Talk:Measles vaccine

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

expert

This page needs help from experts on this topic. It is very short and the table has little information. If there is an expert, please help. Dogposter (talk) 01:03, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added Wikiproject tags to this page, that may help, I've also added the medicine parameter to the expert tag. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:07, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
MMR vaccine appears to be the mainpage for this; likely this page will be deleted/merged.Fuzbaby (talk) 01:46, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it should be merged, the measles vaccine was separate from the MMR vaccine at first, so it should have a separate page. Dogposter (talk) 13:51, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that this article should not be merged into MMR vaccine. --Una Smith (talk) 23:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the seperate vaccine can be included in the MMR history; also, of the current content it is mostly ref'd to pages talking about mmr and only mentioning measles vaccine in passing.Fuzbaby (talk) 17:14, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Measles vaccine is a different vaccine than MMR. Yes, we have MMR vaccine now, but this vaccine was separate before and could be mentioned in the MMR history section, but I still think it should have its own article. Dog-poster 18:19, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Dogposter, even though the vaccines are in the same category, they should have different pages. *Pepperpiggle**Sign!* 18:20, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No one is posting anything else. Have we reached a consensus? Dogposter 18:57, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the consensus is to not merge (or at least, there is not a consensus to merge.) --Arcadian (talk) 05:16, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I guess unless someone objects now, I will remove the merge. Dogposter 18:32, 27 August 2009 (UTC)Ok, I'll take it down for now. Dogposter 20:47, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In India the measles and MMR vaccines are different. We use a measles vaccine for the National Programme (everyone gets it) and MMR vaccine based on availability in different states. It is not a historic vaccine (I.e., it is not just used as MMR). It is still in use as a separate vaccine and deserves its own article. 122.173.197.69 (talk) 18:08, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a magnificant chart that I don't see here, but should

Chart showing measles incidence before and after introduction of measles vaccine, and at the point that booster was introduced. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Measles_US_1944-2007_inset.png —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ocdnctx (talk • contribs) 15:04, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

consolidate this article with the much better discussion of "measles vaccine" set out in the MMR_vaccine article? (Has the above chart)

There is a much better discussion of measles vaccine in the MMR WP art. Consolidate this article there?

(Has the above chart, file label http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Measles_US_1944-2007_inset.png —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ocdnctx (talk • contribs) 15:11, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign your comments with ~~~~. If you know how to do merge templates go for it. The MMR article would be better. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 15:55, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MMR vs MMRV

The article says " The measles-mumps-rubella-varicella combo (MMRV vaccine) vaccine has been available since 2005." Is this significant enough to be the second sentence? Most countries don't routinely vaccinate against chickenpox, and those that do often give it separately. --82.27.233.58 (talk) 23:24, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Association with Autism

Really needs to be addressed, because it needs to be refuted once and for all, because it was based on fraudulent study. Rubbish still going around in pop media 129.180.171.57 (talk) 23:26, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dry powder

We say the dry powder needs to be mixed but we dont say with what. Water? Another diluent? Google isnt really helping. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 14:43, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ref says "Before use, the lyophilized vaccine is reconstituted with sterile diluent. Each dose of 0.5 ml contains ≥1000 viral infective units of the vaccine strain; this is also true when it is presented as an MCV combination. Measles vaccine may also contain sorbitol and hydrolysed gelatin as stabilizers, as well as a small amount of neomycin, but it does not contain thiomersal. In general, it is recommended that freeze-dried vaccine be stored in a refrigerated condition, but it may also be stored between -70 °C and -20 °C for long-term preservation of viral potency. The diluent must not be frozen but should be cooled before reconstitution" http://www.who.int/wer/2009/wer8435.pdf
Add a bit on this. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:20, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Diluent versus specific liquid

Stating "specific liquid" is much simplier. Diluent is not a common term. Thus restored. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:13, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Doc James: That works. Tornado chaser (talk) 17:27, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Early Vaccination

A recent news article reported a confirmed case of measles in Toronto from an infant who had recently traveled abroad. The article reported that infants under 12 months of age can get the measles vaccine early if they expect to travel internationally. Upon further investigation I learned that the CDC, NIH, and Health Canada have similar but not identical guidelines for administration of vaccinations against Measles. This wikipedia article currently alludes to an infant receiving its first dose of the vaccine at 9 months (see: second sentence in article). This conflicts with some guidelines as well as the section on "Schedule". How to we reconcile competing guidelines? [1][2][3] Mcbrarian (talk) 14:58, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I will flag WPMED talk page here. JenOttawa (talk) 14:26, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Mcbrarian: Please excuse me refactoring the reference you gave. @JenOttawa: I've moved the second sentence of the lead into the Schedule section where it belongs and has proper context so that it doesn't mislead. It was far too specific for the lead anyway. I've taken the opportunity to add the NHS UK guidance into the same section. Any other guidance is on-topic for inclusion in that section. --RexxS (talk) 18:19, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This was a comment on effectiveness not on when different countries recommend immunization. But sure can go in the body. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:59, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Of course it was a comment on effectiveness, when delivered to travelling infants under a year old. As the second sentence in the lead, and without that context, it gave the misleading impression that doses to 9 month-old children were the norm. The source itself was principally concerned with infants travelling and isn't a great source for discussing effectiveness of the vaccine in general. --RexxS (talk) 13:09, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ The Canadian Press. "Travel-related measles case confirmed in Toronto, others may have been exposed". CBC. Retrieved March 8, 2019.
  2. ^ "Measles". National Health Service UK. 20 October 2017. Retrieved 11 March 2019.
  3. ^ "MMR Vaccination: What You Should Know: Measles, Mumps, Rubella". Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2 February 2018. Retrieved 11 March 2019.

Latest Danish study

I've just reverted the addition of this study:

It is good quality primary evidence and is recent, but we already have four secondary sources to support the statement

Numerous studies have found no relationship between MMR vaccine and autism.

I'll leave it here in case anybody is interested in it. --RexxS (talk) 22:47, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

These secondary sources are quite old. Inclusion of a recent high quality primary source is warranted here at least until this primary source is included into a review article. Ruslik_Zero 17:47, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
They are not old enough for all of them to be discounted (two from 2012, one from 2008, one from 2004), although there's a good argument for reducing the number of them. We never prefer a primary source over an acceptable secondary one and the primary says nothing new that the secondaries don't, so its inclusion is unwarranted. When the primary is included in a review article, that's the time to include the newer review article. --RexxS (talk) 18:45, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If it helps, here are some recent secondary sources that comment on the absence of any link between MMR vaccine and autism:
There's no need for primary sources to support the findings. --RexxS (talk) 20:03, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Adding more data for deaths

Data from the CDC

The current graph on the page only mentions cases, but no deaths. I think these data are complimentary, and it would be a better article if it had both.

I created a new graph that has both cases and deaths per 100000. This is all based on the CDC data like the original graph, and mentions the 1963 and 1989 dates like the original did.

Link to the file : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Measles_cases_graph.svg

If you can think of anything I could do to improve the graph help is very welcome.

I am not sure which of the following I should do : 

  • Replace the current graph with the new one ( it has all the same info, with more added )
  • Add my graph as-is to the page ( the cases data would be duplicated )
  • Remove the cases data from my graph and leave only deaths, add it to the page leaving the original one. One problem with this is we loose the superposition of death and cases data which I would think is a nice thing to have.

What do you think ? Thanks a lot ! --Arthurwolf~enwiki (talk) 14:10, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is fine just to add it aswell User:Arthurwolf~enwiki. The bit that it is missing is when the vaccines were introduced routinely in the USA which the first graph has. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:54, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks !! I actually tried to add the 1963 and 1989 dates as vertical lines, green and blue, they don't render when you look at it ? Or are you talking about something else ? --Arthurwolf~enwiki (talk) 08:59, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
What's the source for the reported cases data? The file lists this as the source: "Data Source for the number of cases ( and not deaths ),[1] the same source as the original graph I am trying to improve or replace." But clicking on that link just takes me to statistics for 1993. Am I missing something? 2600:6C55:7800:4BC:14D0:9EA4:244C:E919 (talk) 23:40, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Measles cases per year

Anyone knows where to find the measles cases per year for the beginning of the 20th century ? The data I can find starts in the 40s, I can't find earlier data. It would really help improve the graph I think. I searched a lot on the CDC website and couldn't find it, maybe there is some other source somebody here knows about?

--Arthurwolf~enwiki (talk) 12:40, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The data doesn't exist, the CDC didn't start collecting these data until 1944 which is when the graph starts. Likewise the NHS didn't start collecting measles statistics until 1940. 80.209.166.9 (talk) 14:14, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removals

@Whywhenwhohow: Your edit summary says this is already covered but it is not covered anywhere in the lead. Consistent with the standards seen in our other articles like polio (a featured article) or polio vaccine (a GA article), this basic information should not be removed from the lead section. Dartslilly (talk) 23:47, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Updated and moved to the history section of the lead.Whywhenwhohow (talk) 00:05, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Measles_vaccine"