"An unusual observation from a large outbreak in Quebec may raise some alarm among those who attend the conference, the annual meeting of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.
An investigation into an outbreak in a high school in a town that was heavily hit by the virus found that about half of the cases were in teens who had received the recommended two doses of vaccine in childhood -- in other words, teens whom authorities would have expected to have been protected from the measles virus.
About half ? Actually it was MORE THEN HALF.
Look at the stats from article. You know the part that most readers never bother to get to?
"52 of the 98 teens who caught measles were fully vaccinated came as a shock to the researchers who conducted the investigation"
Forty nine cases would have been half, so it was actually more then half, approximately 53 percent of measles cases were fully vaccinated
To put this all simply- of the 98 total cases
52 teens were fully vaccinated
46 were not vaccinated
It would seem the vaccinated have greater odds of getting measles then the unvaccinated. Perhaps a 6 percent higher risk?
"How could that have happened?" said Dr. Gaston De Serres.
The Doctor then postulates "whether the timing of the delivery of the first dose of measles vaccine is undermining the efficacy of the prevention program"
Never does he question whether the vaccines themselves are at fault. Or if the concept of "vaccination" is faulty?
I am going to postulate.
What if the people who were vaccinated had compromised immunity due to the inoculations themselves?
What if the mercury (thimerosol) and all the other additives and adjuvants compromised the immune systems of these children so greatly that when exposed to the measles virus their compromised (taxed) immune sytems could not fight the virus off ?
There's a thought?
“This outbreak is being fed largely on unvaccinated or undervaccinated people, but we were concerned that a significant number had received the recommended two doses of MMR vaccine,”