Blissfully Informed Hippie Chick

Encouraging people to think critically about everything.

Reduction of Disease: Where does the credit lie?

on February 14, 2015


The population of the US was about 133.4 million in 1941. Assuming this graphic is correct, that means a whopping .67% of the population contracted measles in that year. We’re talking fractions of a percent here, people. ~900,000 might seem like a huge number, but it’s not. And actually, the CDC says that before the measles vaccination, the average number of reported cases was 400,000 per year. ( Which would mean that only .3% of the population contracted measles (severe enough to be reported, at least). And considering that our sanitation is better, water sources are cleaner, understanding of the disease is better, etc, even if no one was vaccinated, far less than .67% or even .3% of our population would contract the disease now.  Also, considering that the CDC only claims a 99% efficacy rate (meaning, ~1% of those vaccinated will not show any immunity), we know that far less people would naturally contract measles than will be unaffected by the vaccination for measles! How is that any sort of improvement? If less than 1% of people were naturally contracting measles, and 1% of those vaccinated are still vulnerable to infection, why in the world are we taking such a huge risk of injecting ourselves with a host of chemicals, heavy metals, etc?

The reality is that vaccination has little or nothing to do with the decline in deaths from measles infections (as well as other diseases).


This article briefly describes why vaccinations deserve little or no credit for the decline of diseases such as the measles:

Here are a few excerpts:

The credit for the century-long decline, scientists generally agree, goes to improved nutrition and improved health care, side effects of the West’s growing affluence. In the U.S., the death rate dropped by about 98%, from about 10 per 100,000 population a century ago to one fifth of one person by 1963, the year measles vaccines made their American debut. Both before and after vaccination started, victims tended to be poor.

Measles didn’t only discriminate by income — in another study, [Roger] Barkin found that children with underlying diseases were particularly vulnerable, and that the “majority of this group were physically or mentally retarded, or both.” The realization that measles was selective in whom it killed led Barkin to emphasize that vulnerable populations, rather than the general population, should be targeted for measles vaccination.

In the pre-vaccine era, when the natural measles virus infected the entire population, measles — “typically a benign childhood illness,” as Clinical Pediatrics described it — was welcomed for providing lifetime immunity, thus avoiding dangerous adult infections. In today’s vaccine era, adults have accounted for one quarter to one half of measles cases; most of them involve pneumonia, one-quarter of them hospitalization.

In my opinion, vaccinations have been rarely (if ever) beneficial, but have done a whole lot of damage to society as a whole. It’s my belief that we’d be better off without them. And before you disagree with me, I encourage you to do the research, crunch the numbers, and then decide if your opinion is based on on facts or fear.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: