Vaccination Research Proposal

Introduction
As you may be well aware of, I advocate being wholly informed of both sides of the story when it comes to vaccinations. An informed decision is the best decision. However, too many people put too little effort into researching vaccinations: their ingredients, their immediate effects, their long term effects, their efficacy, their necessity, etc. Sadly, people research major purchases (eg, car, television, vacation, etc.) more than they do what they inject/ingest in their body. As a tremendously curious student of life and a future Chiropractor, I am of the opinion that most, if not all, vaccinations are unnecessary. I do not claim to have hard-core proof of such a mindset at this point in time. (Though I do claim there is not hard-core proof to the contrary.) I do propose, however, a research study that could be performed that would convince most of the people who currently oppose my mindset.

Background
It is a physiological fact that antibodies are produced with exposure to an antigen. Diseases, such as measles, mumps, and rubella, have their own specific antigen. When the body comes in contact with those diseases, diseases-specific antibodies are produced. One specific type of antibody, IgG, that is produced remains in a person for a significant period of time after exposure. That means if you were ever exposed to measles then you would have the measles IgG in your system long after exposure.

It should be mentioned that "exposure" can come from a vaccinations for the disease or directly from the pathogens that cause that disease. It should also be noted that exposure to the pathogens that cause a disease does not necessarily imply you contract the disease. If this was the case no one would be alive today to have this discourse. What it means is that you were exposed to it but defended it successfully.

Proposed Study
My study involves taking two groups of people and compare their IgG levels for certain diseases. One group of people would be those who were vaccinated (Group 1) for disease x and the other group would be those who were not vaccinated for disease x (Group 2). Compare their disease x IgG levels, making sure the average age of the participants are the same. There are three logical scenarios that would result from such a study.

Scenario 1: Group 1 > Group 2
This means Group 1 has higher IgG levels than Group 2. This would make sense in that only Group 1 has been exposed to the disease via their vaccination.

Scenario 2: Group 1 = Group 2
This means both groups have the same IgG levels. This would be an interesting scenario in that it would mean the Group 2 was also exposed to the disease and is now just as protected against it as Group 1.

Scenario 3: Group 1 < Group 2
This means Group 1 has lower IgG levels than Group 2. This would be a startling discovery. This would imply the natural exposure to the disease is more effective than exposure via vaccination.

Conclusions
I think it is obvious that Scenarios 2 and 3 would debunk the efficacy of vaccination for that disease. I would submit Scenario 1 would debunk the necessity of vaccination for that disease. Given that there is not a scenario in which vaccinations are necessary and/or effective, the counter argument could be that the rate of morbidity (contracting the disease but persevering through it) and/or mortality (contracting the disease but dying because of it) in the two groups would differ. I concede that point and offer to analyze that in the study as well.

One of the Best Weeks Ever, 3/26/2010 - 4/1/2010

I was chilling on my apartment's rooftop deck soaking in the Mississippi River and downtown Davenport when I got hit by a powerful feeling of gratitude. I realized the last 7 days provided me with an inordinate amount of fulfilling personal transactions. What follows is the execution of my wish to share this with you. Granted, it is in executive-summary format and in no particular order. I find that is the only way to bring this to life. (I have tried for the last 90 minutes to bring this to life more substantially but I realized I was writing a novel instead of a blog. Nothing against novels but I want to finish this tonight.)

* full weekend adjusting seminar. learned tons of new techniques and became more proficient in already-known techniques.

* bridged the gap with a disenfranchised clique of people in my class. without getting into too much detail, a certain clique of people did something offensive to my sense of public decency yet I looked passed that to lessen the awkwardness.

* branched out to discover new extracurricular clubs. attended Mo Chih Chu and absolutely loved it. motivating and inspirational.

* super excited to get back on the pitch and referee soccer. first game in 6 months is two days from now and the thought enters my mind at least once an hour.

* I made no fewer than 5 strangers smile. the most powerful one was a disgruntled old lady sitting on a park bench. I rode by her on my bike, flashed a toothy smile, and gave her the quasi-guy-nod as to say "what's up, friend?!" when she first made eye contact she was still bitter but when she saw my facial expression she relented and broke into a humungous, genuine smile.

* Alyssa made brownies for me. ok, so they weren't for me specifically. but I did have some and they were awesome and thoughtful.

* a friend let me borrow his car for the weekend.

* organized yet another small-scale social organization, serving the void I felt last trimester

* Jenna, the indoor, FIV-infected cat, came home after several days on the prowl

* sat and talked chiropractic for 3.5 hours in the same house BJ Palmer, the Developer of Chiropractic, did

* became inspired by Chris's vision of opening a free kids chiropractic clinic in Davenport

* had my mind blown by discussing what a subluxation is for 2 hours at Troxell with Johanna

* MLS started and USSF produced their first Referee Week In Review