MrShorty

vaccines at the intersection of religious liberty and public health

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Scott said:

Plague is easily treatable as long that it is recognised, if that makes you feel better.

5 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Here in Colorado about every other year or so, we have a case or three of bubonic plague.  Usually in Pueblo, usually showing up in people who have been cleaning out hay barns in dusty conditions.  I don't remember any deaths.

From the CDC:

Quote

How many cases of plague occur in the United States? Globally?

In recent decades, an average of 7 human plague cases are reported each year (range: 1-17 cases per year). Plague has occurred in people of all ages (infants up to age 96), though 50% of cases occur in people ages 12–45. 

From PBS:

Quote

Infection in all forms can be fatal unless treated immediately with antibiotics, such as streptomycin. Mortality rates for treated individuals range from 1 percent to 15 percent for bubonic plague to 40 percent for septicemic plague. In untreated victims, the rates rise to about 50 percent for bubonic and 100 percent for septicemic. The mortality rate for untreated pneumonic plague is 100 percent; death occurs within 24 hours.

So, yes, if treated, we have a much better chance of survival.  But consider what you're saying:

Quote

1% to 15% mortality rate from the plague (when treated) is nothing to be afraid of.  But a 0.41% mortality rate from the flu (when unvaccinated) is a catastrophe! 

Can we have some consistency?  And what about if it is septicemic?  That's even worse!  And you're not afraid of it?  True, incident rates are very low (for now).  But I pointed out that we're getting worse and worse sanitation conditions in big cities that outbreaks could in reality happen.

Yes, I know. You're going to play the "preventable" card.  And it is a valid card to play here.  I'm not arguing that.  I'm saying that regardless of reasons, the death rates are high enough that we really ought to be afraid of the plague.  Yet you're not.  And, you are afraid of a disease with a much lower morbidity rate.

Edited by Mores

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mores said:

I'm saying that regardless of reasons, the death rates are high enough that we really ought to be afraid of the plague.  Yet you're not.  And, you are afraid of a disease with a much lower morbidity rate.

There are lots of diseases that can kill you.  I don't usually go around worrying about them on a daily basis, whether it be flu, plague, ebola, malaria, West Nile etc.

Of course that doesn't mean that they aren't a concern and shouldn't be dealt with.

No doubt the plague is some nasty stuff.

I don't know how much you have studied up on it, but it's a pretty scary disease.  All three forms are caused by the same bacteria, but infect different areas of the body.

Bubonic plague is the one that causes foul smelling and painful swellings in the body, especially the lymph nodes.

Pneumonic plague is when your lungs are infected and liquify.  You basically eventually cough up your liquified lungs.

Septicimic plague is when the blood is infected.  Your infected blood thins to the point that you eventually bleed to death through the skin.

Luckily now days at least, septicimic and pneumonic plague is rare (see below).

As to which diseases to fear the most, I'd go with viruses.

Luckily plague is a bacterial disease, so it can be treated with antibiotics.

Viral diseases can't be treated with antibiotics.  While bacteria are living things, virus aren't really alive (though a minor number of scientists don't fully agree), so you can't kill them.  Viruses are much harder to treat once a person is infected.

The flu may have a lower mortality rate, but I'd still consider it to be a more deadly disease when it comes to chances of getting infected.

As far as plague goes, the chances of getting infected are still low; at least for now.

It seems to be the case that the strain that caused the black death is extinct.  It is theorized that the bacteria itself mutated to become much less contagious.  The bacteria was becoming too successful and was in danger of wiping itself out because it was so deadly that it was in danger of wiping out all of it's hosts.  So, it mutated to a much less contagious strain.

That doesn't mean that the disease couldn't mutate again to a much more deadly strain.  In addition to bubonic, it is theorized that the plague was spread pneumonically person to person through much of the black death, which is why it became so deadly.  Today, plague can still be spread pneumonically, but with the current strains, it is very rare.

For widespread plague today, the disease would either have to mutate to spread more easily pnuonically or would have to nearly wipe out the rat and rodent population.

The former is possible and hard to predict, but for the latter, we'd see it coming.  We'd see the rodent population begin to die off.  The fleas that spread the black death prefer rodent hosts.  It is usually only after the rodents start to die off that it is common for them to jump to human hosts.

Now days most people contracting the plague do so by coming in contact with (or in parts of Asia, even eating raw or undercooked) dead or infected rodents.  The chances of it spreading from person to person are slim.  

The bacteria would either have to mutate to be spread more easily from person to person contact or the rodent population would have to begin to die off for there to be a large scale epidemic.  That's not to say that it couldn't happen though.

Anyway, the above is all from my memory, so I'm sure that I missed some things.

Edited by Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Scott said:

There are lots of diseases that can kill you.  I don't usually go around worrying about them on a daily basis, whether it be flu, plague, ebola, malaria, West Nile etc.

You desire to mandate vaccines would say otherwise.

Be clear what conversation brought us to this point.

  • I offered the position that we need to calculate the risks for each disease vs vaccines.
  • Others didn't listen and wanted to mandate vaccines for everyone.
  • I pointed out that the plague is now becoming an imminent threat.  That scares me since it has a greater morbidity rate than any of the viruses we have been discussing.
  • You pointed out that it is treatable, so we shouldn't worry about it.
  • I pointed out he contradiction in a position of mandating vaccines for diseases with a lower morbidity rate while not caring about an imminent disease with a higher morbidity rate.
  • You defended yourself by saying you don't go around worrying about any disease.

Well...you should.

8 hours ago, Scott said:

I don't know how much you have studied up on it, but it's a pretty scary disease.  All three forms are caused by the same bacteria, but infect different areas of the body.

Bubonic plague is the one that causes foul smelling and painful swellings in the body, especially the lymph nodes.

Pneumonic plague is when your lungs are infected and liquify.  You basically eventually cough up your liquified lungs.

Septicimic plague is when the blood is infected.  Your infected blood thins to the point that you eventually bleed to death through the skin.

It's as if you repeated the links I provided and then asked if I knew much about it.

8 hours ago, Scott said:

Luckily plague is a bacterial disease, so it can be treated with antibiotics.

Yes, that's true.  But with a 24 hour window for treatment, that is only combated by awareness.  And if we don't know what the symptoms are and are of a mindset to look for it, then the antibiotics will be useless.

8 hours ago, Scott said:

As far as plague goes, the chances of getting infected are still low; at least for now.

I guess I'll have to repeat myself.  For now, yes.  But various medical authorities are talking about the sanitation conditions in large cities throughout the country are such that the plague could really become an epidemic or even a pandemic in a short time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, mikbone said:

Thank you.  Just thru the introduction so far.  Love it.  Every time I read the phrase legal plunder I kinda do this.

528098C5-36ED-4171-8EC9-990E7CC11214.gif.165cf32a0d1568a8e532049a66397265.gif

I asked my wife what she thought of Bastiat.  She is the legal mind of the house.  She said, “Oh he is wonderful!  We should have his words framed all over the house.”

 

stupid greed and false philanthropy.

One of the sad realities in life is that it is impossible to help someone that is not invested themselves in the help making a permanent difference.  In short - help that does not bring about change is not help.  As sad as it seems - why should anyone help someone rebuild in a flood zone that has regular flooding?  The more someone is invested in change the more affective help will bear fruit and be appreciated.  Also - the more someone is helped that is resistant to change - the more in the end they will despise those that provide or offer the help - likewise the more those helping will feel rejected and unappreciated for helping.  Sometimes the best help is letting someone struggle with figuring and working it out themselves.   The one case of the law that I agree very much with Bastiat is that when harm is intended - we need to prevent (act to) prevent it.  I believe this true, even when it is revenge that seems justified.   I love the concept in medicine of "Do no harm".  But even that can become confusing when there is a conflict such that helping one harms another.

Now that it seem that you and I have come to agreement - I will look forward to the next seemingly disagreement.  

 

The Traveler

Edited by Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mores and @Scott I am not an expert in treating diseases but I am a believer in evolution.  As I have talked to experts I have learned that we are evolving more resistant bacteria and viruses.  The more a particular treatment is used - the more likely something will evolve that is resistant to that treatment.  I am not sure that a government mandate is necessary or a good idea.  I am also convinced that refusing any medical assistance to diseases is not a brilliant idea.

My personal involvement with "homeless" has convinced me that there are quite often mental issues with those suffering physically and subject to disease (and this is not just a homeless phenomenon) .  Prescribing various treatments (either orally or by injection) for someone with failing mental issues that hampers their physical health - just does not seem like a good idea to me (with an exception that is a very different matter than what is being discussed) because I am convinced that nothing good will evolve form such efforts - for anyone.

I do not believe everyone should be forced to receive various treatments - including preventive treatments.   But I also believe we should not force integration of those those that refuse preventive treatments with those that insisted on them.   I believe it should be a matter of public record those that refuse and those that comply and if it is a big deal for anyone they should be able to segregate based on such choice.

 

The Traveler

Edited by Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/23/2019 at 11:17 PM, Just_A_Guy said:

Well, crap, guys.  I’m just finishing up Week 2 of a case of shingles that blew up half my face—most of the pain has gone, but it’s still very tender.  Even hydrocodone didn’t help the pain at its worst; and the only thing that got me through it was swearing I’d get the vaccine in another month or so and then never have to deal with that kind of pain again.  :( 

I'm sorry to hear that you had to go through this. It sounds like you're mostly better now, but for what its worth the following may help:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC139995/

Wakame seaweed appears to have a reasonably potent antiviral activity that helps with all manner of herpes infections from the common cold sore, to Epstein Bar, and even your current pain-in-the-face Herpes Zoster/ Varicella Zoster. You can see in the charts how those taking the preparation were able to clear lesions faster and reduce pain. Although the preparation used in the study doesn't appear to be commercially available, wakame seaweed is very available. Unless you are allergic to shell fish which can contaminate seaweed products, or really need to watch your iodine levels, it's quite safe to simply ingest seaweed or pulverize it and encapsulate it if you can't take the taste. It might help.

In the mid-twentieth century Doctor Fred Klenner also reports having successfully clearing both chicken pox and shingles lesions within 72 hours with sufficient vitamin c. This was done intravenously, but many claim to have had success using oral dosing protocols to bowel tolerance similar to the one I'll link below:

http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v01n05.shtml

The bioflavonoid Quercetin is also thought to exhibit potent antiviral activities and also helps to act as a natural antihistamine which could make it helpful for reducing redness and itchiness.

B vitamins help the nerves to function at there best and may help the damaged nerves heal and reduce the likelihood of post-herpetic neuralgia.

Of course, none of this is meant to act as medical advice. Simply sharing information that you may find valuable in researching for yourself which very well may, and probably should, involve discussing ideas with your doctor and/or pharmacist.

Here's to a smooth recovery!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Late to the party with an unpopular view.

I have a real problem with this.  Gonna be blunt here, and I mean no offense to anybody.

I really think the "but it's a public health risk" argument is WAY overblown.  The vast majority of people are vaccinated, yet people sometimes talk about anti-vaccine adherents as if they're the harbingers of the pandemic that will be the doom of all humanity.  They aren't.  It's just not that big a problem.  No, it just isn't.

Honestly... I think in most (not all, but most) cases it's a natural human instinct to want to impose control over others.  Libertarianism is the antithesis of this urge, while authoritarianism indulges it.  The vaccine issue is a way we can feel good about imposing control on others, and that's why even a significant chunk of the Libertarian movement are on board.  It's really, really easy to support curtailing someone else's liberty if you can do it with a good, convincingly emotional argument that has a dash of "it's science!" behind it.

Sorry to be more blunt than usual.  I'm not pointing fingers at anybody and I haven't read the thread, so please take no offense.

Edited by unixknight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, unixknight said:

Late to the party with an unpopular view.

I have a real problem with this.  Gonna be blunt here, and I mean no offense to anybody.

I really think the "but it's a public health risk" argument is WAY overblown.  The vast majority of people are vaccinated, yet people sometimes talk about anti-vaccine adherents as if they're the harbingers of the pandemic that will be the doom of all humanity.  They aren't.  It's just not that big a problem.  No, it just isn't.

Honestly... I think in most (not all, but most) cases it's a natural human instinct to want to impose control over others.  Libertarianism is the antithesis of this urge, while authoritarianism indulges it.  The vaccine issue is a way we can feel good about imposing control on others, and that's why even a significant chunk of the Libertarian movement are on board.  It's really, really easy to support curtailing someone else's liberty if you can do it with a good, convincingly emotional argument that has a dash of "it's science!" behind it.

Sorry to be more blunt than usual.  I'm not pointing fingers at anybody and I haven't read the thread, so please take no offense.

Yeah.  You haven't lived in the Philippines so you're excused.  ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, unixknight said:

we do have it pretty good here in the U.S.  I think people often forget that.

It's not about forgetting.  It's just a totally different world.  Brandon Straka is a high-society-hairstylist-actor-wanna-be in Manhattan.  He decided to walk down LA Skid Row to see if the stories he hears about it being like a 3rd World Country is true.   He didn't last long walking Skid Row.  He couldn't believe that is America with all the homelessness and abject poverty on the streets and he got scared by the aggressiveness of the people there.  He said, yes, the reports are true, it's like a 3rd World Country.  I get what he's saying and I get how much of a shock it would be to a Manhattan dweller, or even for, say, an Iowa Farmboy to see the state of LA Skid Row.  But, it's far from 3rd World Country.  These guys have weather-proof tents!  3rd Worlders can't afford THAT! 

You see what I'm saying?  They just couldn't imagine the 3rd World because it's just beyond the scope of their experience and imagination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/25/2019 at 8:08 AM, Mores said:

But various medical authorities are talking about the sanitation conditions in large cities throughout the country are such that the plague could really become an epidemic or even a pandemic in a short time.

I have been gone a while.

Anyway, which medical authorities are saying this?

As I pointed out, it's going to take more than unsanitary conditions to start another plague pandemic.   If that were the case, a lot of the world would be having a plague pandemic right now.

That's not to say that it couldn't happen, but it isn't as risky as some diseases right now.   At least not until the next mutation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now