The benefits of vaccines far outweigh the minuscule risks, but some parents still question their safety. John Oliver discusses why some people may still feel uncertainty about childhood vaccinations.
Connect with Last Week Tonight online...
Subscribe to the Last Week Tonight YouTube channel for more almost news as it almost happens: www.youtube.com/user/LastWeekTonight
Find Last Week Tonight on Facebook like your mom would: http://Facebook.com/LastWeekTonight
Follow us on Twitter for news about jokes and jokes about news: http://Twitter.com/LastWeekTonight
Visit our official site for all that other stuff at once: http://www.hbo.com/lastweektonight
You intentionally Did Not include Gary Null Phd. Who Has Done a Documentary And A Book. Check Out His Website. John Oliver Show Usually Has Good information But Like Fox News I Use Rake With John Oliver I Will Use A Sifter. In The Jewish Religion Our Children Are Not Vaccinated We Haven't Spread Anything Sooooo Now What?
what most pisses me off about anti-vaxxers are that hey don’t even look at the ACTUAL risks of a vaccine. if an unfinished vaccine were used, then there would be an actual risk of people getting infected. BUT THEY DONT FOCUS ON THAT THEY FOCUS ON THE SAFE METALS IN IT. and the problem with the one criticism that i just said is that it’s borderline impossible due to the insane amount of testing the vaccines go through
I know I'm super late to the party here, but I think I may have a solution to all this anti-vaccine bullshit: release a "scientific study" with a ton of fake research "proving" that autism is actually a type of previously unknown disease. Get the majority of the scientific/medical community secretly on-board, minus the idiots who somehow became doctors, and release a "vaccine" against that "disease." Except the vaccine is just a shot of salt water, or something that isn't harmful to be injected with. Spread the report like wildfire, have accompanying reports created that "prove" the link and make educational pamphlets that promote the vaccine to parents worried about vaccinating their child early on in life.
I think not vaccinating your child is selfish, ignorant, putting them at risk and if I'm gonna get preachy here, maltreatment. Hey, "Anti-vaxxers", guess what: you're not giving them what they need & deserve. Think about people in countries who can't afford vaccines or they're not widely available, and their children die....and you just decide that YOU & a Google search know better than a doctor who relies on factual research & data. Or imagine parents a century ago, crying and miserable because yet ANOTHER one of their children died, thanks to an epidemic with no cure, and how much they wished & prayed there was one. And now you have this basically, literal miracle cure and yet, you turn your nose up at it while your child suffers. I think if you don't give your kids all their shots they actually need, it's the same thing as not feeding them sufficiently and they should be taken away until you legally agree in writing to give them shots and follow through on it. You're putting other kids lives at risk by not doing so which is just a dick move. Hashtag sorry not sorry.
they have a responsibility to give you information and address any questions you have, but as you have access to the information yourself there is a certain level of personal responsibility as well - if you are concerned about a specific ingredient, ask if it's in the vaccine you're getting - depending on the ingredient they should be able to tell you or to direct you to that information. or you can ask here and someone will give their unqualified opinion.
I'm against Vaccines because these dangerous diseases are significant filters in Human evolution. We were supposed to die by them and only the ones which overcome the diseases get to reproduce and further the human species. We simply cannot save everyone in a finite planet with finite resources to expect a utopia at the end of it. We are already seeing the effects of it. Its unfathomable how conceited Humanity can get. Even by this world's very own standards " Every human life is important" is bloody lie. Look at Yemen , Syria, Congo, India Post war Germany. Nowhere is Human life treated equally. This western centric utopian mentality needs to be dealt with .
+the calcified one I think you lack the understanding of the point I'm trying to make.. This is creating a parallel time line of human evolution, the repucussions and vulnerabilities of which we will never know. Clause when it hits us in the near distant future all our kids might die.
Where as natural evolution is based on chance and it has many safety nets built into it. In evolutionary scenarios, viruses and and our immune responses are Co-evolving and the weaker vulnerable population is lost. By blanket vaccinations we are building the future human populous on the foundations of these vulnerabilities.
All it needs is a singular virus strain, subjected to this pressure to change drastically for survival, cause by blanket vaccinations, jumps the gun! We will have mass deaths. Societies and civilisations can collapse from that, possibly taking down the entire species. Making the poor in developing countries who are not touched by vaccines or any breeding regulations like Indian caste systems, to be our most natural Co-evolving line of humans.
simple michael, antivax nonsense comes from con-artists undermining conventional medicine to sell worthless (but expensive) 'alternative' supplements, treatments, books and dvds. buy the 'platinum package' for "just" $247 here: http://bit.ly/yt-ttav-order-dvd
this is the guy behind them: http://americanloons.blogspot.com/2015/06/1398-ty-bollinger.html
+eeeaten and I didn't buy anything you can access it for free and if you want to buy you can they showed every episode of this for free all the profits go to research if you choose to buy it you should at least watch one episode and decide for yourself that's what is wrong with people they don't look at both sides most of them just stick with the popular opinion
+eeeaten why would anyone make antivax propaganda who does that help nobody nobody makes money off of kids not getting vaccinated it's ridiculous that nobody will even listen to the facts they just say listen to your doctor who knows absolutely nothing about vaccines except how to give them not only that they get a huge bonus for giving vaccines if you don't believe me ask your doctor or any for that matter I have asked multiple doctor's they are literally taught about vaccines for 2 hours during their entire schooling and is it not a huge red flag that the cdc has no liability for any negative side affect that happens because of vaccines and the fact that 1% of the profits from vaccines given is put into a vaccine injury relief fund for injured children and I know that vaccines don't directly cause autism but autism is cause because the child already has a predisposition and ingredients in the vaccine cause the predisposition to mature into autism I could go on and on there is so much easily accessed information proving that vaccines injure children and no not on Google anybody with even a little bit of intelligence could figure that out
Let’s get this correct childhood's most crippling moment is not seeing your father's penis. Human children have seen both their mothers and fathers naked for the majority of the existence of human beings on this planet it’s only been the last few hundred years that worrying about whether a child saw an adult naked was even an issue. That was only because of screwed up Victorian and religious attitudes which has only succeeded in screwing us up in the 21st century even more.
When my children were young the pediatrician had no problem staggering vaccines two weeks apart. He said there were small studies that showed a slightly better immune response when vaccines were spaced out slightly instead of giving multiple shots at one visit. He stated the reason multiples are given at one visit is because so many parents won’t bring their kids in to finish the recommended list of vaccines if they are spaced out.
I actually think the doctor saying that spreading vaccines may help convince parents to get their kids vaccinated is right. I mean, just spread the schedule a little and MORE PEOPLE will decide to do it. The other way around is obviously not causing more people to vaccinate their kids.
There's still people like this in the UK too. My mother bought into all this vaccine scare back in the late 90's, so i'm only just getting my jabs done now. I think people should actually read the science that they use to influence decisions this important before they y'know make this kind of decision. Vaccines have been around for hundreds of years, I think if they were that bad we'd know by now!
I don’t trust vaccination and never will :) my mom doesn’t either, I really appreciate that she has never vaccinated me... EVER. :)))) I’ve never gotten the flu, only sickness I’ve gotten is the common cold. Me and her are also both Pescatarians, which is like a vegetarian but the only meat we eat is fish and sea food in general:))))))) and we’re super healthy!!!
What kind of fucking response is "dead kids are autism free"??? I don't hate vaccines nor does anyone else but if they are causing autism then don't you think we should say "hmm let's figure out which part of these vaccines are causing catastrophic damage to the neurological development of our children?" And then we should fix it so that people aren't as offended and outraged by the entire situation as a whole. Not wanting products to be forced on the population that cause damage to large portions of our species seems like a pretty fucking reasonable concern that most decent human beings should have no problem comprehending but for some God forsaken reason the stance I continue to hear is that vaccines prevent diseases and because of this it's ok that some of the population dies or sufferers brain damage as a result because vaccines prevent the death and long term damage which diseases can cause. But when you look at the data the number of people who die of measles is realitively small when compared with the overall number of people who caught measles and cleared the virus with no damage. So why is it a good idea to force everyone to inject something which can cause death and brain damage in order to prevent death and brain damage which the disease that vaccines is made for has a potential to cause?? Why is this crazy to question??
the (peer reviewed, international and independent) science is comprehensive - vaccines don't cause autism. not mmr, not thimerosal, not aluminium adjuvants. i already linked to the science showing this. https://www.healthychildren.org/English/safety-prevention/immunizations/Pages/Vaccine-Studies-Examine-the-Evidence.aspx
even autism advocacy groups like autism speaks acknowledge that vaccines don't cause autism. why not you? https://www.autismspeaks.org/science-news/new-meta-analysis-confirms-no-association-between-vaccines-and-autism
the evidence is in front of your face, but you are lying. why?
When something is clear cut and obvious there is not this much debate and disagreement among individuals who are closely watching the topic and that's why the fact that you and everyone else that says the data is clear and that vaccines are completely safe, are either completely unaware of anything outside of the data that supports your view or you're lying and Im willing to be it's the latter in your case.
+eeeaten For someone who speaks so much about science, you obviously know very little about how it works...
In order for something to be proven or disproven conclusively there needs to be peer-reviewed studies which can prove the medical consensus that's behind the claims that are being disseminated among society in order for those claims to be accurate and justified. Now since you appearently are unaware of this process, peer review is a concept in which a group of educated and highly qualified professionals who specialize in the scientific discipline that is best suited to be conducting the research on the topic at hand, design and conduct a study that focuses on a specific hypothesis which they are fairly certain of and upon completing said study they publish the results along with the tests they conducted which lead to their conclusion. They must include all methods along with the justified reasons for using such methods in order to show that the conclusion they've arrived at are completely free of any personal bias and based purely on the data alone.
The entire scientific method is based on the acceptance that peer review is the only method that exists in which a scientific and reasonable conclusion can be made concerning topics which aren't very easy for most of us to understand because it allows other portions of the scientific community (more commonly known as the reasearcher's peers hence the name peer-reviewed study) to then take that data and replicate the procedures described in it which will either produce the same results and confirm the claims made by the original reasearcher's, or it won't. This is so that individuals such as yourself can't just say make claims that aren't grounded in any kind of legitimacy and when they do people like myself can then call you out on it.
Now I haven't claimed for one moment that I know for a fact that vaccines cause autism, however there sure as hell seems to be a significant amount of data which suggests there indeed is some connection and as such the entire topic needs to be closely studied and only then can we arrive at a sensible conclusion one way or another. However you keep stating over and over that vaccines don't cause autism and the fact of the matter is whether or not you like it or you don't is really irrelevant, there is no data which proves that claim, there are no peer reviewed studies which have been conducted on all vaccines which would allow anyone to come out and make the claim that vaccines don't cause autism or any other long term risks of any kind because there are no studies that have taken place outside of the Cdcs study of mmr in the early 2000s. Regardless of that fact, you keep on making the claim that vaccines don't cause autism it is a blaring representation of where you stand on this issue, it's purely ideological and you could use a lot of big words and you can try to be as witty as you want and you can try to come off as someone who is well educated on the topic but you're not! You're lying to these people and putting their children in danger when you tell them there's nothing to be worried about because vaccines don't cause any kind of problems that anyone needs to be worried about.
Why would anyone do something like that?? Well I think that answer is pretty obvious either you know nothing about what you're talking about and you just really don't want it to be true that vaccines could possibly be causing any kind of damage to anyone, or (and I'm almost positive this is indeed the reason) you most likely work for some pharmaceutical industry and you're being paid to come on here and totally rip apart as many people as you can, not with any kind of data that's legitimate and easily verifiable, but with a bunch of stories that can do nothing more than try to sway people into the direction you want them to go and when that doesn't work you resort to name-calling and trying to make it seem as though people who don't agree with you are dumb and have no business speaking on the matter. That's called called bias and it's the exact reason why the concept of peer review was created to begin with! So that people can't just make wild claims about things without having the kind of proof that holds up to the kind of scrutiny which peer review implements in order for their claims to be reasonable and accurate, but more importantly it's so that others can differentiate between individuals whose claims are most likely true or at the very least honorable and trustworthy, and those such as yourself which are most likely biased which provides the public with a reason for being extremely cautious about believeing anything that individual says concerning issues in which the public's well being is in someway connected or at the very least it's a red flag and it should warrant a level of caution from that point on until it's obvious that this person is not someone who should not be seen as A-Reliable and trustworthy source of information for others whom they may influence which then becomes justification for making sure that as many people as possible that are involved in the topic are made aware of this persons possible intentions.
I would never make the claim that all vaccines are dangerous because I don't know that there's no data that exists for me to reference and say that. So until you can come out with some actual data which proves that there are peer reviewed studies which have focused on every single one of these vaccines that we give children and have released their data sets and result in verification by the scientific and medical communities showing conclusively that vaccines don't cause autism or any other medical ailments with actual justification then you should probably shut the fuck up because you're talking out of your ass because of that I'm going to keep on calling you out so others are aware of the possible motives you have and why they should exercise caution regarding anything you say playing some role in a decision they might make.
You're an idiot and you're never going to win this argument with me because you're not sincere and it's blaitently obvious to anyone who actually reads what you have to say.
yeah you need to explain it to me, because everything you say is false. what study are you talking about? why did you ignore the link to many studies i gave you? the science showing vaccines don't cause autism comes from doctors/hospitals/universities/medical scientists all over the world, not from pharmaceutical companies or even from the cdc. you are lying - why?
Do I really need to explain this to you? If they don't know what causes autism and theyve only conducted one study of one out of 36 vaccines and that study was claimed to have been manipulated by the very individual who was put in charge of conducting the study then how on Earth can you tell anyone anywhere for any reason that vaccines don't cause autism??? Why are you even arguing this like it's me who's being ridiculous here?? Imagine if the tobacco industry conducted their own investigation concerning the link between cancer and smoking and concluded that a link does not exist despite having only looked at individuals who smoke cigars (which you don't inhale) and then concluded that the data is clear and tobacco does not cause cancer... That's the logic which is being applied to the vaccine and autism debate...
I had my Mumps vaccine as a child and at age 20 worked in a college. One of the students brought her toddler in a buggy, who was asleep. She asked if she could leave the buggy in my office for ten minutes to grab some paperwork and off she went. She came back and collected her child and went home. About a week later I came down with a horrific case of the mumps, all because she chose to vaccinate her child. It was bad enough to suffer my illness, but at the time I was considering trying for a baby, if I had been pregnant, I could have lost my child. Please vaccinate.
The part in this vid that stuck out to me most is that we just THINK we are magically going to avoid all disease. Maybe we will, maybe we wont. No one today really got to live in a time where disease was common and rampant. We are fortunate for this. But the reason WHY it isn't rampant..is because of medicine and vaccines. Lets keep it goin' people!
Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. It boils down to a disease by diseases basis really. Measles...simultaneously 'common childhood disease' but actually a big killer worldwide, worldwide, but not nationwide, EVEN before vaccines were invented, even 10 years before the vaccine was invented, 500 deaths in a year from measles in a country of 150,000,000, doesn't really sound like a whole lot. And that's 10-13 years before the vaccine comes out, and so far I haven't been able to find anybody who can say what the death rate from measles in America was the year *before* the vaccine came out, then what the death rate was the year *after* the vaccine came out, or maybe more to the point, before the vaccine came out at all in 1963, and when the new and improved vaccine came out 5 years later.
I’m wondering if there are any kids that didn’t get vaccinated that have autism. If there are this would be good proof that vaccines don’t cause autism. If there aren’t any...that would make me at least wonder.
that would not be proof of anything. but yes of course there are unvaccinated kids with autism. vaccination doesn't increase your chances of being autistic, which is unsurprising considering vaccines don't cause autism.
Good news bad news...
The uneducated who tend to believe the "Vaccines are bad!" garbage will not vaccinate, and weaken heard immunity unfortunately resulting in those who can't be vaccinated being harmed... However! Due to them not vaccinating it is also restoring "Survival of the Fittest" to a limited degree.
I heard there's a risk of parents not keeping multiple appointments as opposed to getting it all done in one go. Way I see it is, you're giving them an opportunity to think "but the first shots were so unpleasant, my kid cried so loud, I don't think I can handle it again today, I'll just cancel" and then it gets put off.
think about it: imagine everyone reads his book, and 5% of people are convinced to space out vaccines. about 92% of people vaccinate (actually much higher, but let's take the mmr rate for the sake of argument). if 5% of the 8% who don't vaccinate agree to spaced out vaccines, that's about half a percent more people vaccinating. great! but what of the vaccinaters who follow his advice? if 5% of them start following sears' advice spacing out vaccines, that's about 4.5% of the population delaying vaccines more than they currently do. preventable disease ftw.
maybe the numbers aren't perfect, but i hope you get the point. the advice needs to be consistent - the potential harm from vaccines is tiny compared to the potential harm from disease - protect your kids as soon as you can.
nope. from their perspective (and no one at all really) there is no choice between autism and death. it's about relative risk.
your comment about being a burden is weird and irrelevant. this is not about you. don't you wish you didn't have autism? what about autistic people who are crippled by autism - don't you wish they didn't have autism?
sure. their information is wrong, they think vaccination causes autism and it obviously doesn't. the choice they're making is between the risk of autism from vaccines and the risk of harm from the diseases they prevent. if a vaccine did carry a high risk of autism it would be reasonable to reconsider the risk of that vaccine aganist the risk from the disease it prevents.
Those scientists would say the same thing about ANY of the ingredients, about water, and about air. They will NEVER say there is no doubt - EVER, because they don't know everything. For God's SAKE, the majority of people are stupid.
I've literally heard someone's argument against vaccines be "I don't want to inject my child with the virus."
This boggles me, because first of all, the virus is practically dead already. Second of all, the kid's going to get sick anyway from the alive virus so may as well vaccinate before that happens.
Antivaxxers give me headaches.
A bit late to the party, but... Here's some studies that show that unvaccinated children have autism at the same rates as vaccinated children. Discussion over.
The last one is particularly relevant, since it's a study of children who are the younger siblings of autistic children whose parents vaccinated the older child, then decided not to vaccinate the younger child. No difference in the chances of your kid having autism.
2 ways to go about it imo, either go full Australia (and other reasonable countries) and make vaccine mandatory, or mitigate the damage by making parents feel like they are being safe buy spreading it out. Better to have a risky vaccination than a dead baby. Though the majority should be normal, not bullshit spread out plans.
The amount of ignorance + idiocy in the comment section is overwhelming.
For those of who believe in the efficacy of vaccines, I ask you one simple question: how do you know what you know? You probably believe what you believe not based in any research you've done, but b/c medical authority, the school system, and probably your parents blindly believe in the power of vaccines. (I dare you to question what education your doctor received about vaccines while in med school and I can assure you beyond the good ol "Vaccines save lives and are absolutely safe" slogan and the immunization schedule itself, there wasn't much more education)
The reality is, you haven't read the studies; you haven't read vaccine package inserts; you didn't know there was a difference between vaccination and immunization; you probably don't even care what the difference is; you probably have no idea what an antibody is, and that having a particular antibody--as package inserts readily admit--does not guarantee immunity; or that the last batch of the flu shot had a whooping 1 in 50 preventative rate; or that shingles is on the rise b/c the chickenpox vaccine; or that vaccine adverse reactions are under reported; or that the manufacturers of vaccines are immune from law suits; or that our government has an entire legal sector dedicating to adjudicating vaccine disputes; or that we--tax payers--have paid MILLIONS of dollars to those damaged from vaccines; or a whole host of other shit.
Rather, you'd like to just latch on to popular, unsubstantiated opinion while taking the moral high ground b/c it simply feels good to call other people "stupid" while siding with the majority and "safe" opinion.
Welcome to humanity.
"Which studies would you like?" - which ever studies you think support your claim that vaccines aren't effective. vaccine efficacy varies - from 100% for some, to the seasonal flu vaccines which are generally 30-60% effective. maybe you think halving your chances of getting the flu, or halving the number of flu-related deaths each year is a waste of time?
"All package inserts are readily available online" - of course they are, so which inserts do you think are hiding secret information about vaccine harm?
i've read the studies, i've read the inserts. you are wrong. so where do you get your information?
i'm more than happy to provide you with studies. Which studies would you like? All package inserts are readily available online in PDF format via a google search.
Also, if you look into the efficacy of vaccines, most of them use antibody titers as the metric for efficacy and not actual disease prevention. Fancy that!
Consent is a real thing. If you're going to make parents comply with vaccines through a law why not pass a law that requires all children to be circumcised? That sounds like a dangerous way of thinking. In the context of what I've said I believe group immunity is irrelevant.
The worst thing about anti-vaxxers is that they’re not only harming themselves, but making other people who cannot get vaccines or have such a weak immune system that past vaccines cannot protect them (like when my friend had cancer) at a higher risk of getting those diseases by spreading or carrying them.
I had chicken pox when I was a kid. I got shingles as an adult. In fact, I've had shingles every summer for the past three years. It's hell. I have neuropathy that will probably take years to go away fully. My nephew got the chicken pox vaccine, and he won't have to go through this. Vaccinate your fucking children.
John 8:7 "When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.”
Ironically, it's a pretty fitting piece of scripture nonetheless.
@anti vaxxers, rot in hell.
If you think youre smarter than 99.
999999% of doctors and scientists you deserve to die.
If you are willing to put newborns, the elderly, and the immune compromised at risk because youre and idiot you dont deserve kids, or life.
Yall fucking morons are out here making diy medieval vaccines acting like you're innovative geniuses. You're not. You're a fucking moron. Vaccines have existed for centuries. How the actual fucking fuck do you think they dont work?
If you are willing to risk polio, measles, and whooping caugh because you're a lazy and incapable parent you deserve to lose all rights to reproduce.
noone says this though - it's a misinformed distraction. vaccines don't cause autism, but if one did, it would be reasonable to consider the risk of autism from that vaccine against the risk of harm from the disease it prevents.
How the in the fuck is a brain surgeon standing next to him and not correcting him in the slightest about Trump's complete lack of understanding of how vaccines work? HOW Kunta? HOW? Fucking sleepy ass house bitch Carson.
https://blogs.bmj.com/bmjebmspotlight/2018/09/23/response-to-cochrane-editors-jorgensen-gotzsche-and-jefferson/ sorry i was wrong about the cochrane institute itself as it was the nordic cochrane institute (which was made up of scientest that left the cochrane institute) that had objections to how the study from the cochrane institute itself was done.....either way there are bad side effects to that vaccine however small.....and as for chicken pox does not negate what i was saying.....same with the flu
Pedantic and condescending Oliver. Go read about the original Salk live vaccine. It actually killed people. Read 'Dr. Mary's Monkey by Ed Haslam. The Salk vaccine also carried SV40, a virus that has been shown to cause CANCER in humans. There was and there is reason to be concerned about vaccines and what's in them. Trump was not wrong about this, imho.
everything i have said is true.
salk's inactivated (dead), injected vaccine contained the three polio strains; sabin's attenuated (live) oral vaccine also contained the three polio strains from 1957.
both vaccines - salk's and sabin's, we contaminated with sv40.
the number of cancer diagnoses has risen, but this has nothing to do with vaccination. it is because the population is aging, and 3/4 of all new cancers are diagnosed in people over the age of 65. increasing number of elderly = increasing incidence of cancer.
+eeeaten Just one response, are you sure about Sabin and Salk? My understanding was that Salk's vaccine was the attenuated live one while Sabin's came after Salk's, and was the safe one ( in other words, history has it backwards ). I do not believe Haslam's book is fiction, btw. I read some alternate sources about this topic. They agree with you. So I may have been wrong about dead vs. live pathogen. However, there were different strains of polio, and Salk's vaccine used both of them, while Sabin's used only the weak strain which did not cause paralysis. The question of whether or not sv40 was introduced into the human population by one or both vaccines, for me is still an open question. The number of recorded cancer cases in the USA, especially those of the digestive tract did go up considerably beginning in the early 60's. A friend who is a physician told me it was due to better detection (introduction of endoscopy) and that actual number of cancers likely remained the same.
again, where do you get your information? salk's vaccine was inactivated. sabin's vaccine was attenuated.
"The actual number of polio cases in the USA had been on the decline" - that is actually completely false if you know anything about polio. look it up (https://ourworldindata.org/polio) improved sanitation actually _caused_ polio epidemics, as before that _everyone_ got polio as a baby and most had some protection from maternal antibodies. improved sanitation delayed exposure to polio, and kids started getting it later with more serious consequences.
"Thousands in the USA and abroad were injected with the original live vaccine." - nope, the injected vaccine was the inactivated (dead) one.
"The CDC will never admit that there is or was a link between SV40 virus and cancer." - information on it is freely available from the cdc. studies on the sv40-cancer link were done by the national cancer institute and a cleveland university, not by the cdc
everything you say is demonstrably false. your "reference book" is a fictional staple of conspiracy loons.
. nice picture... 😨 the original Salk vaccine was an attenuated live vaccine (by his design). My understanding is that the 2nd (successful) generation vaccine used dead polio pathogen, the DNA remnants of which were adequate to form the necessary human immune response. The actual number of polio cases in the USA had been on the decline, btw, but that is another discussion. Thousands in the USA and abroad were injected with the original live vaccine. Very few of them fell ill immediately, but all were exposed to SV40. The CDC will never admit that there is or was a link between SV40 virus and cancer. No surprise there. I got my information from Ed Haslam's book: Dr. Mary's Monkey. That book describes all this in detail. Sidenote: There is also a documentary out there about a team of French researchers in Africa who were harvesting chimpanzee kidneys for export to the USA. These people may have been responsible for the (accidental) introduction of SIV into the human population. You should look for that on YouTube.
the hpv vacine however is horrible and according to the cochrane institute was released with extreme bias crippling people.....mmr is worth getting but i question the chickenpox vaccine and tamiflu....tamiflu is along the same lines as hpv.....doesnt do much.....and chickenpox vaccine only if you never had as an adult.....otherwise children should build natrual immunities
I agree with you that children should develop natural immunities on their own. The problem is that they suck at it. We need to force all preschools to teach classes to toddlers on how to develop better immunities.
wtf are you talking about? the cochrane review said "There is high‐certainty evidence that HPV vaccines protect against cervical precancer in adolescent girls and young women aged 15 to 26." and "We did not find an increased risk of serious adverse effects."
why do you question the chickenpox vaccine? it has reduced the disease by over 99% in the united states.
why are you talking about tamiflu? it's not a vaccine at all, it's an antiviral medication to treat flu symptoms.
wow you have no clue.
Community pharmacists are the health professionals most accessible to the public. They supply medicines in accordance with a prescription or, when legally permitted, sell them without a prescription. In addition to ensuring an accurate supply of appropriate products, their professional activities also cover counselling of patients at the time of dispensing of prescription and non-prescription drugs, drug information to health professionals, patients and the general public, and participation in health-promotion programmes. They maintain links with other health professionals in primary health care.