caused by drugs that stimulate the part of the nervous system – “autonomic nervous system” – that controls muscles of the internal organs such as the heart, stomach, glands, and blood vessels – can cause a drop in blood pressure, abdominal cramps, bloody diarrhea, and shock/stoppage of the heart)
    Chorea (irregular rapid jerky movements usually affecting the face and limbs) (13 case(s))
    - even with a single dose
    Choreoathetosis (irregular rapid jerking movements of the face and limbs accompanied by slow, constant writhing movements)
    Cogwheel rigidity (muscle stiffness in which attempt to force a limb to bend results in a jerking motion – occurs in people with Parkinson’s disease)
    Colitis (inflammation of the large intestines)
    Confusion/disorientation occurs in 1% of cases
    - in men and women
    Congestive heart failure (symptoms may include shortness of breath, swelling of the legs, weight gain, shortness of breath worsened by lying down, awakening from sleep short of breath, dizziness, consusion, sweating)
    Contact dermatitis – an allergic reaction caused by contact
    Coordination problems (“ataxia”)
    Coronary artery disease (heart disease that involve the blood supply to the heart)
    Coughing up blood
    Cutaneous vasculitis (inflammation of small blood vessels that affect the skin and cause rash, but may involve other organs of the body as well) (2 case(s))
    Deafness
    Decrease in REM sleep (the sleep time during which dreaming occurs) (single study)
    Decreased ability to initiate (start) movement (such as with Parkinson’s disease)
    Decreased blood flow to the brain
    Decreased bone density (thinning of bones or “osteoporosis”)
    Decreased movement or activity
    Decreased night vision
    Decreased or slowed movement
    Decreased oxygen to the heart due to blockage of the coronary arteries (blood vessels that supply the heart)
    Decreased reflexes
    Decreased sensitivity to touch
    Decreased sweating
    Dehydration
    Delirium (abnormal mental function – such as confusion; disorientation; hallucinations; agitation; or extreme excitement – usually caused by a disease or drug intoxication)
    Delusions (strongly held thoughts/ideas that are not consistent with reality)
    Dental cavities
    Destruction/death of liver tissue (a few cases reported)
    Diabetes
    Diarrhea
    - when the drug is stopped or dose is decreased
    Difficulty reaching orgasm
    Difficulty starting urination/delay in urination
    Difficulty walking
    - when the drug is stopped or dose is decreased
    Digestive tract inflammation
    Digestive tract problems
    Digestive tract ulcers
    Discomfort (pain, burning, etc.) with urination
    Disruption in sleep cycle – reduced sleep time (single study)
    Disruption of sleep cycle – changes in rapid eye movement (REM) sleep (single study)
    Disruption of sleep cycle – increased awakenings (single study)
    Dizziness (single study)
    - when the drug is stopped or dose is decreased
    Double vision
    Drooping eyelid(s)
    Drug dependence (potential for drug abuse)
    Drug withdrawal symptoms (develop when drug is stopped – may include agitation, restlessness, anxiety, depression, insomnia, tremor, increased blood pressure, nausea, abdominal cramps, blurred vision, seizures, sweating)
    Dry skin
    Dysarthria (difficulty articulating words due to impairment in the muscles used in s

  61. windriven says:

    @ Chris

    In my experience it is often cost effective to rent a backhoe when emptying out a teen’s room. It saves time and in cases where teenage boys are involved, it keeps you at a reasonable distance from noxious odors.

  62. windriven says:

    Ah poor pathetic slacker, including links does not flag moderation. We post links all the time to journal articles and related sites.

    While I do not speak for Chris, I would not routinely think of Tamiflu in the event of influenza. Most cases are managed with proper hydration, fever management, and OTC meds for symptomatic relief. In the unfortunate circumstance of life threatening course I would seek treatment by a pus whisperer with an MD and careful adherence to science based medicine principles. I am confident that sambucol (an extract of elderberries) would not be part of the therapy.

    On the other hand I highly recommend elderberries for jam or in pies. They’re tiny berries that grow in clusters somewhat reminiscent of Queen Anne’s Lace. They’re a pain to remove from the stems. And I recommend latex or nitrile gloves and an apron because the deep purple juice stains hands and clothing alike. But the resulting confections are worth every bit of the time and trouble.

  63. windriven says:

    @ slacker

    “then explain away these…”

    Happily.

    1. The site that you linked to is a manufacturer of honey dressings and all of the posters are presented in exactly the same style suggesting that they are recreations of the original posters and may or may not reflect the original poster accurately;
    2. The site claims the PDFs as “Peer-reviewed clinical posters.” But posters are not peer-reviewed; they are used to present research – often early and incomplete – that has not been published in peer-reviewed journals. I did not read each of the posters on the site but I read the first three. Did you? They don’t suggest that honey is superior to other treatments. They are not the results or large or blinded studies. They are interesting clinical observations;
    3. No one on this site to the best of my knowledge has suggested that honey is terrible – only that honey has not been demonstrated to offer better results than therapies currently in use.

    Now how about telling us what exactly your point is? Answering your poorly framed and barely-documented ‘challenges’ is tiresome and increasingly pointless. If you are trying to have one of these alternate therapies seriously discussed on these pages, frame your challenge meaningfully.

    I am coming to believe that you actually do not understand the scientific method and that we therefore do not share a common language in which to debate.

    Can you understand that if, for instance, I eat a salad for lunch on Tuesday and find a one dollar bill on the sidewalk when I leave the restaurant and then have salad again on Friday and, mirable dictu!, find another dollar bill on the sidewalk when I leave, that in scientific terms that does not constitute proof that eating salad is the true path to wealth?

  64. weing says:

    backer,

    All that means is that sambucol has not been tested to the degree that tamiflu has. Do you know what percentage of people taking sambucol have accidents or experience flatulence? I don’t. There is no data. You cannot make the claim that there are no side effects from it unless you do the studies.

  65. weing says:

    backer,

    Are you asking practicing physicians to use untested and unproven treatments on their patients? Forget about it. I am not conducting research on my patients. I am not set up for that. Too much red tape to make it practical for me. I leave that to academic centers.

  66. Chris says:

    Tamiflu mentioned here in a link so that slacker can just click on it

    Thanks windriven. There will be a backhoe to dig out the driveway of the house being built next door, perhaps I should borrow it.

  67. backer says:

    weing-

    All that means is that sambucol has not been tested to the degree that tamiflu has. Do you know what percentage of people taking sambucol have accidents or experience flatulence? I don’t. There is no data. You cannot make the claim that there are no side effects from it unless you do the studies

    that is why i said no KNOWN side effects

    Are you asking practicing physicians to use untested and unproven treatments on their patients?

    there are tests to the efficacy of sambucol, on pubmed…small test but none the less it shows to be promising, they are also currently undergoing a much larger test with the product. Also i am sure that if the side effects where as severe as the ones listed with tamiflu we we DEFINITELY know about them, as hundreds of millions of bottles have been sold. what i am saying. i personally have used it in my family with TREMENDOUS results.

  68. backer says:

    windriven-

    here i will post it again, scroll a little farther until you get the the “Peer-reviewed journal articles” section

    http://www.dermasciences.com/showpage.php?sid=48&id=1&pid=37&show=p

  69. backer says:

    windriven-

    They don’t suggest that honey is superior to other treatments.

    oh and in case you miss this one…

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17927079?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

  70. weing says:

    No known side effects means that we don’t know what they are.
    I do not practice anecdote based medicine. That is dangerous. There is such a thing as standard of care. Should something go wrong, I’d be legally screwed. I’ll wait for the study results. BTW, how do you know your results were tremendous. I’ve had the flu, taken nothing but symptomatic treatment and rest. Should I call the result tremendous?

  71. windriven says:

    What exactly do you believe the Blaser paper to mean? To quote the abstract:

    Full healing was achieved in seven consecutive patients whose wounds were either infected or colonised with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Antiseptics and antibiotics had previously failed to irradicate the clinical signs of infection

    Did you read my earlier post about finding a dollar bill? I am unwilling to spend 10 pounds sterling to read the entire article but it is clear from the abstract that this is an interesting clinical observation, not a randomized controlled study.

    I will say again, no one here is arguing that honey is evil, only that it is not a proven clinical treatment. The study of honey in wound treatment may well be a profitable inquiry. That does not mean that it should be a first line of therapy today.

    You may recall that there was a time that an extract of peach or apricot pits was touted as a cure for some cancers. There are proponents of all sorts of treatments and therapies AND VERY OFTEN ONE CAN FIND ANECDOTAL STUDIES to support their use. But generally these, upon rigorous investigation, are found to be worthless. Do you seriously suggest that those entrusted with our health care should jump on every half-witted miracle berry extract or folk remedy eschew scientifically vetted therapies in their favor? If, for instance, your child were thus treated and promptly succumbed, would you tell your physician, ce’est la vie, I guess honey only works in cases of …

  72. backer says:

    windriven-

    ok here you go…

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18666717?itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum&ordinalpos=5

    Do you seriously suggest that those entrusted with our health care should jump on every half-witted miracle berry extract or folk remedy eschew scientifically vetted therapies in their favor?

    No i suggest using discernment to determine if there might be a better alternative to big pharma. If there is…then use it, thats all. It seems in the case of honey as wound care that it might be merited for an MD to try it as a remedy.

  73. windriven says:

    Tabby on a crutch! Did you read the abstracts of any of these?

    “here i will post it again, scroll a little farther until you get the the “Peer-reviewed journal articles” section

    http://www.dermasciences.com/showpage.php?sid=48&id=1&pid=37&show=p

    They relate interesting clinical observations about wound care and honey. That, dear reader, is the BEGINNING of the process, not the end.

    The most compelling of the publications you offered, J Clin Nurs. 2009 Feb;18(3):466-74. Epub 2008 Aug 23., concluded thusly: “RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: This study confirms that Manuka honey may be considered by clinicians for use in sloughy venous ulcers.” And even this is based on an unblinded study.

    The other interesting study that included a reasonably large test population (still only 100 patients) J Am Soc Nephrol. 2005 May;16(5):1456-62, demonstrated only that honey was no better than standard chemoprophylaxis in patients with central venous catheters.

    So again, read this stuff before you post it as proof that honey is some sort of miracle preparation.

    What many of these papers demonstrate is that science based medicine is open to the potential of treatments like honey, that the potential mechanisms of action are being investigated and that science is doing exactly what it is supposed to do.

    What exactly are you proposing?

  74. windriven says:

    This will be my last post on this thread. I’m growing weary.

    “No i suggest using discernment to determine if there might be a better alternative to big pharma. If there is…then use it, thats all. It seems in the case of honey as wound care that it might be merited for an MD to try it as a remedy.”

    The study you cite, J Wound Care. 2008 Jun;17(6):241-4, 246-7, is an RCT but not apparently blinded. If you read the abstract you will find that the study suggested that honey was more effective than hydrogel in treating MRSA but less effective in treating pseudomonas aeruginosa.

    Is it your position that AquaMed is BIG PHARMA and Derma Sciences is small pharma? Is there some importance to chosing small pharma over big pharma? Should an MD try honey in cases of venous leg ulcers or in wound treatment in general? And when should the MD have included honey in his/her armamentarium? Based on what?

    Honey advocates have made some interesting observations and conducted some preliminary studies. This is a wonderful thing and may lead to important clinical advances. But the finish line is still a long way off.

  75. backer says:

    weing-

    No known side effects means that we don’t know what they are.

    point taken…maybe i should say no side effect observed to date.

    I do not practice anecdote based medicine. That is dangerous. There is such a thing as standard of care. Should something go wrong, I’d be legally screwed.

    I appreciate your position here, but let me ask you. Lets say your arent fully comfortable with something like tamiflu because of the side effects. Would you be willing to “suggest” something like sambucol? after all there are studies to verify that your suggestions

    I’ll wait for the study results. BTW, how do you know your results were tremendous.

    my 3 yr daughter had a confirmed case of the flu (along with my wife, who gave it to my daughter). I gave her sambucol because i wasnt comfortable with the side effects of tamiflu in children. she had a fever for exactly 1.5 days, and no symptoms on day 3. I consider that tremendous. Oh, and my wife who got nothing was sick for 8 days. my daughter, who caught the flu from my wife, was actually well before my wife.

    here is one of the studies…there was another done in norway but i don’t have time to find it right now.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11399518

  76. pmoran says:

    “here is one of the studies…there was another done in norway but i don’t have time to find it right now.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11399518

    The most striking increase was noted in TNF-alpha production (44.9 fold). We conclude from this study that, in addition to its antiviral properties, Sambucol Elderberry Extract and its formulations activate the healthy immune system by increasing inflammatory cytokine production.”

    Backer The anecdote and the in vitro studies mean little. This outcome in healthy people should arouse concern. How do you know thaT

  77. backer says:

    windriven-

    So again, read this stuff before you post it as proof that honey is some sort of miracle preparation.

    please show me where i proposed this.

    Honey advocates have made some interesting observations and conducted some preliminary studies. This is a wonderful thing and may lead to important clinical advances. But the finish line is still a long way off.

    agree 100%

    so what do we do in the mean time? throw a potentially promising treatment out the window because it doesnt have enough proof? where the hell does that get us…nowhere. Your position is self defeating, you propose that this is promising but we shouldnt use it until it has more proof, so if we shouldnt use it how can we get more proof?

    I am almost positive i am taking you out of context…how does it feel?

  78. pmoran says:

    this does not represent a sterotyped response of the body to a noxious influence of this drug?

  79. pmoran says:

    Sorry about the split post. Here it is joined up–

    “here is one of the studies…there was another done in norway but i don’t have time to find it right now.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11399518”

    The most striking increase was noted in TNF-alpha production (44.9 fold). We conclude from this study that, in addition to its antiviral properties, Sambucol Elderberry Extract and its formulations activate the healthy immune system by increasing inflammatory cytokine production.”

    Backer The anecdote and the in vitro studies mean little. This outcome in healthy people should arouse concern. How do you know that this does not represent a sterotyped response of the body to a noxious influence of this drug?

  80. windriven says:

    It has been quite difficult to ascertain your point in this thread. If I have mischaracterized your position about honey I apologize. But I reiterate that I have no idea what your actual point is. I will take this to be the thrust, at least at this moment:

    “so what do we do in the mean time? throw a potentially promising treatment out the window because it doesnt have enough proof? where the hell does that get us…nowhere. Your position is self defeating, you propose that this is promising but we shouldnt use it until it has more proof, so if we shouldnt use it how can we get more proof?”

    And here you are 100% wrong. As weing has noted routine clinical practice is different from practice in a research setting. Until both the potentially beneficial and the potentially harmful ‘side effects’ of this or any other therapy are clearly elucidated, they have no place in routine clinical practice.

    A few generations ago a promising therapy for ‘morning sickness’ was widely prescribed in Europe. The result was a plague of devastating birth defects. The therapeutic agent was called thalidomide. This from Wikipedia: “The impact in the United States was minimized when pharmacologist and M.D. Frances Oldham Kelsey refused Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for an application from Richardson Merrell to market thalidomide, saying more study was needed.”

    In the US a relatively small number of children were born thus handicapped – only because of the insistence on following proper scientific protocols before wide adoption.

    And I don’t want to hear that honey or elderberry juice or acai or anything else is ‘natural’ and therefore gets to play by different rules. BS of the vilest form. Foxglove is a natural and beautiful flower. It contains digitalis, a powerful cardiac glycoside that can kill as easily as it can benefit. It became an immensely useful drug only because of careful scientific study and the isolation, purification, and controlled dosage of the compound.

  81. woofighter says:

    Does anyone else want a discussion of measles, vaccines, infectious disease, etc.

    Maybe Backer’s point was to change the subject.

  82. weing says:

    “so what do we do in the mean time? throw a potentially promising treatment out the window because it doesnt have enough proof? where the hell does that get us…nowhere.”

    No, we wait for the studies. It takes 10 years and close to a $1 billion to get a new drug on the market. That’s the way it is. Lots of promising drugs and treatments but you gotta do the studies.

    “maybe i should say no side effect observed to date.”
    No. It means no studies have been done to look for side effects. Not the same thing at all.

  83. Chris says:

    backer is now just another off-topic troll who wanders from subject to subject. What is really weird is he posts links that are essentially nothing (one was a “file not found”), so he is just copying and pasting from some sales site without even reading them himself.

    Time to ignore the troll.

    Though right now a common jokey comment from a college friend is going through my mind: “Your mother wears army boots and your breath smells of elderberries!”

  84. pmoran says:

    But why should we expect a five minute Internet interchange to overturn deeply ingrained attitudes/beliefs – especially when the subject is as complex as medicine and simmering under the surface there are always little germs of dimly understood truth?

    Certainly some (like Tim Bolen, and some others I could mention) are patently insincere. They just want to stir the pot, jerk chains, and create a faint but false climate of doubt within which ridiculous notions and knowing fraud can seem worthy of consideration. They are very few, I think. Others are simply testing their beliefs, or perhaps half-held tentative beliefs against what they perceive to be the opposition.

    So we need patience, politeness, and especially not going beyond what the science actually permits us to say with confidence. Not easy, I know. But there is less frustration when short-term expectations are low.

  85. backer says:

    weing-

    “No, we wait for the studies. It takes 10 years and close to a $1 billion to get a new drug on the market. That’s the way it is. Lots of promising drugs and treatments but you gotta do the studies.”

    Medihoney it is already FDA approved so now what are we waiting for?

  86. backer says:

    chris-

    i dont know if it will work this time but here is the 404 link.

    http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008NRL…..3..129R

  87. Chris says:

    So what, it is still off topic. Sorry, Dr. Moran, but believe no one should respond to him except at the appropriate place.

  88. weing says:

    Now you sound like a big-pharma shill for Medihoney.
    I would want comparison studies. If they are available and look good, I would have no problem with it. Most of the time I refer tough to treat wounds to the wound clinic around the corner.

  89. Th1Th2 says:

    Mark Crislip,

    “My kids are vaccinated and in schools where vaccine rates are high. My kids are safe. I would have thought the same thing.”

    Not so fast.

    Measles outbreak in a fully immunized secondary-school population

    We conclude that outbreaks of measles can occur in secondary schools, even when more than 99 percent of the students have been vaccinated and more than 95 percent are immune.

    http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/316/13/771

  90. backer says:

    windriven-

    It has been quite difficult to ascertain your point in this thread. If I have mischaracterized your position about honey I apologize. But I reiterate that I have no idea what your actual point is.

    I have a tendency to skip the point and just dive into the details. My wife hates this. I also do it sometimes just to see the response to the idea. Sorry if i caused confusion. So now to my point. It seems to me that almost every other article on this site is about vaccines. I don’t really want to get into the whole vaccine debate since it has been beaten to death. that is why i made the disclaimer in the beginning.

    what i can’t understand is why so much attention is given to vaccines instead of treatment options. Who cares about vaccines there are people in the developing world dying of measles right now, they need treatments, not vaccines. Tell me how many treatment options are there for measles? Exactly zero. So it seems to me that ANYTHING that shows promise should be tried, especially in developing countries. If there are no other options what do we lose? That is why i mentioned silver sol. I have no idea if it works or if it is even a viable option, it does however seem to show promise, even if it is just anecdotal. So why doesnt someone grow a pair and start giving it to sick people?

    Often time people want too much evidence, at some point you just have to try a bunch of new things and see what works.

  91. backer says:

    weing-

    Now you sound like a big-pharma shill for Medihoney.

    now that is the last thing i want to do.

    I would want comparison studies. If they are available and look good, I would have no problem with it.

    then you are a smart person, this is all that can be expected, and i appreciate your opinion on the matter.

  92. woofighter says:

    Why are we looking for treatment for measles when we have a great vaccine? (Sorry, you can’t hijack an article on vaccines and try to change the subject because your tired of talking about vaccines – take it somewhere more appropriate.)

    Isn’t science-based medicine criticized for treating “symptoms” instead of the cause of disease or instead of preventing disease (total BS, btw)? Why the heck we would wait until people are sick with measles to do something? Increase accessibility and utilization of the vaccine!

  93. Chris says:

    Thing1Thing2, the last time you posted that study you were told that was before there was a two MMR vaccine schedule. Did you forget that? This should jog your memory:

    Oh, and then there is the cherry picking. Dear trolls: why do you think the second MMR vaccine was added to the schedule in 1989 for school age children? It is called seeing a pattern with constant monitoring, and correcting. No one in their right mind expects the vaccines to be 100% effective nor to last forever.

    I have responded to backer on the appropriate thread. If he dislikes the content of the posts, then he does not have to read them. Take a look at the list on the right hand side of this page. It shows the topics, with the number of posts devoted to each (some are counted twice because there can be multiple tags on one post). You will see that vaccines has 105 posts. Compare that to the following subjects which all have more posts:
    Clinical Trials (108)
    Politics and Regulation (140)
    Public Health (106)
    Science and Medicine (334)
    Science and the Media (158)

    Even though this posting is tagged with both “vaccines” and “Science and Medicine”, you will see that the latter has three times as many posts. If every other posting was on vaccines, it would be half the number of “Science and Medicine.” There are also several other topics that do not overlap “vaccines.” backer’s perception is biased.

  94. windriven says:

    backer-

    What woofighter said.

    I don’t know how old you are but when I was young both small pox and polio were devastating scourges. Smallpox has, for all intents and purposes, been banished from the face of the earth. Polio has ceased to be a problem everywhere that vaccination is universal. If there was a concerted effort, it too could be totally eradicated.

    The best fire fighting strategy is fire prevention. Why treat people for measles or anything else that is easily preventable by vaccination? The cost is lower, the suffering is lower and the benefit is much higher.

    I have whiplash from this thread: silver for measles, honey for wound care, prophylaxis versus unproven treatment. I’m going to pour myself a glass of very nice Barolo.

  95. backer says:

    funny, as i was perusing the SBM posts i came across a gentleman that has summed up my point quite nicely. (well actually he rants a bit, but hopefully you can catch the drift)

    http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=473#comment-18672
    http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=473#comment-18743
    http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=473#comment-18835

  96. Kiwi says:

    Here in New Zealand we did have a significant increase in measles a few months ago. Approx 160 confirmed and more than 50 probable since May. Over 80% of cases were not completely vaccinated.

    http://www.surv.esr.cri.nz/surveillance/WeeklyMeaslesRpt.php

  97. Kiwi says:

    I forgot to mention, NZ has a population of 4.2 million and in 2008 there were only 12 confirmed cases of measles.

  98. Chris says:

    SD never had much of a point either. He was mostly incoherent. Not something one should emulate. After reading one SD rant, I mostly ignored him.

    But I looked more closely at your links, and realized I did not miss anything by ignoring him. Though now I understand why you are mostly incoherent.

    Still waiting for the real data that shows that the MMR vaccine has more risks than measles, mumps rubella.

  99. backer says:

    chris-

    there is a fine line between incoherence and brilliance.

    Trust me i can tell just by reading his rantings that SD is brilliant.

    Still waiting for the real data that shows that the MMR vaccine has more risks than measles, mumps rubella.

    me too, wouldnt it be nice to have nice clean comparative data to look at? too bad there isnt, one thing i did find which i thought was interesting.

    One of the statistics that is thrown about these days is that 1-3 out of 1000 die of measles in developed countries like the United States. If that is the case, however, it begs the question, “Why?” Because, in the past, at least in the United States, the death rate from measles was considerably lower. Prior to vaccination 3 to 4 million measles cases occurred with around 500 deaths. This would make the case-fatality rate .0001% exceedingly small. It makes me wonder why we even bothered.

    In the years 1989, 1990 and 1991 combined, however, it was reported that around 55,000 people got the measles and 166 died, making the case-fatality ratio dramatically higher at .003% still small however a SUBSTANTIAL increase. At this rate, fewer than 175,000 cases per year would be necessary to result in the same number of deaths which used to occur when there were millions of cases. makes me wonder if the fatality rate increase is due to the vaccine?

Comments are closed.