I’d like to add another thought to the vaccine discussion on my last post. It’s prompted by two things: the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s push for vaccinations in Third World countries and the sudden recollection of seemingly innocuous events, like the illness that hit one of Steve Bemis’ sons, in association with vaccination.

When you think about the problems of disease confronting Third World countries, vaccination makes a lot of sense. The problems of preventable disease are so huge that mass innoculation almost certainly will make things better than they were, even allowing for some bad reactions to the vaccines.

Well, those Third World countries are the U.S. 100 years ago. And vaccines did help eradicate disease in the U.S. Part of the problem may be that the effect was so dramatic that we fell in love with the seemingly magical power of vaccines. The article Dave Milano links to by Joseph Mercola captures this idea:

“Epidemiologic studies…have shown that as families improve their living conditions, hygiene, nutrition, literacy and education, the risk of life-threatening acute infectious, inflammatory diseases very much decreases. Families with poor living conditions, hygiene, nutrition and literacy would generally be most likely to benefit from vaccinations. Families with good living conditions, hygiene, nutrition and education probably would benefit from vaccinations very little or not at all. Individuals with a tendency to allergic or autoimmune diseases are LIKELY to BE HARMED BY VACCINATIONS.”

Our world has changed big time since many of the most important vaccines were developed, yet our bureaucratized and autocratic health care system can’t accept that our children’s vaccination needs likely have changed in the interim.

***

I’ve been thinking some more about an exchange Anna, Steve Bemis, and I had a couple days ago about our cholesterol levels. (Yes, Steve, my test was a fasting test.)

Each of our recaps ended with something to the effect that cholesterol testing may well be meaningless in any event. Now we’re being told that homocysteine and C-reactive protein levels are possibly more important markers. Another reminder of how little we know about key areas of health assessment, though that doesn’t seem to impede the pharmaceutical companies, which continue promoting statins to reduce cholesterol levels as a multibillion dollar enterprise.

***

Speaking of how little we know, or want to know, here are is a quote from a front-page Financial Times article today about how the number of American children being treated for type II diabetes more than doubled between 2001 and 2005: “The substantial increases uncovered by the analysis bolster the pharmaceutical industry’s push for new pills to treat type II diabetes…and the potentially vast market that is opening up because of childhood obesity.”

***

And possibly a glimmer of reality from an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association about the decline in American health care: “ The US health care system is considered a dysfunctional mess… Today, the list of drugs and technologies for which new might not be better (and may be even worse) has expanded rapidly: postmenopausal hormone therapy, bare-metal stents, megadose antioxidants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for adolescents, Swan-Ganz catheters, gabapentin for bipolar disorder, erythropoietin for anemia, and the list goes on.”