The authors looked at all the reported US national reports of child tetanus cases for the years 1992-2000. They found there were 15 cases in the 8 year span. No deaths, but some hospitalizations. 12 of the 15 were un-vaccinated. (I’m assuming all or most cases get reported, which I think is likely. Otherwise you’d need a factor for reporting frequency in the back of the envelope calculations below.)
The first thing their survey tells you is, the tetanus vaccine seems to protect against tetanus. Something like 90% of the population is vaccinated according to the CDC, yet only 20% of the tetanus cases are. That suggests the vaccine is something like 97% effective at protecting against tetanus, which I think makes it probably more effective than any other I know of. If every child were vaccinated the number of cases over the 8 year period might well have dropped from 15 to the 3 vaccinated cases they had or maybe 4 if they got another.
The second thing it tells you is, even if all the vaccinated had been UNvaccinated so they all got it 30 times as much, you might only expect 100 cases nationwide over the 8 year span. (How does that compare to the number of serious complications from the vaccine?) The chance of an unvaccinated child getting tetanus over the 8 year span seems maybe to be something like 1/500,000 or less, figuring that roughly 50 million vaccinated kids generated 3 cases so vaccinated maybe has 3/50 million, unvaccinated maybe 30 times as great or 1/500k.
(The 10% unvaccinated are maybe 5 million who generated roughly 10 cases, which checks the math.)
Those are childhood cases, but I'll assume adult cases is some small multiple, so it seems without vaccination you'd have dozens of cases per year.
According to this history https://sites.google.com/site/tetanuswiki/project-definition : there used to be 200 cases per 100K people per year. (Caveat: This may be an overestimate for children, so I’m not quite apples to apples to the above figures which are of children. There maybe should be a fudge factor for that.) A frequency of 1/500. So tetanus frequency has dropped by a factor of maybe roughly 30000, of which maybe a factor 30 was due to the vaccine and 1000 was due to other factors unknown. I don’t see how this drop can possibly be attributed to herd immunity, since tetanus is not passed between humans. So tetanus is another example of a disease that largely vanished where a vaccine seems NOT to have been the major factor in the vanishing.
For a detailed examination of the evidence regarding vaccine iatrogenics see the attached proof statement or go directly to the diagram cited by it on the subject:http://truthsift.com/search_view?id=406&nid=4098
Based on the evidence there, we will assume that vaccines are causing infant death, aluminum toxicity, ASD, and have introduced several unwanted viruses into humanity. To get a very rough estimate of the number of people killed or maimed, we'll look at a few estimates here:
If you regress infant mortality rates against number of vaccines in the national series over the developed nations, you find that for each 7 vaccines is associated with an additional 1/1000 mortality in developed nations. By that measure the US vaccine series is estimated to be killing 4/1000 babies in the first year. In the US, that would be about 16,000 dead/yr. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3170075/
If you regress vaccine compliance against ASD and SLI accross the 50 states, you find for each 1% increase in compliance an additional 680 children ASD or SLI. By that measure about 60,000 are estimated to be given ASD or SLI. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535
In addition Bishop et al found each additional 40mcg/kg of parenteral aluminum in preemies cost about a mental development point. Linear extrapolation to the 4000mcg in the vaccine series first 6 months suggests its maybe costing the entire vaccinated population 15 IQ points.http://truthsift.com/search_view?id=406&nid=4118
A number of viruses have or may have entered humanity through vaccines. http://truthsift.com/search_view?id=406&nid=4148
Before the polio vaccine, Doctors used to routinely call any childhood paralysis polio. It played well on insurance forms. Here’s an analysis of the Detroit polio epidemic of 1958. http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=327642 They had a big epidemic, but when they went in and examined the cases, it turned out that less than 1/3 of the patients even had polio virus, and whether it is what was causing their problem is of course even then unclear. Maybe they would have beat it easy without some other factor (eg DDT).
So how did the polio vaccine stop a disease where at least 2/3 of the cases didn’t have the virus? It seems plausible that most polio cases back in the day were mostly or entirely DDT poisoning. Polio is normally a very mild disease. DDT exposure makes you more vulnerable. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4285235
Supposedly rich people used to spray DDT around to keep bugs away, prevent polio. (Here's a paper arguing that FDR didn't even have polio: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14562158 ) In so doing, some maybe gave their kids polio, much like parents today, thinking to protect their kids, seem to be vaccinating them and making them sick.
Here's another discussion of the history of polio. https://idsent.wordpress.com/2015/03/15/sorry-in-the-vaccine-debate-the-experts-are-the-historians/?fb_action_ids=10206904382260412&fb_action_types=og.shares It discusses in detail how the definition of polio was changed when they introduced the vaccine, how the timing of polio epidemics suggests that they were actually caused by DDT spraying campaigns, how the early polio vaccine also caused increase in polio cases, and more about how the contamination of polio vaccine by SV-40 was discovered and ignored by authorities and covered up.
Chen et al, Measles antibody: reevaluation of protective titers http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2230231 reported on data from a measles outbreak that came just after a school blood drive. So they had before and after titer information on the students. They observed that 7 out of 8 donors with titers below 120 got clinical measles, compared with none having titer above 120. So a titer of 120 appears to protect against getting clinical measles. However, 70% of donors with titers between 120 and 1050 reported symptoms without getting the rash, as did 30% of donors with titers above 1050, and about 70% of patients in the 120-1050 group also had their titers go up by a factor of more than 4, indicating that they had had a measles virus infection, even though short of clinical measles.
So the conclusion: below 120, vulnerable to measles. Above 120, won’t get clinical measles, but may get ill without rash and become contagious for measles. Below 1050, 70% chance of getting ill and becoming contagious for measles. Above 1050, less than 30%.
Le Baron et al, Persistence of measles antibodies after 2 doses of measles vaccine in a postelimination environment http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=569784 studied how long titers persist in kids after their last booster. The results are plain in their Figure 3. They report that around 95% of recipients of the MMR have a titer over the 120 that Chen et al predict should prevent one from getting clinical measles for at least 10 years. (After that the percentage vulnerable starts rising rapidly.) That’s the good news.
The bad news is, they report that 2 years after their last booster, more than a third of kids will have titers below 1050, the region where, according to Chen et al, such kids will have a 70% chance of becoming ill and contagious if exposed, although they won’t show the rash. And 30% of kids with titers not far above that, and there are many of those, may also become ill and contagious.
Another study confirms this. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21539880 Vaccine. 2011 Jun 15;29(27):4485-91. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.04.037. Epub 2011 May 1. A large observational study to concurrently assess persistence of measles specific B-cell and T-cell immunity in individuals following two doses of MMR vaccine. Haralambieva IH, Ovsyannikova IG, O'Byrne M, Pankratz VS, Jacobson RM, Poland GA.
Reports only 23% of people have a PRMN titer of over 1050, 7.4 years after their last MMR booster.
Putting this together, almost everybody in the population over 13 or so is susceptible to at least sub-clinical infection.
In fact, it seems very likely that the pool of vaccinated carriers may well be keeping measles from being eradicated. As we saw in the NY case (although she apparently had a rash), a vaccinated carrier may not recognize they have measles or may not be quarantined, preventing the disease from being eradicated. Measles may travel from vaccinee to vaccinee, not getting the characteristic rash or being recognized, until finally it lights into an unvaccinated individual or one whose titer has faded below 120, and is declared measles. If we persist in vaccinating, the disease may never go away, whereas it might well be that if we simply stopped vaccinating, the disease would vanish from the means that have likely eradicated most of the other diseases that have gone away: quarantine and better nutrition.
A study showed that vaccinated baboons (but not naturally immune baboons) when exposed to pertussis carried the virus and could spread it for 35 days. Seemingly, as titers fade, the carriers take very long times to clear the virus if exposed. The reason for this may be what is known as "Original Antigenic Sin", the hypothesis that when you are vaccinated, your body ties itself down to one mode of fighting that virus, and gives up on its other defenses. So when titers fade, your defences are diminished.
Also evidence in a mouse model shows that pertussis vaccinees actually had a 40 fold increase in a different pertussis infection:
We show that aP vaccination helped clear B. pertussis but resulted in an approximately 40-fold increase in B. parapertussis lung colony-forming units (CFUs). Such vaccine-mediated facilitation of B. parapertussis did not arise as a result of competitive release; B. parapertussis CFUs were higher in aP-relative to sham-vaccinated hosts regardless of whether infections were single or mixed. Further, we show that aP vaccination impedes host immunity against B. parapertussis-measured as reduced lung inflammatory and neutrophil responses. Thus, we conclude that aP vaccination interferes with the optimal clearance of B. parapertussis and enhances the performance of this pathogen. Our data raise the possibility that widespread aP vaccination can create hosts more susceptible to B. parapertussis infection.. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20200027 ;; http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/those-vaccinated-pertussis-vaccine-are-spreading-disease ;;
Finally it's worth noting that as always happens when they introduce a vaccine, they redefine the disease clinically making the numbers incompatible, and thus greatly exaggerated the effectiveness of the vaccine in the first place. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/129/5/968?sso=1&sso_redirect_count=1&nfstatus=401&nftoken=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000&nfstatusdescription=ERROR%3a+No+local+token
The only reason I've seen to believe the vaccine was important in the eradication, is the timing, that the disease was eradicated after the vaccine was universal. That would be at best 1 bit of information, not a very strong piece of evidence. A lot of things happened before the disease was eradicated. But in fact, the timing argues strongly *against* the vaccine being important in the eradication.
Smallpox had regular epidemics in 100% vaccinated populations in England, Sweden, Massachussetts, and Germany, for more than a century. Here's some graphs showing the smallpox mortality rates spiking up again and again in completely vaccinated populations. http://www.dissolvingillusions.com/graphs/#1 ) There was a city in England, Leicester, that was famous for repealing mandatory vaccination, and concentrating on quarantine instead, which had much better results avoiding smallpox than all the vaccinated cities around it. (see also Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and The Forgotten History by Suzanne Humphries MD, Roman Bystrianyk (2013)
According to the WHO report, the last outbreak of smallpox on the planet, in Yugoslavia in 1972, the index case was vaccinated a month before, and 3/4 of the adult cases had been vaccinated.
http://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/67617 Epidemiologic aspects of smallpox in Yugoslavia in 1972 / by S. Litvinjenko, B. Arsi, S. Borjanovi Issue Date: 1973 Publisher: Geneva, Switzerland : World Health Organization Description: WHO/SE/73.57
So was the vaccine really conferring immunity, or just a placebo?
For more historical context, please see: VACCINATION A DELUSION, Its Penal Enforcement a Crime: PROVED BY THE OFFICIAL EVIDENCE IN THE REPORTS OF THE ROYAL COMMISSION" BY ALFRED RUSSEL WALLACE LL.D. DUBL., D.C.L. OXON., F.R.S., ETC. (1898) http://people.wku.edu/charles.smith/wallace/S536.htm
====== Here's Larry Brilliant giving a TED talk on how smallpox was eradicated, which involved a massive quarantine campaign that knocked on literally billions of doors to catch cases early and quarantine them. https://www.ted.com/talks/larry_brilliant_wants_to_stop_pandemics?language=en#t-65535 Transcript: "The key to eradicating smallpox was early detection, early response.I'm going to ask you to repeat that: early detection, early response.Can you say that?"
"A surveillance system was necessary,because what we needed was early detection, early response.So we searched and we searched,and we found every case of smallpox in India.We had a reward. We raised the reward.We continued to increase the reward.We had a scorecard that we wrote on every house.And as we did that,the number of reported cases in the world dropped to zero.And in 1980, we declared the globe free of smallpox.
9:37It was the largest campaign in United Nations history,until the Iraq war. "
The evidence vaccines cured diseases is mostly that the vaccines were discovered before the diseases went away. But other things happened before the diseases went away.Why focus on the vaccines?
For example, nutrition improved. Refrigeration and better trade meant people got fresh fruit and vegetables year round. That may have been most of the difference by itself. The decline of scurvy as a killer pretty much mirrors the decline of smallpox as a killer. They started putting vitamin d in the milk and distributing it in school. Vitamins A, C, and D are important for resistance to various bugs including, doctors have reported, measles and polio. And many other nutrients may be important as well in immunity to particular diseases. For example, Keshan's Disease is devastating to those with a selenium deficiency, no problem for anyone else's immune system.
Society became much better at isolating viruses and bacteria, so they couldn't pass from one afflicted individual to another and died out. This happened because of better sanitation, better sewage, quarantine.
Another problem with the timing evidence allegedly supporting vaccines causing decline in infectious disease: they invariably change the clinical definition of the disease exactly when they released the vaccine, thus corrupting the data. Polio was often diagnosed for any childhood paralysis before the vaccine, but after the vaccine that wouldn't do, so you had to have paralysis actually caused by the virus. Likewise measles was likely substantially overdiagnosed before the vaccine, and its definition changed, and so on for probably every vaccine. Pertussis was changed just when they introduced DTaP.
Diseases where there was no vaccine, or no widely administered vaccine, vanished alongside ones with vaccines. For example Bubonic plague, scurvy, scarlet fever, typhoid, cholera, tuberculosis.
Finally, the timing does not really suggest the vaccines were the key factor because all of the vaccine diseases, except smallpox, were in decline well before the vaccines were in widespread use. Measles mortality was down 98% in the US, an astonishing 99.96% in England before the vaccine. And for smallpox, there was more than a century of periodic epidemics in 100% vaccinated populations in multiple countries.
The preponderance of the evidence indicates the vaccine series is causing a serious problem like autism spectrum disorder, autoimmune problems, damaged immune system, death, or decreased IQ in a substantial fraction of recipients of the US childhood vaccine series.
The proof of this is that the evidence strongly indicates the aluminum in the vaccine series is doing damage, and that animal studies report brain or immune system damage from early or many vaccines,
and that peer reviewed studies comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated indicate damage,
and that vaccines have been found to have contaminants which have been reported to be continuing to have dire consequences,
and that all the epidemiology comparing those who got more vaccines to less indicates vaccines cause damage.
There appears to be no methodologically sound peer reviewed papers presenting evidence against the model that multiple different vaccines do cumulative and/or somewhat random damage, such as would be expected from contaminants and cumulative aluminum and vaccines interacting with critical periods of development or self-organized criticality in the immune system. Most papers compare patients who got numerous vaccines to patients who got numerous vaccines, and so are totally insensitive to such vectors.
Outbreak of Measles Among Persons With Prior Evidence of Immunity, New York City, 2011
Jennifer B. Rosen1, Jennifer S. Rota2, Carole J. Hickman2, Sun Sowers2, Sara Mercader2, Paul A. Rota2, William J. Bellini2, Ada J. Huang3, Margaret K. Doll1, Jane R. Zucker1,2, and Christopher M. Zimmerman1
Clin Infect Dis. (2014)
First published online: February 27, 2014
Conclusions. This is the first report of measles transmission from a twice vaccinated individual.
Abstract:: Analysis of urine specimens by using reverse transcriptase-PCR was evaluated as a rapid assay to identify individuals infected with measles virus. For the study, daily urine samples were obtained from either 15-month-old children or young adults following measles immunization. Overall, measles virus RNA was detected in 10 of 12 children during the 2-week sampling period. In some cases, measles virus RNA was detected as early as 1 day or as late as 14 days after vaccination. Measles virus RNA was also detected in the urine samples from all four of the young adults between 1 and 13 days after vaccination. This assay will enable continued studies of the shedding and transmission of measles virus and, it is hoped, will provide a rapid means to identify measles infection, especially in mild or asymptomatic cases.
"...The first reason, and perhaps the most important one, is that our estimates of vaccine efficacy have been inflated because of case definition.3–11 At the time of the pediatric diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and acellular pertussis (DTaP) vaccine efficacy trials in the early 1990s, it was hoped that a universal case definition could be developed so that the results of the various trials could be compared. To this end, the World Health Organization (WHO) casedefinition was developed.3 The primary case definition requiredlaboratory confirmation and $21 days of paroxysmal cough. I was a member of the WHO committee and disagreed with the primary case definition because it was clear at that time that this definition would eliminate a substantial number of cases and therefore inflate reported efficacy values.4–11 ...
"Deleterious effects and ineffectiveness of smallpox vaccination have been among the main smallpox issues discussed in medical papers for a long time. In 1928, the British Medical Journal (21 January: 115-116) published an article by Dr Garrow showing that the fatality rate among the vaccinated cases of smallpox in England and Wales in 1923 and 1926, in those over 15 years of age, was higher than among the unvaccinated. Dr Parry, one of the contributors to the discussion, summarised the questions raised by Dr Garrow:
1. How is it that small-pox is five times as likely to be fatal in the vaccinated as in unvaccinated.
2. How is it that, as the percentage of people vaccinated has steadily fallen from about 85 in 1870 to about 40 in 1925, the number of people attacked with variola has declined pari passu and the case mortality has progressively lessened? The years with least vaccination have been the years of least small-pox and of least mortality.
3. How is it that in some of our best vaccinated towns – for example Bombay and Calcutta – small-pox is rife, while in some of our worst vaccinated towns, such as Leicester, it is almost unknown?
4. How is it that something like 80 percent of the cases admitted into the Metropolitan Asylum Board small-pox hospitals have been vaccinated whilst only 20 percent have not been vaccinated?
5. How is it that in Germany, the best vaccinated country in the world, there are more deaths [from smallpox] in proportion to the population than in England – for example, in 1919, 28 deaths in England, 707 in Germany; in 1920, 30 deaths in England, 354 in Germany. In Germany, in 1919 there were 5,012 cases of small-pox with 6 deaths. What is the explanation?
6. Is it possible to explain the lessened incidence and fatality of small-pox on the same grounds as the lessened incidence and fatality of other infectious fevers – namely, as due to improved hygiene and administrative control?
Polio eradication by vaccination? Part 1 06 June 2012 Dr Viera Scheibner (PhD)
"They also noted that while India was declared polio-free in 2011, at the same time there were 47500 cases of NPAFP, which increased in direct proportion to the number of polio vaccine doses received. Independent studies showed that children identified with NPAFP “were at more than twice the risk of dying than those with wild polio infection”.
According to their report, nationally, the NPAFP rate is now twelve times higher than expected. In the states of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar – which have pulse polio vaccination every month – the NPAFP rate is 25 and 35 fold higher than the international norms (Ramesh Shankar, Mumbai 2012).
Ron Law (Assaulting alternative medicine: worthwhile or witch hunt? BMJ.com 10 March 2012) recently addressed the polio situation in India: eradication has been achieved by re-naming the disease. Poliomyelitis paralysis which occurs even after 30+ vaccination doses, is now called acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) or polio-like paralysis; hardly a great success of vaccination or comfort to the parents of the more than 60 000 affected children.
Earlier redefinition of poliomyelitis had been introduced in the US: a disease with residual paralysis which resolves within 60 days changed into a disease with residual paralysis which persists for more than 60 days. Cases of paralysis which resolve within 60 days (99% of cases) are diagnosed as viral or aseptic meningitis.
According to MMWR (1997; 32: 384-385), there are 30 000 to 50 000 cases of viral/aseptic meningitis per year in the US. Considering that in the pre-vaccine era the vast majority (99%) of the reported cases were non-paralytic (corresponding to aseptic or viral meningitis), vaccination has actually increased the incidence of poliomyelitis. Before mass vaccination there were a few hundred or few thousand cases of polio in some outbreaks, while now it is up to 50 000 cases every year.
Figure 1 in Schonberger et al. (1984. Control of poliomyelitis in the United States. Rev infect dis; 6 (Suppl 2: S424-S426) shows the steady downward trend in the incidence of poliomyelitis stopping, and indeed increasing, when DPT and P vaccination became mandatory in the US in the mid-seventies.
The experience in northern Namibia showed that with no polio vaccination children developed natural immunity to the wild polio virus without developing paralysis (Biellik et al. 1994. Poliomyelitis in Namibia. Lancet 344: 1776).
The vaccine viruses inactivation by a 14-day treatment with 1:4000 formaldehyde solution is the subject to asymptotic factor making the inactivation incomplete (Gerber et al. 1961. Inactivation of vacuolating virus (SV 40) by formaldehyde, Proc Soc Exp Biol & Med; 108: 205-209), and, Fenner (1962. The reactivation of animal viruses. BMJ; July 21: 135-142) showed that the process is also reversible.
Evans et al. (1985. Nature ; 314: 548-550) demonstrated “Increased neurovirulence associated with a single nucleotide change in a noncoding region of the Sabin type 3 poliovirus genome”.
The only way to eradicate paralytic poliomyelitis is to stop vaccinating.
"Conclusions. Based on now more than 120 years of published orthodox medical research, vaccines of any kind, smallpox and polio including, not only increase their recipients’ susceptibility to the targeted diseases, but also to related and unrelated bacterial and viral infections. Hence outbreaks mainly in the vaccinated who also infect contacts. The best way to stop epidemics is to stop vaccinating and let nature do its own thing."
The claims of vaccine efficacy against smallpox are based on the claim that they looked at smallpox victims in epidemics in third world countries and mostly couldn't find a vaccination scar. They are looking for a tiny old scar in people covered with pustules, including quite possibly pustules right on top of the scar, and probably not looking all that hard. They were hoping not to find it. This is the purest of confirmation bias.
Wouldn't even be all that surprising if a vaccinated individual who later gets smallpox preferentially gets a pustule right on top of the scar.
The cognitive bias inherent in this approach is extensively supported by Alfred Russel Wallace, the co-inventor of Evolution, in his book VACCINATION A DELUSION, Its Penal Enforcement a Crime: PROVED BY THE OFFICIAL EVIDENCE IN THE REPORTS OF THE ROYAL COMMISSION” BY ALFRED RUSSEL WALLACE LL.D. DUBL., D.C.L. OXON., F.R.S., ETC. (1898) http://people.wku.edu/charles.smith/wallace/S536.htm ;;
For example he quotes:"I have always classed those as 'unvaccinated,' when no scar, presumably arising from [[p. 26]] vaccination, could be discovered. Individuals are constantly seen who state that they have been vaccinated, but upon whom no cicatrices can be traced. In a prognostic and a statistic point of view, it is better, and, I think, necessary, to class them as unvaccinated" (Dr. Gayton's Report for the Homerton Hospital for 1871-2-3).
"In the Second Report of the Commission, pp. 219-20, a witness declared that out of six persons who died of small-pox and were reported by the medical officer of the Union to have been unvaccinated, five were found to have been vaccinated, one being a child who had been vaccinated by the very person who made the report, and another a man who had been twice revaccinated in the militia (Q. 6730-42). One other case may be given. In October, 1883, three unvaccinated children were stated in the Registrar-General's weekly return of deaths in London to have died of small-pox, "being one, four, and nine years of age, and all from 3, Medland Street, Stepney." On enquiry at the [[p. 27]] address given (apparently by oversight in this one case) the mother stated that the three children were hers, and that "all had been beautifully vaccinated." This case was investigated by Mr. J. Graham Spencer, of 33, Rigault Road, Fulham Park Gardens, and the facts were published in the local papers and also in The Vaccination Inquirer of December, 1883.
Also they are I think ignoring the hidden factor that people who were poorer and more malnourished were likely way more likely because of that to (a) get smallpox and (b) not have gotten vaccinated.
BTW, worth pointing out that smallpox vaccine, unlike every other I know of, isn't even using the same virus. They used cowpox, that was the "breakthrough".
This vaccine is about two years old so nothing at all is a known about its long-term effects, so the repeated claims on the WHO citation that it is "proven safe and effective" show you something Not very complementary about their definition of "proven safe".
There appears to be no evidence whatsoever that the vaccine was instrumental in curbing spread. There have been at least 10 outbreaks previously with no vaccine that they stopped so it seems quite plausible that the strategy of isolating victims is what is being successful, just as it was in smallpox. At best this seems another case of post hoc ergo propter hock.
The current outbreak, in spite of the vaccine, has spread to urban centers and is sometimes described as out of control. https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/what-we-do/news-stories/story/drc-what-we-know-about-latest-ebola-outbreak?source=ADD180U0U00&utm_source=AdWords&utm_medium=ppc&utm_campaign=GooglePaid&utm_content=NonBrand&gclid=EAIaIQobChMItJz6yc7R3gIVg-DICh3-5g-HEAAYASAAEgL-6fD_BwE
I haven't found any evidence or claim that the vaccine is even effective against the current strain. It is claimed to be effective against one strain, but nobody seems to be claiming that is the current strain.
Ebola is an animal disease that has probably existed for a very long time although the first case that was confirmed was in 1976. In history there are less than 2000 deaths confirmed from Ebola, In spite of the fact that the vaccine was only very recently developed and hasn't even been licensed yet. Only some thousands of people have ever been vaccinated. To try to compare this to all the deaths from the smallpox vaccine and all the ongoing deaths likely happening from vaccine aluminum and all the deaths from RSV which was presumably due to contaminated polio vaccine and all the autism which is likely due to vaccine aluminum http://truthsift.com/search_view?topic=&id=406&next=6678&fs=0 etc Is extraordinarily alarmist about Ebola and not supported by the evidence. It seems a very thin reed indeed to try to hang the benefits of vaccines on a vaccine that isn't even licensed yet.
The question in this topic is whether there is strong evidence that vaccine benefits outweigh the harm. This could not be described as strong evidence of that.
Refutations (2) - CON To Topic
Legend: (incoming replies) , Created On, Title, Last Updated On
The number of "saved lives" may be hard to estimate, given the other factors involved in the termination of an outbreak, but any resonable estimate surely exceeds the harm caused by the vaccination itself. Here is one study on the vaccine's effectiveness: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(18)30165-8/fulltext . Here is the most current info from the WHO regarding the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine http://www.who.int/ebola/drc-2018/faq-vaccine/en/