Also see this

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00000359.htm

Measles Outbreak among Vaccinated High School Students — Illinois

From December 9, 1983, to January 13, 1984, 21 cases of measles occurred in Sangamon County, Illinois.* Nine of the cases were confirmed serologically. The outbreak involved 16 high school students, all of whom had histories of measles vaccination after 15 months of age documented in their school health records. Of the five remaining cases, four occurred in unvaccinated preschool children, two of whom were under 15 months of age, and one case occurred in a previously vaccinated college student (Figure 5).

The affected high school had 276 students and was in the same building as a junior high school with 135 students. A review of health records in the high school showed that all 411 students had documentation of measles vaccination on or after the first birthday, in accordance with Illinois law.

Measles vaccination histories were obtained from the school health records of all 276 senior high school students. Risk of infection was not significantly associated with type of vaccine, medical provider, age at most recent vaccination, or revaccination. All the students with measles had received their most recent vaccinations after 15 months of age. However, the measles attack rate increased with increasing years since most recent vaccination (p = 0.024) (Table 3). The attack rate was four times greater for students vaccinated 10 or more years before the outbreak than for students vaccinated more recently (p 0.05). When these data are corrected for the number of vaccinations, the trend was still observed and achieved a borderline level of statistical significance (p = 0.07). Age at first or last vaccination was not a confounding variable.

The point is…the inefficiency of the vaccine to produce LIFELONG IMMUNITY, whereas natural inoculation creates LIFELONG IMMUNITY.

I think the problem here is the CDC thinking that they have a “right” or “need” to eradicate ALL DISEASE. Perhaps there is a PURPOSE for this disease. Measles, chickenpox and many other vaccinated diseases may actually do a lot of good to build up our immune system library. Making us STRONGER to fight future disease. But no one will study that! Furthermore, the instance of nutrient deficiency in making one susceptible as well. Many diseases which went away on their own well before vaccines or modern medicine did so when people were getting better nutrition and fixing those mineral/vitamin deficiencies making them vulnerable or were even causing the symptoms that were attributed to “disease”.

Did you catch the part about declining immunity in adults due to LACK of exposure to measles? Interesting, isn’t it. And something you won’t hear about from mainstream resources.

This is why insidevaccines is needed.

I also wanted to add to your comment about “how do we isolate the impact of vaccines on the amount of measles in circulation”. Along that line of questioning, how do we remove measles from circulation without fully vaccinating all the adult population that currently does not have natural immunity from contracting the disease? This applies to those of us born after 1957 or so who have never contracted measles (including myself). How do we know what percentage of the population that comprises? I don’t understand how the medical community can even discuss “herd immunity” with regard to measles without considering the number of adult susceptibles due to waning artificial immunity. This problem makes the above mentioned Time magazine figures about the level of coverage of the US kindergarten population a moot point. 77% of the kindergarten population MAY have temporary immunity, but not 77% of the overall population.

The first is a false paradox, I believe, because there is no meaningful way to quantify that risk/benefit equation. Scientists still don’t know why some people are susceptible to disease and vaccine antibody formation, so the likelihood of disease incidence in those folks relative to different levels of circulating virus is pretty vague. How do we isolate the impact of vaccines on the amount of measles in circulation? How do we even really KNOW the amount of measles in circulation?

As to the second, the mainstream mindset that vaccines are completely safe and effective will have to shift considerably before the “just one more” mantra sees real resistance. Out here in the ether where we talk about these things, a lot of people mention initially questioning vaccines because of how many more there are. However, based on the practices of the majority, most folks still don’t think that is a problem. Most people are so grateful for the “amazing increase in life expectancy made possible by allopathic medicine,” and don’t see additional shots on the schedule as demonstrative of the weakness of the science, but rather as demonstrative of its strength.

Well, a lot of what you see the media reporting is coming from the CDC’s communications department. They send out media info packets to “increase demand for vaccines” (their words) to “communicate” with everyone.

The people in charge of public health don’t worry about the people who are just a bit behind, because they can be brought in line with a note from the school. And tapping into “moral outrage” over intentional vaccine refusers is a good way to “motivate” the rest to stay on schedule, I’d guess.

They’re not going to turn the spotlight on themselves, because in their minds, admitting a mistake would endanger public health, for one thing, and they just look at it all like “experience” since they don’t have a problem with adding more and more vaccines to fix problems created by vaccines.

“I don’t understand why the blame and criticism is reserved only for exemptors, except that it is easier to point the finger at the one group that is outspoken about their beliefs.”

Remembering that a lot of the criticism is coming from the CDC indirectly, it’s sort of a response to what the exemptors state by exempting.
The exemptors are saying “You people don’t really know what you’re doing, and I’m not going along with your program.” so they come back with “Well you people could start an epidemic that kills a lot of people.”

Thanks for the discussion link, I will check it out. I hear what you’re saying about immunocompromised individuals. That kind of altruism may enter into the decision making process of a minority of individuals. But I do not believe that it has any effect on the motives of the pharmaceutical companies or the other driving forces behind public vaccination policies (CDC, etc.) Also, mass vaccination and “herd immunity” theories and practices were implemented long before there was any talk of “immunocompromised” individuals due to chronic diseases like cancer and HIV.

http://insidevaccines.com/discussions/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=135&start=0&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

Regarding herd immunity…
There’s also the argument that we’re doing it to protect the immunocompromised. And I can see the altruism in that, but…I guess it comes down to me wondering “at what price?” Where do you draw the line with that kind of mass-moral obligation? I mean, if everyone on earth had to get a 5 shot series to create global herd immunity to some hypothetical pathogen to save an average of 10 lives a year, would we be morally obligated to participate? Where do you draw the line? Because the way it works now is that the line is drawn at whatever vaccine has completed Phase III. It’s not like the vaccines are coming out in a progressive order from most deadly to least deadly…the way it’s always worked is that some scientist makes some discovery, some pharma company goes “we can make a product with that info!” and it’s in the pipeline, and if all goes well, it gets mandated.
And the radical provaccine enthusiests say “if even ONE life is saved, it’s worth it to mandate it for the population.”

Ehhh…gotta go somewhere…I’ll be back later with more.