More spread of measles - yikes!

[jimnyc]

Never mind vaccines at this day and stage... but this spread is starting to get pretty bad.

And I think the main thing is folks traveling, in and out of countries and spreading at a quick rate it seems. I surely wouldn't want to work at an airport right now, or one of those immigration centers. :(

---

'Unprecedented' 100,000 hit by European Measles outbreak spreading at 'alarming' rate

MORE than 100,000 people across Europe have been infected with the potentially deadly Measles virus, which is spreading an “alarming” rate., WHO has confirmed.

The World Health Organisation said the rise in cases was "unprecedented" for a preventable disease.

They revealed they are rapidly ramping up their response to the outbreak, which has spread over two years, “based on the growing number of children and adults affected by and dying from the disease".

Measles is one of the leading causes of death in the world from a disease that can be cured by a vaccine.

It poses a particular danger to children and gives sufferers excruciating rashes, fever, and inflamed eyes.

WHO revealed today that, since the beginning of last year, more than 90% of countries across the continent have together reported over 100,000 measles cases and over 90 related deaths.

In recent years, conspiracy theories and fake reports have led to many parents stopping their kids having a vaccine, which is effective at preventing the disease.

The WHO highlighted “the persistence of pockets of non-immunized or under-immunized individuals in many countries fuelling the continuing spread of measles.”

More than half a million UK children could be at risk of disease after missing crucial jab, children's charity Unicef warned last month.

And earlier this week, it was reported that so-called “anti-vaxxers” in Germany could face fines of over £2000 children in their care are not given a jab.

“We have observed an unprecedented upsurge in people sick with this preventable disease, and too many have lost their lives to it,” Dr Dorit Nitzan, a WHO regional emergency director in Europe, said.

Rest - https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/777832/Measles-outbreak-hits-100-000-people-in-Europe-WHO-confirms


Will Cook County be home to the next big measles outbreak? Researchers think so.

Researchers who in 2015 correctly predicted where the Zika outbreak would strike in the U.S. say they think the country’s next big measles outbreak is most likely to happen in Cook County.

A research project spearheaded by Sahotra Sarkar, a University of Chicago-educated professor at the University of Texas at Austin, revealed the 25 counties most at-risk for a widespread measles outbreak, like those seen in Washington, Oregon and New York. Sarkar and his former student, Lauren Gardner of Johns Hopkins University, determined Cook County was the most at-risk for an outbreak. That’s based largely on the number of airplane flights to Chicago from global destinations where parents increasingly don’t have their children vaccinated, he said.

“Cook County turns out to be as important as it is, mainly because of the presence of O’Hare Airport,” Sarkar said.

The study was published Thursday in The Lancet Infectious Diseases. The research took about six months to complete, using risk assessment models similar to one Sarkar and Gardner used when they determined Zika, a mosquito-carried virus that can cause serious birth defects, would first affect Texas and Florida when it emerged as a global threat to pregnant women.

Rachel Rubin, a senior medical officer with the Cook County Health Department, wasn’t surprised by the study’s findings. The seven measles cases reported in Illinois this year may have stemmed from encounters with people who were infected overseas and traveled back to Illinois, she said, adding it’s unknown if any cases were connected.

“As we know O’Hare is a huge transfer point for travel within the United States, not to mention all of the international flights,” she said. “I’m not surprised that their modeling would’ve predicted that Cook County and the city of Chicago would be such a hot spot.”

Rest - https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/breaking/ct-met-cook-county-worst-measles-outbreak-risk-20190509-story.html

[jimnyc]

And obviously other illnesses, which is why I pointed out these types of facilities. Little germ carriers carrying in all kinds of shit.

---

Border patrol rep: Record number of agents contracting illness from illegals

More agents than ever before are calling in sick to work or showing up sick, says a Border Patrol union representative who worries too many agents are succumbing to illnesses brought by illegal aliens.

Carlos Favela, president of the National Border Patrol Council Local 1929, says the number of agents affected by illnesses has reached alarming levels in recent years, with an estimated 20 to 25 agents from the El Paso sector calling in sick each day, while others come in to work sick because they’ve used up their sick days.

“I believe this is probably the record, you know, Border Patrol-wide, since ever, of agents calling in sick,” Favela told ABC-7.

According to Favela, numerous agents are filing union reports claiming they’ve contracted everything from the H1N1 virus to chicken pox to Legionnaires’ disease after coming in contact with sick illegals encountered at the border.

Favela says agents are concerned they could infect their family members with infectious diseases such as tuberculosis.

“The nightmare for the agent out in the field,” said Favela, “is that they contract tuberculosis or some kind of bacterial disease and they unknowingly take that home to their families and then their whole family is sick.”

Rest - https://www.infowars.com/border-patrol-rep-record-number-of-agents-contracting-illness-from-illegals/

[Drummond]

Never mind vaccines at this day and stage... but this spread is starting to get pretty bad.

And I think the main thing is folks traveling, in and out of countries and spreading at a quick rate it seems. I surely wouldn't want to work at an airport right now, or one of those immigration centers. :(

---

'Unprecedented' 100,000 hit by European Measles outbreak spreading at 'alarming' rate

MORE than 100,000 people across Europe have been infected with the potentially deadly Measles virus, which is spreading an “alarming” rate., WHO has confirmed.

The World Health Organisation said the rise in cases was "unprecedented" for a preventable disease.

They revealed they are rapidly ramping up their response to the outbreak, which has spread over two years, “based on the growing number of children and adults affected by and dying from the disease".

Measles is one of the leading causes of death in the world from a disease that can be cured by a vaccine.

It poses a particular danger to children and gives sufferers excruciating rashes, fever, and inflamed eyes.

WHO revealed today that, since the beginning of last year, more than 90% of countries across the continent have together reported over 100,000 measles cases and over 90 related deaths.

In recent years, conspiracy theories and fake reports have led to many parents stopping their kids having a vaccine, which is effective at preventing the disease.

The WHO highlighted “the persistence of pockets of non-immunized or under-immunized individuals in many countries fuelling the continuing spread of measles.”

More than half a million UK children could be at risk of disease after missing crucial jab, children's charity Unicef warned last month.

And earlier this week, it was reported that so-called “anti-vaxxers” in Germany could face fines of over £2000 children in their care are not given a jab.

“We have observed an unprecedented upsurge in people sick with this preventable disease, and too many have lost their lives to it,” Dr Dorit Nitzan, a WHO regional emergency director in Europe, said.

Rest - https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/777832/Measles-outbreak-hits-100-000-people-in-Europe-WHO-confirms


Will Cook County be home to the next big measles outbreak? Researchers think so.

Researchers who in 2015 correctly predicted where the Zika outbreak would strike in the U.S. say they think the country’s next big measles outbreak is most likely to happen in Cook County.

A research project spearheaded by Sahotra Sarkar, a University of Chicago-educated professor at the University of Texas at Austin, revealed the 25 counties most at-risk for a widespread measles outbreak, like those seen in Washington, Oregon and New York. Sarkar and his former student, Lauren Gardner of Johns Hopkins University, determined Cook County was the most at-risk for an outbreak. That’s based largely on the number of airplane flights to Chicago from global destinations where parents increasingly don’t have their children vaccinated, he said.

“Cook County turns out to be as important as it is, mainly because of the presence of O’Hare Airport,” Sarkar said.

The study was published Thursday in The Lancet Infectious Diseases. The research took about six months to complete, using risk assessment models similar to one Sarkar and Gardner used when they determined Zika, a mosquito-carried virus that can cause serious birth defects, would first affect Texas and Florida when it emerged as a global threat to pregnant women.

Rachel Rubin, a senior medical officer with the Cook County Health Department, wasn’t surprised by the study’s findings. The seven measles cases reported in Illinois this year may have stemmed from encounters with people who were infected overseas and traveled back to Illinois, she said, adding it’s unknown if any cases were connected.

“As we know O’Hare is a huge transfer point for travel within the United States, not to mention all of the international flights,” she said. “I’m not surprised that their modeling would’ve predicted that Cook County and the city of Chicago would be such a hot spot.”

Rest - https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/breaking/ct-met-cook-county-worst-measles-outbreak-risk-20190509-story.html


AARGH !!!!!


... WELL, NOW ....

... I can only state what's obvious here. Evidently, this is The End Of Days. Civilisation, Life As We Know It, is under Serious Threat ! Send the sixth Fleet. Quick ... !!!

Who needs ebola, when MEASLES is spreading !!!

Oh, for God's sake !

Let people be immunised if they see a need for it, and good luck to them. All power to them. But I definitely will NOT like being told I MUST be immunised.

And, yes. I will not CHOOSE to be. Why ? Because I know I don't need it.

Shall I get every contributor, here, telling me that I must 'bend' to authoritarian diktat on this ? Too bad ... bring it on.

I dare to be an individual who values his individual rights. I also dare to exercise the proper sense of proportion in all this.

This is about .... MEASLES !!!!

Next time I get a head-cold, maybe I'll go catatonic out of pure mortal fear ...... :waaaah::waaaah::waaaah::waaaah:

[jimnyc]

No one said any of the above, Mr. Drummond. I made a separate thread, so that this one wasn't about vaccines, but rather simply about what is out there NOW, and how do we attack it and/or keep it from spreading. None of this really has anything to do with vaccines, even if the thread could technically veer from that and off to 'how did we get here', but that wasn't my point.

I posted this to that we can discuss how it's spreading possibly, and from where, and what is the biggest ways it may be spreading, and then lastly, how we can work to keep it from getting worse.

My belief is that likely the most of it is coming from illegals around the world, and then of course they travel here and there, and unfortunately insert it elsewhere unwittingly. Imagine an infected person sneaking into the USA, and then needing medical care and going to the hospital. That's a great place to spread it. But I believe airports are probably just as bad, and being in the airplanes secluded probably even worse. And hell, while this topic is measles, as I pointed out, we can even discuss it as any infections/diseases being transmitted in such ways, and the same, how to stem it.

Anyway, not sure why the crazy sarcasm and what not towards me, as I've shown you nothing but respect and will continue to do so. End of days, end of civilization.... all those things to exaggerate and diminish anything I post about diseases and/or how they are CURRENTLY spreading. This was not in any way meant to diminish any thing you have been stating, or really anyone for that fact. And the issues of the disease being out there right now, and spreading right now, is factual. So not sure the animosity in replying to me about this.

I certainly don't think it's the end of times, civilization, .... comparing it to some of the deadliest diseases man has known ----- and then right away into individual rights and what not -- when nothing of the sort was posted in THIS thread. One's rights don't come into the picture when talking about the fact that the disease IS out there, and unfortunately we need to face it and find best ways to minimize it. So, please save the for God's sake stuff - when no one in this thread stated the things you imply and I have not done so to you.

[Gunny]

No one said any of the above, Mr. Drummond. I made a separate thread, so that this one wasn't about vaccines, but rather simply about what is out there NOW, and how do we attack it and/or keep it from spreading. None of this really has anything to do with vaccines, even if the thread could technically veer from that and off to 'how did we get here', but that wasn't my point.

I posted this to that we can discuss how it's spreading possibly, and from where, and what is the biggest ways it may be spreading, and then lastly, how we can work to keep it from getting worse.

My belief is that likely the most of it is coming from illegals around the world, and then of course they travel here and there, and unfortunately insert it elsewhere unwittingly. Imagine an infected person sneaking into the USA, and then needing medical care and going to the hospital. That's a great place to spread it. But I believe airports are probably just as bad, and being in the airplanes secluded probably even worse. And hell, while this topic is measles, as I pointed out, we can even discuss it as any infections/diseases being transmitted in such ways, and the same, how to stem it.

Anyway, not sure why the crazy sarcasm and what not towards me, as I've shown you nothing but respect and will continue to do so. End of days, end of civilization.... all those things to exaggerate and diminish anything I post about diseases and/or how they are CURRENTLY spreading. This was not in any way meant to diminish any thing you have been stating, or really anyone for that fact. And the issues of the disease being out there right now, and spreading right now, is factual. So not sure the animosity in replying to me about this.

I certainly don't think it's the end of times, civilization, .... comparing it to some of the deadliest diseases man has known ----- and then right away into individual rights and what not -- when nothing of the sort was posted in THIS thread. One's rights don't come into the picture when talking about the fact that the disease IS out there, and unfortunately we need to face it and find best ways to minimize it. So, please save the for God's sake stuff - when no one in this thread stated the things you imply and I have not done so to you.Naturally, you're going to get the jarhead response. In all 4 pages of the other thread and this one I picked out the key phrases/words as they pertain to the topic in my brain housing group.

"Measles IS Killing ...", "Preventable".

So in my little military mind and in keeping with my rank and position in the company, when the Sergeant Major looks my way with that "How long's it going to take you to fix this and why are you still here?" look, I'm going to start lining people up and solving the problem in a manner that is known to work. Medical staff first so they can spread out. Every other swinging d*ck (or not) in the unit get on line and start rolling sleeves. And I get mine first.

That's pretty much how it actually went in my unit with the anthrax shots.

First step in life saving: stop the bleeding. The other three don't matter if you can't do the first.

[Drummond]

No one said any of the above, Mr. Drummond. I made a separate thread, so that this one wasn't about vaccines, but rather simply about what is out there NOW, and how do we attack it and/or keep it from spreading. None of this really has anything to do with vaccines, even if the thread could technically veer from that and off to 'how did we get here', but that wasn't my point.

I posted this to that we can discuss how it's spreading possibly, and from where, and what is the biggest ways it may be spreading, and then lastly, how we can work to keep it from getting worse.

... OK. I apologise for my intemperance.

I can only say that I was reaching the end of my patience. I'm absolutely amazed at what I've been reading lately. I also take your point about this thread not being about vaccines, though from any discussion this thread generates, I'll be amazed if discussion about them doesn't feature.

I just don't understand why the proper sense of proportion seems to be so absent ! There are major diseases out there. Measles, by any criteria I recognise, just doesn't qualify.


My belief is that likely the most of it is coming from illegals around the world, and then of course they travel here and there, and unfortunately insert it elsewhere unwittingly. Imagine an infected person sneaking into the USA, and then needing medical care and going to the hospital. That's a great place to spread it. But I believe airports are probably just as bad, and being in the airplanes secluded probably even worse. And hell, while this topic is measles, as I pointed out, we can even discuss it as any infections/diseases being transmitted in such ways, and the same, how to stem it.

All fair enough. I don't think it fair to disproportionately blame 'illegals' for the spread of illness, though I absolutely take the point that they must add to it significantly, AND, being illegals, that's a source of it which needs staunch attention .... since, after all, none of that should ever be happening. Logically, all points of entry into the US should be set up to screen for illnesses carried by incoming visitors.

That said, there are practical difficulties. Exhaustive screening would delay the traffic of incoming people to unrealistic levels. Do you 'quarantine' them all, until exhaustive tests had been conducted ? By how long ? Several hours ? A day ? More ? To make that remotely feasible, you'd have to ban the numbers of visitors to where only a small percentage of those entering even made it to your shores in the first place.

What if - shock, horror ? - I tried to enter the US, having somehow, however improbably, contracted measles just a couple of hours before leaving Heathrow ? Would it even be detectable in me, upon arrival at JFK ?

I honestly think the only answer is to accept that only so much can be done, short of going to extremes. Yes, you could close your borders off to the outside world entirely, risking whatever consequences (business ones, for example) that resulted. My guess is that America would become the laughing stock of the world if they tried it, BUT, you could argue that it was a reasonable measure.

My recommendation is that the proper sense of proportion be brought into play. It's not a perfect world out there ! It's not, nor ever will be, a risk-free environment.

That's just reality, and I face that reality.


Anyway, not sure why the crazy sarcasm and what not towards me, as I've shown you nothing but respect and will continue to do so.

Sorry. I just 'lost it' for a while. I couldn't believe what I had recently read. Such extremes, over only MEASLES. No animosity involved ... just sheer, utter, incredulity, that came from several posts elsewhere on this forum. I shall do my very best to curb it in my future posts.

[jimnyc]

Naturally, you're going to get the jarhead response. In all 4 pages of the other thread and this one I picked out the key phrases/words as they pertain to the topic in my brain housing group.

"Measles IS Killing ...", "Preventable".

Regardless of all of that, the outbreaks are here and there and now must be faced. Maybe not make hospitals as bad as when ebola was running around, but of course areas for the infected is the best idea. And anyone even showing symptoms, and unsure, should all be treated with major caution until confirmed or not. And borders, airplanes & airports and other places I may not mention, should all of course take major care. But it's hard to fight something you can't see, in places that aren't medical facilities.


So in my little military mind and in keeping with my rank and position in the company, when the Sergeant Major looks my way with that "How long's it going to take you to fix this and why are you still here?" look, I'm going to start lining people up and solving the problem in a manner that is known to work. Medical staff first so they can spread out. Every other swinging d*ck (or not) in the unit get on line and start rolling sleeves. And I get mine first.

That's pretty much how it actually went in my unit with the anthrax shots.

First step in life saving: stop the bleeding. The other three don't matter if you can't do the first.

I don't know how far any quarantines may be necessary, but even using military ships as temporarily hospitals is a good idea.

[jimnyc]

... OK. I apologise for my intemperance.

All good, Mr. Drummond! :)


I can only say that I was reaching the end of my patience. I'm absolutely amazed at what I've been reading lately. I also take your point about this thread not being about vaccines, though from any discussion this thread generates, I'll be amazed if discussion about them doesn't feature.

I just don't understand why the proper sense of proportion seems to be so absent ! There are major diseases out there. Measles, by any criteria I recognise, just doesn't qualify.

That's why I made a separate thread, so that we could move on from vaccines and talk about just the cases we currently know about, and how best to face it.


All fair enough. I don't think it fair to disproportionately blame 'illegals' for the spread of illness, though I absolutely take the point that they must add to it significantly, AND, being illegals, that's a source of it which needs staunch attention .... since, after all, none of that should ever be happening. Logically, all points of entry into the US should be set up to screen for illnesses carried by incoming visitors.

The reason I point them out in a disproportionate manner is because of the huge influx of them that we normally don't see, and then these outbreaks soon follow. Are they the only reason? Absolutely not. But I tried to avoid too much pointing of fingers to try and avoid any fighting. But unfortunately, where it got started and how will end up being a focus.


That said, there are practical difficulties. Exhaustive screening would delay the traffic of incoming people to unrealistic levels. Do you 'quarantine' them all, until exhaustive tests had been conducted ? By how long ? Several hours ? A day ? More ? To make that remotely feasible, you'd have to ban the numbers of visitors to where only a small percentage of those entering even made it to your shores in the first place.

I've seen it several times already in America. Never quarantines to the level of closing things or delaying incoming/outgoing from airports or similar. Usually still test people only showing symptoms and feeling any symptoms, and of course very very important to educate people in America at such a time, so that they know if/when to seek any assistance if they feel any symptoms. You won't see an overall delay/stoppage otherwise, only tend to those I mentioned. I can't foresee any banning of incoming folks, other than hopefully the illegals at our borders.


What if - shock, horror ? - I tried to enter the US, having somehow, however improbably, contracted measles just a couple of hours before leaving Heathrow ? Would it even be detectable in me, upon arrival at JFK ?

Nope, not unless you are showing obvious or feeling symptoms and bring it to someone's attention.


I honestly think the only answer is to accept that only so much can be done, short of going to extremes. Yes, you could close your borders off to the outside world entirely, risking whatever consequences (business ones, for example) that resulted. My guess is that America would become the laughing stock of the world if they tried it, BUT, you could argue that it was a reasonable measure.

I agree 100% and that's generally how it's attacked. Life cannot be stopped, travel cannot be stopped. It'll mostly be life as normal, but with extreme education, and extreme care when seeing a patient that is a "possibility" and then how to handle any such patients coming to a Dr. office or hospital. That's usually how things have been handled, with worse diseases.


My recommendation is that the proper sense of proportion be brought into play. It's not a perfect world out there ! It's not, nor ever will be, a risk-free environment.

That's just reality, and I face that reality.

Agreed again - and my belief is that is how it will be handled. I've never seen even an overreaction with worse diseases. So I think we're more than OK in that department. The problem is locating those who may be sick, educating the masses so that when someone think they may be sick, they know what to do and who to contact. And of course the most important would then be handling those presented and confirmed as sick.


Sorry. I just 'lost it' for a while. I couldn't believe what I had recently read. Such extremes, over only MEASLES. No animosity involved ... just sheer, utter, incredulity, that came from several posts elsewhere on this forum. I shall do my very best to curb it in my future posts.

Understood, being passionate about a subject isn't something one needs to apologize for! I was just hoping to leave the fighting about vaccines in the other thread, and have some duking it out and/or just plain discussion in here about what we now do with what we face in front of us.

[Gunny]

Regardless of all of that, the outbreaks are here and there and now must be faced. Maybe not make hospitals as bad as when ebola was running around, but of course areas for the infected is the best idea. And anyone even showing symptoms, and unsure, should all be treated with major caution until confirmed or not. And borders, airplanes & airports and other places I may not mention, should all of course take major care. But it's hard to fight something you can't see, in places that aren't medical facilities.



I don't know how far any quarantines may be necessary, but even using military ships as temporarily hospitals is a good idea.Drummond was right about one thing, it couldn't help but go toward vaccines.

The vaccine is two-fold: one, it protects the vaccinated. Two, it prevents an infected person from spreading it having nowhere to go among the vaccinated. Minus the ever-present exceptions :)

It is the most effective, cost-effective, and efficient means of both stopping the spread of the disease and killing it off. Problem - solution. If some are offended, I'll sleep at night with the results.

[Drummond]

Regardless of all of that, the outbreaks are here and there and now must be faced. Maybe not make hospitals as bad as when ebola was running around, but of course areas for the infected is the best idea. And anyone even showing symptoms, and unsure, should all be treated with major caution until confirmed or not. And borders, airplanes & airports and other places I may not mention, should all of course take major care. But it's hard to fight something you can't see, in places that aren't medical facilities.



I don't know how far any quarantines may be necessary, but even using military ships as temporarily hospitals is a good idea.

Keeping my temperance fully engaged ... let me just ask, how much of a threat IS measles ? Are we really, as I suspect, firmly in 'sledgehammer to crack a nut' territory with all of this ?

Yes, there are recorded cases of measles leading ultimately to death ... but, it's not as though the mortality rates of measles are anything more than 'rare'. That's just a fact, at least, as I understand it to be.

Are more lethal strains of measles even possible ? I don't know. If there could be, I somehow doubt that the medical world would be prepared to properly treat the mutation responsible. So, until they can, that's out as an answer.

I honestly think that resources, time, effort, staffing levels, could and should be held in abeyance for those conditions which pose an actual, real, critically quantifiable, problem. You mention ebola ... that's a good example. I'd rather not see resources so drained on minor illnesses that when a major one comes along, it just isn't possible to cope with it.

[jimnyc]

Keeping my temperance fully engaged ... let me just ask, how much of a threat IS measles ? Are we really, as I suspect, firmly in 'sledgehammer to crack a nut' territory with all of this ?

Yes, there are recorded cases of measles leading ultimately to death ... but, it's not as though the mortality rates of measles are anything more than 'rare'. That's just a fact, at least, as I understand it to be.

Are more lethal strains of measles even possible ? I don't know. If there could be, I somehow doubt that the medical world would be prepared to properly treat the mutation responsible. So, until they can, that's out as an answer.

I honestly think that resources, time, effort, staffing levels, could and should be held in abeyance for those conditions which pose an actual, real, critically quantifiable, problem. You mention ebola ... that's a good example. I'd rather not see resources so drained on minor illnesses that when a major one comes along, it just isn't possible to cope with it.

Here are some posts I gathered. Some are about the current outbreaks and where they are - which is scary, because the more locations the more obviously it can spread to others. I'm not trying to post things that are solely about vaccines but rather about what we have now and what to do - and as you asked, how bad of a threat is measles, and my addition of how contagious is it.

---

Measles Cases in 2019

From January 1 to May 3, 2019, 764** individual cases of measles have been confirmed in 23 states. This is an increase of 60 cases from the previous week. This is the greatest number of cases reported in the U.S. since 1994 and since measles was declared eliminated in 2000.

States That Have Reported Measles Cases in 2019

https://i.imgur.com/lVzsQwl.png

The states that have reported cases to CDC are Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Tennessee, and Washington.

Rest - https://www.cdc.gov/measles/cases-outbreaks.html


Measles strikes another 60 Americans in a week as outbreak surges to 764 cases, CDC reveals

---Measles cases in the US have far outstripped the previous 2014 record, reaching 764 cases
---The virus is spreading among tight-knit communities and anti-vaccine groups
---International travel has introduced the virus into communities in Washington, Oregon and New York

Another 60 cases of measles were confirmed in the US in the last week alone, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention revealed Monday.

Now, a total of 764 people in 23 states have been sickened by the highly contagious virus.

The current outbreak has now shattered the previous record - 667 cases in 2014 - since the disease was declared 'eradicated' in the US in 2000.

Measles has reappeared, particularly in close-knit and religious communities, and its rise trails growing anti-vaccination sentiments among Americans.

Last week, the Washington outbreak of the disease was declared over, but this week Pennsylvania was added to the list of states with outbreaks with five cases.

Once more, the vast majority of the new cases are in New York.

The state contributed 50 out of this week's 60 new cases.

In New York, measles has spread like wildfire in Orthodox Jewish communities where some believe that a vaccine constitutes a foreign body, which the Torah forbids Jews from allowing to enter their own bodies.

'Outbreaks in New York City and state are the largest ...the longer they continue, the greater the chance measles will once again get a foothold in the United States,' said Dr Nancy Messonier.

Rest - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-6997983/Measles-strikes-60-Americans-week-outbreak-surges-764-cases-CDC-reveals.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&ito=1490


Global Measles Outbreaks

Measles cases are on the rise. All WHO regions are experiencing large, often extended outbreaks of the disease.

Measles is extremely contagious. It is estimated that around 9 in 10 people who are not already immune will become infected following exposure.

Measles can be very serious. In 2017 it caused approximately 110,000 deaths. Possible complications include encephalitis (an infection that leads to swelling of the brain), pneumonia, severe diarrhea and dehydration, and/or permanent disability. In developing countries, approximately 1 of every 100 children with measles will die from the disease or its complications.

Measles is preventable. Because of vaccination, measles deaths have been reduced by 80% since 2000, and more than 21 million lives have been saved. Without urgent efforts to address gaps in coverage, outbreaks like the ones occurring around the world will continue to occur.

What is CDC Doing

In coordination with partners including WHO, Gavi and the Measles & Rubella Initiative, CDC provides the following services

---Guidance on measles and rubella elimination across the globe
---Support for outbreak investigations
---Surveillance and specialized laboratory testing
---Planning, implementation, monitoring & evaluation of immunization campaigns
---Reviews of immunization programs

https://www.cdc.gov/globalhealth/measles/globalmeaslesoutbreaks.htm


U.S. Measles Outbreaks Are Driven By A Global Surge In The Virus

In 2000, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention declared measles "eliminated" from the United States. But with measles continuing to spread and at times flourish in many parts of the globe, the U.S. has been unable to remain immune to the disease.

This year, the U.S. has its highest number of measles cases in 25 years. As of this week, the CDC has recorded 704 cases in 22 states.

The reemergence of measles is linked to parents who have chosen not to vaccinate their children against this highly contagious disease.

But that's not the full explanation. James Goodson, a senior measles scientist at the CDC, says the U.S. outbreaks are being driven by a surge in measles globally.

The World Health Organization tallied over 112,000 measles cases in the first quarter of 2019. This is up more than 300% compared with the same period in 2018. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director-general of the WHO, calls the rise in measles "alarming" and a "global crisis."

Madagascar is grappling with a measles outbreak that has sickened 70,000 people and killed more than 1,000. There are also significant outbreaks in Brazil, India, the Philippines, Ukraine and Venezuela. There have been smaller flare-ups in France, Greece, Israel and Georgia.

"When we see large measles outbreaks in countries that are common destinations for U.S. travelers, like we're seeing this year," Goodson says, "that's when we often see the largest number of measles cases in the U.S."

That's because of the nature of the virus. "The only reservoir for the measles virus is people," Goodson says. "So the only way you're going to get measles is if you come in contact with somebody who's infected with measles."

Measles is one of the most highly contagious human diseases known to science. Before a measles vaccine was introduced in the U.S. in the 1960s, the CDC estimates there were 3 million to 4 million cases a year in the country.

Rest - https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2019/04/30/717473521/u-s-measles-outbreak-is-linked-to-global-surge-in-the-virus

[Gunny]

Keeping my temperance fully engaged ... let me just ask, how much of a threat IS measles ? Are we really, as I suspect, firmly in 'sledgehammer to crack a nut' territory with all of this ?

Yes, there are recorded cases of measles leading ultimately to death ... but, it's not as though the mortality rates of measles are anything more than 'rare'. That's just a fact, at least, as I understand it to be.

Are more lethal strains of measles even possible ? I don't know. If there could be, I somehow doubt that the medical world would be prepared to properly treat the mutation responsible. So, until they can, that's out as an answer.

I honestly think that resources, time, effort, staffing levels, could and should be held in abeyance for those conditions which pose an actual, real, critically quantifiable, problem. You mention ebola ... that's a good example. I'd rather not see resources so drained on minor illnesses that when a major one comes along, it just isn't possible to cope with it.Measles is the number ONE killer of preventable diseases. It's posted in one of Jim's links above. Again, "#1 killer among PREVENTABLE diseases.

I'm not sure about your concern with drained resources. You can go to just about any Walmart, grocery store or drug store here and get immunizations. A lack thereof doesn't seem to be an issue for us. That isn't even counting medical facilities. And you can get them free if you don't have the money (I don't know how or specifically from who).

I see very little difference between a spreading measles pan-epidemic and a spreading radical Islam epidemic except we have an immunization for the former.

[jimnyc]

I see very little difference between a spreading measles pan-epidemic and a spreading radical Islam epidemic except we have an immunization for the former.

** OT rant

I think we have an immunization for the latter as well, but PC politics prevents us from going full throttle and eliminating 90% of the issue around the world, perhaps more if you're touched in the head like me and just don't care about anything other than eliminating the infestation that admits they want us dead. Kill them all first. Problem solved.

** Ok rant over. :)

[Gunny]

** OT rant

I think we have an immunization for the latter as well, but PC politics prevents us from going full throttle and eliminating 90% of the issue around the world, perhaps more if you're touched in the head like me and just don't care about anything other than eliminating the infestation that admits they want us dead. Kill them all first. Problem solved.

** Ok rant over. :)It is only partially off-topic. I introduced one disease in comparison to another. If you put them side by side, what is difference? One we can prevent and one we (as you stated) are not allowed to. The effect of each is the same. Multiply, spread and destroy everything in its path that isn't it. When you take away all the layers of politics and the veneir, you have the same damned thing. A disease. Destroy it completely before it spreads further if you have the ability. In both cases.

[Drummond]

It is only partially off-topic. I introduced one disease in comparison to another. If you put them side by side, what is difference? One we can prevent and one we (as you stated) are not allowed to. The effect of each is the same. Multiply, spread and destroy everything in its path that isn't it. When you take away all the layers of politics and the veneir, you have the same damned thing. A disease. Destroy it completely before it spreads further if you have the ability. In both cases.

... um. I'm just beginning to wonder if I've taken the wrong approach to all this.

To both Jim and Gunny:

I still say that measles is decidedly minor compared to the capacity to kill that ebola has. Still, it's way more of a killer, judging by the stats I've just seen, than I believed. I've been motivated throughout in my postings to believe that measles deaths were a rarity.

I think I've had good reason for my belief, because here, those deaths ARE a rarity. Granted that, decades ago, that wasn't true. Today, though, in my part of the world, actually ... they ARE.

See this, from the Office for National Statistics (it was a fully linked-in Government Department, but for the sake of shrugging off accusations of pro-Governmental bias in its data publications, was given administrative independence at least a decade ago ...) ...

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/measles-deaths-by-age-group-from-1980-to-2013-ons-data/measles-notifications-and-deaths-in-england-and-wales-1940-to-2013

Note the year-by-year table. In 1940, we had a much smaller population, of course, but still recorded (of 409,521 notifications, i.e number of people known to have contracted it) 857 deaths that year.

With at least double the population of those days ... by the turn of the century, we had just 2,378 notifications, and just ONE death that year (from a population of around 52 million). Add the total number of notifications from 2013 to 2015 together (population around 60 million), again, only the ONE death recorded.

Do you see why, in the environment I'm familiar with, we don't take measles seriously ??

Quoting from the link:


Prior to 2006, the last death from acute measles was in 1992. In 2006, there was 1 measles death in a 13-year-old male who had an underlying lung condition and was taking immunosuppressive drugs. Another death in 2008 was also due to acute measles in an unvaccinated child with a congenital immunodeficiency, whose condition did not require treatment with immunoglobulin. In 2013, 1 death was reported in a 25-year-old man following acute pneumonia as a complication of measles. In 2016, one death was reported in a 10-month-old infant who suffered complications due to a secondary infection.

All other measles deaths since 1992 shown above are in older individuals and were caused by the late effects of measles. These infections were acquired during the 1980s or earlier, when epidemics of measles occurred.

Do you now see why I react to the postings I've seen, as I have ? I daresay I could dredge up stats on pneumonia cases, or flu cases, and those would show a greater incidence of mortality than measles does !

Here, it's a very minor malady !!! For those VERY few people at risk of dying from measles, this is because they were unhealthy in the first place.

I'd say this. We've never, in the UK, had any program of mass vaccination that's ever been compulsory. Thanks to (as we see it over here) the scare stories emanating from the US about near-uncontrolled measles outbreaks, NOW, there's beginning to be talk of compulsory vaccinations. However, the Minister in charge of that Department has also voiced his reluctance to go that far. He considers it an extreme step to take.

No doubt a lot of our 'healthy' environment comes from immunisations ... we've had the MMR vaccine here for a considerable time ... since 1988, in fact. So ... let's check the statistics for 1987, say.

Notifications: 42,158.

Deaths in 1987: SIX.

Now, that's only half the deaths than for each of the three preceding years. But it still shows that our older, far less developed, immunisation programs of those days, were producing stats proving that deaths were a rarity.

Note the fact that out of tens of thousands of reported cases, and BACK THEN, recorded deaths from it struggled to even get to double figures ! And .... of those VERY FEW deaths ... how many died because their health was compromised by other factors ??

I hope my attitude in my posts, to say nothing of my incredulity, is now clear to you.

And I also believe this: measles is so minor, here, I think not only because of immunisations (which are NOT compulsory, as I said), but because we have an environment where, historically, exposure to measles is proven great enough for our immune systems to be able to cope with it.

So, I ask: do you Americans actually have weakened natural immunity, because of your reliance on vaccinations ?

Your population is only five times the size of ours. Why on earth are you recording HUNDREDS of deaths ??

Something has to explain why measles, to you, is significantly more deadly than it is to us in the UK.

[jimnyc]

Drummond - measles remains #20 on top causes of death throughout the world.

https://www.infoplease.com/math-science/health/healthcare/top-20-causes-of-mortality-throughout-the-world


And out of all the leading deaths of children, measles is in the top 5 of preventable/treatable diseases. That's more than half of 10.6 million children in this source, and continues today in leading killers of children.

https://www.webmd.com/lung/copd/news/20060525/top-10-causes-death-worldwide

Even though a safe and cost-effective vaccine is available, in 2017, there were 110 000 measles deaths globally, mostly among children under the age of five.

https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/measles

--

I think all of those show some major death still coming from measles around the world and that's mainly discussing children in these articles, not to mention the sickly and other categories. Myself, I wouldn't be so willing to diminish the death rate of measles and the damage it can potentially bring. The data and deaths are there.

[Drummond]

Drummond - measles remains #20 on top causes of death throughout the world.

https://www.infoplease.com/math-science/health/healthcare/top-20-causes-of-mortality-throughout-the-world


And out of all the leading deaths of children, measles is in the top 5 of preventable/treatable diseases. That's more than half of 10.6 million children in this source, and continues today in leading killers of children.

https://www.webmd.com/lung/copd/news/20060525/top-10-causes-death-worldwide

Even though a safe and cost-effective vaccine is available, in 2017, there were 110 000 measles deaths globally, mostly among children under the age of five.

https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/measles

--

I think all of those show some major death still coming from measles around the world and that's mainly discussing children in these articles, not to mention the sickly and other categories. Myself, I wouldn't be so willing to diminish the death rate of measles and the damage it can potentially bring. The data and deaths are there.

OK, fair enough.

I can only say what I have. We in the UK regard measles as a minor illness ... unpleasant, yes, but VERY unlikely to kill ... and those who do die, invariably do because their health and ability to ward off measles was compromised in the first place. If you're healthy enough, you just don't die from it !! Our own statistics show that reality very clearly indeed. To us, it's a kiddie illness, and if you get it, you shrug it off, and then get on with your life.

That's been my understanding throughout all of my posting on this subject, and I've regarded other posts as unduly alarmist, possibly because your authorities had, as I had believed, hyped it up to seem especially serious.

Very well, then - I'm in error.

Understandably so ... I've never, ever, in my long life, regarded measles as serious ! Why, given the truth of my own environment, would I ??

-- So. I'd like to know why the US is faring so much worse than we are, over here, considering that compulsion to take immunisations has never, yet, been introduced (... just heavily recommended ...).

[Kathianne]

Seems until the vaccine was brought to the UK, many succumbed to measles just like everywhere else. Seems not everyone there was able to 'shake it off.'

US has had the vaccine approved for even longer, leaving many folks with no memories of those who couldn't 'shake it off' or went blind or had encephalitis and brain damage.

http://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/measles

[Drummond]

Seems until the vaccine was brought to the UK, many succumbed to measles just like everywhere else. Seems not everyone there was able to 'shake it off.'

I've never said that vaccinations don't have a value ! However, what I have questioned, is:

1. The need or desirability of compelling them.

2. The incidence in today's world, and in an advanced Western country (such as mine, or yours) of mortality ... bearing in mind non-compulsion to date.

3. Whether people have, and can enjoy, better immunity from the disease than otherwise just by having immune systems primed to fight it off.

In making your statement, Kathianne, have you stopped to consider that, in the days I assume you're talking about, UK society was very different to modern times ? Poorer hygiene. Poorer healthcare altogether, regardless of its type. Definitely poorer nutrition !! Rationing of food in the UK, following WWII continued until well into the 1950's ... that couldn't help but impact on peoples' health.

No vaccination existed in the UK on any major level until 1968. So, going back to the Office for National Statistics (ONS) table I posted before, the stats for 1967, were:

NOTIFICATIONS: 460,467.

DEATHS: 99.

Rather less than a tenth of one percent, by my reckoning. That was BEFORE vaccinations, remember.

The year vaccinations were introduced ...

NOTIFICATIONS: 236,154.

... a fifty percent decrease.

DEATHS: 51.

... Roughly the same percentage of deaths to notifications persisted. However, notifications jumped to 307,408 just two years later, this WITH vaccinations !! How come ... if vaccinations were such a great remedy ? But, deaths, percentage-wise, compared to that figure, were at a lower percentage level. Only 42 that year.

Again, how come ? How did an ability to fight off measles come about ... from higher incidences of contracting it, and WITH vaccinations continuing as before ?? What added factor had come into play ?

Let me remind you of this text, from my link:


Prior to 2006, the last death from acute measles was in 1992. In 2006, there was 1 measles death in a 13-year-old male who had an underlying lung condition and was taking immunosuppressive drugs. Another death in 2008 was also due to acute measles in an unvaccinated child with a congenital immunodeficiency, whose condition did not require treatment with immunoglobulin. In 2013, 1 death was reported in a 25-year-old man following acute pneumonia as a complication of measles. In 2016, one death was reported in a 10-month-old infant who suffered complications due to a secondary infection.

All other measles deaths since 1992 shown above are in older individuals and were caused by the late effects of measles. These infections were acquired during the 1980s or earlier, when epidemics of measles occurred.

There's an inescapable conclusion to be drawn from all of this, at least, so far as the UK's population is concerned. Isn't there ?

So, I still have to ask you about this:


US has had the vaccine approved for even longer, leaving many folks with no memories of those who couldn't 'shake it off' or went blind or had encephalitis and brain damage.

http://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/measles

In the UK, it's the case these days that measles deaths are associated with pre-existing conditions RESULTING IN WEAKENED IMMUNE SYSTEMS. That's a statistical fact. In far healthier immune systems, where pre-existing health conditions aren't present, deaths are not recorded.

That's a statistical fact, too. Statistically, in the UK, measles is not a killer, unless there's some other illness contributing to a person's condition ... and even then, death is a rarity.

If my assumptions are wrong, (a) how do you account for it, and (b) do I correctly understand that this is not true in the US ... and if not, WHY NOT ?

[Gunny]

Seems until the vaccine was brought to the UK, many succumbed to measles just like everywhere else. Seems not everyone there was able to 'shake it off.'

US has had the vaccine approved for even longer, leaving many folks with no memories of those who couldn't 'shake it off' or went blind or had encephalitis and brain damage.

http://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/measlesEncephalitis. Want to know where Gunny's creep factor is, that will do it. Had a friend when I was a kid get that crap. No thanks.
s

[Elessar]

OK, fair enough.

-- So. I'd like to know why the US is faring so much worse than we are, over here, considering that compulsion to take immunisations has never, yet, been introduced (... just heavily recommended ...).

Across the Southern border with people not vaccinated come from.

[Drummond]

Across the Southern border with people not vaccinated come from.

Understood.

Still, how come the vast majority of Americans aren't rendered immune ? Also, why doesn't the total lack of deaths from people contracting it (if healthy, when they do !! ..) reflect what's true in the UK ?

See what I've posted above. Unless a citizen suffers from some pre-existing, additional condition ... a UK citizen has, these days, no reason to think that contracting measles could be a death sentence. I just don't get why America isn't mirroring what's true here. Supposing that we're somehow 'genetically superior' to you is complete nonsense.

I'm genuinely staggered to see that, in the US you've a real, actual basis for fearing the disease !! It's something of a revelation to me. I, for one, never have done.

[Elessar]

Understood.

Still, how come the vast majority of Americans aren't rendered immune ? Also, why doesn't the total lack of deaths from people contracting it (if healthy, when they do !! ..) reflect what's true in the UK ?

See what I've posted above. Unless a citizen suffers from some pre-existing, additional condition ... a UK citizen has, these days, no reason to think that contracting measles could be a death sentence. I just don't get why America isn't mirroring what's true here. Supposing that we're somehow 'genetically superior' to you is complete nonsense.

I'm genuinely staggered to see that, in the US you've a real, actual basis for fearing the disease !! It's something of a revelation to me. I, for one, never have done.

How do illegals from Central America storming our borders get vaccinated?

They bleed into their own illegal communities and spread it.

They never got vaccinations down there for anything, so they are carriers. Not the
USA's fault despite the amount of aid sent which ended up lining the pockets of
mini-dictators.

[Kathianne]

How do illegals from Central America storming our borders get vaccinated?

They bleed into their own illegal communities and spread it.

They never got vaccinations down there for anything, so they are carriers. Not the
USA's fault despite the amount of aid sent which ended up lining the pockets of
mini-dictators.

It's a fact that there are those from 'outside' that may not be vaccinated and bring the disease, (and others) to the US. The real problem today, as we can't change the ability to travel-legally or otherwise-are those people living here, that CHOOSE not to vaccinate. The outbreaks are in the areas with the highest percentage of anti-vaxxers.

[Drummond]

How do illegals from Central America storming our borders get vaccinated?

They bleed into their own illegal communities and spread it.

They never got vaccinations down there for anything, so they are carriers. Not the
USA's fault despite the amount of aid sent which ended up lining the pockets of
mini-dictators.

Well ... they're not automatically carriers. Not everybody trying to get into the US is going to be a carrier.

I take your point, though. An unacceptably high proportion WILL be.

My response, though, is .. so what ? Those immunised against it, won't be affected. Those who aren't, may be (there are no guarantees). But even if they aren't, why don't those catching it just shrug it off after a week or so ?

Unless an individual has some serious underlying health problem, that's what happens here ... on those (- these days -) rare instances when somebody contracts it. It's been decades since we in the UK have needed to think of major measles outbreaks as (a) occurring, and (b) carrying the potential for a health emergency.

My only thought on this - this is where your argument might gain ground - is if the influx of immigrants carrying it are carrying a more virulent form of measles. Maybe that's true. In which case, is the real problem that there's been no means of adapting to it ? I mean this in two ways: (1) are your vaccination preparations less effective, & / or, (2) have you had less time to adapt immune responses to cope with it ?

[jimnyc]

I was doing some reading around on my own, looking at various mortality rates, depending on where you live in the world, and or in any pocket areas. And how low even in the best places and how large of percentages in the worst of places. So the mortality rate, and just how contagious things are. These are some things that cannot be avoided and are simply the facts no matter where folks stand on this matter. The rates are what they are, and it's been proven of course over and over, the immunization rates we know for the most part anyway.

Of course there will be a ton of variables that come into play. And where it slowly makes its way to, no one really knows for sure until it happens and we're faced with it. But once those amount of people that get his by the contaminated, then all these rates will come into play, the do and they have.

One thing that seems to be a 'constant', and then can be used to diminish, or show the strength of such a disease, depending on where you are looking at things from - and that is that the death rate is somewhere VERY low in the one percent range or even below in some areas. (bear with me here as I am using my cell in one hand and typing into a text document to edit later!)

And yup, those less than 1% sure does make it sound like it's not that bad of a disease after all. How bad can a disease be if the death rate, for example, is only at .8%.

Well, ok, take the masses into account for a moment. We KNOW this would really never happen with measles thanks to many vaccinations, but humor me for a moment. So if there is 65 million people in the UK - at .8% that would equate to 5,200,000. And in the USA at 327.2 million as of 2018 - that would equate to 26,160,000. That's using total population numbers though. BUT, gives and idea into the total numbers assuming an entire area is not vaccinated at all. Many folks would die, even if not those types of numbers.

In the modern era it is rare to suffer permanent disability or death from measles in the United States. Between 1900 and 1963, the mortality rate of measles dropped from 13.3 per 100,000 to .2% per 100,000 in the population, due to advancements in living conditions, nutrition & healthcare - a 98% decline.

So those numbers vary a tad - and why? - it depends on the vaccinated areas where there are small to large pockets of non-immunized. And absolutely, I'm sure there are some that aren't immunized that don't catch the infection. But OVERALL speaking, it ranges between .5 - 1% range. And when there are small pockets of 20-50, things get underestimated as thank God, the folks suffer a little like any other sickness, but no one dies sometimes, so the more and more that happens you have more and more people thinking it's not so bad. But again, even if at only .5%, and you lets say have an outbreak in a major area that remains un-vaccinated, or the susceptible as the sick/elderly/babies.... let's just say the minimum of .2% and say worldwide it's 10,000 people - that's 200 dead people.

---

The next thing I think of is just how contagious is such a disease?

Ways it spreads:

mother/baby pregnancy
airborne/respiration/coughing/sneezing (probably the highest way here)
saliva - kissing, sharing drinks, just sharing anything in that area
Skin to skin - handshakes, hugging, close contact
Simply touching contaminated surfaces - doorknobs, blankets (think hotels, bathrooms...)

If ONE person has it, then 90% of those that get close to that person, and aren't immunized, will also become affected. NINETY PERCENT - that is astonishingly high of a transmission rate.

"Measles is highly contagious virus that lives in the nose and throat mucus of an infected person. It can spread to others through coughing and sneezing.... infected people can spread measles to others from 4 days before and 4 days after the rash appears."

[Drummond]

I was doing some reading around on my own, looking at various mortality rates, depending on where you live in the world, and or in any pocket areas. And how low even in the best places and how large of percentages in the worst of places. So the mortality rate, and just how contagious things are. These are some things that cannot be avoided and are simply the facts no matter where folks stand on this matter. The rates are what they are, and it's been proven of course over and over, the immunization rates we know for the most part anyway.

Of course there will be a ton of variables that come into play. And where it slowly makes its way to, no one really knows for sure until it happens and we're faced with it. But once those amount of people that get his by the contaminated, then all these rates will come into play, the do and they have.

One thing that seems to be a 'constant', and then can be used to diminish, or show the strength of such a disease, depending on where you are looking at things from - and that is that the death rate is somewhere VERY low in the one percent range or even below in some areas. (bear with me here as I am using my cell in one hand and typing into a text document to edit later!)

And yup, those less than 1% sure does make it sound like it's not that bad of a disease after all. How bad can a disease be if the death rate, for example, is only at .8%.

Well, ok, take the masses into account for a moment. We KNOW this would really never happen with measles thanks to many vaccinations, but humor me for a moment. So if there is 65 million people in the UK - at .8% that would equate to 5,200,000. And in the USA at 327.2 million as of 2018 - that would equate to 26,160,000. That's using total population numbers though. BUT, gives and idea into the total numbers assuming an entire area is not vaccinated at all. Many folks would die, even if not those types of numbers.

In the modern era it is rare to suffer permanent disability or death from measles in the United States. Between 1900 and 1963, the mortality rate of measles dropped from 13.3 per 100,000 to .2% per 100,000 in the population, due to advancements in living conditions, nutrition & healthcare - a 98% decline.

So those numbers vary a tad - and why? - it depends on the vaccinated areas where there are small to large pockets of non-immunized. And absolutely, I'm sure there are some that aren't immunized that don't catch the infection. But OVERALL speaking, it ranges between .5 - 1% range. And when there are small pockets of 20-50, things get underestimated as thank God, the folks suffer a little like any other sickness, but no one dies sometimes, so the more and more that happens you have more and more people thinking it's not so bad. But again, even if at only .5%, and you lets say have an outbreak in a major area that remains un-vaccinated, or the susceptible as the sick/elderly/babies.... let's just say the minimum of .2% and say worldwide it's 10,000 people - that's 200 dead people.

---

The next thing I think of is just how contagious is such a disease?

Ways it spreads:

mother/baby pregnancy
airborne/respiration/coughing/sneezing (probably the highest way here)
saliva - kissing, sharing drinks, just sharing anything in that area
Skin to skin - handshakes, hugging, close contact
Simply touching contaminated surfaces - doorknobs, blankets (think hotels, bathrooms...)

If ONE person has it, then 90% of those that get close to that person, and aren't immunized, will also become affected. NINETY PERCENT - that is astonishingly high of a transmission rate.

"Measles is highly contagious virus that lives in the nose and throat mucus of an infected person. It can spread to others through coughing and sneezing.... infected people can spread measles to others from 4 days before and 4 days after the rash appears."

Jim ... I could be going through a 'blonde' moment here, and miscalculating. Sorry if so ! BUT ... I think your figures are out by a factor of ten ?

Let's use your 'UK figures' to illustrate. Let's also round down slightly. 60 million, not 65 million. 5 million, not 5.2 million.

Point eight of a single percentage point means that the answer has to be less than one hundredth of the number you're using, in this case 60. So, rather less than one million, not over five times a million, as in excess of 5 million.

Let's reduce your 5,200,000 by a factor of 10. OK, then it's really 520,000.

Our first year of mass vaccinations was in 1968 (a handful of limited trials in the years leading up to 1968, though). Bearing in mind the population figure back then was probably half what it is now (say 32.5 million ?) ... and the stats my table reported for that period (say, 1967) were:

NOTIFICATIONS: 460,407

DEATHS: 99.

99 deaths, Jim, is WAY less than one percent of the base figure !! That was BEFORE we'd gone in for immunisations across the UK ! You can safely assume that the percentage of people immunised in 1967 corresponded to a single digit percentage point. So, what percentage of the population, minus a meaningful immunisation effort, fell prey to measles ? Maybe 1.5-2 percent ?

Of those, how many died ?

Let's take your lowest mortality rate percentage figure of 0.2 percent per 100,000 (based on 1963 ?). That's 2 percent per million. For, say, 30 million people, divide that by 50 ... that's 600,000.

But, we only had 99 deaths in 1967, in the year before mass immunisation even began.

The UK is a small land mass compared to America. Our population is correspondingly smaller. It has its remote corners, maybe not so remote as in the USA ? Even despite considering all that, and given as totally valid your description of methods of transmission ... STILL ... what makes our death rate, even BEFORE immunisation, so very low ?

Or, if you like, yours so high ?

[jimnyc]

You are free to wish as you believe, Mr Drummond! I'm done after this post, as my goal isn't to convince anyone of anything. This thread was more about "what do we do now that it's out there". :) (re-reading my post, this comes off as a little snippy, but it is NOT intended as so, sir! )

There were 110,000 deaths from measles in 2017, likely last data available for such rates. And admittedly it changes by year. And it's MUCH worse in 3rd world countries where immunizations aren't found.

And then "even if" one were to eliminate ALL deaths from the equation, we're still looking at an infection that is one of the most contagious in the world, and sickens so many people... and then the costs involved, and who needs special protection at such times - in the babies, cancer patients, elderly patients and various other groups. So, at such a point then, while not deadly, it remains a massive ailment and a very costly one at that. But let's face reality and add in that it does in fact kill people. The majority that it kills are children under the age of 5 years old. And many poor bastards already working on something like cancer.

So whether 99 deaths at what you point out that year in the UK, or that year worldwide... or in the 1990's just USA or the current statistics of deaths worldwide for the past decade. It's folks dying. I think any amount is too many. I'm not implying folks should be crapping their pants and ending the world, but it's something more than important to pay attention to. And it's grabbed more than it's share of attention over here, not just because of it spreading alone - but because for quite some time now there is a vocal group out there trying to persuade others NOT to get any vaccines. And it's THOSE people that end up getting infected in those pockets.

And anyone can look at the yearly global stats of how many got the infection and how many died. It does pop all over the map - but certain that the majority of the deaths are in other countries.

Madagascar, for example. They have 115,000 reported cases in 2019 and 1,200 deaths so far. So it shows that it CAN spread and kill, depending on factors of course. They are saying that worldwide the measles is up 300% so far this early 2019 compared to last year.

[Drummond]

You are free to wish as you believe, Mr Drummond! I'm done after this post, as my goal isn't to convince anyone of anything. This thread was more about "what do we do now that it's out there". :) (re-reading my post, this comes off as a little snippy, but it is NOT intended as so, sir! )

There were 110,000 deaths from measles in 2017, likely last data available for such rates. And admittedly it changes by year. And it's MUCH worse in 3rd world countries where immunizations aren't found.

And then "even if" one were to eliminate ALL deaths from the equation, we're still looking at an infection that is one of the most contagious in the world, and sickens so many people... and then the costs involved, and who needs special protection at such times - in the babies, cancer patients, elderly patients and various other groups. So, at such a point then, while not deadly, it remains a massive ailment and a very costly one at that. But let's face reality and add in that it does in fact kill people. The majority that it kills are children under the age of 5 years old. And many poor bastards already working on something like cancer.

So whether 99 deaths at what you point out that year in the UK, or that year worldwide... or in the 1990's just USA or the current statistics of deaths worldwide for the past decade. It's folks dying. I think any amount is too many. I'm not implying folks should be crapping their pants and ending the world, but it's something more than important to pay attention to. And it's grabbed more than it's share of attention over here, not just because of it spreading alone - but because for quite some time now there is a vocal group out there trying to persuade others NOT to get any vaccines. And it's THOSE people that end up getting infected in those pockets.

And anyone can look at the yearly global stats of how many got the infection and how many died. It does pop all over the map - but certain that the majority of the deaths are in other countries.

Madagascar, for example. They have 115,000 reported cases in 2019 and 1,200 deaths so far. So it shows that it CAN spread and kill, depending on factors of course. They are saying that worldwide the measles is up 300% so far this early 2019 compared to last year.

All noted.

I can only say to this that there must be a reason why we fare so much better than you, or better than other countries across the world. Bear in mind that, in giving my mortality figures, I effectively skewed them into examining an environment that PRECEDED our commencement of mass vaccinations !

I've posted elsewhere a far more modern example, from 2010 to 2016. Number of deaths in that entire period, confirmed as involving measles ... THREE. Obviously, for some of those years .. not one death. And in every single case, the person died while also suffering from another serious condition at the same time.

Number of people dying from measles in the UK, and nothing else at all involved, over those six years ... ZERO.

Whatever you conclude from all this, the simple and clear fact is that, these days in the UK, our statistics show that measles is not a killer !

... And that's the starting-point, for me, in all of these discussions. In my reality, measles no longer kills. In yours ... well, it's a significant threat to your lives.

Your country has my utmost sympathy, and I'm very sorry that I was blind to the reality you people face.

But, I was, and for good reason. That's just the truth of it.

Make of that what you will.

[Kathianne]

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/measles-outbreak/measles-outbreaks-make-2018-near-record-year-u-s-n961276


...


Although some people argue that measles is a relatively harmless childhood illness, it can kill. Measles causes encephalitis and pneumonia (https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/smart-facts/what-are-measles-what-you-need-know-n860506)and before mass vaccination began in the 1980s, measles killed nearly 2.6 million people a year, according to the World Health Organization (http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs286/en/). It still kills more than 100,000 people a year, mostly children under five. One in 1,000 people who catch measles die of it....

[jimnyc]

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/measles-outbreak/measles-outbreaks-make-2018-near-record-year-u-s-n961276


...

That's the part that saddens me, is that those who suffer the most from these outbreaks are children.

[jimnyc]

A few articles to ponder, the first being last year (not sure if it's part of this current worldwide outbreak). And while numbers and percentages don't always match up worldwide - no country seems to be fully immune. And while maybe not directly in the UK where you are, my friend - but it's certainly not discriminating from spreading through all of Europe. And while no significant deaths in the UK in the past decade, other places had similar records and are now getting hit. And while the deaths in the UK may not be there to show, it is showing a large increase in cases. And if only .1% or even as low as .5% - you may only see one death or none from a thousand cases. But it's expensive! And the worry of death is there.

---

RED ALERT Measles cases reach eight year high in Europe – sparking fears of a UK outbreak

Across Europe there were more than 41,000 measles cases recorded during the first six months of 2018, including 37 deaths

CASES of measles in Europe have reached an eight-year high - sparking a rise in the number of cases in the UK, health bosses have warned.

Anyone travelling in the continent is urged to make sure their vaccination against the disease is up to date to stop the illness from spreading.

https://i.imgur.com/3kS0ByH.png

The World Health Organisation (WHO) warned the number of cases of the highly infectious disease during 2018 have already outstripped any year since 2010.

Across Europe there were more than 41,000 measles cases recorded during the first six months of 2018, including 37 deaths.

The WHO said the highest annual total for measles cases since 2010 was recorded in 2017 when 23,927 cases were identified.

The global health body said France, Georgia, Greece, Italy, Russia, Serbia and Ukraine have had more than 1,000 cases each so far in 2018.

Rest - https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7058753/measles-europe-eight-year-high-uk-outbreak-fears/


Measles cases in Europe tripled last year, WHO says

Measles cases in Europe tripled between 2017 and 2018 to 82,596 - the highest number recorded this decade, data from the World Health Organization shows.

While vaccination rates are improving, the WHO says coverage is not high enough to prevent circulation of the virus in many countries.

Ukraine reported the highest number of measles cases last year - more than 10 times that of the next highest, Serbia.

Over 90% of cases were in 10 countries, including France, Italy and Greece.

Measles is a highly infectious viral illness that can sometimes lead to serious health complications, including infections of the lungs and brain.

There were 72 deaths from measles in Europe in 2018 compared with 42 in 2017.

The European countries with the highest number of measles cases from January to December 2018 were:

Ukraine (53,218)
Serbia (5,076)
Israel (2,919)
France (2,913)
Italy (2,517)
Russian Federation (2,256)
Georgia (2,203)
Greece (2,193)
Albania (1,466)
Romania (1,087)

Rest - https://www.bbc.com/news/health-47157020


Record measles outbreak in Europe with dozens of deaths and nearly 1,000 cases in UK in past year

At least 37 people are thought to have died in the European region this year due to the highly contagious disease

Measles cases have hit a record high across Europe with more than 41,000 children and adults infected in the first six months of this year.

That figure is nearly double the highest number of yearly cases recorded since 2010.

At least 37 people are thought to have died due to the highly contagious disease so far this year, although there have been no fatalities in the UK.

Between July 2017 and June 2018, there were just under 1,000 cases of measles in Britain, compared to 531 confirmed cases for the whole of 2016.

Meanwhile, there have been 760 cases in the first six months of this year in the UK alone compared to 187 in the last half of 2017.

Rest - https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/record-measles-outbreak-europe-dozens-13108567


Measles cases quadruple globally in 2019, says UN

The number of measles cases reported worldwide in the first three months of 2019 has quadrupled compared with the same time last year, according to the World Health Organization (WHO).

The UN body said provisional data indicated a "a clear trend", with all regions of the world seeing outbreaks.

Africa had witnessed the most dramatic rise - up 700%.

The agency said actual numbers may be far greater, since only one in 10 cases globally are reported.

Measles is a highly infectious viral illness that can sometimes lead to serious health complications, including infections of the lungs and brain.

Ukraine, Madagascar and India have been worst affected by the disease, with tens of thousands of reported cases per million people.

Since September, at least 800 people have died from measles in Madagascar alone.

Outbreaks have also hit Brazil, Pakistan and Yemen, "causing many deaths - mostly among young children", while a spike in case numbers was reported for countries including the US and Thailand with high levels of vaccination coverage.

Rest - https://www.bbc.com/news/health-47940710

[Drummond]

That's the part that saddens me, is that those who suffer the most from these outbreaks are children.

Agreed.

I thought this might be of interest .. a Daily Express article about contracting measles, and what symptoms could be expected if a person does. They make a point of showing how nasty the symptoms could be.

https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/health/1006744/measles-vaccine-do-adults-need-to-get-it-mmr-outbreak-europe

Anyone who's interested ... read through it. The one 'telling' feature of this article is that, nowhere in their own text does it give any mention of measles being enough of a threat to lead to death ... except once, as a health 'advisory' comment originating from an authority that isn't British. That isn't even mentioned as a possibility from, and for, our own people. I think it would have been, if it was one, for us.

Folks ... something has to explain why measles in the UK is neither a killer these days, nor is regarded as an illness threatening us with death. If in fact there is something specific to the UK that protects us from a lethal measles effect ... should it be investigated ?

My guess .. our measles strains are less virulent, for some unknown reason, than yours. But I don't know.

[Drummond]

A few articles to ponder, the first being last year (not sure if it's part of this current worldwide outbreak). And while numbers and percentages don't always match up worldwide - no country seems to be fully immune. And while maybe not directly in the UK where you are, my friend - but it's certainly not discriminating from spreading through all of Europe. And while no significant deaths in the UK in the past decade, other places had similar records and are now getting hit. And while the deaths in the UK may not be there to show, it is showing a large increase in cases. And if only .1% or even as low as .5% - you may only see one death or none from a thousand cases. But it's expensive! And the worry of death is there.

---

RED ALERT Measles cases reach eight year high in Europe – sparking fears of a UK outbreak

Across Europe there were more than 41,000 measles cases recorded during the first six months of 2018, including 37 deaths

CASES of measles in Europe have reached an eight-year high - sparking a rise in the number of cases in the UK, health bosses have warned.

Anyone travelling in the continent is urged to make sure their vaccination against the disease is up to date to stop the illness from spreading.

https://i.imgur.com/3kS0ByH.png

The World Health Organisation (WHO) warned the number of cases of the highly infectious disease during 2018 have already outstripped any year since 2010.

Across Europe there were more than 41,000 measles cases recorded during the first six months of 2018, including 37 deaths.

The WHO said the highest annual total for measles cases since 2010 was recorded in 2017 when 23,927 cases were identified.

The global health body said France, Georgia, Greece, Italy, Russia, Serbia and Ukraine have had more than 1,000 cases each so far in 2018.

Rest - https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7058753/measles-europe-eight-year-high-uk-outbreak-fears/


Measles cases in Europe tripled last year, WHO says

Measles cases in Europe tripled between 2017 and 2018 to 82,596 - the highest number recorded this decade, data from the World Health Organization shows.

While vaccination rates are improving, the WHO says coverage is not high enough to prevent circulation of the virus in many countries.

Ukraine reported the highest number of measles cases last year - more than 10 times that of the next highest, Serbia.

Over 90% of cases were in 10 countries, including France, Italy and Greece.

Measles is a highly infectious viral illness that can sometimes lead to serious health complications, including infections of the lungs and brain.

There were 72 deaths from measles in Europe in 2018 compared with 42 in 2017.

The European countries with the highest number of measles cases from January to December 2018 were:

Ukraine (53,218)
Serbia (5,076)
Israel (2,919)
France (2,913)
Italy (2,517)
Russian Federation (2,256)
Georgia (2,203)
Greece (2,193)
Albania (1,466)
Romania (1,087)

Rest - https://www.bbc.com/news/health-47157020


Record measles outbreak in Europe with dozens of deaths and nearly 1,000 cases in UK in past year

At least 37 people are thought to have died in the European region this year due to the highly contagious disease

Measles cases have hit a record high across Europe with more than 41,000 children and adults infected in the first six months of this year.

That figure is nearly double the highest number of yearly cases recorded since 2010.

At least 37 people are thought to have died due to the highly contagious disease so far this year, although there have been no fatalities in the UK.

Between July 2017 and June 2018, there were just under 1,000 cases of measles in Britain, compared to 531 confirmed cases for the whole of 2016.

Meanwhile, there have been 760 cases in the first six months of this year in the UK alone compared to 187 in the last half of 2017.

Rest - https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/record-measles-outbreak-europe-dozens-13108567


Measles cases quadruple globally in 2019, says UN

The number of measles cases reported worldwide in the first three months of 2019 has quadrupled compared with the same time last year, according to the World Health Organization (WHO).

The UN body said provisional data indicated a "a clear trend", with all regions of the world seeing outbreaks.

Africa had witnessed the most dramatic rise - up 700%.

The agency said actual numbers may be far greater, since only one in 10 cases globally are reported.

Measles is a highly infectious viral illness that can sometimes lead to serious health complications, including infections of the lungs and brain.

Ukraine, Madagascar and India have been worst affected by the disease, with tens of thousands of reported cases per million people.

Since September, at least 800 people have died from measles in Madagascar alone.

Outbreaks have also hit Brazil, Pakistan and Yemen, "causing many deaths - mostly among young children", while a spike in case numbers was reported for countries including the US and Thailand with high levels of vaccination coverage.

Rest - https://www.bbc.com/news/health-47940710

Oh, it's spreading, all right, and at an alarming rate. I don't have it to hand, but in doing my bit of research I came across an article that says a Jewish community in London (if I had to guess, I'd think maybe Stoke Newington / Stamford Hill, north London ?) has been hard hit, recently, by measles being contracted. But ... no mention of deaths, and nothing to show it was a feared outcome.

In the Daily Express article I posted a link to, I found something possibly of interest. This is what it said about how the disease first manifests itself (before it goes into detail on symptoms) ....


Measles usually clears around seven to 10 days, but the initial symptoms of the virus develop around 10 days after you’re infected

So, by the time we get symptoms, our bodies have rid themselves of the disease ! So, it's the aftermath of the disease that causes us problems, after we've first shrugged it off.

I don't know if this indicates an atypical capacity to resist it. It seem to ... ?

Our description of a 'typical' measles illness:


According to the NHS, these can include: cold-like symptoms, such as a runny nose, sneezing and a cough, sore, red eyes that may be sensitive to light, a high temperature (fever), which may reach around 40C, and small greyish-white spots on the inside of the cheeks.

Horrendous-looking rashes notwithstanding, the description just sounds like getting the equivalent of a bad cold.

Is this typical of cases elsewhere in the world ? Or do we just get mild versions of the illness ?

[jimnyc]

Is this typical of cases elsewhere in the world ? Or do we just get mild versions of the illness ?

Not sure anyone knows for sure this answer or any of your other queries. When I was a kid, they tried not to scare us, but MANY MANY more kids got it back in the 70's than they do today. And from then to today, the cases can range from simply inward symptoms that don't even show, like getting a bad cold. Then you have those who get all of that and the little dots all over, which can go from easy on one person to absolute horror on another. And then lastly, some are able to easily beat it, others get sick and fight and beat it out fairly easy with medication. Then others in hospitals that also beat it, but have a helluva time with it. And then unfortunately, there are cases of death, and as you see, more so in underdeveloped countries and spreads outward from there and hits other areas for different reasons.

[Drummond]

Not sure anyone knows for sure this answer or any of your other queries. When I was a kid, they tried not to scare us, but MANY MANY more kids got it back in the 70's than they do today. And from then to today, the cases can range from simply inward symptoms that don't even show, like getting a bad cold. Then you have those who get all of that and the little dots all over, which can go from easy on one person to absolute horror on another. And then lastly, some are able to easily beat it, others get sick and fight and beat it out fairly easy with medication. Then others in hospitals that also beat it, but have a helluva time with it. And then unfortunately, there are cases of death, and as you see, more so in underdeveloped countries and spreads outward from there and hits other areas for different reasons.

OK, thanks. Your description sounds a lot like what we'd expect here today, only minus the mortality.

Even in the 'bad' days, though, you'd have to go back over half a century to find mortality stats for the UK that reflected large numbers.

I think I've found the article I was looking for .. illnesses reported, but no deaths included for the UK.

https://www.jewishpress.com/news/health-and-medicine/measles-outbreak-spreads-to-london-uk-jewish-communities/2018/12/06/


The “Lithuanian” and Hassidic” streams of the Orthodox Jewish community in the United Kingdom has begun — belatedly — vaccinations against the measles virus, as the illness spreads to London and elsewhere in the country.

The outbreak is believed to have followed travelers returning from Israel after a visit for the Jewish holidays.

More than 500 children in the British Jewish community have received emergency vaccinations over the past two months as a measles epidemic begins to take hold in England. More than 60 cases of the illness have been reported since the start of October — a jump of more than 250 percent since January — primarily in northern London Jewish communities, according to the Jewish Chronicle.

Vaccination rates in the local strictly Orthodox Jewish community is “definitely lower than the general population and there are lots of reasons for that,” said Doctor Joseph Spitzer, who is affiliated with Cranwich Road Surgery in London and who spoke with the Jewish Chronicle.

Israel’s Health Ministry has been struggling to convince families of the importance of vaccinating their children, as thousands are believed to be at risk for either contracting the illness or becoming carriers, or both. More than 2,000 people have been infected with measles in Israel since March.

The week after an 18-month-old baby died of the illness in Jerusalem, rabbinic leaders at the Mir Yeshiva in the capital immediately invited medical teams into the institution and urged every student and staff member — citizen and foreigners alike — to accept the vaccination, regardless of insurance status.

Other Orthodox Jewish yeshivas in Jerusalem soon followed suit as well, with several rabbinic councils eventually ruling that choosing not to vaccinate one’s self and one’s children was similar to murder.

No mention of UK deaths .. those suffering from it (thus far) involve people of Lithuanian and Ukrainian extraction. We'll just have to see how it progresses, and how UK citizens become affected.

[Drummond]

I've found something showing more up-to-date stats for the UK. It's from a Sky News report.

https://news.sky.com/story/why-are-we-still-having-the-anti-vax-debate-11710936


Between 1 January 2018 and 31 October 2018, there were 913 confirmed cases in England.

This is compared to 259 cases in the whole of 2017.

The sharp rise is associated with outbreaks linked to travel to Europe, particularly among teenagers and young adults who missed out on their MMR vaccine when they were younger, according to the NHS.

The US is currently having its largest outbreak in 25 years.

The worst affected city has been New York, particularly the Orthodox Jewish communities in Brooklyn, according to the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention and city public health officials.

Last year a similar outbreak occurred in London's Orthodox Jewish areas, thought to be due to close-knit communities.

The current outbreak in the US is also linked to travel from Ukraine, and in the last year there have also been measles outbreaks in Europe and elsewhere.

Preliminary global data by the World Health Organisation shows that reported cases rose by 300% in the first three months of 2019, compared to the same period in 2018.

Didn't I see a post suggesting that illegal immigration flowing into the southernmost borders of the US was to blame for the US outbreak ? The Sky News report says it originated from Ukraine ... apparently ?

Still no mention of any UK fatalities. If there'd been any, why aren't we getting reports of them ?

[jimnyc]

I've found something showing more up-to-date stats for the UK. It's from a Sky News report.

https://news.sky.com/story/why-are-we-still-having-the-anti-vax-debate-11710936



Didn't I see a post suggesting that illegal immigration flowing into the southernmost borders of the US was to blame for the US outbreak ? The Sky News report says it originated from Ukraine ... apparently ?

Still no mention of any UK fatalities. If there'd been any, why aren't we getting reports of them ?

Not for nothing, and no thanks to our current border issues and the Dems announcing to the world that NOW is the time to come and infiltrate our borders as there's nothing much we can do to stop it right now. So with that said, the incoming numbers from illegal immigration is probably a wee tad more than over there. And you're looking at less than 1k cases thus far, and with the rate being perhaps .2 - .5 - 1% - it stands to reason that there may be no deaths. The USA has many more cases and I'm not hearing a ton about deaths if any myself. But they sure as hell are happening all around the world, as everyone is seeing increases in cases. If you have 110,000 reported cases, then it also stands to reason that such an area will then have more deaths.

[Drummond]

Not for nothing, and no thanks to our current border issues and the Dems announcing to the world that NOW is the time to come and infiltrate our borders as there's nothing much we can do to stop it right now. So with that said, the incoming numbers from illegal immigration is probably a wee tad more than over there. And you're looking at less than 1k cases thus far, and with the rate being perhaps .2 - .5 - 1% - it stands to reason that there may be no deaths. The USA has many more cases and I'm not hearing a ton about deaths if any myself. But they sure as hell are happening all around the world, as everyone is seeing increases in cases. If you have 110,000 reported cases, then it also stands to reason that such an area will then have more deaths.

Good points. And of course, in our history, we did have years equalling or exceeding 110,000 reported cases in a year. Checking back .. in 1980, 139,487 cases. 26 deaths that year. 1977: 173,361 cases. 23 deaths that year.

If numbers keep increasing here, I expect that we'll start to know fatalities, and finally, a concept of real and imminent mortality from measles might start to take hold. If UK people do have some sort of resistance ... it might be overruled by the incidence of outbreaks occurring within immigrant communities.

I rule nothing out. I'm going to be watching all this in the coming months very carefully indeed.

[jimnyc]

Let's hope and pray that as this spreads, that it swings to the side we see Drummond pointing out - which is little to no deaths. But I think we will see high numbers in the 3rd world countries. Hopefully the UK and the USA will fare much better, and much better in the children department!! Of course this article is only discussing the outbreak in the US.

---

Number of Measles Cases Nearing Pre-Eradication Annual Record—and It's Only May

What if they eradicated a disease in the 21st century but people inexplicably wanted it to come back?

Welcome to the measles in 2019 AD.

Thanks to a bunch of armchair scientists who are adherents of a movement that was mostly begun by celebrities whose IQs averaged in the single digits, a disease that was declared to be gone less than twenty years ago is soaring to record outbreak numbers. In a hurry, too:

https://i.imgur.com/9TNWavA.png

I have recently been chronicling the life-threatening consequences of the anti-vaxxer lunacy, as well as proposing a not-so-tongue-in-cheek solution. Last week, Instagram joined parent company Facebook in combating the spread of anti-vaxxer misinformation.

As I have written before, the initial reaction to the threat posed by the anti-vaccination people was a bit slow, as they were mostly viewed as a fringe, isolated curiosity.

Not so much anymore.

The Hill:


The number of measles cases in the U.S. has reached 839 across 23 states, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as outbreaks across the country show no sign of slowing.

There have been 75 new cases reported in the past week, and the total number of cases is inching closer to the record 963 cases reported in 1994. The current outbreak is still the largest since the disease was declared eliminated in 2000.

No new states reported outbreaks in the past week, but the number of cases in New York — home of the largest outbreak in the country — continued to climb.

Rest - https://pjmedia.com/trending/number-measles-cases-nearing-pre-eradication-annual-record-in-may/

[Abbey Marie]

All I know is if I contract Measles and die, I’m going to come back and haunt these non-vaxxers.

[Drummond]

All I know is if I contract Measles and die, I’m going to come back and haunt these non-vaxxers.

Not too likely, I'm thinking, Abbey.

If America reacted to a measles outbreak as we in the UK did, back in 1967 ... we'd be talking about (roughly) half a million sufferers from it, and just around 100 deaths. Or, to use the exact 1967 figures I posted a while back (that was just BEFORE we'd started mass immunisations) ... you'd have just one chance in 4,651 of dying.

If I knew that to walk across a busy street involved a one in 4,651 chance of dying from it, I don't think those odds would stop me.

Maybe I'm wrong. But from all I've seen, the average Brit's standard of health is that we can shrug off measles, these days, without dying from it. In the past decade, every single fatality recorded has involved those dying ALSO simultaneously suffering from an illness suppressing their immune responses at the time. If you're fit enough, certainly here, you don't seem to be in mortal danger from it !

Also, health advice (as I've illustrated) from our authorities totally lacks any warning of measles leading to a possibility of death. Symptoms described just limit examination of them to a recognition that getting it isn't a pleasant experience.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

I thought that after you vaccinated against Measles, that was good for life... or is that Small Pox?

[Kathianne]

I thought that after you vaccinated against Measles, that was good for life... or is that Small Pox?

In general, yes to both. We're not talking about that though, the anti-vaxxers that aren't getting their kids vaccinated. Once the number of those vaccinating drops below 92% with measles, the herd immunity is gone-leaving those unvaccinated-whether by choice or because they are too young or have another medical issue that prohibits them from being vaccinated-vulnerable to the highly contagious virus.

[Gunny]

I thought that after you vaccinated against Measles, that was good for life... or is that Small Pox?Smallpox I've had several times because of the military. Supposed to be good for life. I had measles and chickenpox as a kid, so I never had a shot for either until I was a grandfather.

All other vaccines have a shelf life as far as I know. Means you better check up on that plague shot if it's more than 10 years old :) Tetanus, cholera, typhoid all have a shelf life. Anthrax is one of the worst. You get an initial shot, then a booster every 3 or 6 months for 3 more shots, then you have to have an annual booster after that.

[Drummond]

In general, yes to both. We're not talking about that though, the anti-vaxxers that aren't getting their kids vaccinated. Once the number of those vaccinating drops below 92% with measles, the herd immunity is gone-leaving those unvaccinated-whether by choice or because they are too young or have another medical issue that prohibits them from being vaccinated-vulnerable to the highly contagious virus.

There may be some truth to that conclusion. However, to apply a statistical presumption as though it was a 'natural law' doesn't amount to anything at all exact.

Take 'my' case. I had already been around, in this world of ours, for quite some time before mass vaccinations were first introduced in my country (.. so, there would've been no likelihood of getting anywhere near that 92 percent figure you mention). In that time, to my knowledge, I was exposed to a measles outbreak at my school. Exposed as in, un-immunised myself, therefore, capable of contracting it.

I did not. Nor did the majority of the school's population, for whom the same conditions would've applied. I don't think anybody in my class contracted it.

Nor did the outbreak result in a single fatality (... that, from a school which had over a thousand pupils). It was an illness. Some contracted it, some didn't. They all, without exception, shrugged it off in less than 2 weeks, then the 'novelty' of the outbreak wore off, and we went back to full normality.

Nobody talked of a threat to anybody's life. So far as I know, nobody considered that at all. To us, it was a bit nastier than a cold. And nothing more.

[Gunny]

There may be some truth to that conclusion. However, to apply a statistical presumption as though it was a 'natural law' doesn't amount to anything at all exact.

Take 'my' case. I had already been around, in this world of ours, for quite some time before mass vaccinations were first introduced in my country (.. so, there would've been no likelihood of getting anywhere near that 92 percent figure you mention). In that time, to my knowledge, I was exposed to a measles outbreak at my school. Exposed as in, un-immunised myself, therefore, capable of contracting it.

I did not. Nor did the majority of the school's population, for whom the same conditions would've applied. I don't think anybody in my class contracted it.

Nor did the outbreak result in a single fatality (... that, from a school which had over a thousand pupils). It was an illness. Some contracted it, some didn't. They all, without exception, shrugged it off in less than 2 weeks, then the 'novelty' of the outbreak wore off, and we went back to full normality.

Nobody talked of a threat to anybody's life. So far as I know, nobody considered that at all. To us, it was a bit nastier than a cold. And nothing more.Here's the problem. I do not disagree with your reasoning. It makes sense. Except here:

As I am constantly reminded, this is not "then". Fact is, most of today's kids wouldn't survive in my day. Most of the conveniences they consider facts of life were luxury items when I was a kid. We didn't have AC. I can't even imagine these little cream puffs living in S Texas in the summer with no AC nowadays. They'd die. Or move back up North where they came from.

We didn't have a vaccine for measles so we caught them. That's how it was. You survived or died. Our kids' auto-immune systems are probably suppressed to nothing by now. They got a shot for everything and are pampered and catered to in almost every way.

As wrong and backward as that all sounds to me, THAT is what we have to deal with NOW. Not how it was. It's one of those no going back things. If we had "do-overs" I might be inclined to agree more with your argument. So you deal with it now for what it is now.

[jimnyc]

If not as dangerous as some say - then can someone explain the hundreds of thousands and likely millions of deaths over the years due to measles? 110,000 dead last year. Sure, a lot better than many years in the past, but 110k is nothing to sneeze at. In 1980, it killed 2.6 million people. And that number has lessened thanks to vaccines. But it is far from a weak or non-dangerous disease.

We don't see/hear of leprosy much, or tuberculoisis, smallpox... but they are there and they are deadly, even if leading countries have learned how to deal with them and immunizations and all that.

Some countries don't get the amount of immigrants coming in and out, whether to live, to work or to just visit.

"The USA has a larger immigrant population than any other country, with 47 million immigrants as of 2015. This represents 19.1% of the 244 million international migrants worldwide." --- I think this is just one of the larger pieces that accounts for more cases coming to the US than other leading countries. The immigrants coming/going out of UK are still large numbers, but not nearly that of the USA. That's just one small piece.

But the deaths are there, year after year after year. So there is no diminishing of this disease and what is is 'capable' of, and generally does more damage in places unprepared to deal with it.

Let's put it this way - how many here, that would have a child born in the next year - would be willing and feel confident to NOT get that child vaccines - and then also take that child to Madagascar? The deaths cannot be denied. It is deadly. It's all a matter of vaccines, those vaccinated around you, vaccinations in your country, who is visiting... so many factors.

[Abbey Marie]

For someone like me with health issues, this is more likely to be deadly. Don’t I count?

[jimnyc]

For someone like me with health issues, this is more likely to be deadly. Don’t I count?

There are MANY susceptible to the disease, more so than others. All depends on where it hits, spreads and where folks like yourself are at. :(

[Gunny]

For someone like me with health issues, this is more likely to be deadly. Don’t I count?In a civilized society where the weak are protected, the weakest link has to be the standard.

[STTAB]

In a civilized society where the weak are protected, the weakest link has to be the standard.

That's the exact point I was making to Drummond in the other measles thread. I'm healthy and have money I'd survive a measles outbreak 100%, but there are lots of people who wouldn't, and that's actually when a government is supposed to get involved, to protect those who can't protect themselves, rather than the way our government usually behaves in protecting the most privileged.

[Drummond]

Here's the problem. I do not disagree with your reasoning. It makes sense. Except here:

As I am constantly reminded, this is not "then". Fact is, most of today's kids wouldn't survive in my day. Most of the conveniences they consider facts of life were luxury items when I was a kid. We didn't have AC. I can't even imagine these little cream puffs living in S Texas in the summer with no AC nowadays. They'd die. Or move back up North where they came from.

We didn't have a vaccine for measles so we caught them. That's how it was. You survived or died. Our kids' auto-immune systems are probably suppressed to nothing by now. They got a shot for everything and are pampered and catered to in almost every way.

As wrong and backward as that all sounds to me, THAT is what we have to deal with NOW. Not how it was. It's one of those no going back things. If we had "do-overs" I might be inclined to agree more with your argument. So you deal with it now for what it is now.

Exactly. 'Now' is a time when mass vaccinations occur. This can't help but mean that the number of people anybody CAN contract measles from, is low ... so, anybody's chance of contracting it must also be low.

In my example, I deliberately chose one which went back to the 1960's ... happening at a time just before mass vaccinations had begun. So the likelihood of contracting it had to be a lot higher, surely. Besides, it WAS an 'outbreak', so that says something about kids' vulnerability to contracting it.

Even so ... NOBODY feared 'dying' from it. I don't ever remember anybody discussing that possibility. Our health authorities (as I've shown) don't include that likelihood in their advice about that disease, to this day.

[Drummond]

In a civilized society where the weak are protected, the weakest link has to be the standard.

I can agree with that in principle. That said ... it's exactly thinking of this sort that the Left can latch on to, using it as a basis for insisting that a dependence culture, and an all-protective culture, is 'the way to go'. Before you know where you are, all sorts of control-freaking edicts occur, and with them the imperative of its being one's 'civic duty' to comply ....

[jimnyc]

In a civilized society where the weak are protected, the weakest link has to be the standard.

Or you can be like Cliff Clavin from "Cheers" - and claim that the pack is only as strong as the weakest link, therefore killing the weakest link will make the pack only stronger!

Of course he was speaking of brain cells and drinking, and getting smarter from drinking. :)

[Drummond]

There are MANY susceptible to the disease, more so than others. All depends on where it hits, spreads and where folks like yourself are at. :(

I've done a small bit of research. I'd hoped to find evidence of there being different strains of measles, those differences accounting for greater morbidity from some than from others. I read in one article that 21 strains had been identified.

Apparently, though, they're too similar to be regarded differently ... a pity, because differing morbidities between them would've explained a lot.

So without that explanation, all I can think is that maybe conditions play a major part. Density of population. Cleanliness. Nutrition. Factors such as those. We in the West may be in better conditions to shrug measles off, in part, because of the environment we enjoy. In which case .. I'd expect comparable, maybe even better, environmental conditions to be true of America than in the UK (and in the UK, deaths from measles since 2010 remain in SINGLE FIGURES !).

Of course, and as I've conceded, vaccinations play their major part.

[STTAB]

Exactly. 'Now' is a time when mass vaccinations occur. This can't help but mean that the number of people anybody CAN contract measles from, is low ... so, anybody's chance of contracting it must also be low.

In my example, I deliberately chose one which went back to the 1960's ... happening at a time just before mass vaccinations had begun. So the likelihood of contracting it had to be a lot higher, surely. Besides, it WAS an 'outbreak', so that says something about kids' vulnerability to contracting it.

Even so ... NOBODY feared 'dying' from it. I don't ever remember anybody discussing that possibility. Our health authorities (as I've shown) don't include that likelihood in their advice about that disease, to this day.

If in the 50s "nobody feared dying of measles" then they were simply uneducated on the matter because even toady measles kills.

[Drummond]

I'm still doing research online on this subject of measles. I've FINALLY found a UK source which admits the possibility of death from it.

See:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/669505/Measles_yp_leaflet.pdf

It's an online PDF document.

The two most 'telling' statements (from the measles section) are; (1) around one in 5,000 people contracting it may die ... and (2) a critical factor is the state of the individual's immune system at the time it is contracted.

This bears out a part of my thinking. The state of an individual's immune system is all-important, and evidently, those with a perfectly healthy immune system need not fear for their lives. Which also accounts for the wide variation in morbidity in some parts of the world, to others.


There have been three deaths from measles in England since 2006.


If you think you have measles, call your GP or walk in centre before you visit. This is important - if you spend time with someone who has a weak immune system they can easily catch it and become seriously ill. So if you have symptoms of measles, call ahead and get advice.

[jimnyc]

I've done a small bit of research. I'd hoped to find evidence of there being different strains of measles, those differences accounting for greater morbidity from some than from others. I read in one article that 21 strains had been identified.

Apparently, though, they're too similar to be regarded differently ... a pity, because differing morbidities between them would've explained a lot.

So without that explanation, all I can think is that maybe conditions play a major part. Density of population. Cleanliness. Nutrition. Factors such as those. We in the West may be in better conditions to shrug measles off, in part, because of the environment we enjoy. In which case .. I'd expect comparable, maybe even better, environmental conditions to be true of America than in the UK (and in the UK, deaths from measles since 2010 remain in SINGLE FIGURES !).

Of course, and as I've conceded, vaccinations play their major part.

Different strains, stronger ones, I dunno. Seems to kill the most where there are little to no vaccines and does best in those that do immunize, but seems nowhere is truly safe from getting the disease. And that's the part that angers me, as regardless of the mortality rate - this CAN be brought down so much further with vaccines - but many refuse - and mainly from the agenda of the anti-vaxxers.

[STTAB]

I'm still doing research online on this subject of measles. I've FINALLY found a UK source which admits the possibility of death from it.

See:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/669505/Measles_yp_leaflet.pdf

It's an online PDF document.

The two most 'telling' statements (from the measles section) are; (1) around one in 5,000 people contracting it may die ... and (2) a critical factor is the state of the individual's immune system at the time it is contracted.

This bears out a part of my thinking. The state of an individual's immune system is all-important, and evidently, those with a perfectly healthy immune system need not fear for their lives. Which also accounts for the wide variation in morbidity in some parts of the world, to others.


Again, that's what we were discussing. Healthy people , especially those who can afford good health care, almost certainly will survive measles, those with weak immune systems probably won't, and as Gunny pointed out, for whatever reason we have more people today with weak immune systems than in the past. Just more of the pussification of America I guess. "In my day we got measles we rubbed some dirt on it and went back to work" mentality I guess LOL

[Drummond]

If in the 50s "nobody feared dying of measles" then they were simply uneducated on the matter because even toady measles kills.

That point isn't without merit.

'The 1950's', though. In the UK, yes, conditions were a lot worse. Nutrition was worse, because of continued rationing in the UK until the last of it, in 1955 (all thanks to recovery from WWII).

In 1954, then:

NOTIFICATIONS: 146,995

DEATHS: 45.

H'm. OK. Let's try for a higher number.

In 1951 ...

NOTIFICATIONS: 616,182

DEATHS: 317.

Each of these years precedes the full availability of nutritional foodstuffs, remember.

In one example ... one chance in 3,267 of dying from measles. In the other ... one chance in 1,944.

The greater chance of dying corresponded to the earlier year, in which there was a greater impact of rationing than the other.

The obvious conclusion from these statistics is that the chance to build and maintain a healthy immune system plays a great part in determining likelihood of morbidity.

This is surely clear.

So, today, morbidity even amongst non-immunised individuals is likely to be a whole lot lower than in times past.

I suggest that this accounts, in significant part, for the very low incidence of mortality today (with immunisations playing their important part, too ...).

[Kathianne]

There may not be plague like numbers of deaths, though it's not insignificant as Jim has shown. Death isn't the only issue though, so is encephalitis and other opportunistic diseases when one is weakened. Measles can also cause other permanent damage due to high fever, including sterility. Of course mumps, which is not as contagious as measles, causes sterility in males at a much higher rate than measles. It has shown up in a few strong anti-vax areas, but if the trends continue and the number vaccinated keeps dropping, there will be more.

Side note, we are already coming close to losing replacement population, if not for immigrants, we would be below replacement. Europe already is. Just what we need, more sterility.

[Drummond]

Again, that's what we were discussing. Healthy people , especially those who can afford good health care, almost certainly will survive measles, those with weak immune systems probably won't, and as Gunny pointed out, for whatever reason we have more people today with weak immune systems than in the past. Just more of the pussification of America I guess. "In my day we got measles we rubbed some dirt on it and went back to work" mentality I guess LOL

OK, I see you concede the point I just posted about, STTAB.

But can you tell me why, according to you, Americans today have weaker immune systems ? Our people in the UK demonstrably don't have.

I'm unaware of any differences in our countries that'd lead to yours resulting in, as you wonderfully choose to put it, greater 'pussification' on your side of the Pond to ours. Don't we have roughly comparable environments ?

My guess: when the current major outbreak in the US has run its course (as it must, sooner or later) the lack of morbidity in your population will surprise you.

It won't be any surprise for me, though.

[Drummond]

There may not be plague like numbers of deaths, though it's not insignificant as Jim has shown. Death isn't the only issue though, so is encephalitis and other opportunistic diseases when one is weakened. Measles can also cause other permanent damage due to high fever, including sterility. Of course mumps, which is not as contagious as measles, causes sterility in males at a much higher rate than measles. It has shown up in a few strong anti-vax areas, but if the trends continue and the number vaccinated keeps dropping, there will be more.

Side note, we are already coming close to losing replacement population, if not for immigrants, we would be below replacement. Europe already is. Just what we need, more sterility.

Not intending to be overly flippant ... but, globally speaking, maybe more sterility is what the world needs ? Our population - globally - is threatening to reach unsustainable levels as it is.

You make good points, though. I basically concede them. But I still feel 'good', to whatever extent that's appropriate, about what I expect to be true of much-lowered morbidity rates. Naturally I feel sorry for those parts of the world where people are more susceptible. But in the West, we do have better chances of survival than ever before, because of good environmental conditions.

[jimnyc]

Madagascar - about 68,000 infected & about 900+ dead. Ukraine had 30 deaths & over 35,000 cases last year. Another 24,000 so far this year but the deaths haven't been recorded. In the Philippines there have been 12,736 cases & 203 dead.

I can go on and on and on using 3rd world countries as examples. Then there are many examples over the years in many other places. One can't pick out a single or 2 to 3 examples of years over a 50 year period alone. While admittedly I don't see a lot of deaths at all in the UK, so I see where you're coming from 100%. But don't let it fool you. Get an outbreak in today's world, in the sizes you see in these other countries, and the unfortunate deaths will likely come. In the USA there have been less than 1,000 cases, although getting close to that number. I believe the reason that in today's society we can see that, with minimal to no deaths - while places like Madagascar can get 1,000 cases and have 50 deaths with it - and I think that reason of course is vaccines and the hospitals and doctors to care for people and also help prevent the spreading.

BUT, I won't use a place like Madagascar and a few years as my sole way of understanding either. I like to look at things in total. I know we're lucky to be in places like the USA and the UK where we are healthy and have access to good doctors and hospitals. I think it's a lot of things that give is better numbers and less fatalities - but I also think that we would both be more susceptible should folks go more and more without vaccines.

And again, the numbers for the cases yearly, and the deaths yearly, are there. It seems to be based on locations though, hence my last few paragraphs.

[Drummond]

Madagascar - about 68,000 infected & about 900+ dead. Ukraine had 30 deaths & over 35,000 cases last year. Another 24,000 so far this year but the deaths haven't been recorded. In the Philippines there have been 12,736 cases & 203 dead.

I can go on and on and on using 3rd world countries as examples. Then there are many examples over the years in many other places. One can't pick out a single or 2 to 3 examples of years over a 50 year period alone. While admittedly I don't see a lot of deaths at all in the UK, so I see where you're coming from 100%. But don't let it fool you. Get an outbreak in today's world, in the sizes you see in these other countries, and the unfortunate deaths will likely come. In the USA there have been less than 1,000 cases, although getting close to that number. I believe the reason that in today's society we can see that, with minimal to no deaths - while places like Madagascar can get 1,000 cases and have 50 deaths with it - and I think that reason of course is vaccines and the hospitals and doctors to care for people and also help prevent the spreading.

BUT, I won't use a place like Madagascar and a few years as my sole way of understanding either. I like to look at things in total. I know we're lucky to be in places like the USA and the UK where we are healthy and have access to good doctors and hospitals. I think it's a lot of things that give is better numbers and less fatalities - but I also think that we would both be more susceptible should folks go more and more without vaccines.

And again, the numbers for the cases yearly, and the deaths yearly, are there. It seems to be based on locations though, hence my last few paragraphs.

Very hard indeed to disagree with your points, Jim.

I feel especially sorry for Ukraine, a society impoverished by their perpetual conflict with Russia. They want to be a Western nation to the fullest extent possible, but are having to forever fend off the fracturing efforts of Russia to destabilise them, and even (as Crimea illustrates) land-grabs made by Russia.

Imagine a US where (as mind-boggling as this is !) Canada succeeded in grabbing some of your more northern territories ... what harm would come to your country as a whole ? Ukraine has an equivalent as its reality, as well as other attrition tactics Russia inflicts on them.

[STTAB]

OK, I see you concede the point I just posted about, STTAB.

But can you tell me why, according to you, Americans today have weaker immune systems ? Our people in the UK demonstrably don't have.

I'm unaware of any differences in our countries that'd lead to yours resulting in, as you wonderfully choose to put it, greater 'pussification' on your side of the Pond to ours. Don't we have roughly comparable environments ?

My guess: when the current major outbreak in the US has run its course (as it must, sooner or later) the lack of morbidity in your population will surprise you.

It won't be any surprise for me, though.

You're unaware of any differences in our countries? Well for starters sir we have FIVE times the population you have. So let's say all else is equal, that means we have FIVE times as many people who would die from measles as you do.

And of course each generation gets softer and softer for a variety of reasons, most related to technological advances.

I'll use an example of me and my now deceased grandfather and my son. Growing up I hauled a LOT of square bales of hay each summer, as you can imagine when you are mowing about 150 acres of hay for yourself plus helping neighbors. Growing up, my grandfather made fun of me for griping about baling hay "in my day we didn't have any fancy bailing equipment we went out with a wagon and pitchfork , load the wagon bring to the barn unload with pitchfork repeat until done you don't know how easy you have it" then my son comes along and is bitching about sitting in an air conditioned tractor hauling round bales of hay with me " you don't know how good you have it in MY day we had to square bale the hay and then manually load it onto a trailer then unload it at the barn" and probably when HIS son comes along he'll be bitching about sending a robot out to haul hay with my son "you don't know easy you have it. In MY day............."

In my grandfather's eyes what I thought was hard was easy and likewise what my kid thought of as hard work seemed easy in comparison to me.

And in each case the older generation was right, the younger generation had it easier , and having it easier does make you less tough. That's why basic training, for example, is hard. You have soft training you have soft soldiers. Though basic training is nothing today compared to "my day" LOL

In short I believe we have made life too easy and that means that yes if an epidemic came about many would die simply because of how easy their life has been up to that point.

[Gunny]

Exactly. 'Now' is a time when mass vaccinations occur. This can't help but mean that the number of people anybody CAN contract measles from, is low ... so, anybody's chance of contracting it must also be low.

In my example, I deliberately chose one which went back to the 1960's ... happening at a time just before mass vaccinations had begun. So the likelihood of contracting it had to be a lot higher, surely. Besides, it WAS an 'outbreak', so that says something about kids' vulnerability to contracting it.

Even so ... NOBODY feared 'dying' from it. I don't ever remember anybody discussing that possibility. Our health authorities (as I've shown) don't include that likelihood in their advice about that disease, to this day.You don't remember the German measles (rubella)? That was considered a death sentence or guaranteed birth defects when I was kid in the 60s. It was a separate vaccine they did have because they did not have one for common or regular or whatever you want to call them measles. And, one could carry rubella and pass it on and never contract it themselves nor even know they had it.

That has to be factored in as well. Carriers obviously are immune and might think they don't need immunization when the immunization is not to protect them from the disease, it to protect everyone else from THEM.

[Drummond]

You're unaware of any differences in our countries? Well for starters sir we have FIVE times the population you have. So let's say all else is equal, that means we have FIVE times as many people who would die from measles as you do.

And of course each generation gets softer and softer for a variety of reasons, most related to technological advances.

I'll use an example of me and my now deceased grandfather and my son. Growing up I hauled a LOT of square bales of hay each summer, as you can imagine when you are mowing about 150 acres of hay for yourself plus helping neighbors. Growing up, my grandfather made fun of me for griping about baling hay "in my day we didn't have any fancy bailing equipment we went out with a wagon and pitchfork , load the wagon bring to the barn unload with pitchfork repeat until done you don't know how easy you have it" then my son comes along and is bitching about sitting in an air conditioned tractor hauling round bales of hay with me " you don't know how good you have it in MY day we had to square bale the hay and then manually load it onto a trailer then unload it at the barn" and probably when HIS son comes along he'll be bitching about sending a robot out to haul hay with my son "you don't know easy you have it. In MY day............."

In my grandfather's eyes what I thought was hard was easy and likewise what my kid thought of as hard work seemed easy in comparison to me.

And in each case the older generation was right, the younger generation had it easier , and having it easier does make you less tough. That's why basic training, for example, is hard. You have soft training you have soft soldiers. Though basic training is nothing today compared to "my day" LOL

In short I believe we have made life too easy and that means that yes if an epidemic came about many would die simply because of how easy their life has been up to that point.

I thought that much of this had already been argued out, directly or indirectly.

The further back you go in time, so the WORSE the stats get for susceptibility to measles, and mortality from it. If you consider older generations to be 'less pussified' than younger ones, and if you say this counts, why weren't the older generations tougher, more robust, and therefore, showing us BETTER statistics, than now ??

The fact is that people, today, are far more likely to survive measles outbreaks than from decades ago.

Your point about America having several times more people than the UK is all very well, but it only holds water if the direct comparison between mortalities here, and those where you are, holds up. I've shown previously that there was a figure of THREE - repeat - THREE - deaths, here, between 2010 and 2016. So ... 5x3=15. Did you only have fifteen deaths over that same period ?

[Instructive, if so]

I take it that fifteen is the true number, and that, as was (& is) true here, each death involved people already suffering from OTHER serious immune-suppressing illnesses beforehand.

... Yes ?

If not ... your attempt at a comparison fails.

[jimnyc]

I thought that much of this had already been argued out, directly or indirectly.

The further back you go in time, so the WORSE the stats get for susceptibility to measles, and mortality from it. If you consider older generations to be 'less pussified' than younger ones, and if you say this counts, why weren't the older generations tougher, more robust, and therefore, showing us BETTER statistics, than now ??

The fact is that people, today, are far more likely to survive measles outbreaks than from decades ago.

Your point about America having several times more people than the UK is all very well, but it only holds water if the direct comparison between mortalities here, and those where you are, holds up. I've shown previously that there was a figure of THREE - repeat - THREE - deaths, here, between 2010 and 2016. So ... 5x3=15. Did you only have fifteen deaths over that same period ?

[Instructive, if so]

I take it that fifteen is the true number, and that, as was (& is) true here, each death involved people already suffering from OTHER serious immune-suppressing illnesses beforehand.

... Yes ?

If not ... your attempt at a comparison fails.

I believe there have been 11? I'm not 100% on that though. But there could be tons of reasons why we would be so close, even with such a huge population difference.

[jimnyc]

Another thing to look at, isn't how many dead, but how many did it save. The medical community and the scientists agree that between 20-21 million lives have been saved.

https://www.sciencealert.com/the-measles-vaccine-has-saved-more-than-20-million-lives-since-2000-new-report-finds

[Drummond]

I believe there have been 11? I'm not 100% on that though. But there could be tons of reasons why we would be so close, even with such a huge population difference.

If it's only eleven, then I have to ask why, from 300 million plus people, an 'epidemic' worries people .. the chances of dying from it are literally many millions to one against !! Compare that to the number of people dying from road accidents in a single year, much less than in several.

But I'm glad to hear it. I never did believe there was anything special about the UK stats. Now, we know for sure. Simple fact is, our living conditions are comparable to yours, and I daresay the same is true for vaccination take-ups. QED ... everything figures as you'd expect it to.

The stats quoted in your link cover worldwide ones ... ?

[jimnyc]

If it's only eleven, then I have to ask why, from 300 million plus people, an 'epidemic' worries people .. the chances of dying from it are literally many millions to one against !! Compare that to the number of people dying from road accidents in a single year, much less than in several.

But I'm glad to hear it. I never did believe there was anything special about the UK stats. Now, we know for sure. Simple fact is, our living conditions are comparable to yours, and I daresay the same is true for vaccination take-ups. QED ... everything figures as you'd expect it to.

The stats quoted in your link cover worldwide ones ... ?

Because there was a very very minimal mount of outbreaks. Most we had in the after-immunization issue was 667, then 372 last year, and those cases are attached to this years outbreaks. So actually prior to that 667 was 220. That's the point and why these outbreaks are scary, as the outbreak numbers are very large this time around.

Wanna take a chance with EVEN ONE of those cases being walked through the baby ward in a hospital accidentally? Or by a cancer patient, even at their home? Or more than likely, when such a person enters an area with low vaccine rates. Which is mainly what we are seeing thus far.

[Abbey Marie]

Or you can be like Cliff Clavin from "Cheers" - and claim that the pack is only as strong as the weakest link, therefore killing the weakest link will make the pack only stronger!

Of course he was speaking of brain cells and drinking, and getting smarter from drinking. :)

:eek:

[Drummond]

You don't remember the German measles (rubella)? That was considered a death sentence or guaranteed birth defects when I was kid in the 60s. It was a separate vaccine they did have because they did not have one for common or regular or whatever you want to call them measles. And, one could carry rubella and pass it on and never contract it themselves nor even know they had it.

That has to be factored in as well. Carriers obviously are immune and might think they don't need immunization when the immunization is not to protect them from the disease, it to protect everyone else from THEM.

Rubella .. I know nothing about it, though, again, I don't recall reports of deaths from it. Rubella has about as much significance for me as measles itself does. Something else to research ...

In any case, we combine measles vaccinations with vaccinations against rubella, in one ... an 'MMR' (Mumps, measles, rubella) vaccination shot.

[Drummond]

Because there was a very very minimal mount of outbreaks. Most we had in the after-immunization issue was 667, then 372 last year, and those cases are attached to this years outbreaks. So actually prior to that 667 was 220. That's the point and why these outbreaks are scary, as the outbreak numbers are very large this time around.

Wanna take a chance with EVEN ONE of those cases being walked through the baby ward in a hospital accidentally? Or by a cancer patient, even at their home? Or more than likely, when such a person enters an area with low vaccine rates. Which is mainly what we are seeing thus far.

For us, post-immunisation has to be dated from 1968.

The most deaths since then was in 1970 .. 42 of them. Multiply by five .. 210 deaths to adjust for 300 million people. 372 is a phenomenal figure for last year .. I don't have figures for last year, though I'd be astonished if any such UK figure even went into double figures, much less triple !

I don't know what to say for your final paragraph. If one such case walked through a hospital ward where I was a patient, though, I assure you that it wouldn't worry me. Remember, I've never been vaccinated. I've 'survived' outbreaks before, without the disease so much as touching me. I'm no youngster these days. But I'm sure I'd cope fine.

[jimnyc]

For us, post-immunisation has to be dated from 1968.

The most deaths since then was in 1970 .. 42 of them. Multiply by five .. 210 deaths to adjust for 300 million people. 372 is a phenomenal figure for last year .. I don't have figures for last year, though I'd be astonished if any such UK figure even went into double figures, much less triple !

I don't know what to say for your final paragraph. If one such case walked through a hospital ward where I was a patient, though, I assure you that it wouldn't worry me. Remember, I've never been vaccinated. I've 'survived' outbreaks before, without the disease so much as touching me. I'm no youngster these days. But I'm sure I'd cope fine.

No one is saying that it is so fatal that it will kill everyone. In fact, I've shown the numbers to be the opposite, that the mortality rate is very low, with all things considered. But still one of the most contagious, and still causes all kinds of other problems in addition to death, and then yeah, unfortunately there is a small percentage of the masses that will die. Get hit with less than 1000, and you may see all the outlying issues, symptoms and costs and all the other things involved. When you see a few hundred thousand cases like in the other countries, then you will see some deaths - more so in the countries that haven't immunized properly.

Yeah, I'm sure YOU would cope just fine - but the children is such wards may catch something from someone infected - and their survival rates are much much lower. It's them that I'm mostly worried about, from those not vaccinated and that get infected. That's what I had stated in the beginning - what do you do with those people. They are the ones I don't want to see accidentally walking in to greet a relative that just had a baby.

[Elessar]

Point in Fact is that if an un-vaccinated Adult gets Rubella or other strains of measles, it can be lethal.

[Drummond]

No one is saying that it is so fatal that it will kill everyone. In fact, I've shown the numbers to be the opposite, that the mortality rate is very low, with all things considered. But still one of the most contagious, and still causes all kinds of other problems in addition to death, and then yeah, unfortunately there is a small percentage of the masses that will die. Get hit with less than 1000, and you may see all the outlying issues, symptoms and costs and all the other things involved. When you see a few hundred thousand cases like in the other countries, then you will see some deaths - more so in the countries that haven't immunized properly.

Yeah, I'm sure YOU would cope just fine - but the children is such wards may catch something from someone infected - and their survival rates are much much lower. It's them that I'm mostly worried about, from those not vaccinated and that get infected. That's what I had stated in the beginning - what do you do with those people. They are the ones I don't want to see accidentally walking in to greet a relative that just had a baby.

The more I consider all this, the more I become convinced that sheer hysteria is playing its part.

Does anyone have statistics for road deaths across the US, on a year-by-year basis ? I've a funny feeling that those figures would dwarf those you think are, or might be, true for measles or rubella.

Who'd like to argue for actions taken against road traffic ? A ban on it, 'in case' of accidents occurring. I mean, why not. I'm sure the death tolls traffic produces must justify it !

This isn't about numbers of the dead. It's about how the cause of them is regarded. And, no, I'm not going to stop crossing a busy street, because the incidence of mortality resulting from crossing busy streets is so much greater than catching measles.

[Drummond]

Rubella: its incidence in the UK.

I've yet to find any data on mortality from rubella. I'm beginning to doubt that I will.

See this:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/measles-confirmed-cases/confirmed-cases-of-measles-mumps-and-rubella-in-england-and-wales-2012-to-2013

It's a list of confirmed cases of measles, mumps and rubella covering England and Wales spanning 1996 to 2017. Not fatalities, just incidences of those diseases being contracted. Rubella cases are a VERY small percentage of the total.

For example: in 2015, we had 91 measles cases. Number of rubella cases ... FIVE.

In 2016, we had 547 measles cases. Just TWO rubella cases.

For 2017, we had 277 measles cases. Just THREE rubella cases.

We've come close to zero cases of fatalities, for any of those measles figures. What are the chances of any fatalities from rubella ?

See this, dated 2006:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/4871728.stm


A 13-year-old boy has become the first person in the UK in 14 years to die from measles. The victim was from a travelling family living in the north-west of England, the Health Protection Agency said.

A string of outbreaks mainly in England and Wales's travelling communities has led to 100 cases so far in 2006, compared with 76 in the whole of 2005.

The boy, who was suffering from an underlying lung condition, had not had the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine.

The HPA confirmed on Monday it was the first fatal case of measles in the UK since 1992.

For 'travelling communities', read Gypsies. Their very lifestyle is likely to heighten the likelihood of contracting diseases, be it from the relatively low standard of everyday environment, or lack of immunisation, or both.