Vaccine Discussion Master Thread

[Excalibur]

This XML file does not appear to have any style information associated with it. The document tree is shown below.
<Error>
<Code>AccessDenied</Code>
<Message>Access denied</Message>
</Error>

https://payhip.com/b/EtJhe

[Excalibur]

For the laymen who will not be reading all 800 pages, can you explain why you do not agree with these critiques?

“Wrong About Polio: A Review of Suzanne Humphries, MD and Roman Bystrianyk’s ‘Dissolving Illusions’”
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/wrong-about-polio-a-review-of-suzanne-humphries-md-and-roman-bystrianyks-dissolving-illusions-part-1-the-long-version/

Dissolving illusions dedicates the majority of the book explaining historical context, smallpox, polio and measles.

It appears to me, the author of the critique did not read the book and does not attack her points at all. I did stop reading his critique once it got to typhoid

[Excalibur]

Side related question-Did you read this and/or anything similar prior to it being posted here?

Obviously not as much, but I have. Furthermore, I don’t believe once ounce of the Covid BS, not from day one, and see how the Covid situation mirrors history in a stunning way. Once you read the section on smallpox from dissolving illusions, and if you’re not a branch covidian, you easily see the BS

[jj1000]

Dissolving illusions is an 800+ pages book. I can’t summarize it all here.

Vaccine Medical Research has 25,000,000+ pages written on it.

I can't summarize it all here.

If you'd like to address the near immediate elimination in waterborne illness but not in airborne illness, post-sanitation standards, we were discussing above, I'm all ears.

If you want to pinpoint data from graph share that as well, and we can discuss if it addresses mine and @aygart questions.

[Moshe Green]

Obviously not as much, but I have. Furthermore, I don’t believe once ounce of the Covid BS, not from day one, and see how the Covid situation mirrors history in a stunning way. Once you read the section on smallpox from dissolving illusions, and if you’re not a branch covidian, you easily see the BS

So all those elderly people who died of Covid are still alive?

[imayid2]

Side related question-Did you read this and/or anything similar prior to it being posted here?

Nothing of that magnitude. I am not equipped to properly understand and analyse all this information, and then follow every rebuttal of, certainly not without spending an inordinate amount doing so.

[Chilla]

So all those elderly people who died of Covid are still alive?

Boy, you really have a way with words.....

[imayid2]

Dissolving illusions dedicates the majority of the book explaining historical context, smallpox, polio and measles.

It appears to me, the author of the critique did not read the book and does not attack her points at all. I did stop reading his critique once it got to typhoid

Can you provide an example of what leads you to this conclusion? People who didn’t read it have  no way of knowing, so its important to demonstrate.

[aygart]

Nothing of that magnitude. I am not equipped to properly understand and analyse all this information, and then follow every rebuttal of, certainly not without spending an inordinate amount doing so.

Sorry that wasn't addressed to you but rather to @Excalibur since I am curious about how diversified his/her reading on this topic was.

[imayid2]

Another critique of a different chapter
  https://medium.com/%40visualvaccines/why-dr-suzanne-humphries-an-anti-vaccine-activist-is-lying-to-you-about-measles-ce446d0a7e0f

Conclusion
The problem is that Dr Humphries is so fervent in her belief that vaccines are evil that it ultimately “blinds” her, and leads her to become clumsy in her interpretation of studies, which in turn hurts her credibility. The more you delve into her work and consult her sources, the more you will find her guilty of:
Cherry-picking isolated statements from a range of studies that support her views but completely ignoring qualifying statements made by those authors and overall conclusions drawn in those studies.
Aiming to confuse readers by quoting 30-year-old studies on the failures of the 1963 inactivated measles vaccine (and serum gamma globulin as a form of treatment) numerous times throughout the chapter, even though both are no longer in use.
Ignoring data on counter studies and third world countries that are inconvenient to her claims.
Stripping numerous quotes off their context as an intentional means to mislead and deceive.
Vaccinate or don’t vaccinate. But please don’t base your decision on the writings of this extremist.

[imayid2]

This looks interesting:

https://deplatformdisease.substack.com/p/lies-damned-lies-and-suzanne-humphries

Here is the polio part:

Polio History (09:28-17:41)
Claim: Polio never went away; the diagnostic criteria were changed.

Reality: Humphries claims at various points that what was called polio is actually Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) or transverse myelitis (TM). This is absolutely false.

To begin with, we can recover and culture poliovirus from those that have poliomyelitis (stool is the highest yield source of virus, but it can occasionally be recovered from the cerebrospinal fluid, CSF, of poliomyelitis patients). We can also inoculate susceptible animals with poliovirus and watch them develop poliomyelitis. This is not the case for any other condition.

Polio is a virus that, when causing poliomyelitis, infects and causes death of the cell bodies that (via signals through peripheral axons) cause muscle to contract (these cells are referred to as lower motor neurons). Guillain-Barré Syndrome is an autoimmune condition that - often reversibly - damages the myelin insulating the peripheral axons of lower motor neurons. In other words, polio and GBS are distinct processes, in separate locations, with contrasting treatments and divergent prognoses. They even cluster in different seasons: one of the most common risk factors for GBS is gastroenteritis from the bacteria Campylobacter jejuni, which peaks in the wintertime, whereas polio exploded in the summertime.

While a single publication reported several children with paralytic polio whose initial presentation resembled GBS, they generally appear clinically distinct:

GBS classically presents with symmetric sensory loss and paralysis that appears to the patient as if it is ascending from the feet; paralysis polio is more likely to be asymmetric and affecting the proximal muscles

Paralysis in poliomyelitis progresses much more rapidly - often within hours from first symptoms to complete limb paralysis; GBS typically evolves over days to weeks

Spinal poliomyelitis does not affect sensory neurons - sensation remains intact. Sensory deficits will be detectable in GBS except in rare variants

CSF studies for poliomyelitis show increased leukocytes and mildly elevated protein; GBS classically has markedly elevated protein with minimal or normal leukocyte counts

Electrophysiologic evaluation (often referred to as EMG) of affected limbs in polio and GBS will identify different locations and types of nerve dysfunction

Dysautonomia (autonomic nervous system dysfunction) is common in GBS, but rare in paralytic polio

With regard to TM, though this condition can in some cases be caused by infection with polio, it too is clearly distinct from the condition poliomyelitis:

TM is defined by the fact that it involves an entire transverse segment of the spinal cord. Poliomyelitis is confined to the ventral horn where the motor neurons lie. This difference can be seen on MRI imaging.

TM may begin as flaccid paralysis but often progresses into spastic. Polio causes primarily flaccid paralysis.

TM tends to cause symmetric weakness. Polio is generally asymmetric.

Sensory symptoms are also common with TM, but do not occur with paralytic polio.

Upper motor neuron signs are generally present with TM but unusual for polio (spasticity, clonus, hyperreflexia).

Bottom line: Trained clinicians do not have difficulty differentiating between poliomyelitis, TM, and GBS- all of them are distinct from one another and cases where presentations overlap are the exception, rather than the rule (and diagnostic testing can differentiate them in such cases). Clinical presentations consistent with GBS are approximately as prevalent now as before the elimination of polio. On the other hand, presentations characteristic of poliomyelitis occur over 99.9% less frequently since vaccine introduction in the 1950s. To conclude that polio vaccination is not responsible for preventing poliomyelitis is either a lie or a mind-boggling logical fallacy.

Claim: DDT was a cause of polio.

Reality: This claim has been thoroughly debunked by epidemiologists and medical historians. There is no correlation between DDT use patterns and polio outbreaks in either timing or geographic distribution. This was at one point based on a misconception that polio was spread by flies, which at times led to massive DDT spraying during polio epidemics to try to mitigate spread. Most significantly, the polio epidemics of the early 20th century began before widespread DDT use, and polio cases declined dramatically following vaccine introduction while DDT use continued in many areas. Correlations between polio epidemics and DDT use are poor- the peak of polio epidemics post-vaccine was in 1952 but DDT use peaked in 1959 and does not correlate with polio incidence:


https://vaxopedia.org/2017/10/19/is-there-a-ddt-polio-connection/
Humphries also fails to explain why polio affected specific age groups or why it occurred in seasonal patterns typical of enterovirus transmission.

Bottom line: There is no correlation between DDT patterns and polio incidence in timing or geography. Polio epidemics predated widespread DDT use, and cases declined significantly after the introduction of the polio vaccine. This refutes the possibility that DDT can be a cause of polio.

Claim: 95 to 99% of polio cases are asymptomatic (originally made by Rogan, but affirmed by Humphries).

Reality: This is incorrect. About 70% of polio cases in children are asymptomatic. Approximately 0.5-2% cause paralysis, 2-8% cause aseptic meningitis, and 24% cause a minor, nonspecific flu-like illness.

The risk of symptomatic infection is multifactorial with older ages at infection generally having poor outcomes, and pregnancy also being associated with worse outcomes.

Soundbites like this erase critical context. Though the probability of a bad outcome at the level of individual infections with polio represents a very minor fraction of cases, applied to the scale of the population, you still see devastating epidemics of paralysis.

Claim: Tonsillectomies cause severe polio.

Reality: This is not a baseless claim, but Humphries's categorical phrasing in the podcast paints a misleading picture. In the early and mid-20th century, researchers noted a connection between tissue injury and increased risk of paralysis in the injured area. For example, bulbar poliomyelitis (affecting the brainstem) was frequently seen after tonsillectomy, and paralysis sometimes occurred at injection sites. This "provocation poliomyelitis" phenomenon was later demonstrated to reflect direct viral introduction into peripheral nerve axons, allowing the virus to infect the proximal cell bodies, a nuance completely missing from Humphries's oversimplified narrative.

Claim: "Poliovirus is commensal."

Reality: This claim fundamentally misunderstands basic microbiology. Commensal organisms are elements of the normal microbiota present in healthy individuals, typically because they confer some benefit to the host (in simpler terms, these are "friendly" microorganisms that naturally live in or on our bodies without causing harm, and often providing benefits) and they naturally persist on the body unless disrupted by another force e.g., an antibiotic. Poliovirus is unequivocally a pathogen and is not commensal.

One of the standards for something being a commensal is that the immune system should tolerate its presence (at least within its natural site within the body). While poliovirus shedding in the stool can last weeks, fundamentally, the virus will be cleared by the immune system because it induces a robust immune response that eradicates the infection. Immunocompromised people can shed poliovirus in their stool for decades after oral polio vaccine (OPV) administration, representing a public health risk. There is absolutely no evidence for poliovirus conferring any beneficial function to human hosts.

While many infections can be asymptomatic, this does not make the microbe responsible a commensal. Many dangerous pathogens can cause asymptomatic infections while still being capable of causing severe disease in others or in different circumstances. The absence of symptoms does not define a commensal relationship.

Bottom line: Poliovirus is not a commensal organism. Commensals are harmless or beneficial microbes that naturally coexist with the host, while poliovirus is a pathogen that causes disease. Polio fails to meet anything resembling this definition.

[imayid2]

Is there a correlation between religious ideology which believes in outdated medical theories, and anti vaxism?

Meaning, if someone feels obliged to accept that Humoral theory and Miasma theory have to be true to an extent, because their religious leaders believed them a thousand years ago before they were disproven, can than be an aggravating factor in being anti vax? I would guess yes.

[Euclid]

Is there a correlation between religious ideology which believes in outdated medical theories, and anti vaxism?

Meaning, if someone feels obliged to accept that Humoral theory and Miasma theory have to be true to an extent, because their religious leaders believed them a thousand years ago before they were disproven, can than be an aggravating factor in being anti vax? I would guess yes.

You mean like eating fish and meat together?

[imayid2]

You mean like eating fish and meat together?

Which category would that fall into?

[Euclid]

Which category would that fall into?

religious ideology which believes in outdated medical theories

[imayid2]

his/her

FTR

I'm a yeshiva guy

[imayid2]

Let’s go with the assumption that the gemora isn’t just basing off contemporary medical theories.

[Yosel]

Is there some allergy event making you draw the line in 1976?

No,  i am not talking about vaccines necessarily, i was referring to our food intake, real food/drinks or modified ............

[aygart]

No,  i am not talking about vaccines necessarily, i was referring to our food intake, real food/drinks or modified ............

But where does 1976 come from?

[jj1000]

Does this analogy work?

Lihavdil...

Goyim tried to get Jews to convert. Almost never would a gadol hador convert. But sometimes an uneducated person would. And they'd take that person around proclaiming look, even the Jews who learn Torah believe in this. Maybe they'd even get a Rabbi and then it'd be a real celebration and the Rabbi would gain instant glory and thousands of followers if they choose to become a priest.

Today, the anti-vax movement tries to gain followers. Almost never would a renowned expert in the field of vaccines ever switch sides. But sometimes an uneducated person would. And sometimes a nephrologist (Suzanne Humphries) will come along and join their ranks, and they instantly get glory and millions of followers. Forget that this was not something they trained in, and they are far from experts in this field. They got what they could, and they celebrate it to no end.