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.
Bacterial meningitis was not 100% confirmed by autopsy. The Former Chief Medical Examiner testified and stated that she thought viral meningitis was much more likely then bacterial based on the symptoms and the autopsy report. The experts disagreed. So no, vaccines are not the issue in this case. The case is about whether or not the parents sought care early enough.
Thankfully, enough people on this thread can see the reality of that situation, whatever their personal views on vaccination are. It is not the vaccination status, but the Negligence afterwards for not seeking medical treatment that is the legal issue.
Kuddos, to those posters who can see that the issue is Neglect of a very sick/dying child, not solely an issue of an unvaccinated one, which "might" have been prevented.
There are many poster on here who seem to think that any parent, or for that matter even adults, who do not get their vaccinations, should be prosecuted purely from that fact alone; whether that child get sick or not.
There are plenty of illnesses a child can get for which there is NO vaccine at all. Strep is one. However, once the child is very, very ill and the parents do not seek immediate medical attention, that is where the Negligence factor comes in. It is not the vaccinated status, but what happened after the fact.
Should parents also be prosecuted for not giving their children (and themselves) Flu shots too? Plenty don't. If the child only has mild symptoms, should parents be charged also for not seeking medical care? There is a MAJOR difference if that "unvaccinated" child has a very high temperature, having convulsions, and the parents do not seek medical treatment immediately. It is not the Negligence for refusing the Flu Shot, but refusing medical treatment afterwards.
There have been a few lawsuits with "Vegan" mothers giving their babies vegetable concoctions where babies have died. Should they have been prosecuted for not Breastfeeding them? Of course, not. Should they have been prosecuted for not giving them Cow's Milk Formula. Again, NO. Soy Formulas are a perfectly acceptable and safe alternative. The "woo" alternative which will not kill that infant.
Here is one for Suzy Q, If a pregnant woman refuses to get a Tdap (less than 50% do today), does not demand that every person who comes into with her Newborn gets a Tdap (do that HOW?), should she be prosecuted for refusing Tdap herself if her Newborn catches Whooping Cough and dies. Should every unvaccinated person who came into contact with that Newborn also be prosecuted? I would say No, UNLESS that Newborn's Mother does not seek medical treatment for her baby with Whooping Cough right away.
It is the AFTER the fact for which these prosecutions occur, not the BEFORE the fact.
Most of us have a problem with waiting until a child is sick with a preventable disease to do something about it.
Frankly, the idea of letting an infant get whooping cough by not vaccinating the mother and those who will be in contact with the baby is nauseating. It's child abuse. Whooping cough is not just a few days of fever, sniffles and crankiness. The cough lasts for weeks, and although the bacteria causing it can be treated with antibiotics there is no treatment for the cough, which can cause young babies to stop breathing. The infant is going to suffer, and suffer a lot, even if taken to a doctor "right away".
Unfortunately, there are no penalties for refusing to protect your child from whooping cough and other infectious diseases. The idea of denying certain tax advantages to those who do not vaccinate is appealing to me.
What puzzles me is why you do not want others to be vaccinated. If you are not going to vaccinate yourself you should want everyone else to do so.
By the way, no one here has said anything about prosecuting everyone who does not vaccinate. As I have said before, your attempt at snark is weak and does not help your argument, but when that's all you've got in the way of argument I guess it's the best you can do.
Bacterial meningitis was not 100% confirmed by autopsy. The Former Chief Medical Examiner testified and stated that she thought viral meningitis was much more likely then bacterial based on the symptoms and the autopsy report. The experts disagreed. So no, vaccines are not the issue in this case. The case is about whether or not the parents sought care early enough.
There was only one "expert" who disagreed, the one hired by the family and who is suing over the loss of her job as ME. For someone who thinks every scientific study financed by industry is absolutely 100% biased, it is amusing that you cannot see the obvious conflict of interest of the former ME. The defense attorney was stupid to even consider using her. The physicians taking care of the baby diagnosed bacterial meningitis and there were autopsy findings consistent with it, including a test that found Hib.
Ultimately, Ezekiel might be alive and well if he had been vaccinated against Hib.
There was only one "expert" who disagreed, the one hired by the family and who is suing over the loss of her job as ME. For someone who thinks every scientific study financed by industry is absolutely 100% biased, it is amusing that you cannot see the obvious conflict of interest of the former ME. The defense attorney was stupid to even consider using her. The physicians taking care of the baby diagnosed bacterial meningitis and there were autopsy findings consistent with it, including a test that found Hib.
Ultimately, Ezekiel might be alive and well if he had been vaccinated against Hib.
The one employed by the government which was the prosecution gave his opinion that the boy died due to bacterial meningitis. It was not however, 100% conclusive nor was there any evidence that it was a VP strain. The former Chief Medical Examiner with the stellar performance record who's contract was not renewed after she blew the whistle regarding the government intervening in the results of death investigations, disagreed with the prosecutions' witness. The former medical examiners was not "hired" although she testified for the defense. In her testimony she concluded evidence from the autopsy that the prosecutions expert did not include because it did not support his case. Her opinion was that the boy had viral meningitis, which stemmed from enterovirus (which was found in his nose and throat) and that he died from lack of oxygen which was in part the parents fault and in part the ambulance's fault (owned by the prosecution) for not being properly equipped.
The experts are not in agreement. You cannot see the obvious conflict of interest for the prosecution's witnesses and experts. He works for the crown and he works in a place that has been accused of corruption. I see no conflict of interest with the former chief. She did what was right and she lost her job because of it. She is a woman who has a proven track record of putting her ethics first.
We've been over this before though and I am sure you'll be back to argue these points and spin the situation so that you can make this about vaccines even when it's clearly not. But I will include the article for those who would like to read what came out during her testimony.
Dr. Sauvageau concludes the meningitis found at autopsy is likely viral meningitis, and supported her assertion with science. The samples taken of the infected meninges of the brain (pus) revealed an abundance of lymphocytes and other white blood cells associated with viral infections. The usual white blood cell associated with bacterial infections is neutrophils. There wasn't an abundance of neutrophils as Dr. Adeagbo had reported. There were no bacteria identified to conclude Bacterial Meningitis.
Here is a quote from you in this thread: Canadian Couple treats son for Menegitis with Maple syrup
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 What was the virus that caused the meningitis? The bacterial organism was not identified because the child was moribund on arrival at the hospital. No spinal tap was done. The doctor who saw him states in her examination that Ezekiel was so fragile she did not even want to turn him over to examine his back.
So you said there that the bacterial organism was not identified and explained why but are now saying it was confirmed as HIB? Not true.
Most of us have a problem with waiting until a child is sick with a preventable disease to do something about it.
Frankly, the idea of letting an infant get whooping cough by not vaccinating the mother and those who will be in contact with the baby is nauseating. It's child abuse. Whooping cough is not just a few days of fever, sniffles and crankiness. The cough lasts for weeks, and although the bacteria causing it can be treated with antibiotics there is no treatment for the cough, which can cause young babies to stop breathing. The infant is going to suffer, and suffer a lot, even if taken to a doctor "right away".
Unfortunately, there are no penalties for refusing to protect your child from whooping cough and other infectious diseases. The idea of denying certain tax advantages to those who do not vaccinate is appealing to me.
What puzzles me is why you do not want others to be vaccinated. If you are not going to vaccinate yourself you should want everyone else to do so.
By the way, no one here has said anything about prosecuting everyone who does not vaccinate. As I have said before, your attempt at snark is weak and does not help your argument, but when that's all you've got in the way of argument I guess it's the best you can do.
Ah, Suzy, why should I want others to protect Elderly me from things like measles, mumps., etc. when I have immunity not from vaccinations, but from the diseases? I am not a walking unvaccinated "cesspool" for these diseases because my generation had them, have lifetime immunity, so cannot give them to anyone else. Do you seriously think I fear some unvaccinated child with Measles or Chicken Pox killing Elderly Unvaccinated me? ROFL Since you are about my age, I am sure you have gotten all these vaccinations for these you yourself, including for those diseases you had as a child before the vaccine ever was invented? That would not surprise me at all.Have you demanded your HPV vaccination too being over 26 years old?
Again, YOUR people fear the unvaccinated, including those with naturally acquired immunity too. The ONLY path to immunity is from a vaccination. I would bet that your followers would also advocate all the people who got Measles from the Disney Outbreak should have learned their lesson and now go out and their MMR vaccination? Hey, Suzy, go ahead and say that is TRUE and should be done because vaccinations are the ONLY prevention.
I know you don't like we Seniors not pushing your program. Do not fit your "profile" of who Anti Vaxxers are. FYI, two weeks from Monday I am going with my daughter to take BOTH her 3 month old and 2 year old for their vaccinations. HER choice and not Granny's. It is also HER choice and MINE to not vaccinate our Adult selves for what you think we should have.
Yes mm, he was joking. He was well known for his jokes, which were sometimes crude.
Think for a minute. If he really did invent HIV, do you think he would admit it in front of a camera? The man was not stupid.
You're the one asking that straw man question, not anyone else here. C-D readers see for themselves Hilleman isn't making any "jokes" in this clip. Not about SV40, "monkey kidney virus," not about leukemia virus, or anything else.
You're a little rattled that people like Edward Shorter and his cohort are laughing hysterically at the news Merck's Hilleman imparts here:
Why didn't adult daughter (19-26?) go out and get the vaccination herself if Mom didn't vaccinate her as a teen? If adult dying daughter is in her 30's, it did not exist when she was a teen.
At least know the timeline of these vaccines.
True. The HPV vaccination came out in 2006. So children, both girls and boys, can start the series of vaccinations preferably before they become sexually active.
1. Example of how folks who don't vaccinate can pass their VPD on to someone too young to be fully vaccinated or on to their fellow non-vaxed.
2. Example of what can happen when nut jobs avoid getting their sick child proper medical attention (for weeks) due to their "belief system". Whatever it is.
Last edited by Informed Info; 05-03-2016 at 08:30 PM..
The one employed by the government which was the prosecution gave his opinion that the boy died due to bacterial meningitis. It was not however, 100% conclusive nor was there any evidence that it was a VP strain. The former Chief Medical Examiner with the stellar performance record who's contract was not renewed after she blew the whistle regarding the government intervening in the results of death investigations, disagreed with the prosecutions' witness. The former medical examiners was not "hired" although she testified for the defense. In her testimony she concluded evidence from the autopsy that the prosecutions expert did not include because it did not support his case. Her opinion was that the boy had viral meningitis, which stemmed from enterovirus (which was found in his nose and throat) and that he died from lack of oxygen which was in part the parents fault and in part the ambulance's fault (owned by the prosecution) for not being properly equipped.
The experts are not in agreement. You cannot see the obvious conflict of interest for the prosecution's witnesses and experts. He works for the crown and he works in a place that has been accused of corruption. I see no conflict of interest with the former chief. She did what was right and she lost her job because of it. She is a woman who has a proven track record of putting her ethics first.
We've been over this before though and I am sure you'll be back to argue these points and spin the situation so that you can make this about vaccines even when it's clearly not. But I will include the article for those who would like to read what came out during her testimony.
The former ME is the only "expert" who disagrees. The pediatric intensive care expert who treated Ezekiel also diagnosed bacterial meningitis. You can continue to support the fired ME. The jury obviously did not believe her.
The current ME has no conflict of interest. He does not have a (Canadian) $5 million lawsuit at stake. He gets paid the same no matter what the verdict is.
Quote:
Here is a quote from you in this thread: Canadian Couple treats son for Menegitis with Maple syrup
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010
What was the virus that caused the meningitis? The bacterial organism was not identified because the child was moribund on arrival at the hospital. No spinal tap was done. The doctor who saw him states in her examination that Ezekiel was so fragile she did not even want to turn him over to examine his back.
I am not sure what your point is. The question about what the virus was was directed to you and was made before I found the results of the Hib test.
Quote:
So you said there that the bacterial organism was not identified and explained why but are now saying it was confirmed as HIB? Not true.
The test was done and found Hib. The defense tried to discredit the test. The jury did not buy it.
Why aren't docs found guilty for injecting Thermosol (Mercury), a known neurotoxin, into millions of babies?
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.
