Last login: Tuesday, December 14, 2010
My first question is... why are the statistics for CA between 44-83%? I would think that someone could get a little more accurate than a 40% margin of error. Seems odd...Secondly, why is this story about a child who has not received immunizations getting pertussis? His family is fine; they had their immunizations. Not sure what the argument is here?Last, what are the ages of the people acquiring this illness? Since the immunization is meant to protect young children, whose immune systems are not yet developed enough to handle this disease, is it doing its job? Are the people getting it in their 70's, 80's, 90's or 20's? In my opinion, this article is just spewing a bunch of random statistics, that are so out of whack, it is hard to determine the point. Once again, it is great to do a study and provide the general public with a portion of the results... those that fit the desired outcome. It is sad when most people don't know enough to research further.
December 14, 2010 at 1:58 p.m.
( permalink | suggest removal )