My little boy



In <[email protected]>, Anth wrote:

> "D. C. Sessions" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...

>> Have a look at the measles stats. The USA had already made the
>> most of antibiotics and oxygen by 1960:
>
> This also shows a downward trend was this due to vaccines?.

Where would you say the downward trend begins?
1960? Pick a year.

>> MEASLES
>>
>> Year Cases Deaths
>>
>> 1960 441,703 380
>> 1961 423,919 434
>> 1962 481,530 408
>> 1963 385,156 364
>> 1964 458,083 421
>> 1965 261,904 276
>> 1966 204,136 261
>> 1967 62,705 81
>> 1968 22,231 24
>> 1969 25,826 41
>> 1970 47,351 89
>> 1971 75,290 90
>> 1972 32,275 24
>> 1973 26,690 23
>> 1974 22,094 20
>> 1975 24,374 20
>> 1976 41,126 12
>> 1977 57,345 15
>> 1978 26,871 11
>> 1979 13,597 6
>> 1980 13,506 11
>> 1981 3,124 2
>> 1982 1,714 2
>> 1983 1,497 4
>> 1984 2,587 1
>> 1985 2,822 4
>> 1986 6,282 2
>> 1987 3,655 2
>> 1988 3,396 3
>
> Interesting in 1989 something happened.
>
>> 1989 18,193 32
>> 1990 27,786 64
>> 1991 9,643 27
>> 1992 2,237 NA

It wouldn't take much. One small community with no
immunity could generate 30 cases in one elementary
school, even in one grade. The question is, were
these cases an isolated outbreak or scattered across
the country?

--
| "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a |
| completely unintentional side effect. " -- Linus Torvalds |
+--------------- D. C. Sessions <[email protected]> ----------+
 
In <[email protected]>, Jan wrote:

> Rich is a liar, stalker, continues to badger, and accuse others of exactly what
> he does.

What was that about "never right to belittle?"
The quoted line is a wonder example of PKB.

--
| "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a |
| completely unintentional side effect. " -- Linus Torvalds |
+--------------- D. C. Sessions <[email protected]> ----------+
 
In <[email protected]>, Anth wrote:

> ...and other diseases which leave science scratching their heads will
> appear.

Are you suggesting that they would /not/ appear if we
didn't eliminate smallpox, polio, measles, etc?

--
| "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a |
| completely unintentional side effect. " -- Linus Torvalds |
+--------------- D. C. Sessions <[email protected]> ----------+
 
Polio peaked at 1950 in the world. I was refering to that.
Anth

"D. C. Sessions" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In <[email protected]>, Anth wrote:
>
> > "D. C. Sessions" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
>
> >> Have a look at the measles stats. The USA had already made the
> >> most of antibiotics and oxygen by 1960:
> >
> > This also shows a downward trend was this due to vaccines?.
>
> Where would you say the downward trend begins?
> 1960? Pick a year.
>
> >> MEASLES
> >>
> >> Year Cases Deaths
> >>
> >> 1960 441,703 380
> >> 1961 423,919 434
> >> 1962 481,530 408
> >> 1963 385,156 364
> >> 1964 458,083 421
> >> 1965 261,904 276
> >> 1966 204,136 261
> >> 1967 62,705 81
> >> 1968 22,231 24
> >> 1969 25,826 41
> >> 1970 47,351 89
> >> 1971 75,290 90
> >> 1972 32,275 24
> >> 1973 26,690 23
> >> 1974 22,094 20
> >> 1975 24,374 20
> >> 1976 41,126 12
> >> 1977 57,345 15
> >> 1978 26,871 11
> >> 1979 13,597 6
> >> 1980 13,506 11
> >> 1981 3,124 2
> >> 1982 1,714 2
> >> 1983 1,497 4
> >> 1984 2,587 1
> >> 1985 2,822 4
> >> 1986 6,282 2
> >> 1987 3,655 2
> >> 1988 3,396 3
> >
> > Interesting in 1989 something happened.
> >
> >> 1989 18,193 32
> >> 1990 27,786 64
> >> 1991 9,643 27
> >> 1992 2,237 NA
>
> It wouldn't take much. One small community with no
> immunity could generate 30 cases in one elementary
> school, even in one grade. The question is, were
> these cases an isolated outbreak or scattered across
> the country?
>
> --
> | "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a |
> | completely unintentional side effect. " -- Linus Torvalds |
> +--------------- D. C. Sessions <[email protected]> ----------+
 
In <[email protected]>, Anth wrote:

> There was a huge downward trend in infections.

How so? Per your posted spreadsheet, the raw incidence
of paralytic polio through the 1950s was:

1951 10,037
1952 21,269
1953 15,648
1954 18,308
1955 13,850
1956 7,911
1957 2,499
1958 3,697
1959 6,289

I didn't normalize for population because it didn't change
enough during one decade to change the picture. Your "huge
downward trend" had twice as many cases in 1952 as in 1951,
half again as many in 1953, almost 2x in 1954, 40% more in
1955. By 1956 the killed-virus vaccine was being introduced
so the data are harder to interpret, but there certainly
was no clear downward trend prior to introduction.

On the other hand, twenty years later:
1971 17
1972 29
1973 7
1974 7
1975 8
1976 12
1977 17
1978 9
1979 26

Again, the absolute numbers are down by a factor of
1000:1 or more, even while population has increased.
Extrapolate 1950-1955 as you will, you're not going
to get that much of a reduction.

--
| "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a |
| completely unintentional side effect. " -- Linus Torvalds |
+--------------- D. C. Sessions <[email protected]> ----------+
 
...and the highest incidence was 1947 7095 after that 1948 1674 1950 5565 etc
it continues to drop afterwards.
Anth

"D. C. Sessions" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In <[email protected]>, Anth wrote:
>
> > There was a huge downward trend in infections.
>
> How so? Per your posted spreadsheet, the raw incidence
> of paralytic polio through the 1950s was:
>
> 1951 10,037
> 1952 21,269
> 1953 15,648
> 1954 18,308
> 1955 13,850
> 1956 7,911
> 1957 2,499
> 1958 3,697
> 1959 6,289
>
> I didn't normalize for population because it didn't change
> enough during one decade to change the picture. Your "huge
> downward trend" had twice as many cases in 1952 as in 1951,
> half again as many in 1953, almost 2x in 1954, 40% more in
> 1955. By 1956 the killed-virus vaccine was being introduced
> so the data are harder to interpret, but there certainly
> was no clear downward trend prior to introduction.
>
> On the other hand, twenty years later:
> 1971 17
> 1972 29
> 1973 7
> 1974 7
> 1975 8
> 1976 12
> 1977 17
> 1978 9
> 1979 26
>
> Again, the absolute numbers are down by a factor of
> 1000:1 or more, even while population has increased.
> Extrapolate 1950-1955 as you will, you're not going
> to get that much of a reduction.
>
> --
> | "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a |
> | completely unintentional side effect. " -- Linus Torvalds |
> +--------------- D. C. Sessions <[email protected]> ----------+
 
I didn't adjust for age either.

1947 7095
1949 5439
1950 5565 (recovers)
1951 1529
1952 2747 (recovers)
1953 2976
1954 1319

So between 1947 and 1955 80% drop in cases of paralytic polio.

1955 (vaccines kicks in - uncertainty)

Anth

"D. C. Sessions" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In <[email protected]>, Anth wrote:
>
> > There was a huge downward trend in infections.
>
> How so? Per your posted spreadsheet, the raw incidence
> of paralytic polio through the 1950s was:
>
> 1951 10,037
> 1952 21,269
> 1953 15,648
> 1954 18,308
> 1955 13,850
> 1956 7,911
> 1957 2,499
> 1958 3,697
> 1959 6,289
>
> I didn't normalize for population because it didn't change
> enough during one decade to change the picture. Your "huge
> downward trend" had twice as many cases in 1952 as in 1951,
> half again as many in 1953, almost 2x in 1954, 40% more in
> 1955. By 1956 the killed-virus vaccine was being introduced
> so the data are harder to interpret, but there certainly
> was no clear downward trend prior to introduction.
>
> On the other hand, twenty years later:
> 1971 17
> 1972 29
> 1973 7
> 1974 7
> 1975 8
> 1976 12
> 1977 17
> 1978 9
> 1979 26
>
> Again, the absolute numbers are down by a factor of
> 1000:1 or more, even while population has increased.
> Extrapolate 1950-1955 as you will, you're not going
> to get that much of a reduction.
>
> --
> | "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a |
> | completely unintentional side effect. " -- Linus Torvalds |
> +--------------- D. C. Sessions <[email protected]> ----------+
 
Well there's strong correlation with wiping one disease out and causing
others.
Anth

"D. C. Sessions" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In <[email protected]>, Anth wrote:
>
> > ...and other diseases which leave science scratching their heads will
> > appear.
>
> Are you suggesting that they would /not/ appear if we
> didn't eliminate smallpox, polio, measles, etc?
>
> --
> | "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a |
> | completely unintentional side effect. " -- Linus Torvalds |
> +--------------- D. C. Sessions <[email protected]> ----------+
 
On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 18:45:41 GMT, Rich<,@.> wrote:

>On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 17:46:19 -0000, "Anth" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Rich for gods sake get the point.
>>'Roll the press polio vaccination halts epidemic.' Which is rubbish.
>>Anth
>
>
>Roll the presses: If we never vaccinated anyone for polio then we
>would still have no polio in the United States today.

Dear Mr. Rich, that is too complicated for certain people...

Regards,

Aribert Deckers

PS : Rich, I need more details ! I cannot read your emails at the
addresses you used as the catch-all dumps EVERYTHING into /dev/nul...

Please use "deckers" at the same domain.
--
The big "gmt"-scam

http://www.ariplex.com/ama/ama_gmt1.htm
 
So the 'debunkers' are networked!
Anth

"Happy Oyster" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 18:45:41 GMT, Rich<,@.> wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 17:46:19 -0000, "Anth" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>Rich for gods sake get the point.
> >>'Roll the press polio vaccination halts epidemic.' Which is rubbish.
> >>Anth
> >
> >
> >Roll the presses: If we never vaccinated anyone for polio then we
> >would still have no polio in the United States today.
>
> Dear Mr. Rich, that is too complicated for certain people...
>
> Regards,
>
> Aribert Deckers
>
> PS : Rich, I need more details ! I cannot read your emails at the
> addresses you used as the catch-all dumps EVERYTHING into /dev/nul...
>
> Please use "deckers" at the same domain.
> --
> The big "gmt"-scam
>
> http://www.ariplex.com/ama/ama_gmt1.htm
 
http://www.geocities.com/harpub/index.html
"The experiments of Clark, Frazier, and Amoss show that after intravenous
inoculation in monkeys, the virus [filtrate] of poliomyelitis disappears
from the blood within 72 hours; and other observations have shown that it is
only after enormous intravenous doses of the virus that the monkey develops
the disease. Smaller doses intravenously fail to produce any disturbance."
"If injected with 250 to 500 cc [1 to 2 cups!] of the virus by a similar
route the animal succumbed to the disease."
George Draper, Acute Poliomyelitis (1917)
1 to 2 cups injected into a 20 lb Rhesus monkey is equal to 7 to 14 cups
injected into a 150 lb man.
Anth
 
>Subject: Re: The importance of continuing mass polio vaccination (Was Re: My
>little boy)
>From: "Anth" [email protected]
>Date: 11/9/2003 4:06 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <[email protected]>
>
>So the 'debunkers' are networked!
>Anth

They dishonestly work behind the scenes.

Happy has a screw loose, but Rich won't notice. They are some what alike.

Jan

>"Happy Oyster"
 
Interesting .. a disease which 'burned itself out.'
http://ask.yahoo.com/ask/20000412.html
Anth

"Rich Shewmaker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Anth" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > plague is one.
> > Anth
> >
>
> Yersinia Pestis, commonly known as bubonic plague or "the black plague"
has
> NOT "burned itself out." The fact that the disease can no longer kill
> millions in widespread epidemics is a tribute to the brilliant medical men
> who isolated the bacterium and correctly identified the rat/flea/human
> vector of the disease, and developed the rodent control programs that
> brought it under control. The last urban epidemic of plague, if I recall
> correctly, was in Los Angeles, California in 1925. There have been other
> lesser outbreaks of the disease since then in India and other places where
> rodents are poorly controlled. A reservoir of the infection exists in wild
> rodents in many parts of the world, including the American West, where
> several isolated human cases are reported nearly every year.
>
> Try again. Name a disease that has burned itself out.
>
> --Rich
>
>
 
In <[email protected]>, Anth wrote:

> Polio peaked at 1950 in the world. I was refering to that.

Your own numbers don't show that.

--
| "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a |
| completely unintentional side effect. " -- Linus Torvalds |
+--------------- D. C. Sessions <[email protected]> ----------+
 
In article <[email protected]>,
Anth <[email protected]> wrote:
>Well there's strong correlation with wiping one disease out and causing
>others.

Oh, really? Let's see a few examples.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)





>Anth
>
>"D. C. Sessions" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> In <[email protected]>, Anth wrote:
>>
>> > ...and other diseases which leave science scratching their heads will
>> > appear.
>>
>> Are you suggesting that they would /not/ appear if we
>> didn't eliminate smallpox, polio, measles, etc?
>>
>> --
>> | "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a |
>> | completely unintentional side effect. " -- Linus Torvalds |
>> +--------------- D. C. Sessions <[email protected]> ----------+
>
>
 
In <[email protected]>, Anth wrote:

> ...and they want to give the poor people live oral vaccines?
> Money is ********.

The same live oral vaccines that they gave rich American
people for forty years, yes. The ones that don't involve
needles that (studies show) get re-used to spread HIV and
hepatitis. The oral vaccines that are more effective and
result in secondary immunity from rechallenge in the
community. The oral vaccines that survive transport to
nonurban back-country communities.

Yeah, those.

> "Anth" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1554844&dopt=Abstract
>> Anth
>>
>> "Rich" <,@.> wrote in message
>> news:p[email protected]...
>>
>>

--
| "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a |
| completely unintentional side effect. " -- Linus Torvalds |
+--------------- D. C. Sessions <[email protected]> ----------+
 
In <[email protected]>, Anth wrote:

> ..and the highest incidence was 1947 7095 after that 1948 1674 1950 5565 etc
> it continues to drop afterwards.

That's not what your numbers show.

> "D. C. Sessions" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> In <[email protected]>, Anth wrote:
>>
>> > There was a huge downward trend in infections.
>>
>> How so? Per your posted spreadsheet, the raw incidence
>> of paralytic polio through the 1950s was:
>>
>> 1951 10,037
>> 1952 21,269
>> 1953 15,648
>> 1954 18,308
>> 1955 13,850
>> 1956 7,911
>> 1957 2,499
>> 1958 3,697
>> 1959 6,289
>>
>> I didn't normalize for population because it didn't change
>> enough during one decade to change the picture. Your "huge
>> downward trend" had twice as many cases in 1952 as in 1951,
>> half again as many in 1953, almost 2x in 1954, 40% more in
>> 1955. By 1956 the killed-virus vaccine was being introduced
>> so the data are harder to interpret, but there certainly
>> was no clear downward trend prior to introduction.
>>
>> On the other hand, twenty years later:
>> 1971 17
>> 1972 29
>> 1973 7
>> 1974 7
>> 1975 8
>> 1976 12
>> 1977 17
>> 1978 9
>> 1979 26
>>
>> Again, the absolute numbers are down by a factor of
>> 1000:1 or more, even while population has increased.
>> Extrapolate 1950-1955 as you will, you're not going
>> to get that much of a reduction.
>>
>> --
>> | "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a |
>> | completely unintentional side effect. " -- Linus Torvalds |
>> +--------------- D. C. Sessions <[email protected]> ----------+

--
| "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a |
| completely unintentional side effect. " -- Linus Torvalds |
+--------------- D. C. Sessions <[email protected]> ----------+
 
In <[email protected]>, Anth wrote:

> I didn't adjust for age either.
>
> 1947 7095
> 1949 5439
> 1950 5565 (recovers)
> 1951 1529
> 1952 2747 (recovers)
> 1953 2976
> 1954 1319
>
> So between 1947 and 1955 80% drop in cases of paralytic polio.
>
> 1955 (vaccines kicks in - uncertainty)

That's not what your spreadsheet shows. Please reconcile
the two sets of numbers, preferably with citations to
primary sources.

> "D. C. Sessions" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> In <[email protected]>, Anth wrote:
>>
>> > There was a huge downward trend in infections.
>>
>> How so? Per your posted spreadsheet, the raw incidence
>> of paralytic polio through the 1950s was:
>>
>> 1951 10,037
>> 1952 21,269
>> 1953 15,648
>> 1954 18,308
>> 1955 13,850
>> 1956 7,911
>> 1957 2,499
>> 1958 3,697
>> 1959 6,289
>>
>> I didn't normalize for population because it didn't change
>> enough during one decade to change the picture. Your "huge
>> downward trend" had twice as many cases in 1952 as in 1951,
>> half again as many in 1953, almost 2x in 1954, 40% more in
>> 1955. By 1956 the killed-virus vaccine was being introduced
>> so the data are harder to interpret, but there certainly
>> was no clear downward trend prior to introduction.
>>
>> On the other hand, twenty years later:
>> 1971 17
>> 1972 29
>> 1973 7
>> 1974 7
>> 1975 8
>> 1976 12
>> 1977 17
>> 1978 9
>> 1979 26
>>
>> Again, the absolute numbers are down by a factor of
>> 1000:1 or more, even while population has increased.
>> Extrapolate 1950-1955 as you will, you're not going
>> to get that much of a reduction.
>>
>> --
>> | "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a |
>> | completely unintentional side effect. " -- Linus Torvalds |
>> +--------------- D. C. Sessions <[email protected]> ----------+

--
| "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a |
| completely unintentional side effect. " -- Linus Torvalds |
+--------------- D. C. Sessions <[email protected]> ----------+
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back