Momtezuma Tuatara
09-02-09, 06:33 PM
In response to the item about New Zealand having "appalling" vaccination rates, and the paranoia in many of the comments from vaccine defenders, I put up a post which gave the URLs for these graphs for New Zealand and one for Chicago.
Whether they put it up, is another matter. All NZ material comes from official NZ Government documents.
Many of the adults here will have been born around 1970?
This graph shows you the principal causes of infant mortality from 1871 to 1922, by yearly numbers.
http://i655.photobucket.com/albums/uu275/copernicus_2009/IMclasstable1872-1922.jpg
This graph gives you similar information but in four yearly increments from 1872 – 1944
http://i655.photobucket.com/albums/uu275/copernicus_2009/quintales1972-1944.jpg
This graph gives you the European infant mortality decline from 1972 to 1956
http://i655.photobucket.com/albums/uu275/copernicus_2009/IMrates1872-1956.jpg
This graph gives you the European infant mortality decline from 1959 – 1978.
http://i655.photobucket.com/albums/uu275/copernicus_2009/1959-1978infmort.jpg
This page shows the same thing for Chicago:
http://i655.photobucket.com/albums/uu275/copernicus_2009/Infantmortchicago1870-1999.jpg
And this graphs shows that between 1939 to 1979, that the rate of hospitalisation of New Zealand 1 – 4 year olds, per 1,000 children more than doubled:
http://i655.photobucket.com/albums/uu275/copernicus_2009/Hospitalisation1939-1979.jpg
These figures on the last graph, finish about the time some of you were born. I wonder what the figures are now? Perhaps one of the medical people who wishes to defend vaccines could post an update.
The IMR for New Zealand in 1998 was 6.3 per 1,000 and last year was 5.3 per 1,000. Any rational person who adds that data onto the other graphs above, and studies the New Zealand Official statistics, cannot possibly claim that vaccination is the reason for the dramatic decline in infant mortality, which was occurring in dramatic fashion, even before antibiotics or routine childhood vaccines became available.
Whether they put it up, is another matter. All NZ material comes from official NZ Government documents.
Many of the adults here will have been born around 1970?
This graph shows you the principal causes of infant mortality from 1871 to 1922, by yearly numbers.
http://i655.photobucket.com/albums/uu275/copernicus_2009/IMclasstable1872-1922.jpg
This graph gives you similar information but in four yearly increments from 1872 – 1944
http://i655.photobucket.com/albums/uu275/copernicus_2009/quintales1972-1944.jpg
This graph gives you the European infant mortality decline from 1972 to 1956
http://i655.photobucket.com/albums/uu275/copernicus_2009/IMrates1872-1956.jpg
This graph gives you the European infant mortality decline from 1959 – 1978.
http://i655.photobucket.com/albums/uu275/copernicus_2009/1959-1978infmort.jpg
This page shows the same thing for Chicago:
http://i655.photobucket.com/albums/uu275/copernicus_2009/Infantmortchicago1870-1999.jpg
And this graphs shows that between 1939 to 1979, that the rate of hospitalisation of New Zealand 1 – 4 year olds, per 1,000 children more than doubled:
http://i655.photobucket.com/albums/uu275/copernicus_2009/Hospitalisation1939-1979.jpg
These figures on the last graph, finish about the time some of you were born. I wonder what the figures are now? Perhaps one of the medical people who wishes to defend vaccines could post an update.
The IMR for New Zealand in 1998 was 6.3 per 1,000 and last year was 5.3 per 1,000. Any rational person who adds that data onto the other graphs above, and studies the New Zealand Official statistics, cannot possibly claim that vaccination is the reason for the dramatic decline in infant mortality, which was occurring in dramatic fashion, even before antibiotics or routine childhood vaccines became available.