firstly, i feel like im stepping into a time-machine

>http://articles.latimes.com/1996-06-17/news/mn-15871_1_measles-vaccine
- parents signed an informed consent form in this study
the issue here is that they were given a WHO approved measles vaccine. it was called 'experimental' because it wasnt approved by cdc at the time. not because there was something wrong with the vaccine and they needed guinea pigs
and i think this is a more useful paper,

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/104/5/1123.full

and specifically this
Mortality differences between vaccine groups disappeared within a few years after vaccination.6Similar studies of high-titer vaccines in both the United States and developing countries with relatively low baseline infant mortality failed to reveal any such disparity in morbidity or mortality. Despite epidemiologic, clinical, and laboratory studies, a plausible and satisfactory biological explanation for these findings has yet to surface.

>http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1992-08-06/news/9203100664_1_hepatitis-indian-health-service-vaccine

again, i'd rather read what the Committee on Native American Child Health and Committee on Infectious Diseases
http://www.ihs.gov/epi/documents/vaccine/aapaianvaccinestatement.pdf
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1448379/

>http://paperity.org/p/42835468/use-of-hepatitis-a-vaccine-in-a-community-wide-outbreak-of-hepatitis-a

and ^^^ article reiterates the efficacy of community-wide vaccination to control spread of disease
"From December 1995 through December 1996, the number of hepatitis A cases reported inside the intervention area declined by 64%; outside the intervention area, the number of cases declined by 40%. The precise contribution of the vaccine campaign to the decline in the number of outbreak cases is difficult to quantify because community outbreaks often wane over time. The vaccine campaign may have hastened the decline of the number of outbreak cases."

all articles speak of consent. i havent read of any coercion or force (which would be against international law, btw. the nuremberg codeto be specific)

>, I said it wasn't an
>epidemic. We have several measles outbreaks every year.

semantics. outbreak epidemic.
if we are going to be strict on the measles specific definition of epidemic?
then no we havent reach that threshhold per 100,000 to call it an epidemic
if this were a less developed country - this would be considered an epidemic


>>not really, they are a result of unvaccinated people getting
>>exposed to measles and spreading it to other unvaccinated
>>people
>>its not 'visiting a foreign country' that is the issue
>here.
>
>
>Unless you means after measles had already been imported here
>from outside the US, you're wrong. Most measles outbreaks
>occur because first someone brought it into the country from
>outside the country. Or as the CDC said regarding 2013:

i dont understand this. vaccinated people travel outside the u.s all the time. hell i just came back from south sudan. they dont get measles
unvaccinated people travel to places where they are at risk for getting measles, come here infected and then spread the disease to other people who are not vaccinated.
as the cdc says,

" "This is not a problem with the measles vaccine not working," she said. "This is a problem of the measles vaccine not being used."

and
>"Among the 159 cases, 157 (99%) were import-associated, and
>two had an unknown source."

this doesnt mean that all 157 people came back with measles. it means they most likely got infected by the one source who travelled while unvaccinated.

>
>>>However if you want something to get up in arms about try
>>>this. In January 2015 the number of children who had died
>>>from the flu so far this season was reported to be 26.
>>Deaths

ok, i dont play this type of mortality olympics. I personally think measles is far more dangerous than the flu - its case fatality rate is certainly higher
i can also list probably 10 other things that concern me (more) when it comes to infant and child mortality.
but this post is not about 'what is worse' lets rank it
its about 1 thing; 'this measles epidemic (ok outbreak)
do i think its worth speaking about? yes

i also think the flu is preventable and children should get vaccinated.
i didnt come into this post saying, which is more dangerous, flu or measles
i dont even see the need to do that.
we dont have limited space on the issues we can bring up and talk about and so there's no reason not to start a post about the flu

>I'm advocating that people should speak about something that's
>actually worth speaking about.

wait. because you dont think its worth speaking about you want to censor this?
come on.
values are subjective.