Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are quite aware that this statement is not true. Claims for adverse reactions to vaccines must first go through the vaccine court (where compensation is generous and there is no requirement to prove causation unless it is a new, previously unknown reaction). However, if a claimant is not satisfied with the vaccine court decision it is possible to sue.
"The special master's decision may be appealed and petitioners who reject the decision of the court (or withdraw their petitions within certain timelines) may file a claim in civil court against the vaccine company and/or the health care provider who administered the vaccine."
Don't you think it is time to stop claiming that you cannot sue a vaccine maker?
Also, keep in mind that a reaction that happens to one person out of a million and not the other 999,999 who take it is not due to a defect in the vaccine. It is due to the physiology of the person who has the reaction. In the highly unlikely event that a vaccine were to be defective you would not have to go through vaccine court to sue the manufacturer. Suing over a reaction to a vaccine that is not defective would be like suing the farmer whose peanuts caused your kid to have an allergic reaction.
Right. Please post links to all the cases were vaccine manufacturers were sued openly in court.
The vaccine court was instituted in 1984 or 86, can't remember offhand. So in 30+ years, there must be a bunch of cases, right? Since people can freely sue vaccine manufacturer.
I think you’re looking for a conspiracy if you found the conversation to be “anti-Semitic” when people are just stating the known facts. I don’t even know how your propaganda blogger or yourself would come up with such a thing as “anti-vaxxers are anti-Semitic”. Maybe spend some time outside and get some fresh air because that kind of thinking is not based in reality and it’s really hateful.
Officially an outbreak is more then 3 cases.
Edit: I really hope you read the full article you linked to the NYT where you claimed that “anti-vaxxers are anti-Semitic”. It does not say what you think it does. It instead talks about people who are vaxxed fearing and treating Orthodox Jews badly because they assume that they are not vaccinated. That’s exactly the kind of thing that you are trying to do here to people who are for choice. Get people to hate those who may not vaccinate 100% on schedule or at all.
Yep that's the goal.
What happened to choice? My choice, your choice. Freedom of choice.
People are out of their minds with terror at the thought someone has a different perspective than they do.
Tetyana Obukhanych is an expert in her field. The article I posted form NVIC was heavily referenced. I realize that you prefer to get your info from hate filled propaganda blogs but I’m not sorry for sharing those links amongst the numerous scientific studies I’ve also shared over the years.
I think you might be the one who is buying in pseudoscience. Sad.
Obukhanych studied immunology and then went off the rails and denied everything she was taught. You cannot use her credentials to vet her as an expert when she herself says she does not "believe" what she was taught. Someone whose opinion - and that's all she's got, no science - disagrees with virtually every other person on the planet who has ever studied immunology is not "an expert in her field". She does no research on vaccines, has published nothing recently, and the handful of articles on which she was a co-author actually contradict what she says now. No, she is not an expert. Dr. Paul Offit is an expert.
You hate the blogs I have used because they are written by physicians who actually take care of patients. They are not "hate filled propaganda", though I will admit that they tend to get snarky. That is out of frustration with the persistent propagation of misinformation and outright lies by the anti-vax community.
The NVIC article lists a lot of references, but the interpretation of the references is misleading. The article claims vaccines cause autism, uses Wakefield's article as supporting evidence, and refuses to accept that that article was retracted because it was wrong and could not be replicated, not to mention that he was paid by lawyers to come up with something linking vaccines and autism.
It mentions vaccine court claims awarded for adverse reactions to measles vaccine but lies by omission when it fails to disclose that those claims are a few hundred out of millions of doses of measles vaccine administered. It describes a child with encephalopathy due to the vaccine but ignores the fact that one in 1000 children who have measles will have encephalitis from the infection.
It then uses the anti-vax "argument by package insert" meme, without revealing that the package insert lists every event that happened in clinical studies without regard to whether the vaccine caused it or not.
It is true that immunocompromised people should not get live virus vaccines, including measles vaccine, because even the weakened virus might cause a serious infection. That is why it is contraindicated for those patients..
All cases of subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE)are caused by wild virus. No cases have been identified as due to vaccine virus.
"SSPE is caused by the intracerebral spread of measles virus leading to a destruction of neurons. In all cases where brain tissue has been examined by molecular methods, wild type measles virus strains have been identified, never vaccine strains."
It lists info regarding excretion of vaccine virus and vaccine virus in breast milk but does not place that in clinical context, i.e. it does not cause harm.
It lists individual case reports, omitting the fact that those reports were made because the events described are rare.
It ends with:
This information is for educational purposes only and is not intended as medical advice.
Pseudoscience. Give just enough real info to sound "sciencey" but put a misleading spin on it.
MY EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
I graduated summa *** laude with a BA in Biochemistry and then earned a PhD in Immunology. Upon completion of my PhD research thesis (on immunologic memory) at The Rockefeller University in New York, I held postdoctoral research training appointments in prominent immunology laboratories affiliated with Harvard Medical School and Stanford University School of Medicine.
You're only being asked to live in a responsible manner and keep your little bundles of germs out of public places during disease outbreaks.
People are trying to take away all choice. Where have you been? Bundles of germs? Being unvaccinated does not mean one is harboring disease. You can’t be serious.
Obukhanych studied immunology and then went off the rails and denied everything she was taught. You cannot use her credentials to vet her as an expert when she herself says she does not "believe" what she was taught. Someone whose opinion - and that's all she's got, no science - disagrees with virtually every other person on the planet who has ever studied immunology is not "an expert in her field". She does no research on vaccines, has published nothing recently, and the handful of articles on which she was a co-author actually contradict what she says now. No, she is not an expert. Dr. Paul Offit is an expert.
You hate the blogs I have used because they are written by physicians who actually take care of patients. They are not "hate filled propaganda", though I will admit that they tend to get snarky. That is out of frustration with the persistent propagation of misinformation and outright lies by the anti-vax community.
The NVIC article lists a lot of references, but the interpretation of the references is misleading. The article claims vaccines cause autism, uses Wakefield's article as supporting evidence, and refuses to accept that that article was retracted because it was wrong and could not be replicated, not to mention that he was paid by lawyers to come up with something linking vaccines and autism.
It mentions vaccine court claims awarded for adverse reactions to measles vaccine but lies by omission when it fails to disclose that those claims are a few hundred out of millions of doses of measles vaccine administered. It describes a child with encephalopathy due to the vaccine but ignores the fact that one in 1000 children who have measles will have encephalitis from the infection.
It then uses the anti-vax "argument by package insert" meme, without revealing that the package insert lists every event that happened in clinical studies without regard to whether the vaccine caused it or not.
It is true that immunocompromised people should not get live virus vaccines, including measles vaccine, because even the weakened virus might cause a serious infection. That is why it is contraindicated for those patients..
All cases of subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE)are caused by wild virus. No cases have been identified as due to vaccine virus.
"SSPE is caused by the intracerebral spread of measles virus leading to a destruction of neurons. In all cases where brain tissue has been examined by molecular methods, wild type measles virus strains have been identified, never vaccine strains."
It lists info regarding excretion of vaccine virus and vaccine virus in breast milk but does not place that in clinical context, i.e. it does not cause harm.
It lists individual case reports, omitting the fact that those reports were made because the events described are rare.
It ends with:
This information is for educational purposes only and is not intended as medical advice.
Pseudoscience. Give just enough real info to sound "sciencey" but put a misleading spin on it.
Paul Offit for profit is credible? Lol! Just stop.
You’ve said some truly awful things about people who don’t vaccinate in your last few comments in this thread alone. If you can’t see that those comments were out of line then I can’t help you.
I am not asking you for help and you are not a moderator. I have spoken the truth about certain comments.
People are trying to take away all choice. Where have you been? Bundles of germs? Being unvaccinated does not mean one is harboring disease. You can’t be serious.
It was a hyperbolic play on words; that's all. Sorry it was above your head.
No one is trying to take away your "choice." Society just wants you to act like an adult and take responsibility for your choice.
You've done a lot of complaining about stereotypes concerning anti-vaxxers, yet here you are perpetuating them.
Right. Please post links to all the cases were vaccine manufacturers were sued openly in court.
The vaccine court was instituted in 1984 or 86, can't remember offhand. So in 30+ years, there must be a bunch of cases, right? Since people can freely sue vaccine manufacturer.
Let us know about them.
1986.
The number of cases is irrelevant. It is still not true that no one can sue a vaccine maker. It's right there on the vaccine court web site.
"The special master's decision may be appealed and petitioners who reject the decision of the court (or withdraw their petitions within certain timelines) may file a claim in civil court against the vaccine company and/or the health care provider who administered the vaccine."
You do have to go though the vaccine court first. If there are not "a bunch of cases" that implies that perhaps most people are satisfied with the vaccine court decisions. Keep in mind that the burden of proof is higher in civil court than vaccine court. Claimants risk getting nothing at all in civil court when their claim might have been approved in vaccine court. The very fact that vaccine court denied a claim would be a disincentive for an attorney to appeal it.
Some of the autism test cases in vaccine court were appealed.
"The Special Masters’ decisions in the three test cases were issued on February 12, 2009. In each of these cases, the decisions rejected the petitioners’ causation theories. All three of the Theory 1 test cases were appealed to regular judges of the Court of Federal Claims, and two were further appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In all of these appeals, the Special Masters’ decisions were upheld. No further appeals are possible for the Theory 1 cases."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
