This is what happens when you "pass kites" in prison...original note said "send me a cougar" and look what he got.

I am still in shock that he was looking for $20K for the loss of a cat!

This is a horrific story with a very tragic ending. I just hope and pray that this brings some closure to the family. Ironically I just saw the latest episode of Deadliest catch shows Jake in the area his father disappeared just looking for answers.

Unfortunate part of our penal system is that it is "us" the tax payers who also pay for it his at the cost of his freedom, ours is ~$40K/year.

I read this story with the thought that perhaps I would actually get some new information. Poorly written story...it went from a guy that bought some old liquor stores...to Costco...to Total Wine. I got lost in what the story's actual intent was.

At least they refrained from calling them "teabaggers"!

Ummm...welcome to the party, but what I am attempting to ask is why?...not trying to blindly defend either side...not buying into other rhetoric I am asking the questions neither side is bringing up. Yes KC population is ~2 million....but from Jan 1 2012 to Apr 1 2012 there was 100 (count them 100 CONFIRMED cases) of pertussis in KC. The study done on these confirmed cases resulted in the numbers I have provided. I am not over thinking them..I am not manipulating them...I am providing them as founded by KCHD. 100% of the persons with confirmed pertussis...of those 47 were found to be up to date (according to CDC regulations) on their immunizations...49 where not up to date (again not stating if they were unimmunized or have not had a booster) and 4 were unknown. These numbers to me are concerning whether or not you are for or against immunizations and for the Secretary of Health to publicly say it is the (paraphrasing here) unvaccinated kids is IMO misleading and borderline a scare tactic.
My only concern ever with vaccinations is the fact that we (the US medical community) so heavily vaccinate the babies under the age of 6 months...I have always welcomed questions from my patients and and more than willing to modify the vaccination schedule according to the individuals comfort...there actually is no conclusive evidence that defends the current schedule...it has been given and is accepted by enough to continue it.

Dr. Lara according to your sited source, which happened to be a CDC media release, not overly scientific, performed a study of 4000 children. (again ages and other demographic information withheld)..and concluded the vaccination to be 88.7% effective for kids between 4 and 10. From the digging I have done this was not a publish research article...but rather a general research study performed by the CDC.

What does this mean? No rules...no parameters...nothing but what the CDC publishes...do I think they are attempting to mislead? No...but do I think it is iron clad? again No...So here we sit at an impasse (I guess by the continued postings) of what I have been saying from my original post. The Sec of Health has come out and made the statement that "...
unvaccinated children and kids who didn't get all of their shots are contributing to the outbreak, and many adults who contract the disease don't realize they have it." Many on this thread have called those who have not vaccinated "idiots" yet our own Sec of Health can public make this statement without any scientific backing? PLEASE!

The link you gave was to a media release from the CDC regarding the efficacy of the pertussis vaccination a fact I have never refuted, but rather questioned what the numbers would be for those outside of the given age range. You argue the definition of statistics and "failure rate" yet use a media release as your defending article?...again it is you that is confused or perhaps overly persuaded by the mainstream media.

...again, as I have pointed out, I have never made the generalization that the vaccination is only 50% effective...what I have said is that in 100% of the confirmed cases they are finding a 47% failure rate....why? Adding in more numbers would change things but again as is the case with statistics one could manipulates the numbers all day to get the numbers they want. These numbers are, yes, crude at best..but still present a interesting result and IMO should be further examined. What everyone on this thread is so h**l bent on stating is that anyone who doesn't get vaccinated is an idiot...What I am looking for is more information...something it appears a high-gloss media release from the CDC has more than sufficiently provided for you.

What I am doing is using the information that was available at the time. I am not making any changes not making any assumptions. The numbers in the article are yes lower, but in that time frame that is what was there. To say that they have no significance because it is only a study of 100 people (100% of the confirmed infected population) and that the CDC studied 4000 cases (again not stating if it was demographic specific, blind study, of how these cases were selected) is in accurate as well. I did not say that the vaccination is only 50% effective, but the finding thus far are seeing a 50% effective rate again in 100% of the confirmed infected population. I am focusing on this because this is what the KCHD has found and released. The only unknown variable that would have any consequence here would be the overall number of vaccinated / un-vaccinated ratio in the general population...but then you would have to compare and contrast the number of these that have had exposure to the virus and those that did not...and it doesn't appear the CDC study did this.