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.
One thing that concerns me is that 30, 000 reports of side effects with 10 to 15 percent of those being serious including over 100 deaths annually due to vaccines are being reported to the CDCs monitoring system in the U.S. yet they can't seem to find anything wrong. Weighing out that risk with the zero people who've died from measles here in the last 10 years seems counter productive. I believe to take risks like this it needs to be a choice.
Are the people you are mandating allowed to claim your hurting their children? Or is this one sided? What kind of safety measures are in place with the mandates to ensure more kids don't suffer side effects worse than the chance of disease they have in America? It seems like a high number of side effects for them all to be dismissed as other random coincidences.
If mandates are in full swing thanks to people who are pumping this idea of forced is better than choice, what kind of safety procedures do you have in place? What if kids die?
I think most of the criticism of the numbers in VAERS comes from a general lack of understanding as to how those numbers are actually generated. 100 deaths reported in VAERS doesn't mean that 100 people died as a result of vaccination. If I get a vaccination for the flu today and I die from a stroke in a week, that could be entered into VAERS for example.
Anyone and everyone can file reports to VAERS, you could go ahead and report that the flu vaccine you received yesterday made you grow two new arms overnight. You don't even have to be in the U.S. either.
Please report all significant adverse events that occur after vaccination of adults and children, even if you are not sure whether the vaccine caused the adverse event.
Here's a simple definition.
Quote:
A report to VAERS generally does not prove that the identified vaccine(s) caused the adverse event described. It only confirms that the reported event occurred sometime after vaccine was given. No proof that the event was caused by the vaccine is required in order for VAERS to accept the report. VAERS accepts all reports without judging whether the event was caused by the vaccine.
What usually happens after one of these report is that a follow-up is done to determine what the source of the injury was, the problem is that people simply look at the gross reports and not any further to actually determine if a vaccine was in fact responsible.
Also the definition of VAERS as provided by the CDC.
Quote:
"When evaluating data from VAERS, it is important to note that for any reported event, no cause-and-effect relationship has been established. Reports of all possible associations between vaccines and adverse events (possible side effects) are filed in VAERS. Therefore, VAERS collects data on any adverse event following vaccination, be it coincidental or truly caused by a vaccine. The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event."
"There’s absolutely no linkage between cause and effect," Catherine Troisi, an infectious disease epidemiologist at the University of Texas Health Science Center, told us. "If I received the flu vaccine yesterday and got hit by a bus today, I could enter that into VAERS. But I doubt anyone would say the vaccine caused the accident. VAERS is a great reporting system to look for trends that would trigger further studies – but it does not pretend to prove that the conditions entered are related to vaccination."
The system is set up to be a tool for researchers, doctors and scientists to look for trends in vaccination, to look for things to study and gather further insight on but you can't take it at face value and claim that everything in there is directly linked to vaccination.
Continuing with VAERS, one doctor humorously submitted a report that a vaccine he received had caused him to turn into The Incredible Hulk and it actually did end up in the system.
Quote:
An oft-quoted example of just how unreliable VAERS can be can be found from James R. Laidler, MD. Dr. Laidler submitted a report to VAERS that the influenza vaccine had turned him into The Hulk. The report was accepted and posted to the database. As Dr. Laidler reports, he was contacted by a representative because the AE was so unusual. They asked his permission to delete the report from the database, after discussing it with him, and he agreed. Had he not given his permission, the report would still be in the VAERS database.
Other analysis done on the system noted a dramatic spike in autism-related claims due to vaccination, going up incredibly in the early 2000's. Basically as soon as the whole Wakefield and Jenny McCarthy bandwagon started up, the reports of vaccination-linked autism skyrocketed too, especially claims linked to litigation.
In the study, the authors, did something incredibly simple that no one had done before. They took data from the VAERS database from 1990 through 2003 and imported it into SAS data files for analysis. Then they searched the database using key words to look for reports associated with litigation, particularly with regards to autism. They searched for records containing “thimerosal,” “mercury,” or “autism” in their fields, especially when coupled with terms like “lawyer,” “legal,” “attorney,” or “litigate,” while excluding records containing “legal” coupled with the term “guardian” that did not relate to litigation. They also excluded cases related to well characterized allergic reactions to thimerosal. Finally, they compared records from nonlitigation cases to those from litigation cases regarding symptomatology reported.
Not surprisingly, beginning in 2001, they noted a dramatic increase in the number of non-Lyme disease VAERS reports related to litigation, from only 7 in 2000 to 213 in 2002 and 108 in 2003. (They attributed the decline in 2003 reports to processing delays in creating public use files.) Next, they examined symptom sets related to symptom sets. For autism, they observed a dramatic increase in the percentage of litigation-related reports from 0% of the reports related to litigation in 1999 to over one-third (35%) in 2002. For records mentioning thimerosal that weren’t related to allergic reactions, the rise was even more dramatic, from 0% of these reports related to litigation in 2000 to 87% in 2002.
This study once again hammers home the inherent unreliability of the VAERS database as a tool for longitudinal studies of the rate of vaccine-related complications. Not only can anyone access it and enter reports without verification, but there is no denominator, which means testing for causality is not even possible with VAERS. Worse, as the authors point out, the rate of reporting of autism as a complication of vaccines is easily influenced by numerous external factors. For example, the authors pointed out that 75% of the autism reports in VAERS between 1990 and 2001 were received not long after the the publication of the the now utterly and completely discredited Wakefield study that claimed to find a link between the MMR vaccine and autism and that 2/3 were received after the American Academy of Pediatrics recommendation that thimerosal be removed from vaccines. And it’s not just autism. For example, in 2002, half the reports to the VAERS database about mental retardation were related to litigation. The authors conclude:
The findings raise an important question about possible misuse of VAERS in the litigation process. When a study is being used to influence important public health decisions, it is important that reviewers and editors fully understand how the data were constructed and their source. Until now, no one has described the magnitude of litigation-related reporting and how these reports might potentially change the results of studies using VAERS data. Longitudinal studies using VAERS data should explicitly take into account changes in reporting sources like the one described in this article. It is impossible to determine the effect of these reports on existing analyses because the existing literature does not describe carefully inclusion and exclusion criteria. For the conditions reviewed here, it is apparent that a large enough percentage of reports are being made related to litigation that failure to exclude these will seriously skew trends. This is important for vaccines that contain thimerosal, and specifically for the MMR vaccine because of the controversy surrounding its relationship to autism. It therefore is incumbent on the authors who use VAERS data to provide detailed methods sections that describe their inclusion and exclusion criteria. To that end, we are making our SAS code available to interested parties. It is not sufficient simply to reference extraction of the VAERS data set.
Quote:
Computer programmers have a famous saying: “Garbage in, garbage out,” meaning that the quality of the results of an analysis can be no better than the quality of the data upon which the analysis relies. Without correction for factors such as the ones for which the authors of this study tried to correct, the VAERS database definitely qualifies as “garbage in” when used to try to follow the incidence of vaccine-related complications over time. The VAERS database may serve a very important function as an early warning system for potential vaccine-related complications that were not picked up in initial clinical trials used to gain FDA approval, but it was never intended to be a means of following the rates of these complications in a longitudinal fashion.
VAERS is kind of a flea market, anyone can report anything, anyone can claim anything and the only way to verify what is what is through additional research and yet even if that research indicates absolutely no link to vaccination, the initial reports remain intact. Thus taking the VAERS gross numbers at face value would simply be erroneous without verifying what percentage of reports are and are not legitimate.
One thing that concerns me is that 30, 000 reports of side effects with 10 to 15 percent of those being serious including over 100 deaths annually due to vaccines are being reported to the CDCs monitoring system in the U.S. yet they can't seem to find anything wrong. Weighing out that risk with the zero people who've died from measles here in the last 10 years seems counter productive. I believe to take risks like this it needs to be a choice.
Are the people you are mandating allowed to claim your hurting their children? Or is this one sided? What kind of safety measures are in place with the mandates to ensure more kids don't suffer side effects worse than the chance of disease they have in America? It seems like a high number of side effects for them all to be dismissed as other random coincidences.
If mandates are in full swing thanks to people who are pumping this idea of forced is better than choice, what kind of safety procedures do you have in place? What if kids die?
Juram has written you a good reply on the reliability of VAERS reports. VAERS doesn't screen the validity of occurrences or establish whether they were really caused by vaccination. It is simply a database of those who report a problem or a complication with a vaccine for any reason. The connection that is reported is purely scientific. Even if we took that figure of 100 deaths that are allegedly connected to vaccines and assumed every one of those deaths was indeed the result of a vaccine it still wouldn't begin to justify stopping or limiting vaccination. The measles, alone, accounted for five times that many deaths before introduction of the measles vaccine. Serious complications from measles accounted for 18,000 hospitalizations a year before the vaccine. This is greater than 10 to 15 percent of 30,000 VAERS reports. Again, many of these reports very likely have no connection to vaccination at all. They are more likely coincidences. They are reported generally because of their temporal relationship to when the immunization was given.
No one contends vaccines are without side effects. The contention is simply that the benefits of vaccination vastly outweigh any harm done by vaccines. My example above demonstrates that pretty clearly.
You ask "What kind of safety measures are in place with mandates to ensure more kids don't suffer side effects worse than the chance of disease they have in America?"
The safety measures that exist are these:
1. The FDA will not approve any vaccination for production or sale unless that vaccine passes a three stage process of tests. The first test on human volunteers is simply to test whether a vaccine is toxic. If the vaccine passes this test a second test for effectiveness is performed on a small group of volunteers. If, and only if, this test establishes the vaccines effectiveness, a final test is done on a large group of typically over 1000 volunteers. Again, the results of the test with the larger group must document the effectiveness of the vaccine.
2. The CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices must agree to add a vaccine to its list of recommended vaccines. The committee is composed of scientists, those in the medical arts, and a lay citizen.
3. If one believes a vaccine has still injured their child, one may pursue litigation in the Vaccine Court.
I suppose additional safety measures could be adopted, but those would delay the introduction of new vaccines and much of the benefit of those vaccines might be lost over undue fears of the potential risk.
Not everything in life lends itself to a "choice". We don't get to choose whether to obey speed limits or traffic lights. We don't get to choose whether or not we want to take illegal drugs or narcotics. If we are able bodied, we don't get to choose to never work. One who takes a vaccine takes it for himself and for the community both.
Here example of a case that was counted as a death linked to Gardasil in VAERS.
Quote:
“Information has been received from a nurse practitioner concerning a patient’s nephew, a 17-year-old male consumer who she "thought" was vaccinated with a dose of GARDASIL (lot number not provided) in November 2010. The nurse practitioner stated that two weeks after the patient received the dose of GARDASIL, approximately November 2010 (also reported as "two weeks ago" on approximately 01-APR-2011), the patient died of sudden cardiac death on the lacrosse field. Unspecified medical treatment was given. It was unspecified if any lab diagnostic test were performed. The cause of death was sudden cardiac death. Sudden cardiac death was considered to be immediately life-threatening and disabling by the reporting nurse practitioner. Additional information has been requested.”
More examples of deaths that were linked to vaccines in the VAERS database.
Quote:
Information has been received from a website concerning thousands of other young girls who on unspecified dates were vaccinated with a dose of GARDASIL (lot # not reported). The girls have experienced "life-destroying side effects" or death following their HPV vaccines. Life-destroying side effects were considered to be immediately life-threatening. This is one of two reports from the same source. No further information is available.
Quote:
None known -suicidal ideation denied at visit 4/26 - known chronic depression she elected to stop her medications when she turned 18. Committed suicide 04/28/11. Hung herself.
Quote:
A consumer reported that he/she read an internet concerning a female who on an unspecified date was vaccinated with a dose of GARDASIL (lot # , dose and route not reported). On an unspecified date, the patient died of "clot blood" eight hours after vaccination. This is one of several reports from the same source. No further information is available.
Quote:
A consumer reported that he/she obtained the information from internet concerning a 17 years old woman who in June 2007 was vaccinated the first dose of GARDASIL. In the afternoon of the same day, in June 2007, the patient was found unconscious (without signs of life) by her mother. The doctor from the emergency crew attempted resuscitation, but without success. The cause of death was unspecified. This is one of several reports received from the same source. No further information is available.
Quote:
Information has been received from a consumer concerning her daughter who was vaccinated with GARDASIL. The consumer reported that he had nothing to live for because GARDASIL killed his daughter. It was unknown if the patient sought medical attention. No further information is available.
Quote:
Found dead in bed in a.m. by family. Pathologist stated cause of death as consistent with cardiac insufficiency, due to cardiac arrhythmia, due to probable early cardiomyopathy. Child Death Review Team felt this death was consistent with a diagnosis of sudden cardiac death.
Quote:
Relapse of ITP: 18 year-old female with immune thrombocytopenic purpura, diagnosed in 1995 and in remission from 2004 to 2011 following treatment with Rituximab. Relapse in early April, 2011, followed administration of Gardasil vaccine on 10-26-10 and 1-7-11. Relapse of ITP led eventually to death from intracranial hemorrhage on 07/06/2011.
Quote:
Information has been received from a physician concerning a 19 year old female who on an unspecified date was vaccinated with a dose of GARDASIL (lot # not reported, dose number unknown). Approximately a year and a half prior to developing the onset of rapidly progressive ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis). It was unknown if the patient was on any medications or had concomitant vaccinations. Patient died within a year of symptom onset. Patient was found to be positive for a genetic mutation (FUS) recently recognized as associated with early-onset, rapidly progressive ALS. Her parents also had the mutation. It was not reported if the patient had sought medical attention. This is one of several reports received from the same source. Additional information has been requested.
Quote:
Information has been received from a receptionist of the registered nurse, concerning rumor going around that a 19 years old girl who on an unspecified date received the first shot of GARDASIL (dose, route and lot # not reported), developed a brain infection, and passed away. The patient died this summer, June/July 2012. The reporter was not even 100% sure if the patient had had the GARDASIL shot because the nurses found that there was no record of the patient in local registry for GARDASIL patients. They were assuming that she was vaccinated out of state because she had joined the military (unspecified). The patient might have gotten vaccinated by the military. Another part of the rumor that was going around was that "the girl was fine one day, not the next, and it must be the GARDASIL shot that did this". The time from receiving the GARDASIL shot to the time of her death was unknown. It was unknown if she had any adverse experience from the GARDASIL or if it caused the brain infection. Additional information has been requested.
Quote:
This spontaneous report as received from a consumer, who learned from a foreign radio channel of fatal cases after GARDASIL vaccination in one country (1210USA012211) and a second country (2 fatal cases, 1210HKG011628) and in a third country (3 fatal cases, this case). The reporter himself experienced serious adverse events (1210HKG011385). This report refers to three patients of unknown age. The patients were vaccinated with GARDASIL (date and route of administration not provided). No other co-suspects were reported. No concomitant medications were reported. On an unknown date the patients died. No details for death are available. The relatedness for death is unknown for GARDASIL. Additional information has been requested.
Quote:
This spontaneous report as received via social media refers to a female patient of unknown age, who on an unspecified date was vaccinated with a dose of GARDASIL (dose and lot number were not reported). No other co-suspects were reported. No concomitant medications were reported. The other reported that the patient died after vaccination. The relatedness for the adverse event was unknown for GARDASIL. This is one of the several reports from the same source. Additional information is not expected.
Quote:
: Information has been received from a consumer via a website concerning a female patient of unknown age. On an unknown date, the patient was vaccinated with GARDASIL (lot#, dose, and route not provided). On unknown date, the patient died in her bath. The patient had been so healthy prior to the vaccination. The post mortem result stated a cause of death unknown. Additional information has been requested.
Quote:
This spontaneous report was received from a registered nurse who read about the life story of a patient of unknown age on a website. On an unknown date the patient was vaccinated with GARDASIL, (dose, lot no. route not reported). On an unknown date the patient died from an unspecified cause. This is one of reports received from the same source. Additional information is not expected.
Quote:
Sudden death. He was perfectly healthy. This vaccination is the only thing I can think of that would have caused this. Everything else in his life was normal, the same.
That rate is in addition to the medical exemptions, the trend is increasing, and the exemptions are clustered, making some communities very vulnerable to outbreaks.
That's what public health officials are concerned about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead
Who can we blame for hurting these babies?
I don't know. How do you know any were actually harmed by vaccines? Can you link to peer reviewed case reports documenting that vaccines harmed any of them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juram
Anyone and everyone can file reports to VAERS, you could go ahead and report that the flu vaccine you received yesterday made you grow two new arms overnight.
Someone sent in a report that the flu vaccine turned him into the Incredible Hulk. An investigator had to have the permission of the person who made the report to remove it from VAERS. Another reported that a vaccine turned his daughter into Superwoman. The latter reporter is not even in the US.
That rate is in addition to the medical exemptions, the trend is increasing, and the exemptions are clustered, making some communities very vulnerable to outbreaks.
That's what public health officials are concerned about.
I don't know. How do you know any were actually harmed by vaccines? Can you link to peer reviewed case reports documenting that vaccines harmed any of them?
Someone sent in a report that the flu vaccine turned him into the Incredible Hulk. An investigator had to have the permission of the person who made the report to remove it from VAERS. Another reported that a vaccine turned his daughter into Superwoman. The latter reporter is not even in the US.
People report such things as "I saw on tv/read on the internet/ heard from my third cousin's brother in law that Gardasil has killed 131 girls".
The same alleged injury (found on the internet) gets reported multiple times.
Some reports include no information that would enable an investigator to actually do an investigation.
Additionally, some of the reports appear to be drive-by's where they specifically request NOT to be further contacted, meaning there is absolutely no way to verify the veracity of what the reporter is claiming.
So, out of 30000 reports a year, hundreds of serious injuries, hundreds of deaths over the last ten years. Enough to start a National Vaccine injury vaccination program. You're convincing argument is none of it is true? Or, it's worth it to kill and injure that many to save a few? Or, that its your choice to make and out weigh the risks vs benefits for your own chil...........oh wait, not that one right? That last one has been eliminated.
I guess will just stay with all of the reports are coincidence. You like that one.
So, out of 30000 reports a year, hundreds of serious injuries, hundreds of deaths over the last ten years. Enough to start a National Vaccine injury vaccination program. You're convincing argument is none of it is true? Or, it's worth it to kill and injure that many to save a few? Or, that its your choice to make and out weigh the risks vs benefits for your own chil...........oh wait, not that one right? That last one has been eliminated.
Poppy, every one of those VAERS reports gets investigated - if there is enough info in the report to allow it. Every. Single. One.
The deaths being reported are just overwhelmingly not due to vaccines. When the investigation is done, it is most often determined that the vaccine is not responsible. Despite those who believe there is some insane conspiracy to hide complications from vaccines, it does not work that way. Doctors really do not want to be using bad vaccines. Severe adverse reactions to vaccines are so rare most doctors will never see one.
If you are basing a decision not to vaccinate on VAERS, you are making a decision based on ignorance.
The vaccine injury program compensates people who have adverse effects that can possibly have been caused by vaccines. It is in response to a litigation problem that could have made vaccines unaffordable or even totally unavailable. Vaccines do cause adverse effects. They are just very, very rare. VAERS reports do not change that fact.
No, vaccines are not killing hundreds of people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead
That's a lot of compensation for false reports. They're so nice. Of course you can't link any of it to the vaccine, but we will pay you anyway. Yea, right.
No, that is very generous compensation for what might be adverse effects due to vaccines. It is not necessary to conclusively prove the vaccine caused the adverse effect.
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.
