Swine-flu Vaccine: negative public health impact of vaccine-refuseniks easily balanced out by hypothetical tiny positive effects for refuseniks
Dr. John Cohen, recently appeared on WCVB TV (http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/20309509/detail.html) to express his indignation regarding the supposedly horrible consequences of persons refusing to take vaccines. He opined that those who refuse to be vaccinated, increase the risk of infection for persons other than themselves.
"I think it's horrible," said Dr. John Cohen (who looks like a boyish looking innocent looking white-haired bespectacled blue-eyed Irishman), a pediatrician and staunch supporter of vaccination (regarding 1.3% of Massachusetts kids not getting vaccinated). "There's no religion in this world that says you shouldn't immunize your child....Those (unvaccinated) kids are more apt to get the (H1N1 Swine Flu) disease therefore more apt to spread it therefore more apt to get your child in trouble"
"Team 5 Investigates" proudly reportED that it has "reported extensively" on the vaccination refusal; they are clearly in the camp of the vaccine-promoters.
Thus, the focus here will be on how those who refuse vaccination impact those who agree to be vaccinated, as opposed to how they impact their own group which is those who refuse vaccination. After all, if those who refuse vaccination really are as bad as Dr. Cohen says they are, wringing one's hand over how they harm themselves by refusing vaccination is silly.
Dr. Cohen speaks as if it were all very simple: his idea is that the increased risk accruing to the good guys who are vaccinated, due to the refusal of the bad guys to be vaccinated, of course outweighs the risks (such as maybe a small disaster turned into a huge disaster, & responsibly knowledgeable persons not allowed to opt out) and bullying intrusiveness involved when vaccinations are mandatory as opposed to voluntary.
Methinks that this may well be yet another example of an over-rated Jewish doctor, produced by a governmental/medical institution that artificially and unnaturally over-emphasizes rote and brainspeed, putting his foot in his mouth.
One feels like retorting, if these vaccinations are so great, than what have the vaccinated got to worry about, in terms of being infected by the un-vaccinated?
So let's take a look at something that is underemphasized, the facts:
The AP (http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2009/07/health_officials_predict_swine.html) on July 24, 2009, reported that according to Tom Skinner, of the CDC: thus far, 0.03% of the swine-flu infected population in the US has died and in the future, 0.4% of the US Swine-flu infected population is expected to die.
The AP article states 1 million current US swine-flu cases could balloon to 122 million US cases if a vaccination program is not implemented. This implies that 1 million currently infected with swine-flu in the US (according to the CDC), could end up infecting 122 million persons in the US with the Swine-flu in the absence of a vaccination program.
Reports (http://www.cjmed.net/news/info/id/33?PHPSESSID=ea880b282c1baa7c1b48fa5e4e12b022) are that in the 2007-2008 flu season, the flu vaccine promoted by the US government had an efficacy rate of 44%; meaning that those getting the vaccine had a 44% lower chance of contracting the flu, compared to those not getting the vaccine.
Thus if you assume that the swine-flu vaccine will also likewise similarly have an efficacy rate of 44%, meaning those taking the vaccine will have about 56% of the chance of contracting the swine flu compared to those who do not take the vaccine, you could say that one percent of the US population refusing the vaccine would: result in 440,000 additional cases amongst 150 million vaccinated (one in 341), infecting 0.29% of the vaccinated group; and, 780,000 additional cases amongst the 150 million unvaccinated, infecting 0.52% of the unvaccinated group. The total comes to 1,220,000, which is one percent of the 122 million new Swine-flu cases the CDEC expects to occur if there is no vaccination program; the infection rate amongst the vaccinated given these estimates is indeed 56% the rate amongst the unvaccinated.
Yet, even if the one percent who refused the vaccination were to be vaccinated, they would still hypothetically end up causing 246,000 cases amongst the150 million strong vaccinated group, and 437,000 cases amongst the 150 million unvaccinated because the vaccine efficacy rate would give immunity to only 56% of them.
If you assume in making the calculation that 50 million of the population are vaccinated and 250 million are not when the one percent refusing vaccination results in a 1.22 million increase in total cases, you find given that the vaccinated have an infection rate that is 56% of that of the unvaccinated, that the 1.22 million in increased cases would be distributed as: 123,000 or 0.25% amongst the 50 million that are vaccinated, and 1,100,000 or 0.44% amongst the 250 million that are unvaccinated. The total again is 1,220,000, and the rate amongst the vaccinated is again 56% the rate amongst the unvaccinated
If you assume in making the calculation that 250 million of the population are vaccinated and only 50 million are not when the one percent refusing vaccination results in a 1.22 million increase in total cases, you find given that the vaccinated have an infection rate that is 56% of the unvaccinated, that the 1.22 million in increased cases would be distributed as: 896,000 or 0.36% amongst the 250 million that are vaccinated, and 320,000 or 0.64% amongst the 50 million that are unvaccinated. The total is again 1,220,000, and the rate amongst the vaccinated is again 56% the rate amongst the unvaccinated. Yet, even if the one percent who refused the vaccination were to be vaccinated, they would still hypothetically end up causing 502,000 cases amongst the 250 million who have been vaccinated and 179,000 cases amongst the 50 million unvaccinated because the vaccine efficacy rate would give immunity to only 56% of them if they decided to be vaccinated.
Tech note: It is the rigidity of this particular model (assuming that whatever the percentage that is vaccinated a one percent refusal to be vaccinated will still produce 1,220,000 additional cases), that produces the variance amongst the scenarios. The formula is solve for: 0.56 times the number vaccinated plus the number unvaccinated equals 1,220,000.
By this rigid model, as the percent of the population that is vaccinated increases, the percentage of the vaccinated population that gets the disease due to the refusal of the refuseniks, increases. Therefore to paint a picture that shows the refusal to be vaccinated doing as much damage as possible, henceforth I will use the figure from the situation featuring the incidence of the disease amongst the 250 million of the population that has been vaccinated, going up by 0.36%, or 896,000 additional cases, due to the infectious influence of the vaccine-refuseniks.
Thus one percent of the population, 3.04 million persons, refusing to take the vaccine could be pessimistically said to increase the risk of disease for
250 million vaccinated persons, by 896,000-502,000 =394,000 per 250 million people. Thus one percent of the population, 3.04 million persons, refusing to take the vaccine would increase the incidence of Swine-flu disease in the 250 million strong vaccinated population by 394,000 cases or 0.16%.
Meaning, 3.04 million people refusing the vaccination, would result in 394,000 additional cases of the disease amongst the 250 million who are vaccinated, a ratio of one vaccination refusal causing 0.13 additional cases of disease in the vaccinated population; which is also a ratio of 8 vaccination refusals causing one additional case of swine flu in the vaccinated population.
Non-fatal cases of Swine-flu produce natural immunity, leading to the end of the pandemic/epidemic. The CDC (according to the AP report) estimates that 0.4% of the persons infected with swine flu or one in 250 will die as the percentage infected rises. Thus one could say that 8x250=2000 vaccination-refusals can be expected to cause one death in the vaccinated population; and, one vaccination-refusal will result in 0.0005 deaths in the vaccinated population.
The average person lives to be about 80. Thus one can assume that the average vaccinated person who dies because others have refused to take the vaccine, will be age 40. That computes to 40 lost years of life. On the other hand, amongst the 2000 vaccine-refusers who cause the one death in the vaccinated population, more than 0.02 lost years of life for each of the 2000, would total to more than 40 lost years. That means that if each of the 2000 vaccine-refusers who cause the one death of the vaccinated person, were to lose just 7 days of their life due to negative effects of the vaccine, this would more than balance out the 40 years of life lost by the person who died because 2000 persons refused to take the vaccine.
And this is not even taking into account, that a large percentage of those who will die from the Swine-flu, will die because their unhealthy lifestyles that they have voluntarily chosen, have impaired their immune systems.
If the average age of those refusing the vaccine is 40 years, and on average they have 40 years of life left to live, the loss of 0.02 years of life could be said to be analagous to a decline in the quality of life of 0.05 percent, because 0.02/40=0.0005.
Imagine that. If the quality of life of the 2000 persons taking the vaccine were to decline due to the vaccine by just 1/20th of one percent, compared to their quality of life not taking the vaccine, this would more than balance out the 40 years of life lost by the hypothetical vaccinated person who dies due to the refusal of the 2000 to take the vaccine.
There are credible reports that elements amongst the powers that somewhat secretly control the government dabble in: worship of Satan/Evil, deceit, schemes designed to reduce the population level through the destruction of human life, lack of national loyalty, theft, homicide, anti-Christianism, anti-white-europoid-ism, anti-Americanism etc etc. There are legions of tales regarding the selfishness of those who profit from the sale of vaccines and regarding their attempts to corrupt medical and government personnel.
Auto-ethnocentric, racist, malicious, misanthropic literature such as (portions of, some of it is no doubt inspired honorable literature) the 'Talmud' and 'the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion' have historically been quite popular in the ethnic group that Dr.Cohen and WCVB General Manager Bill 'the mouse that roared' Fine are products of. I could swear that once I heard Mr, Fine giving one of his little speeches on TV, and while watching him I heard his voice say, 'I worship Satan', though for some hi-tech reason his lips, like those of a ventriloquist, did not indicate that he was saying this (maybe it was just a hallucination).
I can imagine some new 'psalm' of theirs: 'For the people of the world are the Canaanites of Canaan, made to be exterminated by us, the chosen Joshuas, just as Joshua exterminated the Canaanites to establish our people'.
And then there is simple incompetence--this year the US compnay Baxter managed to send millions of doses of vaccine contaminated with Swine-flu virus to Czechoslovakia (the 'vaccine' was supposed to be distributed to several European nations) (http://www.examiner.com/x-6478-NY-Page-One-Examiner~y2009m7d31-Swine-Flu-Mandate-US-Government-puts-states-on-notice). Nevertheless, Baxter is producing 80 million doses of vaccine for distribution in five countries (http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-biz-baxter-swine-flu-aug5,0,5981377.story).
People have become able to judge the extent to which they as individuals are liable to being harmed by a vaccine (this kind of thing can run in families). A certain percentage of the population compared to other groups, does a better job of assessing the potential cost/benefit of vaccines. There are always persons who are wiser than the government in any given subject.
Given these factors, it as of now certainly seems to be madness to say that vaccinations such as the swine-flu vaccine should be mandatory, when the situation is approximately speaking, that if every person refusing the vaccine were to have their lives shortened by just 7 days, or have the quality of their life decrease by just 1/20th of one percent due to being forced to take the vaccine, such would more than cancel out the loss of life accruing in terms of vaccinated persons becoming fatalities because of the infectious effects of persons refusing vaccinations.
@2009 David Virgil Hobbs
"I think it's horrible," said Dr. John Cohen (who looks like a boyish looking innocent looking white-haired bespectacled blue-eyed Irishman), a pediatrician and staunch supporter of vaccination (regarding 1.3% of Massachusetts kids not getting vaccinated). "There's no religion in this world that says you shouldn't immunize your child....Those (unvaccinated) kids are more apt to get the (H1N1 Swine Flu) disease therefore more apt to spread it therefore more apt to get your child in trouble"
"Team 5 Investigates" proudly reportED that it has "reported extensively" on the vaccination refusal; they are clearly in the camp of the vaccine-promoters.
Thus, the focus here will be on how those who refuse vaccination impact those who agree to be vaccinated, as opposed to how they impact their own group which is those who refuse vaccination. After all, if those who refuse vaccination really are as bad as Dr. Cohen says they are, wringing one's hand over how they harm themselves by refusing vaccination is silly.
Dr. Cohen speaks as if it were all very simple: his idea is that the increased risk accruing to the good guys who are vaccinated, due to the refusal of the bad guys to be vaccinated, of course outweighs the risks (such as maybe a small disaster turned into a huge disaster, & responsibly knowledgeable persons not allowed to opt out) and bullying intrusiveness involved when vaccinations are mandatory as opposed to voluntary.
Methinks that this may well be yet another example of an over-rated Jewish doctor, produced by a governmental/medical institution that artificially and unnaturally over-emphasizes rote and brainspeed, putting his foot in his mouth.
One feels like retorting, if these vaccinations are so great, than what have the vaccinated got to worry about, in terms of being infected by the un-vaccinated?
So let's take a look at something that is underemphasized, the facts:
The AP (http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2009/07/health_officials_predict_swine.html) on July 24, 2009, reported that according to Tom Skinner, of the CDC: thus far, 0.03% of the swine-flu infected population in the US has died and in the future, 0.4% of the US Swine-flu infected population is expected to die.
The AP article states 1 million current US swine-flu cases could balloon to 122 million US cases if a vaccination program is not implemented. This implies that 1 million currently infected with swine-flu in the US (according to the CDC), could end up infecting 122 million persons in the US with the Swine-flu in the absence of a vaccination program.
Reports (http://www.cjmed.net/news/info/id/33?PHPSESSID=ea880b282c1baa7c1b48fa5e4e12b022) are that in the 2007-2008 flu season, the flu vaccine promoted by the US government had an efficacy rate of 44%; meaning that those getting the vaccine had a 44% lower chance of contracting the flu, compared to those not getting the vaccine.
Thus if you assume that the swine-flu vaccine will also likewise similarly have an efficacy rate of 44%, meaning those taking the vaccine will have about 56% of the chance of contracting the swine flu compared to those who do not take the vaccine, you could say that one percent of the US population refusing the vaccine would: result in 440,000 additional cases amongst 150 million vaccinated (one in 341), infecting 0.29% of the vaccinated group; and, 780,000 additional cases amongst the 150 million unvaccinated, infecting 0.52% of the unvaccinated group. The total comes to 1,220,000, which is one percent of the 122 million new Swine-flu cases the CDEC expects to occur if there is no vaccination program; the infection rate amongst the vaccinated given these estimates is indeed 56% the rate amongst the unvaccinated.
Yet, even if the one percent who refused the vaccination were to be vaccinated, they would still hypothetically end up causing 246,000 cases amongst the150 million strong vaccinated group, and 437,000 cases amongst the 150 million unvaccinated because the vaccine efficacy rate would give immunity to only 56% of them.
If you assume in making the calculation that 50 million of the population are vaccinated and 250 million are not when the one percent refusing vaccination results in a 1.22 million increase in total cases, you find given that the vaccinated have an infection rate that is 56% of that of the unvaccinated, that the 1.22 million in increased cases would be distributed as: 123,000 or 0.25% amongst the 50 million that are vaccinated, and 1,100,000 or 0.44% amongst the 250 million that are unvaccinated. The total again is 1,220,000, and the rate amongst the vaccinated is again 56% the rate amongst the unvaccinated
If you assume in making the calculation that 250 million of the population are vaccinated and only 50 million are not when the one percent refusing vaccination results in a 1.22 million increase in total cases, you find given that the vaccinated have an infection rate that is 56% of the unvaccinated, that the 1.22 million in increased cases would be distributed as: 896,000 or 0.36% amongst the 250 million that are vaccinated, and 320,000 or 0.64% amongst the 50 million that are unvaccinated. The total is again 1,220,000, and the rate amongst the vaccinated is again 56% the rate amongst the unvaccinated. Yet, even if the one percent who refused the vaccination were to be vaccinated, they would still hypothetically end up causing 502,000 cases amongst the 250 million who have been vaccinated and 179,000 cases amongst the 50 million unvaccinated because the vaccine efficacy rate would give immunity to only 56% of them if they decided to be vaccinated.
Tech note: It is the rigidity of this particular model (assuming that whatever the percentage that is vaccinated a one percent refusal to be vaccinated will still produce 1,220,000 additional cases), that produces the variance amongst the scenarios. The formula is solve for: 0.56 times the number vaccinated plus the number unvaccinated equals 1,220,000.
By this rigid model, as the percent of the population that is vaccinated increases, the percentage of the vaccinated population that gets the disease due to the refusal of the refuseniks, increases. Therefore to paint a picture that shows the refusal to be vaccinated doing as much damage as possible, henceforth I will use the figure from the situation featuring the incidence of the disease amongst the 250 million of the population that has been vaccinated, going up by 0.36%, or 896,000 additional cases, due to the infectious influence of the vaccine-refuseniks.
Thus one percent of the population, 3.04 million persons, refusing to take the vaccine could be pessimistically said to increase the risk of disease for
250 million vaccinated persons, by 896,000-502,000 =394,000 per 250 million people. Thus one percent of the population, 3.04 million persons, refusing to take the vaccine would increase the incidence of Swine-flu disease in the 250 million strong vaccinated population by 394,000 cases or 0.16%.
Meaning, 3.04 million people refusing the vaccination, would result in 394,000 additional cases of the disease amongst the 250 million who are vaccinated, a ratio of one vaccination refusal causing 0.13 additional cases of disease in the vaccinated population; which is also a ratio of 8 vaccination refusals causing one additional case of swine flu in the vaccinated population.
Non-fatal cases of Swine-flu produce natural immunity, leading to the end of the pandemic/epidemic. The CDC (according to the AP report) estimates that 0.4% of the persons infected with swine flu or one in 250 will die as the percentage infected rises. Thus one could say that 8x250=2000 vaccination-refusals can be expected to cause one death in the vaccinated population; and, one vaccination-refusal will result in 0.0005 deaths in the vaccinated population.
The average person lives to be about 80. Thus one can assume that the average vaccinated person who dies because others have refused to take the vaccine, will be age 40. That computes to 40 lost years of life. On the other hand, amongst the 2000 vaccine-refusers who cause the one death in the vaccinated population, more than 0.02 lost years of life for each of the 2000, would total to more than 40 lost years. That means that if each of the 2000 vaccine-refusers who cause the one death of the vaccinated person, were to lose just 7 days of their life due to negative effects of the vaccine, this would more than balance out the 40 years of life lost by the person who died because 2000 persons refused to take the vaccine.
And this is not even taking into account, that a large percentage of those who will die from the Swine-flu, will die because their unhealthy lifestyles that they have voluntarily chosen, have impaired their immune systems.
If the average age of those refusing the vaccine is 40 years, and on average they have 40 years of life left to live, the loss of 0.02 years of life could be said to be analagous to a decline in the quality of life of 0.05 percent, because 0.02/40=0.0005.
Imagine that. If the quality of life of the 2000 persons taking the vaccine were to decline due to the vaccine by just 1/20th of one percent, compared to their quality of life not taking the vaccine, this would more than balance out the 40 years of life lost by the hypothetical vaccinated person who dies due to the refusal of the 2000 to take the vaccine.
There are credible reports that elements amongst the powers that somewhat secretly control the government dabble in: worship of Satan/Evil, deceit, schemes designed to reduce the population level through the destruction of human life, lack of national loyalty, theft, homicide, anti-Christianism, anti-white-europoid-ism, anti-Americanism etc etc. There are legions of tales regarding the selfishness of those who profit from the sale of vaccines and regarding their attempts to corrupt medical and government personnel.
Auto-ethnocentric, racist, malicious, misanthropic literature such as (portions of, some of it is no doubt inspired honorable literature) the 'Talmud' and 'the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion' have historically been quite popular in the ethnic group that Dr.Cohen and WCVB General Manager Bill 'the mouse that roared' Fine are products of. I could swear that once I heard Mr, Fine giving one of his little speeches on TV, and while watching him I heard his voice say, 'I worship Satan', though for some hi-tech reason his lips, like those of a ventriloquist, did not indicate that he was saying this (maybe it was just a hallucination).
I can imagine some new 'psalm' of theirs: 'For the people of the world are the Canaanites of Canaan, made to be exterminated by us, the chosen Joshuas, just as Joshua exterminated the Canaanites to establish our people'.
And then there is simple incompetence--this year the US compnay Baxter managed to send millions of doses of vaccine contaminated with Swine-flu virus to Czechoslovakia (the 'vaccine' was supposed to be distributed to several European nations) (http://www.examiner.com/x-6478-NY-Page-One-Examiner~y2009m7d31-Swine-Flu-Mandate-US-Government-puts-states-on-notice). Nevertheless, Baxter is producing 80 million doses of vaccine for distribution in five countries (http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-biz-baxter-swine-flu-aug5,0,5981377.story).
People have become able to judge the extent to which they as individuals are liable to being harmed by a vaccine (this kind of thing can run in families). A certain percentage of the population compared to other groups, does a better job of assessing the potential cost/benefit of vaccines. There are always persons who are wiser than the government in any given subject.
Given these factors, it as of now certainly seems to be madness to say that vaccinations such as the swine-flu vaccine should be mandatory, when the situation is approximately speaking, that if every person refusing the vaccine were to have their lives shortened by just 7 days, or have the quality of their life decrease by just 1/20th of one percent due to being forced to take the vaccine, such would more than cancel out the loss of life accruing in terms of vaccinated persons becoming fatalities because of the infectious effects of persons refusing vaccinations.
@2009 David Virgil Hobbs
Labels: Doctor John Cohen, H1N1 virus, swine-flu, vaccines, WCVB TV
posted by David Virgil at 3:19 AM
1 comments
