It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

CDC’s VAERS Data...Multiple Vaccines Given Same Time Increase Morbidity & Mortality N Children

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 01:07 AM
link   
From:
ACTIVIST POST
.
By Catherine Frompovich
9 July 2016

FULL TITLE:

CDC’s VAERS Data Confirm Multiple Vaccines Given at Same Time Increase Morbidity and Mortality in Children

.
www.activistpost.com...
.
.


Kudos to medical research journalist Neil Z Miller on the publication of an apparent retrospective analysis of CDC VAERS data titled “Combining Childhood Vaccines at One Visit Is Not Safe” published in the Journal of American Physicians Surgeons Volume 21, Number 2, Summer 2016. [emphases in original]
.
[ORIGINAL PDF SOURCE LINK:
www.jpands.org...]
. . .
According to Miller, “Since 1990, the VAERS database has received more than 500,000 reports of suspected adverse reactions to vaccines.” That’s over half a million and vaccines are considered safe?
.
. . .
Let's take a closer look at what Miler found




Vaccine Doses and Hospitalizations
.
Of the 38,801 VAERS reports that we analyzed, 969 infants received two vaccine doses prior to the adverse event and 107 of those infants were hospitalized: a hospitalization rate of 11%. Of 1,959 infants who received three vaccine doses prior to the adverse event, 243 of them required hospitalization: 12.4%. For four doses, 561 of 3,909 infants were hospitalized: 14.4%. Notice the emerging pattern: Infants who had an adverse event reported to VAERS were more likely to require hospitalization when they received three vaccine doses instead of two, or four vaccine doses instead of three.
.
The pattern continues: Of 10,114 infants who received five vaccine doses prior to the adverse event, 1,463 of them required hospitalization: 14.5%. For six doses, 1,365 of 8,454 infants were hospitalized: 16.1%. For seven doses, 1,051 of 5,489 infants were hospitalized: 19.1%. And for eight doses, 661 of 2,817 infants were hospitalized: 23.5%. The hospitalization rate increased linearly from 11.0% for two doses to 23.5% for eight doses. Linear regression analysis of hospitalization rates as a function of the number of reported vaccine doses yielded a linear relationship, with an R2 of 0.91.
.
Note: The hospitalization rate of infants who received just one vaccine dose was disproportionately high (16.3%) due to the hepatitis B vaccine administered at birth. As such, the hospitalization rate corresponding to one dose is an outlier and was excluded from the linear regression analysis. [1]
.
. . .
Regarding Vaccine Doses and Mortality (Death), this:
.


Our study also calculated the case fatality ratio (mortality rate) among vaccinated infants, stratified by the number of vaccine doses they received. Of the 38,801 VAERS reports that we analyzed, 11,927 infants received one, two, three, or four vaccine doses prior to having an adverse event, and 423 of those infants died: a mortality rate of 3.6%. The remaining 26,874 infants received five, six, seven, or eight vaccine doses prior to the adverse event and 1,458 of them died: 5.4%. The mortality rate for infants who received five to eight vaccine doses (5.4%) is significantly higher than the mortality rate for infants who received one to four vaccine doses (3.6%), with a rate ratio (RR) of 1.5 (95% CI, 1.4-1.7). Of infants reported to VAERS, those who had received more vaccines had a statistically significant 50% higher mortality rate compared with those who had received fewer. [2]

.
Miller’s retrospective data review points to what vaccine safety advocates—both healthcare professionals and concerned, informed parents—have contended for a long time, i.e., that receiving multiple vaccines at one time IS dangerous for children’s immune systems, health, wellbeing, including mortality rates.
.
I encourage everyone to read Miller’s reporting about The Age Effect on Hospitalizations and Death. The percentage rates are overwhelmingly in the double digits for infants under one year of age! [3]
.
. . .
Reference:

[1] www.jpands.org... Pg. 48
[2] Ibid. Pp. 48-49
[3] Ibid. Pg. 49
[4] www.activistpost.com...
[5] www.federalcharges.com...

.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm
.
Evidently some earlier rabidly ranting pontificators were at least not as accurate as they presumed . . . or out-right horribly wrong.
.
Seems to me that parents NEED to take a careful look at this data . . . perhaps research it a bit more . . . perhaps make some immediate adjustments to immunization plans and protocols.
.
I think Catherine Frompovich is rather . . . irate . . . evidently with good cause. It appears to me that such infant deaths are at least largely uncalled for.
.
I realize the whole topic is a bit complex with a host of conflicting emotions and even--to some degree--data which can be massaged a number of different directions by statistics jugglers who are primarily trying to shape and manipulate public opinion. Nevertheless, not ALL statics "lie." Solid statistics can inform responsibly and foster better, safer decisions. It appears to me that the stats in this article deserve a fair hearing.
.

edit on 11/7/2016 by BO XIAN because: FULL TITLE




posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 01:27 AM
link   
a reply to: BO XIAN

My oldest had a HORRIBLE reaction to her first run of shots. Up crying all night, virtually screaming, high fever, and we were told to just monitor things. GO figure! There is no excuse for the establishment continuing to push this crap onto our kids, and us, and the more we learn, the more unsafe we know the stuff really is. This data doesn't surprise me at all.



posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 01:38 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

THANKS TONS for your personal experience report.

You might, however, expect the shrill naysayers along to challenge you up one side and down the other. Not sure what THEIR motivations are.

I just believe that there is FARRRR TOOOO MUCH data highlilghting horrific results to just ignore it or rationalize it away.

Besides . . . maybe . . . what most kids need, is just to eat a bit of dirt as they normally do and go on playing! Some studies suggest that notion may not be far-fetched at all.

I just cringe when I think of earnest protective parents having to decide how to handle the tyrannical state on these issues that put their priceless children at risk, often, needlessly.

Thanks much for your input.

Blessings,



posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 02:26 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

My kids did receive every vaccine there is for small children, and not a single problem occured. No crying, no kind of reaction, no fever and so on.

Does my experience count as much as yours?



posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 02:34 AM
link   
a reply to: BO XIAN

It's as much about control as anything else, I believe, and I am far fro convinced that they don't make the stuff dangerous on purpose, and that things not even mentioned are included. People can deny all they want, but all they are denying is the facts. Too many people know better, from personal experience, and too many studies have shown issues, to ignore the data. Remember when docs were not taking the same flu shots they gave to patients? Now, no one wants to talk about that!



posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 02:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: ManFromEurope
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

My kids did receive every vaccine there is for small children, and not a single problem occured. No crying, no kind of reaction, no fever and so on.

Does my experience count as much as yours?


That's true for some people. For many others, there are problems. How many problems of that sort are acceptable? Wen we reported the issue, no one seemed even surprised. They basically expected it, and even told parents to stay in the office a little while, like half an hour, after shots were given, as though that would be nearly enough time. We did that the first time, and went home, and she got worse and worse. If even ten percent of kids have a bad reaction, that's too many. Glad yours didn't. A lot aren't so lucky. At the least, they need to wait till kids are older, and spread the shots out more, and get all the nasty additives out.



posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 02:40 AM
link   
a reply to: ManFromEurope

WONDERFUL for you and your kids.

Of course your experience counts.

It's just not the whole picture, imho.



posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 02:42 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

I absolutely agree about the !!!!CONTROL!!!! agenda.

And, I agree that they worm it into every bit of life they possibly can.

And I certainly suspect you are right about their putting ugly things in vaccines as well as foods that are not often mentioned, if at all.

These folks are utterly ruthless . . . from hell.

"The little people" don't matter to them. They would sell their own grandmothers down the river and sacrifice their children on the altars of Molech or convenience . . . oh, right, they already do the latter fairly routinely. Sigh.



posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 06:56 AM
link   
a reply to: BO XIAN

I was fortunate to have a pediatrician who supported my stance to spread out my child's vaccines, even though it meant I had to pay for more office visits. In fact, he agreed with me and admitted he did the same for his own children. My understanding was that these vaccines were tested and approved by FDA individually - NOT five shots at one time into a small baby's body!

Additional note: In the first Gulf War, soldiers were administered multiple vaccines (again not tested to be given all at once) in one day before shipping out -- many of them had side effects. Could this have contributed to long term illnesses under the cluster of Gulf War Syndrome?
edit on 11-7-2016 by SeaYote because: Typo



posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 09:47 AM
link   
a reply to: SeaYote

Great points.

And congrats on finding a pediatrician that had their head on straight.

Good question about our troops.

I didn't handle all that smoothly the multiple gun vaccinations before I went to SE Asia during the Nam war. I didn't get deathly ill--though it may have degraded my immune system helping trigger the pneumonia that I came within 24 hours of dying from.

Interesting. Thanks.



posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: BO XIAN

My father also served in Vietnam and reported getting sick for about 24 hours after the vaccinations (expressed that it was almost to be expected). Seems ludicrous that this barrage hasn't been reconsidered, for babies as well as soldiers!

PS - Respect to you for your service.



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 01:23 AM
link   
I was wondering if out of the number of children who had adverse reactions how many of those were vaginal births and how many of those were cesarean. There is research that I can't link you to sorry that says if born by cesarean the baby should be smothered in the mothers vaginal secretions to give the baby a better immune system. I hear a lot of women in the states choose to have cesarean when it is not necessary.
Just a thought.



posted on Jul, 14 2016 @ 04:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: BO XIAN
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

I absolutely agree about the !!!!CONTROL!!!! agenda.

And, I agree that they worm it into every bit of life they possibly can.

And I certainly suspect you are right about their putting ugly things in vaccines as well as foods that are not often mentioned, if at all.

These folks are utterly ruthless . . . from hell.

"The little people" don't matter to them. They would sell their own grandmothers down the river and sacrifice their children on the altars of Molech or convenience . . . oh, right, they already do the latter fairly routinely. Sigh.


That they do! Some years ago, I read about some actual connections someone had made in that regard, and then the sources vanished from online.

The vaccines - when they push one as hard as they have for some, you have to wonder! When the usual groups told to avoid a flu shot are told to get a certain one, like swine or bird flu, and the actual cases are far less common than ordinary flu, you have to wonder! I know people who were told their kid, with a cold, "might have swine flu", causing them to panic. Kid wasn't even that sick, and no, didn't have it, but the docs were pushing the narrative. Hubby and I were tested one year, when we did have a BAD cold, for flu. Doc swore that "had to be" what it was, and when the tests came back negative, acted like that didn't matter. He wanted, needed, to list flu cases. Very odd behavior. Plus, signs everywhere for flu shots, so you can't avoid them.



new topics

top topics



 
6

log in

join