Measles: Who is at risk and what they can do

Leave a Comment

Enter the debate: reply to an existing comment

  1. Jack Russell

    In a public health care system such as Ontario and Canada, we pay for health care with our taxes, and we expect to receive health care benefits which are largely paid for by the government.

    If the health care system has determined through solid scientific evidence that diseases such as measles can be largely controlled through immunization and that the risk of adverse reaction is far outweighed by the societal benefits, then I believe that vaccination should be required by everyone in the society who is not medically compromised from receiving it.

    While there will always be a very small number of adverse reactions, these reactions will be managed by the health care system and the costs of managing those cases will be borne by the system. Overall, the costs of vaccinating everyone and dealing with the adverse cases will far outweigh the system costs if vaccines are not used.

    Notwithstanding the economic consequences in a resource limited system, the pain and suffering from the entire portion of the population who would have contracted the disease, will be far less than the pain and suffering of those who suffer adverse reactions.

    Personal choice in vaccinations is contributing to a significant decline in the populations overall health, and certainly increasing costs. This is money that could be better spent on treatment of and research towards other diseases.

  2. Other

    To the families / individuals whose first thought is “autism” when they hear the word “vaccine”:
    Unfortunately people are afraid of vaccines because of the rising rates of autism spectrum disorders. Ok first of all a part of me understands this, since a good parent will obviously want to do what is best for their child and they may have received information from sources that are not fully researched and reliable. If the medical community strongly believes that there is absolutely no link between vaccinations and autisum then I welcome a thorough large scale international epidemiological study to please disprove this – and please share the links to the evidence.
    We also have to keep an open mind to other factors at play, such as the fact that we are improving our autism screening and diagnostics, which will result in more children being positively identified as “autistic”. There are other environmental, lifestyle, and genetic factors that need to be considered by the medical community as well. If you consider that the rates of autism have risen over the past 10-20 years, is there anything else that comes to mind that may have changed in the developed world over that same period of 10-20 years? I personally would like to see researchers and doctors please start to consider the rise of electromagnetic frequencies (EMFs) – i.e. the exposure to cell towers and wifi. There is evidence coming from Europe that demonstrates positive associations between wifi exposures and childhood behavioural changes. Many countries in Western europe have very strict policies about wifi exposure in primary schools/daycare centres (i.e. no wifi and dial up only) as well as wifi exposure near individual dwellings (i.e. wifi tower needs to be at least 250m away from a person’s home; not on top of a condo building like you see all over big cities). The research is growing but for some reason we here in North America do not discuss or report on this and we are even foolishly getting excited about the prospect of 5G technologies. This is by far the most dangerous of the technologies as the signals are milimeter waves (ie. the lenght of the wave emitted is <0.45 inches in length) and can penetrate human tissue. Many people will laugh and say "microwaves haven't killed me yet" – you are right, the microwave in your kitchen emits wavelengths of the length of 12 cm and this will not penetrate your tissue and will not kill you. The milimeter waves of 5G will penetrate into your tissues, and the sad part is that the 5G will be everywhere since the waves are so short and don't travel as far as our current 2G long waves, you will need the 5G routers simply everywhere to have cell signal available. Research has shown that these tiny waves will disrupt mitochondrial processes and DNA.

    Here is one peer reviewed research article of 100s to get you started:

    Please if you disagree with this one article that's fine, I welcome it. Look at others, try to find ones that disprove this, this is the point of debate.

Submit a comment