home
RSS
Airline passengers exposed to measles in 4 states
February 28th, 2011
03:59 PM ET

Airline passengers exposed to measles in 4 states

Public health officials in four states are contacting airline passengers and employees who might have been exposed to measles in various airports last week.   A 27-year-old woman who was not immunized against the disease and had recently returned from a trip overseas passed through Virginia, Maryland, Colorado and New Mexico.

CNN contacted the health departments of each state and here's what you need to know.  All times are local.

Dulles International Airport on February 20, 2011

Loudoun County Health Department is alerting passengers who traveled through the airport on Sunday, February 20, and went through international arrivals and the main terminal baggage claim from 3:15 p.m. to 7:15 p.m. Based on the date of exposure these passengers may develop symptoms as late as Sunday, March 13, 2011.

BWI Thurgood Marshall Airport on February 22, 2011

The Maryland Department of Health is alerting passengers who traveled through BWI from early afternoon until around 9:00pm on Tuesday, February 22. The infected passenger passed through Gate A3 at approximately 7 p.m. on a flight to Denver, Colorado.

Denver International Airport on Tuesday, February 22, 2011

The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment is alerting people who were working or traveling through Concourse C on Tuesday, February, 22. The infected passenger arrived at Gate C39 at approximately 9 p.m. Passengers and employees who were at these locations should monitor themselves for early symptoms of measles, especially fever, between March 1 and March 12.

Albuquerque International Sunport Airport on February, 22, 2011

The New Mexico Department of Health is alerting passengers who traveled on Southwest Airlines flight 2605 which departed Denver at 9:55pm and arrived at Albuquerque Sunport at approximately 11:10pm. The patient, a New Mexico resident, is currently hospitalized and is the first confirmed measles case in New Mexico since 2008.

According to the Centers for Disease Control, measles is a highly contagious respiratory disease that  can spread easily through coughing, sneezing and secretions from the mouth. People who have been exposed may develop symptoms including fever, a sore throat, rash or tiny white spots inside the mouth within seven to 14 days of being infected.

Vaccination has nearly eradicated the condition within the United States, but  the virus kills almost 200,000 people each year around the world. For more information on measles exposure during travel, visit the CDC's Travelers' Health Yellow Book.


soundoff (131 Responses)
  1. Steph

    So, all it takes is one young woman who wasn't vaccinated to cause all of this. It is fine by me if you don't want to be vaccinated or vaccinate your kids. With this decision comes some consequences tho.......that of infecting others. If you aren't vaccinated then don't attend public schools, don't use public transportation, etc. Now there are others at risk because of this unvaccinated woman and the tax payers are probably the ones paying the bill to track down all these other travelers to warn them of the risks the unwittingly took by flying. Not right medically or fiscally. She has has caused others to take the risks for her (and her parents)decisions.

    February 28, 2011 at 16:31 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Brian

      mmm, no... If your vaccinated, your fine, right? So, as your theory goes, only the people who aren't vaccinated are at risk, right?
      Maybe do a little reading about efficacy, vaccine manufacturing, immune systems, "herds" as they like to say. The latest research on the human "biom" and the zillions of bugs that live in us, good and bad, suggests we don't know quite enough about it to tell people to stay home, stay off public transpo etc. Since you mentioned it, homeschooling is a great way to go for many of us. Vaccines can be medical heroes, but one needs to be an educated consumer. Maybe stay off your phone while driving, save a lot more lives!

      February 28, 2011 at 16:44 | Report abuse |
    • David

      Brian, that isn't the way vaccinations work. Unfortunately many people that choose not to vaccinate believe that they are only putting themselves at risk when they choose to not vaccinate. Vaccinations are not a 100% effective in isolation. They are only effective because if a population at whole is vaccinated it makes much more difficult to pass the pathogen from host to host.

      February 28, 2011 at 16:57 | Report abuse |
    • Brian

      True, they are not 100% effective, all the more reason to consider efficacy, was pointing out that Steph's confidence in vaccines was not necessarily accurate, we just don't know for sure, so, we get to decide for ourselves. I got all my shots when I went to Africa, I wanted them and I had to. Brand new babies that are US citizens are a different story. I tell people to do the research if they have any questions. Then, go for it, probably won't have any problems. But, it is indeed very possible. And some parents don't think the pro's outweigh the cons. And really, which is it? If your vaccinated for measles, you should be OK right?

      February 28, 2011 at 17:10 | Report abuse |
    • nepawoods

      Communicable diseases are a fact of life, and nobody has a right to force others to be vaccinated for someone else's good.

      February 28, 2011 at 18:19 | Report abuse |
    • Kyle

      It is not o.k. to choose not to get vaccinated. First, the efficacy of each vaccine is different and each person's immune system is different. Not everyone CAN get the vaccine, they have allergies or are immune suppressed, or they simply don't develop a resistance. People in the medical field have to not just get the vaccinations, they have to prove an immunity to the diseases. You can't force the whole population to do that, but when you take the health of the entire community into account, being vaccinated should be the LEAST we can do. The individual risk is miniscule while the benefit for the community can be immeasurable.

      February 28, 2011 at 18:23 | Report abuse |
    • LC

      So what you are saying is that children like my son who received his first set of vaccinations and had a severe reaction and he also had a doctor's excuse for no more vaccinations– should not be educated or allowed to travel because he could not tolerate vaccines? You're so brilliant! You should post on these types of forums all of the time. Grow up. Not everyone can tolerate the vaccines. My husband can't physically tolerate them either. Schools are set up that children who are not vaccinated are required to go into quarantine if a disease breaks out. My son has to stay at home and have his work sent to him. And guess what? I'm fine with that! That's what we have to live with in order for my son not to be left mentally challenged or dead from the next vaccine you would have him forcefully receive.

      February 28, 2011 at 18:28 | Report abuse |
    • Sanandra

      @nepawoods– would you still feel that way if it was smallpox and one of your neighbors or kid's friiends were infectious?

      February 28, 2011 at 18:31 | Report abuse |
    • Young

      @LC your point is taken...those who can't tolerate the vaccines should not be forced to take them. but those who can tolerate the vaccines should use the vaccines in order to prevent the spread of measles and smallpox to your son.
      Those who decided not to take vaccines choose to put themselves and others who have no choice (those like your son) at risk.

      February 28, 2011 at 18:49 | Report abuse |
    • steve

      @ Kyle: The individual risk might be low (in fact its roughly the same likelihood of contracting the diseases that people get vaccinated against)...but the consequences are exclusively personal. Drug manufacturers can't be held accountable for problems arising from vaccination..our ultra-conservative supreme court has seen to that.
      Also..the only waivers you can get for vaccination are religious. If its so critical to public safety that everyone get vaccinated..why make such an exemption?

      February 28, 2011 at 21:14 | Report abuse |
    • Aaron

      The government is on it like white on rice after the exposure has been completed. They couldn't stop the TB guy from flying to Europe a few years ago.

      February 28, 2011 at 21:56 | Report abuse |
    • Jason

      LC _ I am going to call out shenanigans. Which vaccines did your kid have an allergic reaction too? Or your husband? Is it the preservatives(egg allergy?)(DT-based vaccine) in the vaccine or something else, if you have an adverse reaction in one case, there are other vaccines that hold preservatives with completely different chemical compositions that should/could be used ? Regardless, most vaccines initiate an immune response to expedite immunity, is your child or husband immune system depressed? And if they are, then you should be an advocate for vaccinations.

      February 28, 2011 at 23:20 | Report abuse |
    • colin

      over and over again i hear "educate yourselves first" just to let you know, the internet is full of misinformation. and i will telly you that vaccines help you fight an infection quickly and efficiently, they do not make you impervious to the infection, and yes one infected individual can adversely affect herd immunity, but probably not that bad. Its people wit compromised immune systems, old people, and not yet vaccinated people who were at most risk in this case. you guys all need to take an immunology course

      March 1, 2011 at 00:25 | Report abuse |
    • DK

      People forgot to mention children who are too young to get the vaccines... they would especially be at danger in this case

      March 1, 2011 at 00:28 | Report abuse |
    • Virologist

      I completely agree with Colin. I'm tired of hearing the idea about educating oneself. I'm a big supporter of education, but for someone to think reading a couple articles off the internet means they are an expert and have enough information to challenge the recommendations of nearly all biologists and doctors is ridiculous. Take a couple of graduate level courses in immunology and then do research in the field for 5 years or so. Then you can decide if you want to challenge the field on whether vaccines do more harm than good.

      Its pretty scary to put our health in the hands of others, but we have to. Not everyone can be an expert at everything. That is why we have physicians. Physicians are not always right, which is why it is important to get second or third opinions before undergoing a major procedure. It's much better to put your safety in the hands of experts than it is to put it in the hands of gut intuition, celebrities, and bloggers,

      March 1, 2011 at 01:14 | Report abuse |
  2. Ad

    This wouldn't be even the slightest of concern if people were immunized. I wonder how many young children have been put at risk because of the quackery from the likes of Jenny McCarthy?

    February 28, 2011 at 16:35 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Brian

      Many, many physicians do not vaccinate their newborns because when they examine efficacy, they decide to wait. Jenny McCarthy has a kid who is profoundly disabled, so I'm sure she has given it a lot of thought. They can't prove her kid was damaged by vaccines, and they can't prove he wasn't! If you want to disregard her "quackery" you'll probably be safe, the vast majority of people tolerate vaccines, as far as we know / no great way to measure / too many variables. Just 'cause she's pretty, doesn't make her views invalid. You have no way of knowing if she's wrong really, do you, just your opinion. Fair enough. Are you a Dr.?

      February 28, 2011 at 16:51 | Report abuse |
    • Girl

      I think some of these home school people forgot to study science. Jenny McCarthy-a science expert-huh?

      February 28, 2011 at 16:55 | Report abuse |
    • Brian

      Check popular science's list of genius kids going to the best science college programs on full rides- half+ are homeschoolers. Nice try. Jenny McCarthy went to an Ivy League school too I think. Something tells me she may have read a little more about it than you. Might be wrong, tell me what you know about her IQ. She's pretty so she's dumb?

      February 28, 2011 at 17:14 | Report abuse |
    • Dr. S.

      Brian – Where's your source for your claims? You say "many, many physicians don't vaccinate their newborns" Back it up, and I'm not talking about naturopaths either, or physicians in some third world country, let's talk about MDs here. Oh, and Jenny McCarthy went to Southern Illinois University Carbondale, HARDLY an ivy league school, and she dropped out to become a playboy model. And do you think the brilliant Jenny McCarthy knows more about vaccines than people who spend their entire life studying them? Really?

      February 28, 2011 at 18:25 | Report abuse |
    • Fridaynight

      @Brian, Jenny McCarthy's son does not have autism, he has Landau-Kleffner syndrome.

      February 28, 2011 at 18:52 | Report abuse |
    • Fridaynight

      @Brian again: Jenny McCarthy also reversed her opinion that vaccines are the cause of Autism because guess what – THEY'RE NOT! I'll just medical journals before anyone out of Hollywood. That one study was completely disregarded and the people involved full on admitted the data had been falsified. That one study has NEVER been able to reproduce the results.

      You should go move yourself to a third world country, birth some kids, don't get the immunized and then watch them suffer and die or suffer and live a miserable and disabled life due to the horrible diseases that we now immunize against.

      This woman could be killing people. There are thousands of infants who travel daily who are not immunized against this disease because they are too young but are highly susceptible to catching it. Their parents may have been traveling stateside but this lame lady can't think about anyone but herself.

      February 28, 2011 at 18:57 | Report abuse |
    • jax22

      Fridaynight is right that Jenny Mccarthy reversed her opinion that Autism was caused by vaccines... she also managed, and seemingly reversed his syndrome based on a gluten free diet. Seems further proof that the 2 aren't related. I once watched a family who didn't believe in vaccines come very close to losing their 12 year old daughter to pertussis by suffocating in her own phlegm. Ever see a family that vaccinated their child do that? Its true you should weight the pros and cons to vaccines... but really? I feel the choice is simple.

      February 28, 2011 at 23:18 | Report abuse |
    • Virologist

      When did Jenny McCarthy reverse her opinion. It wasn't very long ago that she was attacking scientists?

      Also having an autistic child doesn't make one an expert on the causes of autism (I have heard that her child may not be autistic, but I don't know enough about that to formulate an opinion). It did motivate her to inform herself on the issue, but that doesn't mean she understands the science.

      March 1, 2011 at 01:23 | Report abuse |
  3. Wendy

    What about the planes on which she traveled? I assume that those sharing a flight with her are being contacted by the airline, but what about those traveling at a later time on the same plane? Would they also be at risk, considering how long the virus is able to survive outside the body (several hours, if I'm not mistaken)?

    February 28, 2011 at 16:43 | Report abuse | Reply
  4. Burbank

    Maybe we need to require immunization for people travelling internationally so they don't bring it home with them. You can fly out if you aren't immunized but you can't fly back in...

    February 28, 2011 at 16:45 | Report abuse | Reply
    • nick

      Nice...I like

      February 28, 2011 at 17:02 | Report abuse |
    • jax22

      Sounds good to me! People get malaria shots when they go to Africa, why not cover all the bases?

      February 28, 2011 at 23:30 | Report abuse |
  5. Robin

    One issue with immunizations is that you are not protected for life. You need booster shots for a number of diseases. Contracting a disease is not a good thing, but many of us over the age of 50 survived having many of the childhood diseases they are immunizing against. There are risks in both cases.

    February 28, 2011 at 16:55 | Report abuse | Reply
    • nepawoods

      Also, when a mother has natural immunity (from having had the disease), her breast-fed children obtain a resistance to the disease as well. If a mother was vaccinated, this doesn't happen. Those who blame the non-vaccinated for measles ought to consider this as well.

      February 28, 2011 at 18:24 | Report abuse |
    • LMS

      @napa
      The child recieves passive immunity that wanes over a couple of months after breastfeeding is continued. This occurs for the newborns of both vaccinated and nonvacinnated mothers. Antibodies are present in breastmilk. The plasma cells that provide the antibodies are not transferred with the breastmilk. Passive immunity lasts as long as the antibodies do. The halflife of immunglobins in blood is measured in days to weeks, not years.

      February 28, 2011 at 20:08 | Report abuse |
  6. FellowFlier

    I flew the same day/time (but different flight) with my family (including an infant not yet immunized because of recommended vaccination schedules) and this is what I've found out so far: Southwest flight from BWI-DEN-ABQ departed around 7pm from BWI, landed in DEN around 9pm. The article above says gate A3 in BWI.

    As for those of you who think vaccinations aren't important, tell that to the other parents who have to sit around like I do and wait to see if their child contracts this highly contagious, preventable disease. It's not my kid's fault that she isn't old enough for the vaccine. She's gotten everything according to recommendations, but now she's been exposed because of someone else's careless disregard for others.

    February 28, 2011 at 16:55 | Report abuse | Reply
    • CodeMonkee

      If, heaven forbid, your child contracts measles, perhaps she can be charged with assault or some such thing. Presumably, she and/or her parents were willing to risk not just her health, but the health of others, such as your child. Your point is well taken. Not all un-immunized have made the choice to risk themselves – some simply aren't vaccinated for a myriad of other reasons.

      February 28, 2011 at 17:54 | Report abuse |
    • Gbop

      While that must be extremely stressful for you, you must also consider how stressful it is for someone who's child has been harmed by vaccines and now refuses them.

      February 28, 2011 at 20:21 | Report abuse |
    • Abigail

      If I were you, and there is some legal precedent, I would go after this flier for attempted murder in the event something happens to your child. Essentially, by not being vaccinated, her body is a weapon. It was her choice not to be vaccinated. If that is the choice she was willing to make she should live with the consequences of her decision.

      I hope for your and your child's sake that they are fine!

      March 1, 2011 at 00:07 | Report abuse |
  7. Brian

    Look up measles, some where where you are likely to get factual data- measles are highly treatable, highly survivable, almost never fatal, some people might have serious complications, vast majority that get it anymore then have lifetime, for-sure immunity. Vaccines need boosters, never know when. Again, vaccines are indeed medical miracles / heroes, but this thread is a perfect example of how NOT to make public health decisions. You need scientific proof, as much as possible, before you start poking everyone in the arm with genetically modified, chemical laden "dead" virus' etc. Get a grip guys, if your healthy, your body can handle most, if not all these bugs!

    February 28, 2011 at 16:57 | Report abuse | Reply
    • David

      I would hardly consider 200,00 deaths benign. Fortunately you have been raised in a society that allows you the comfort to make stupid decisions yet still be protected by those that have been vaccinated (herd protection). There was a reason why people never questioned vaccinations. It was because people died. And those that didn't die suffered from casualties such as blindness, mental retardation, and organ failures. You may have convinced yourself that these are no big deal, but I can assure you that if you ask anyone over the age of 70 what it was like before vaccinations they can tell you of real personal accounts of people they new that had died or were left serious afflicted. Remember vaccinations do not give you 100% protection they only work by inhibiting the spread of the disease and require that a significant majority be vaccinated.

      February 28, 2011 at 17:09 | Report abuse |
    • Brian

      source for 200K deaths? Efficacy includes where you spend most of your time, when you are living / not 70 years ago. Of course I'm glad many of these diseases have been minimized / gotten rid of. But any medical decision needs to be considered carefully- some people do not tolerate some medications, procedures, vaccines, etc. So mandatory shots are indicated in some situations, some aren't. All the rest is hyperbole, drama and not helpful to the herd!

      February 28, 2011 at 17:19 | Report abuse |
    • Bruce

      http://www.unicef.org/immunization/index_measles.html

      According to Unicef, 164,000 kids died of measles in 2008. There's your source

      February 28, 2011 at 17:44 | Report abuse |
    • Kyle

      If there wasn't a provable benefit then they would not be recommended. Most vaccines are available for decades before they are recommended for everyone. Just look at Gardasil. Started in the 1980s, was ready for testing in 1993, wasn't until 2006 that the phase III trial was halted on ethical grounds that keeping the treatment from women was wrong. Even if the treatment is not necessary like you claim that most can survive the disease, if the vaccination can be shown to prevent hospitalizations, and save the taxpayers/hospitals/insurance companies more then it costs, then yes people should be forced to do it.

      February 28, 2011 at 18:49 | Report abuse |
    • nepawoods

      @Kyle: "yes people should be forced to do it" ... To me it is absolutely mind-boggling that people are so willing to accept the notion that government has the authority to tell people what they MUST put into their own bodies.

      Disease has always been a fact of life. Avoid it if you can, but it's ludicrous to think you have a right to force others to be injected with something for the benefit of others.

      February 28, 2011 at 20:00 | Report abuse |
    • Gbop

      Vaccines also don't enter your body the same way as diseases, therefore your body doesn't recognize them the same way, therefore, immunity is not possible. With the onset of vaccines there are higher rates of autism, cancer, Lou Gehrigs, ear infections, diabetes, ADD, etc, etc, etc. If you want to shoot yourself full of a toxic mix that is backed by absolutely no science, feel free, but stop trying to push that farce on the rest of us who actually understand that vaccines are tested against vaccines not vaccinated and non-vaccinated people. There are no double blind, placebo studies done in the US and vaccines kill many people here and especially abroad. Dig a little deeper. I feel foe people who have lost a loved one to a disease, but who feels foe those who have lost a loved one to the farce of vaccines?

      February 28, 2011 at 20:28 | Report abuse |
    • Mike C

      Hyperbole? As in "genetically modified, chemical laden "dead" virus' etc." perhaps? You are correct, making educated decisions is the best course, but for the average person, the amount of misinformation is overwhelming.

      February 28, 2011 at 21:36 | Report abuse |
    • Please Read

      Brian, you are an idiot. Did you miss the part where the lady in this story is currently HOSPITALIZED?!? If it was so readily treatable and highly survivable then I think that the only person (and adult for that matter) to have caught the disease in the entire state of New Mexico in the last 3 years would have been treated at home and would be recovering quickly. Not quite readibly treatable and highly survivable. And how do you think the babies and toddlers who havent been vaccinated are going to fair if an adult woman requires hospitalization?
      I think the only person with less knowledge of science is Gbop – seriously do you have any idea how immunity works?!?

      February 28, 2011 at 22:45 | Report abuse |
    • vonspoo

      wow gbop. when you base your ranting in logic and science, maybe some of us will listen. lmao@ vaccines don't enter the body the same way blah blah blah! funniest thing ever! as if your white blood cells give a rats behind about that.

      February 28, 2011 at 22:46 | Report abuse |
    • Good Patient

      No kidding. Gbop couldn't be much more ridiculous. I'd swear he's a CNN plant here just to spur on debate, but his posts are so absurd that I find it hard to believe anyone can't see through them.

      What a witless wonder.

      March 1, 2011 at 10:04 | Report abuse |
  8. Lila

    The woman said in another article she didn't have a vaccination because it was against her religion! Apparently exposing thousands to a disease is ok however. What a selfish disgusting person.

    February 28, 2011 at 17:04 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Gbop

      Thousands, huh? Wow, glad your confidence in vaccines is so strong.

      February 28, 2011 at 20:18 | Report abuse |
    • Tchr89

      @Gbop: yes, thousands of people theoretically COULD have been exposed. The disease can linger in an area 2 hours after the infected person leaves. Think of how many people walk through an airport, and she was at ...3 or 4 of them? Then if some of them picked up the disease, and passed it along...I am for religious freedom, but when a person's decisions can endanger others (especially babies too young to have had all the vaccinations AND at extra risk of dying)...maybe they should just live in a remote location and shop by computer. That may seem extreme, but so is causing other people to die.

      February 28, 2011 at 22:28 | Report abuse |
    • Why oh why?

      So much hatred and anger, you guys need to stop. We all have the right to choose what to put into our own bodies. This women didn't plan to contract measles. She may be filled with guilt and regret, for all you know.

      March 1, 2011 at 03:39 | Report abuse |
    • Jabberwocky

      No, we don't. When we endanger others, our rights end. This woman did not have any "right" to infect others because she didn't get a vaccination.

      March 1, 2011 at 21:07 | Report abuse |
  9. H

    thank you anti-vaccine movement

    what would we ever do without diseases like measles

    February 28, 2011 at 17:13 | Report abuse | Reply
  10. HIGHLOSOME

    Hay Brian
    You sound like you do not care about the health of the herd ??????
    The needs of the whole out weight the needs of the one are the few ???????
    I feel there should be a law that before you get on a fight you show A shot record and if all the shots are not there you do not get on <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

    February 28, 2011 at 18:58 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Gbop

      Let me guess, you're a Republican. Small government when it comes to helping people, Big Government when it suits Big Pharm or other free market capitalism. Typical.

      February 28, 2011 at 20:16 | Report abuse |
  11. Heather

    Non-vaccinated catch it but vax'd people still CARRY it. Sorry guys... Vax'd people who choose to mingle after being exposed are just as responsible. Who gave it to THIS person? If it was non-vax'd person I imagine they also would have HAD IT therefor reason states it was likely a VAX'D person who passed it on to begin with. You CAN contract measles from the vaccine AND pass it on even if you don't show symptoms. So while they do say you can send your kid to school or go to work right away.... they also say you CAN get it from the vaccine. Which means your little vax'd angels could be contagious and YOU CHOOSE TO INFECT THE ENTIRE SCHOOL by sending them back before the typical 14 day quarantine expected of NON'vax'd people. Vaccines aren't a free pass to infect without consequence. Oh wait... this is a brainwashed group so you probably think it's ok... it's our fault that mom has cancer and a child has allergies. We should have kept them home FOREVER to prevent you keeping yours home for a couple days.

    February 28, 2011 at 19:19 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Please Read

      You have no idea what you are talking about. Yes, vaccines are tested against placebos during clinical trials. This is how a trial works: X amount of people get a vaccine, X amount of people get a placebo. At the end of the study they look at how many people got the actual disease. Then they compare the number of disease in the placebo group vs the vaccine group. That determines efficacy.

      February 28, 2011 at 22:52 | Report abuse |
  12. Darlene Buckingham

    Measles are deadly in Countries with less that $1,000.00 per year income cleanliness, – clean water and nutritious food prevents more disease than vaccines. I had measles as a child and I am still here to tell the tale. This is a fear-mongering article. Do the research.

    February 28, 2011 at 20:07 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Semi Descent Human

      Didn't you ever hear the phrase, "Dead men tell no tales"? The people who died of measles obviously cannot come to CNN and post stupid comments.

      March 1, 2011 at 01:45 | Report abuse |
  13. Gbop

    There is no science backing vaccine efficacy. Vaccines are tested against other vaccines not against vaccinated and non-vaccinated people. Numbers don't match up. For instance, measles dropped 94% between 1900 and 1963...the year the vaccine came out. Oh, and BTW, Jenny McCarthy wasn't homeschooled, I think she was a product of public schools. Most people who don't agree with vaccines do believe in science and understand that vaccines are not backed by science, but rather by good PR and lots of money.

    February 28, 2011 at 20:09 | Report abuse | Reply
    • vonspoo

      hey... hows that polio doing? oh wait...

      February 28, 2011 at 22:49 | Report abuse |
    • Jabberwocky

      Yeah, I can hardly wait to see Gbop respond. Oh, wait. He won't, the coward.

      March 1, 2011 at 21:08 | Report abuse |
  14. Gbop

    A common argument is smallpox, look what vaccines have done, blah, blah. Well, diseases are cyclical, they come and go. There wasn't a vaccine against the (misnamed) Spanish flu, but that came and went. People are so afraid of being sick, how about boosting our immune systems? If our immune systems didn't work, the human race wouldn't have survived this long.

    February 28, 2011 at 20:14 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Janet

      My 6th grade teacher's young adult son died of polio; my brother's best friend at age 7 ended up in an iron lung. My uncle died of diptheria as a toddler. The five year old son of family friends died of measles. I had it at the same time; it runs its course in a week to 10 days and is miserable; lots of people end up with damage from it.

      Free riders who are unwilling that their family take ANY risk at all so they can coast on other people's responsibility are finding that when lots of people are self centered and selfish that it doesn't work that well. And we end up with epidemics. One consequence are the dozen newborns dead in California because so many people failed to get pertusis vaccinations - and newborns can't receive them. All vaccinations don't 'take'; we all rely on other's social responsibility when when live in a society.

      And no, you cannot pass on measles if exposed but not infected; people who are vaccinated successfully or have natural immunity don't pass on the disease unless they have it themselves.

      February 28, 2011 at 20:39 | Report abuse |
    • Mary Alice Marshbanks

      The reason Spanish flu came & went (taking millions of lives before it waned) was that in eventually ran out of previously unexposed people to infect in great enough numbers to sustain the epidemic. THAT is the "natural cycle" of such illnesses. No, there was no vaccine. Too bad for the millions who died as a result. It was from such tragedies that the desire for vaccines to help decrease the number of at-risk people in a population was born. The vaccine approach is used to stop epidemics from starting. Unlike the days of the Spanish flu in the early 1900s, these days an infected individual can hop on a plan and easily deliver a virus capable of triggering an epidemic to multiple regions of the world in a few hours, even before that individual has any symptoms.
      So what will all those who remain unvaccinated and without contraindications for vaccination do if a measles epidemic hits their area & their family? I suspect it will be the same thing people do when any disaster hits their area. They will beg for government assistance and some will loudly accuse the government of not doing enough to protect them.

      February 28, 2011 at 21:07 | Report abuse |
    • Gbop

      Again, vaccines are not tested the way people think. There are no studies testing vaccinated people against non-vaccinated people, so when they say studies, they mean one vaccine against another, not a valid statistic. Janet, I'm sorry for those you have listed who have been lost, that is always a tragedy. But I too have people in my life who have been severely damaged by vaccines, but people tell me, no, you're wrong, no matter what the stats and science says. Yes, disease kills people, but so do vaccines, disease I have no choice about, don't push the other killer on people. I have studied and studied and what I have found is that Big Pharm has great PR, but no real science to back what they say.

      February 28, 2011 at 21:30 | Report abuse |
    • Mike C

      The reason the human race has survived is natural selection, millions died and the survivors were the ones whose genetics were passed on. Do you advocate that approach, let millions die so the survivors can repopulate the Earth? What if you and yours are not among the survivors, is that acceptable to you?

      February 28, 2011 at 22:03 | Report abuse |
    • Good Patient

      Gbop, it's a wonder you can tie your shoes. You've "studied and studied"? What? Blogs? Internet sites that claim nonsense that has no basis in science? If you've 'studied and studied', you've studied the wrong things. I'll go with those who studied science, medicine, and actually GOT a degree. Not some bozo who believes that Vitamin D is a cure-all and that vaccines don't prevent disease because there's not a "study" to prove it. There ARE studies; you just don't like what they show.

      March 1, 2011 at 10:01 | Report abuse |
  15. Gbop

    How many of you vaccine advocates are advocates of guns? Guns kill about 36,000 per year, 5,000 children, where's the vaccine against them? Yeah, I know, I know, people kill, guns don't, well people don't eat well or take vitamins or take care of themselves so same could be said about disease. Our immune systems have kept the human race going for hundreds of thousands of years.

    February 28, 2011 at 20:31 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Mary J

      Up until recently, we didn't have such an overpopulated world and rapid transportation. Therefore, it is easier to spread disease to many more people. Someone from say, Africa can hop on a plane and be here in half a day or so, carrying disease with them. This is why vaccines are important.

      March 1, 2011 at 02:55 | Report abuse |
  16. Julie

    Just because you were vaccinated DOES NOT make you immune necessarily! about 20% of those who are immunized DO NOT develop immunity. We are safe from these diseases because the majority of us ARE immune. People have got sick with polio after being exposed overseas where immunization is not standard like it is here. The risk, about 1 in 300,000 does NOT outweigh the risk of getting sick from NOT getting vaccinations. You put everyone else at risk, too, it is a SUPREMELY SELFISH thing to do to not get immunized. and very stupid. The risk of getting sick was much higher before vaccinations than any slight risk today from being immunized. It's irresponsible not to. Just stupid.

    February 28, 2011 at 20:44 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Steve

      But guess who gets to cover the costs if you do have a problem with immunizations...I'll give you two hints: Its not the government and its not the manufacturer.
      Oh, and the risks of complications are = to the risks of having serious complications from the diseases you get vaccinated against. In some cases less...I mean I certainly never heard of anyone dying of chicken pox..yet everyone gets vaccinated against that now.

      February 28, 2011 at 21:17 | Report abuse |
    • iminim

      Hey Steve, you might want to read about the death rate with varicella pneumonia (chicken pox virus pneumonia) in pregnant women and the morbidity rate of shingles (reactivated chicken pox) among the over-50 set.

      February 28, 2011 at 21:26 | Report abuse |
  17. BWItraveler

    I was at BWI on Feb. 22 from 4 pm to ~ 6pm, sitting at gate A2. This is how I found out about it – who are they alerting? I've had the vaccine several times, but it's been a awhile. I think they need to work on their "notification process." (Luckily I feel fine)

    February 28, 2011 at 20:55 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Lila

      They didn't mention it in this article but I think the time you would have symptoms is 3/1-3/18 after exposure.

      February 28, 2011 at 23:46 | Report abuse |
  18. Me

    People, I am just shocked! Do your homework before you open your mouth!US is the only country in the world where babies get 20+ dozes of vaccines in their first year of life!!! and you are surprised why there are so many asthmas, allergies, cancers, etc. here?...Immune systems of our babies are being messed up with so the Big Farma and others can have their billions of dollars...I am just disgusted!!!!!

    February 28, 2011 at 20:56 | Report abuse | Reply
    • vonspoo

      too bad you're exposed to more viruses and bacteria than that drinking out of your average public drinking faucet or pushing an elevator button at the mall. at least vaccinations are DEAD.

      February 28, 2011 at 22:58 | Report abuse |
    • Linda

      Totally agree. These diseases, if contacted as a child, cannot do more harm than the vaccines. Actually, they make your body stronger. I agree with vaccinating against some of the diseases, but many vaccines are not efficient and useless.

      March 1, 2011 at 00:11 | Report abuse |
    • Mary J

      Whooping cough kills. But the vaccine could cause a reaction, so we need to avoid the vaccine, right? Everyone knows that reactions are worse than dying from whooping cough. *shakes head*

      March 1, 2011 at 02:59 | Report abuse |
    • Good Patient

      "Big Farma"? Oh, brother. Thanks for the laugh, Cletus. I'll take my medical advice from people who are literate and actually know something about biology. That would be: not people like you.

      March 1, 2011 at 09:57 | Report abuse |
  19. dgt

    well, grow up, measles is not really such a horrible disease as it is portrayed to be by those who need their vaccines sold. The vaccine for it may be killing or damaging more kids than measles itself. I can't say it's pleasant, but it really is just a bad cold with a rash.

    February 28, 2011 at 21:16 | Report abuse | Reply
  20. ladybear

    I don't know what all the fuss is about, we all had measles as kids, most kids got it, and no lasting effects. We all picked up all kinds of bugs as kids, the only vaccines we ever had were for TB and polio. Now as adults, we virtually never get sick, seldom even catch cold. We eat all kinds of fresh food, locally grown, make eggnog from free range eggs, I love raw meat ( again, from locally raised and slaughtered beef, no agr business product). We use no bleach or disinfectants in my home, just vinegar and baking soda. We don't wash our hands every time we pat the dogs. We are disease free. All these old illnesses are things that until recently were just part of life, our bodies developed natural resistance to just about everything we encounter on a day to day basis. People we know who live in comparably sterile environments, have lots of vaccines, and eat over processed and and chemically treated or grown food products are far more subject to infection and illness that we ever are.

    February 28, 2011 at 21:22 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Gbop

      Well said, Ladybear. My dad says the only time anyone ever cared about measles when he was a kid was when "Little Johnny got measles for the THIRD time."

      February 28, 2011 at 21:34 | Report abuse |
    • Mike C

      I was among the first group getting the polio vaccine in the 50's. There was and is, however, no vaccine for TB. Only tests to determine exposure to TB which use a small needle to perform the test. Some people do have more effective immune systems than others, that is true. Unfortunately for the population as a whole diseases, especially viral ones, mutate naturally and one never knows the end results.

      February 28, 2011 at 22:22 | Report abuse |
    • Mary J

      You eat raw meat? Have you ever seen that show "Monsters Inside Me?"

      March 1, 2011 at 03:01 | Report abuse |
    • Good Patient

      Gbop, it's obvious the apple didn't fall far from the tree.

      March 1, 2011 at 09:56 | Report abuse |
  21. Gbop

    The infant mortality rate in America is embarrassing compared to the rest of the world. If vaccines work so great, why don't we have a lower rate?

    February 28, 2011 at 21:31 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Mike C

      Because infant mortality is less a function of communicable disease and more related to quality prenatal medical care to the moms. This country has good medical care available but not ACCESSIBLE to those who cannot afford it.

      February 28, 2011 at 22:29 | Report abuse |
    • jax22

      Yes infant mortality may be higher, but did you take into account that we also have more fertility treatment and IVF, which leads to more high risk and/or multiple gestation pregnancies... which leads to increased change of premature babies. You don't know the reason for the infant mortality, and I'm pretty sure it isn't based on a chickenpox vaccine. You can't take one statistic and try to blame it on something you know nothing about.

      February 28, 2011 at 23:29 | Report abuse |
    • Margaret

      re infant mortality in the US: When we compare infant mortality rates with other countries, are we comparing only babies who are full term babies who subsequently die - or are we comparing ANY baby born in the US regardless of gestational age (premature)? In the US a woman with an at-risk pregnancy has an excellent opportunity to bring the baby to term or close to term. The same woman, if living in certain other countries who do not have good prenatal care, may not be able to bring the child to term at all, or even to a gestational age when the child can receive the support necessary in order to live. In other words, I believe the statistics are skewed so that although it may appear that our infant mortality statistics are high, at least those children are able to be born who would not have even come to term elsewhere - and being born here with good prenatal care they at least have a CHANCE to survive.

      February 28, 2011 at 23:32 | Report abuse |
    • jax22

      Infant mortality is considered a live birth of an infant greater than 22 weeks gestation.... but the survival rate of a 23-24 weeker is about 50% even with the absolute best care. Point is, infant mortality has absolutely nothing to do with vaccinations.

      February 28, 2011 at 23:57 | Report abuse |
    • Good Patient

      Gbop, you're a perfect example of the saying "Figures lie and liars figure." Why don't you take some time off from proselytizing about vitamin D and find out just how other countries calculate infant mortality. Get back to me when you figure it out, bozo.

      March 1, 2011 at 09:45 | Report abuse |
    • Jabberwocky

      No, Gboob, what is REALLY embarrassing is people like you, who trumpet their ignorance and stupidity for all to see. Why don't you just stop posting and go back to school and get an education? You obviously failed to get one thus far, or you wouldn't be so obliviously displaying your incredible lack of any knowledge about statistics, disease, vaccines, immunity, as well as medicine and science in general. If ignorance is bliss, you must be in seventh heaven.

      March 1, 2011 at 21:03 | Report abuse |
  22. Researcher

    A quote by Benjamin Franklin:
    "In 1736 I lost one of my Sons, a fine Boy of 4 Years old, by the Smallpox taken in the common way. I long regretted bitterly and still regret that I had not given it to him by Inoculation. This I mention for the Sake of Parents who omit that Operation on the Supposition that they should never forgive themselves if a Child died under it; my Example showing that the Regret may be the same either way, and that therefore the safer should be chosen. [Part III, p. 83]"

    The CDC say that adverse reactions to the MMR vaccine are 1 reaction for every million doses given in the United states.
    http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00046738.htm

    from the WHO:
    Key facts

    * Measles is one of the leading causes of death among young children even though a safe and cost-effective vaccine is available.
    * In 2008, there were 164 000 measles deaths globally – nearly 450 deaths every day or 18 deaths every hour.
    * More than 95% of measles deaths occur in low-income countries with weak health infrastructures.
    * Measles vaccination resulted in a 78% drop in measles deaths between 2000 and 2008 worldwide.
    * In 2008, about 83% of the world's children received one dose of measles vaccine by their first birthday through routine health services – up from 72% in 2000.

    http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs286/en/

    Why do people still debate this?

    February 28, 2011 at 21:33 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Gbop

      I notice that this statistic is missing:

      Between 1900 and 1963 measles had dropped 94%. The measles vaccine was released in 1963.

      February 28, 2011 at 21:41 | Report abuse |
    • Gbop

      Oh, and BTW, I also notice that your stats are for countries that don't have clean water nor sanitation. Why do people debate these facts?

      February 28, 2011 at 21:42 | Report abuse |
    • James

      @Gbop
      Your claim of 94% reduction in measles cases from 1901 to 1963 is wrong. The number of cases remained roughly the same during that period. The reduction in the number of deaths resulting from measles from 1901 to 1963 was around 99% (http://www.whale.to/m/measlesdeaths1.html). However, the overall reduction in mortality in the U.S. from 1901 to 1963 was quite significant (see Armstrong, G. (1999). Trends in Infectious Disease Mortality in the United States During the 20th Century JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 281 (1), 61-66) - at least of the same order as the reduction in measles mortality. All this indicates is that mortality rates from Measles, along with other infectious diseases, were on the decline due to better and more accessible supportive care for those afflicted.

      While the mortality rate for measles declined prior to 1963, the rate of measles cases did not decline until after 1963 (see MMWR Summary of Notable Diseases, http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00035381.htm).

      March 1, 2011 at 09:07 | Report abuse |
    • Good Patient

      I notice that Gbop is oddly picky about statistics. He only recognizes those that support his inane claims.

      March 1, 2011 at 09:47 | Report abuse |
    • Jabberwocky

      Because many of them are complete and utter dimwits. Case in point: Gbop.

      March 1, 2011 at 21:04 | Report abuse |
  23. Tara

    I have a very hard time believing that, as some state here, a person who is vaccinated has about the same chance of contracting a disease as someone who is not. When I was a child/toddler, I had to go to the hospital with the flu every year until I was old enough to get the flu vaccine (back then they did not give the very young the vaccine). However, from the time of about 4 years of age, I have had the vaccine every year – that's 36 vaccines – and in that time I have only had the flu twice. Once at age 18 and once this year; both times were years in which they "missed" a strain that then was rampant. Both times I ended up with pneumonia. With asthma, which my child also has, we sing the praises of both vaccines and healthy lifestyles (i.e. whole foods, breastfeeding for at least a year, no smoking/pesticides/chemicals, etc.). If someone related to you has had a severe reaction to a vaccine, then sure, don't be stupid. Avoid the vaccine. But most of the time I think the benefit outweighs the risk, and those of us with respiratory issues thank you for getting them.
    It is not enough, to my mind, to say that communicable diseases are a fact of life. If I did not vaccinate and we gave an infant a disease that then disabled or killed him, that would be on MY head. Why not do everything I can to prevent it?
    Also, I must say that I am not persuaded by those who claim the vaccines are impure. Really? Do you drive a car, use plastics daily, eat processed foods, use bug spray, use make-ups, etc.? The list of ways we are "impure" is endless and I have yet to meet a purist.

    February 28, 2011 at 22:39 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Gbop

      Tara, you are either an agent of Big Pharm or are immuno-compromised, Either way, vaccines are not your friends, vitamin D is.

      February 28, 2011 at 23:27 | Report abuse |
    • Good Patient

      Gbop, you're full of it. You're worse than any pharmaceutical company. Your claims about vitamin D are false and you lie on every message board. Knock it off.

      March 1, 2011 at 09:37 | Report abuse |
    • Tara

      Ahh, so Gbop has been on other boards? I thought his (or her) comments sounded like someone just trolling and causing trouble.
      I live in a college town, so there are plenty of anti-vaccine people here. I always hear them talking about the "damage" of vaccines, but I never see it and I know MANY people with small children (including me!). I'm not saying that there aren't severe reactions out there, but I'm 40, have lived in several states, and have worked with the public for most of my life and I've only met 1 person who actually had a severe reaction to a vaccine (having a sore arm or running a low grade fever for 24 hours does not count). On the other hand, I've known dozens who have been hospitalized or died from the complications of a communicable disease. Some people can get the flu or measles and have an easy time of it but some simply cannot, and I do not personally agree with letting flu or whooping cough thin out the population. I am at far greater risk when I drive my car than when I get a vaccine. I drive my car multiple times a day, but I get a vaccine once per year. It's easy math. As a person with asthma who had chronic bronchitis as a child, I know that if I skip a flu vaccine I will likely get the flu which for me results in pneumonia. Now, if you have a brother who screamed uncontrollaby for 3 hours straight after having a vaccination and there are no allergies or respiratory issues in your family, you might make a different decision. But don't tell me I'm wrong because I prefer to take precautions that are chosen based on my factual medical history.

      March 1, 2011 at 15:27 | Report abuse |
    • Good Patient

      Yeah, he either has a bunch of different screen names, like LT33, or he's part of some bunch of shills for some company that makes Vitamin D supplements. To hear him and his pals tell it, vitamin D will cure cancer and just about everything else. He yaps about doing "proper research" and then cites blogs as proof of his claims. He's a charlatan. When asked about his education, he demurs and won't tell anyone what level of education he has attained or in what field. It's obvious he didn't major in any science and hasn't gotten further than undergraduate school at that.

      March 1, 2011 at 19:36 | Report abuse |
    • Tara

      That's pretty funny. Or pathetic, depending upon how you view it.
      The really funny thing is that he recommended vit. D to me, and I get more of it than most people I know. When there are cheese displays at events, my friends always say, "Get Tara! There's cheese!" I love it. And milk; yum. BUT vit. D does not cure everything. (Nor does any other single thing.)

      March 2, 2011 at 21:32 | Report abuse |
  24. Steve B

    Great, I was stuck at gate A3 in BWI for four hours on Friday the 25th and now have a cold. I really hope it is not measles.

    February 28, 2011 at 22:56 | Report abuse | Reply
  25. Margaret West Grove, PA

    If you are exposed to measles, chances are you will be okay, especially kids. In the 1950's I, like every other kid I knew, had measles, German measles, mumps, chicken pox, and I think I had whooping cough. P I've never had the flu and I wonder if exposure to all those other germs didn't make me stronger.

    February 28, 2011 at 23:16 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Margaret West Grove, PA

      I should have added that in no way do I mean to suggest that vaccinations are unimportant just because I survived the childhood diseases. I certainly had polio vaccine as a child and I had all my children vaccinated.

      February 28, 2011 at 23:41 | Report abuse |
  26. Gbop

    So wait, all of our arguing is because someone has measles, but no on else has come down with it. Wow, we have all been sucked right into the propaganda, shame on all of us Further, last year when there was an "outbreak (whatever that means)" in NY, all of that community was immunized and no one died.

    February 28, 2011 at 23:25 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Please Read

      Thats because she only came through last week – the disease hasnt presented all of the symtoms yet. Last year, the "outbreak" was contained to about 500 people at a church picnic. Of the 465 people who were vaccinated, 3 got measles. Of the 35 people who were not vaccinated, 31 of them got measles. It is highly HIGHLY contagious for people who are not vaccinated.

      Now we are talking about a situation were a woman was going through multiple airports in multiple states. I hope that no one else get it and is hospitalized like this woman or worse.

      February 28, 2011 at 23:34 | Report abuse |
    • Lila

      They did not have the dates in this article but I think I read the symptoms should occur between 3/1-3/18 after exposure.

      February 28, 2011 at 23:54 | Report abuse |
  27. svann

    How is one person that didnt get immunized a danger to thousands that did have immunizations? I thought the point of getting immunized was so that you couldnt catch it.

    March 1, 2011 at 00:14 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Good Patient

      Duh. You do know that there are people who couldn't BE vaccinated for numerous reasons who may have been exposed to this woman, don't you? Infants too young to be vaccinated, for example?

      No, you probably don't.

      March 1, 2011 at 09:34 | Report abuse |
    • Dr.K

      just to be clear, the concept of herd immunity in vaccinations is based in the vaccine effectiveness for a group of people immunized according to standard procedures. A vaccine does not need to prevent disease in everyone (and no vaccine will do this), just in a sufficient number of people to stop the disease from expanding rapidly through the group ("herd"). Since viruses spread by a geometric progression (ie 1 person infects 2, 2 people infect 4, 4 people infect 8), if each infected person can only infect 1/20 or 1/100 people they contact during the period where they are conagious but not showing symptoms, a single infection will not lead to the entire population becoming infected. When you degrade the number of people who can be infected by not vaccinating everyone, you will eventually reach a point where the virus will again be able to spread rapidly to all pre-vaccinated (infants or toddlers not yet vaccinated) or un-vaccinatable (immune deficient, severe life threatening reaction to vaccine) people. These diseases routinely killed children and adults and no amount of medical care will prevent this. Moreover, if we spend all of our medical resources taking care of preventable diseases, we will have little left over to fight cancer and heart disease (and these successes have been largely responsible for the increased life expectancy we have enjoyed over ther past decades). Therefore, people who, on the basis of a discredited, greedy (soon to be ex-con) physician who published a discredited and retracted study on vaccines and autism simply to enrich himself, choose not to vaccinate put the whole population at risk for multiple reasons.

      March 1, 2011 at 11:35 | Report abuse |
  28. Kathy

    This woman left the "herd" where she had protection to travel internationally. She put herself at risk (obviously as she is now in the hospital) as well as those around her. This to me is irresponsible. Personally, I don't think it is fair not to vaccinate if you are physically able. It is the people around you who did make the decision to vaccinate in an effort to eradicate diseases such as these that are giving you protection. I vaccinated my children as infants. My thoughts were that one day they would want to travel as did this woman. I wanted them to be protected both now as well as in the future.

    March 1, 2011 at 00:17 | Report abuse | Reply
  29. Portland Mom

    They left out Portland. A woman and her infant flying from India exposed the PDX terminal and then the Vancouver, Wa. hospital.

    March 1, 2011 at 00:50 | Report abuse | Reply
  30. Dakota Seagull

    yeah, right...the polio vaccine was good to eradicate the polio, but not many knows that together with dead polio virus people were injected with alive SV40 virus (a cancirogenic one), because the early polio vaccine was produced in COS cultured cells a cell line derived from green monkey. And this line contained another virus- SV40. The heat treatment employed killed recombinant polio virus, but kept SV40 alived. Now 60% of amrican population bears previously exclusively primate virus SV40. It is suspected that in human body SV40 virus may work as oncovirus. This what sloppy science sometimes does....

    March 1, 2011 at 01:51 | Report abuse | Reply
  31. roxylove

    Hi everybody!! I and my brother suffered from measles when I was nine years old. Yes, I got very sick and suffered greatly and was it a growing experience in my life, and the Good Lord blessed me to get better to which I am very grateful. My mother was full of faith, and if we all had as much faith as we should, we wouldn't have to depend on vaccines!!!

    March 1, 2011 at 01:53 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Why oh why?

      Wrong, no matter how much faith you have, if you contract a serious disease, you are just as likely to die as a person without faith. Diseases don't care about faith, and that is why "God" (if that's what you choose to believe) allowed us to create medical advances, such as vaccines.

      March 1, 2011 at 03:53 | Report abuse |
    • Good Patient

      roxy, do you think the percentage of people who have faith is higher or lower now than it was, say 100 years ago? How do explain the fact that people then died from diseases like polio that are nearly nonexistent today?

      Your faith isn't based in reality.

      March 1, 2011 at 09:32 | Report abuse |
  32. OvernOut

    I had the measles in 1961, I missed three weeks of kindergarten. No child should ever have to be that sick. There are other medical advancements besides vaccines in my lifetime that are now so common so as to be taken for granted: organ transplants, open heart surgery, open brain surgery, IVF, chemotherapy, joint replacements–and on and on. Those procedures have been accepted, as well as their associated risks; why not vaccines?

    March 1, 2011 at 04:56 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Heather

      Those treatments are intended to repair thing's that are damaged. Vaccines are damaging things that weren't. Prevention should be up to people to choose their method. As long as there are lies and lack of true information there will be people who do not trust them.

      March 1, 2011 at 09:20 | Report abuse |
    • Heather

      It's like... taking anti-biotics every day 'just in case' you get exposed. You don't take anti-biotics unless you NEED them. If there was a mass epidemic I might get the vaccine... IF I believed there actually was a high risk here. When swine flu come through.... I didn't believe them. They've lied so much I want proof and they haven't got it. Convince me why it's safer for ME and MY FAMILY at MY HOUSE in MY SITUATION with MY MEDICAL HISTORY to get a questionable vaccine for an illness I see as no threat. They haven't. For some... it's worth the risk. For me it's not.

      March 1, 2011 at 09:27 | Report abuse |
    • Good Patient

      Sure thing, Heather. And as long as there are fools who don't even have enough education to use apostrophes correctly, I'll ignore their idiotic views in favor of those who have medical degrees and even a hint of intelligence.

      March 1, 2011 at 09:29 | Report abuse |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Heather, precisely what "things" are vaccines "damaging"? Explain. Thanks in advance.

      March 1, 2011 at 10:06 | Report abuse |
  33. Jayson

    HAHAHA!! That's why you get your immunizations when your young. Parents that opt out getting it for their kids are negligent and morons.

    Foriegners are travelling here bringing these diseases and it can do serious harm to your kids. THAT IS WHY IMMUNIZATION HAS BEEN AROUND ALL THIS TIME! Immune system or not your kids can get crippled or die before they are even 8.

    Stop being negligent and get your head out of the sand and get them immunized now. I think we are lucky it was just measles here and not worse like polio or something else. We'll be so unprotected without immunizations the diseases would run rampant throughout the country..

    March 1, 2011 at 09:38 | Report abuse | Reply
  34. ICUnurse

    If you want to know what the world was like before "useless" vaccines which are "more dangerous than the disease" I suggest you read a book called "Of Plagues and Peoples." The reason the death toll from diseases was coming down steadily before a lot of vaccines became common was due to antibiotics, so that people could survive the bacterial infections that would move in after preventable viral infections had weakened immune systems. Have you ever seen someone die from from meningitis because of a preventable, communicable disease? I have, and it's horrible, and I'd be a happy woman if I never saw it again. Be glad that for most people, things like meningitis, encephalitis, and scarlet fever, are just words, not memories of how their loved ones suffered and died after they caught a childhood illness.

    March 1, 2011 at 19:38 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Jabberwocky

      Brava, ICUnurse. Well said and well done. Now get a two-by-four and slap some sense into dopes like Gbop, who is incapable of understanding anything until you get his attention with a wallop.

      March 1, 2011 at 21:12 | Report abuse |
  35. Joseph

    As if airports weren't bad enough already, now people who had to go through all the troubles of security are exposed to a disease? Wow!!! It's amazing how much of a hassle airports have become.

    March 3, 2011 at 19:31 | Report abuse | Reply
  36. angel

    How can people say such bad things about other people when they don't even know them? Just because of measles? The way I see it if your child is not old enough to get vaccinated then try your best not to travel in public areas where there is a higher risk of catching the disease. All people have a right to be in public areas, even if they are not vaccinated its a personal decision that does effect a lot of people BUT those who choose not to get vaccinated for whatever reason don't have to have the dead disease injected into them but before making the important decision to vaccinate or not against diseases like the measles one should educate themselves about the risk on all vaccinations. For those who want to get the dead disease injected into them and there kids they are just doing what they see fit for themselves and there family. I guess where I'm trying to get is that you can't be sure if the person sitting next to you at an airport (or a bus or a taxi) is vaccinated or carrying the disease. Thanks for reading

    March 4, 2011 at 09:17 | Report abuse | Reply
  37. Laura Gomez

    Communicable diseases are a fact of life, and nobody has a right to force others to be vaccinated for someone else's good.
    I agree. period.
    very slippery slope people are sliding on in the futile hopes that they will be protected from every disease on earth.
    And all this over measles? 200,000 might die worldwide (in undernourished, at risk communities), but even before the vaccine only hundreds per year ever died in the U.S. We are well nourished with good medical care and the vast majority never even had complications requiring hospitalization. Those are facts.
    On a side note: check into the widely ignored correlation between the rise in peanut and other food allergies such as egg and milk allergies in highly vaccinated population vs. unvaccinated populations globally. We suddenly start increasing the vaccination schedule and immediately there is a rise in allergic reactions to food. And it is ignored why? b/c it is big business and there is too much money to be made.

    March 24, 2011 at 23:51 | Report abuse | Reply
  38. Namaste Bags

    Hello, I found a interest blog, it's useful for you.. Namaste Bags

    June 29, 2012 at 08:54 | Report abuse | Reply

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.

Advertisement
About this blog

Get a behind-the-scenes look at the latest stories from CNN Chief Medical Correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Senior Medical Correspondent Elizabeth Cohen and the CNN Medical Unit producers. They'll share news and views on health and medical trends - info that will help you take better care of yourself and the people you love.