Preliminary Measles Vax Math
IMHO as of now:
Given that one can expect 90% of the population to get Measles when nobody is inoculated against Measles, and 3% of the population to get Measles when everyone is inoculated, a reasonable rough formula deriving percent of people who get measles from percent vaccinated, would be:
Formula A: % Getting Measles = 90- ( 0.87 x (%vaccinated) )
The most pro-vaccine estimate I could find on the internet, was that the Measles infection rate is (Fact B) 67 times higher for the unvaccinated compared to the vaccinated (A 2012 Report declared that there had been no studies done that compared the incidence of the disease vaccinated against amongst the vaccinated compared to the incidence of said disease amongst the unvaccinated).
Given that the Formula A and Fact B are both true (Ratio in fact B adhered to as much as possible): When 10% of the population is vaccinated vs Measles, 77.0% of the unvaccinated, and 1.15% of the vaccinated will get Measles; When 90% of the population gets the Measles Vax, 100% of the unvaccinated, and 2.2% of the vaccinated will get Measles; & when 99% of the population gets the Measles Vax, 100% of the unvaccinated and 2.9% of the vaccinated will get Measles. This contra-indicates the idea that the Measles rate for the unvaccinated declines when the percent of the population that is vaccinated increases.
I estimate 2% of the US population as being in a condition such that they are unable to be vaccinated vs Measles (due to allergies etc). If the vaccination rate vs Measles in a society were to climb from 80% to 95%, one could suppose that the Measles infection rate amongst the unvaccinated might decline from say, 50% to 25%. That would mean 15% of the population becoming vaccinated against Measles, would result in 0.5% of the population (persons unable to take the Measles Vaccine), coming down with Measles.
The facts show that the infection rate with Measles amongst the 5% or so in the US who are un-vaccinated, cannot be more than approx 600/15,000,000, or 0.004%. If a decline from 95% to 80% in the Measles vaccination rate were to produce a hundred-fold increase in the Measles incidence amongst those unable to be vaccinated against Measles (ya right), the Measles incidence amongst the unvaccinated vs Measles in the US, would rise from 0.004% to 0.4%, saving 0.396% of the population, persons unable to be vaccinated, from getting Measles.
Should 15% of the population be required to get a Measles Shot, so that 0.4% of the population can avoid getting Measles?
If getting a Measles shot doubles the incidence of diseases as bad as Measles from 10% to 20% amongst the vaccinated, then that would mean if the percent of the population vaccinated against Measles rises from 80-95%, such would involve 1.5% of the population getting some disease as bad as Measles.
Compare that 1.5% to the aforementioned hypothetical 0.4% of the population that would be saved from Measles due to the increase from 80-95% in terms of the total population vaccinated.
Persons who are unable to get the Measles Shot due to things like allergies, can depend on themselves, and resort to practices that reduce their own risk of Measles. They can: build up their immune system; refrain from activities that weaken their immune system; avoid places relatively likely to feature the Measles virus; avoid persons relatively likely to carry the Measles virus.
How do you justify the following attitude: "I don't want to get Measles, but I don't want to get vaccinated, so I demand that you save me from getting Measles, by getting vaccinated instead of me"?
Given that one can expect 90% of the population to get Measles when nobody is inoculated against Measles, and 3% of the population to get Measles when everyone is inoculated, a reasonable rough formula deriving percent of people who get measles from percent vaccinated, would be:
Formula A: % Getting Measles = 90- ( 0.87 x (%vaccinated) )
The most pro-vaccine estimate I could find on the internet, was that the Measles infection rate is (Fact B) 67 times higher for the unvaccinated compared to the vaccinated (A 2012 Report declared that there had been no studies done that compared the incidence of the disease vaccinated against amongst the vaccinated compared to the incidence of said disease amongst the unvaccinated).
Given that the Formula A and Fact B are both true (Ratio in fact B adhered to as much as possible): When 10% of the population is vaccinated vs Measles, 77.0% of the unvaccinated, and 1.15% of the vaccinated will get Measles; When 90% of the population gets the Measles Vax, 100% of the unvaccinated, and 2.2% of the vaccinated will get Measles; & when 99% of the population gets the Measles Vax, 100% of the unvaccinated and 2.9% of the vaccinated will get Measles. This contra-indicates the idea that the Measles rate for the unvaccinated declines when the percent of the population that is vaccinated increases.
I estimate 2% of the US population as being in a condition such that they are unable to be vaccinated vs Measles (due to allergies etc). If the vaccination rate vs Measles in a society were to climb from 80% to 95%, one could suppose that the Measles infection rate amongst the unvaccinated might decline from say, 50% to 25%. That would mean 15% of the population becoming vaccinated against Measles, would result in 0.5% of the population (persons unable to take the Measles Vaccine), coming down with Measles.
The facts show that the infection rate with Measles amongst the 5% or so in the US who are un-vaccinated, cannot be more than approx 600/15,000,000, or 0.004%. If a decline from 95% to 80% in the Measles vaccination rate were to produce a hundred-fold increase in the Measles incidence amongst those unable to be vaccinated against Measles (ya right), the Measles incidence amongst the unvaccinated vs Measles in the US, would rise from 0.004% to 0.4%, saving 0.396% of the population, persons unable to be vaccinated, from getting Measles.
Should 15% of the population be required to get a Measles Shot, so that 0.4% of the population can avoid getting Measles?
If getting a Measles shot doubles the incidence of diseases as bad as Measles from 10% to 20% amongst the vaccinated, then that would mean if the percent of the population vaccinated against Measles rises from 80-95%, such would involve 1.5% of the population getting some disease as bad as Measles.
Compare that 1.5% to the aforementioned hypothetical 0.4% of the population that would be saved from Measles due to the increase from 80-95% in terms of the total population vaccinated.
Persons who are unable to get the Measles Shot due to things like allergies, can depend on themselves, and resort to practices that reduce their own risk of Measles. They can: build up their immune system; refrain from activities that weaken their immune system; avoid places relatively likely to feature the Measles virus; avoid persons relatively likely to carry the Measles virus.
How do you justify the following attitude: "I don't want to get Measles, but I don't want to get vaccinated, so I demand that you save me from getting Measles, by getting vaccinated instead of me"?
posted by David Virgil at 9:30 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home