My Photo
Buy Your Copy Now!
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 12/2003

« Veterans' Day 2014 | Main | Yom HaShoah 2015 »

Tuesday, March 03, 2015

Comments

Doritmi

Thank you for doing this work!

kgiffen

Thank you for this work. It puts potential adverse reactions in perspective in a meaningful way. Is there similar information about each specific vaccine for the period 1989 to 2005? It would also be helpful. Are you planning on doing a similar analysis for VAERS and VSD? Sorry to ask you for more work but this is really helpful.

Roger Kulp

I think this is a case of preaching to the choir.I knew about this,but not in the detail you lay it out here.Antivaxers already believe VAERS and NVICP are in the pockets of the vaccine makers,so what are you going to do.But that you want to bring it up sure is interesting. :(

Michael Polidori

No one knows how many injuries occur each year from vaccinations.
No one is actively surveilling.

VAERS is PASSIVE surveillance which is prone to underreporting.
The HHS and CDC admit "The term, underreporting refers to the fact that VAERS receives reports for only a small fraction of actual adverse events."

Based on that crude estimate of "small fraction" and using what any good statistics books defines as "small fraction" (1%-5%), anyone can extrapolate the VAERS reports for any year by any injury, type of vaccine or combination of vaccines.

Whatever numbers VAERS has for reports submitted, multiply by 20 to 100... that gives you a range for the crude estimate coming from the HHS/CDC (based on their "small fraction of actual adverse events" statement).

Add this to the equation - Most VAERS reports are submitted by healthcare professionals (as Merck recommends in the MMR package insert), lending more weight to the vaccine as the cause of the event, rather than mere coincidence.

I do those extrapolated estimates for you below for the year 2011.

Also in the MMR package insert the effectiveness for the Mumps portion is listed as ranging from 95% to 65% in Merck's clinical studies... Merck averages that out to 88%. Which, by "coincidence", is exactly the threshhold needed for herd immunity.

With recent mumps outbreaks reporting the fully vaccinated being the bulk of those with disease symptoms, I would think that Merck has fudged some numbers.

Do I favor vaccinating? Yes, but we have to completely revamp our vaccine production, recommendations, regulations and administration... this is to protect those who cannot be vaccinated and offer those kids and adults an IMPROVED partial protection of herd immunity.

SAFER vaccines would mean more people could be vaccinated resulting in greater herd immunity and better protection for those with immune problems (genetic or acquired).

Bitnun et al - 21 month old died of MMR strain measles infection in his brain 8.5 months after vaccination -
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10589903

MMR package insert -
http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/m/mmr_ii/mmr_ii_pi.pdf

HHS/CDC statement on under-reporting in VAERS -
http://vaers.hhs.gov/data/index

What do the VAERS numbers for 2011 (a below average year) look like before and after extrapolation?

In 2011 VAERS reports totalled 25,000.
3500 of those injuries were "serious", requiring medical intervention.
Deaths were 215 - ONE YEAR
http://medalerts.org/vaersdb/index.php

When the HHS/CDC derived 1-5% fractions are used, total reports, serious injuries & deaths ASSOCIATED with vaccine use are -

All reports - 500,000 to 2.5 million
Serious injuries - 70,000 to 350,000
Deaths - 4,300 to 21,500
ONE YEAR, just in the USA.

So vaccines are LINKED to over 21,000 DEATHS just in 2011, a below average for VAERS reports.
How can we get away with casually linking vaccinations to 21,000 deaths EVERY year... and NOT INVESTIGATE THIS???

To say nothing of the 70,000 to 350,000 SERIOUS INJURIES linked to ALL vaccines (most reports filed by healthcare professionals)!!!!

The BASIC issues surrounding safer and more effective vaccinations are not as complex as some people would have you believe... and getting the CDC and FDA to be truly independent of the drug and vaccine industry is the first place we should begin.

The last CDC head, Julie Gerberding, is being paid off for her rabid promotion of vaccines, including the useless Gardasil.
A year after she resigned her post in 2009, Julie was appointed Merck's Vaccine Division President (at around 5 times her generous CDC salary).

We should be SCREAMING at our representatives to fix this.
Most of those 4,300-21,500 HHS/CDC estimated vaccine-linked deaths are CHILDREN!!!

As always,
For the protection of children,
In the interests of truth and science,
Michael Polidori

Michael Polidori

And this one for Liz -
Liz has the correct definitions for adverse event and adverse reaction.

Now we should all read the MMR package insert and look for DIABETES -
http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/m/mmr_ii/mmr_ii_pi.pdf

DIABETES is listed as an adverse reaction to MMR vaccine.

I spoke to Merck and the FDA about this.
Merck explained they have the studies showing a causal link, but they are all INTERNAL and they would not release them to me.
Merck did point out that CDC's ACIP has stated that MMR is not causing diabetes... but I pointed out to the Merck representative that it doesn't matter what any outside body says, and ACIP steps outside the scope of their duties when contravening package insert information.

The representative agreed, and said she would look into the matter.
She also recommended I talk to the FDA about the studies, which she said they have.

The FDA told me to talk to the vaccine maker. Just for GP, I asked the FDA rep who the MMR vaccine maker was... she said I would have to find that out for myself.

Then I told her that Merck told me to contact the FDA about MMR causing diabetes and the studies Merck gave to the FDA.
The FDA rep said she had never heard of MMR causing diabetes and I would have to submit a Freedom Of Information Act Request for the FDA to search for the studies.

She told me it would cost me at least $250 whether or not the FDA found any information and whether or not the FDA released the information to me.

I would have thought the FDA would have already answered this question many times before. But if they have, they wouldn't share that info with me that day.

There are MANY "adverse reactions" listed in the MMR package insert.
What is very peculiar is that Merck doesn't list any risk factors, so that we can be informed when making decisions about vaccinating our kids.

We should ALL read the adverse reactions and see how "safe" this vaccine is.

As Always,
For the protection of children,
In the interests of truth and science,
Michael Polidori

Arabic Translator

The web is full of controversy regarding vaccines. Many refuse them and don't want their children vaccinated, while others say this is irresponsible and dangerosu for the child. I hear that vaccines are thought to cause autism in children, but i havent seen much evidence for it.

Chris

Package inserts are lawyer written screeds, and are as reliable as raw VAERS data.

"DIABETES is listed as an adverse reaction to MMR vaccine."

Yet the science actually says otherwise, which supercedes anything written by a lawyer:

Pediatrics. 2001 Dec;108(6):E112
Childhood vaccinations, vaccination timing, and risk of type 1 diabetes mellitus.

Mr. Polidor, again, if you have any evidence that the American MMR is more dangerous than measles, mumps, and rubella then post the PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers (not lawyers!).

The comments to this entry are closed.

Pages

What I'm Tweeting

    follow me on Twitter