Low immunization rate leads to measles outbreak in Alberta Add to ...
- Thread starter tay
- Start date
well that is absolutely correct, we hid people away whom we felt were "not normal" and we were quick to label...interestingly enough though, autism can mean an extremely high IQ, and we would just have labelled them as egg heads...we all had kids in school with zero social skills but over the top math abilities, now we know they likely are on the autistic "scale".
One of my administrators was autistic, people management was not really her thing, but because she is so intelligent that is where she landed. It did not make for a good work environment without a buffer. I ended up being the buffer and it worked well.
Yes, it seems to me, and by no means am I any kind of expert on the numbers of special needs kids by any stretch, but I would hazard a guess that it's not that those numbers have drastically increased in recent years but our understanding of the different afflictions of special needs kids has. I was in grade school in the seventies, I can recall a lot of the kids in the 'special ed' class and looking back on them now can see easily where many of them were ADHD or mild autism, just based on what I've come to know about both. (Not suggesting I can make a definitive diagnosis but I'm sure you take my meaning.)
I think what environmental and food additives has factored into are things like asthma and allergies. But autism I think has been around for a very long time.
yes I agree that autism has been around likely from our inception. Spec ed classes were after my time, I am just that old lol.
The kids from my time either made it or they didn't and it was a harsh environment fraught with ridicule and taunting often time reinforced by poorly informed adults. They took a job on the line if they were high functioning and pushed a broom if they weren't. What happens now when even a factory job needs grade 12? What happens now when you can't just push the broom you have to know all about the chemicals in the cleaner and how to use the computer to speak to your boss and get directive for the day?
Wakefields research has been duplicated fifty and more times. Vaccines make lots of money injecting disease which makes lots more money.
The rate of serious adverse events like encephalitis for vaccines is rare, for instance the measles/mumps/rubella vaccine has documented encephalitis cases on the order of 1 in 1 million doses delivered. The measles sickness itself, if you get it can cause encephalitis on the order of 1 in 1000 confirmed measles infections, and 2.5 deaths per 1000 confirmed infections.
In Canada, the peak number of measles cases occurred during the period 1950-1954, at roughly 61,000 cases a year. So it wouldn't have been unusual to have 61 cases of encephalitis, and anywhere from 122 to 183 deaths in a year like that. This at a time when the population in Canada was less than half of what it is now. So let's double the number of cases assuming the prevalence wouldn't have changed-which is actually pretty dubious considering Canada has become much more urbanized in the past 60 years.
In 2009, 92% of two year olds had been vaccinated. The CANSIM tables from Stats Canada don't get that fine with their buckets, but there are about 2 million 5 years olds for that period. So, 2 cases of encephalitis in one year would not be unusual.
120 cases of brain swelling and possibly 360 deaths could be occurring today without vaccines. Two children will have brain swelling from the vaccine.
To not even mention anything about how much worse the antibiotic resistance problem would be if we were still relying on antibiotics instead of preventing disease.
The story is very much similar for other preventable diseases. Context. It matters.
In Canada, the peak number of measles cases occurred during the period 1950-1954, at roughly 61,000 cases a year. So it wouldn't have been unusual to have 61 cases of encephalitis, and anywhere from 122 to 183 deaths in a year like that. This at a time when the population in Canada was less than half of what it is now. So let's double the number of cases assuming the prevalence wouldn't have changed-which is actually pretty dubious considering Canada has become much more urbanized in the past 60 years.
In 2009, 92% of two year olds had been vaccinated. The CANSIM tables from Stats Canada don't get that fine with their buckets, but there are about 2 million 5 years olds for that period. So, 2 cases of encephalitis in one year would not be unusual.
120 cases of brain swelling and possibly 360 deaths could be occurring today without vaccines. Two children will have brain swelling from the vaccine.
To not even mention anything about how much worse the antibiotic resistance problem would be if we were still relying on antibiotics instead of preventing disease.
The story is very much similar for other preventable diseases. Context. It matters.