Childhood vaccines are largely safe, U.S. panel finds

reply to post by burntheships


Horrible that this people are the ones trying to jab our newborn babies with trash, yes is vaccinations that are necessary but the rest are nothing but profiting while using scaremongering on new parents and the government back this practices.

I knew from the beginning that the swine flu was a money making hoax after doing a lot of research on the last scaremongering used by big pharma in the 70s, many people in America do not do research, do not remember their history or never even care to learn.

Scaremongering for profits is not new is a way to induce mass panic in order to make money.

When I was a little kid I went to the sister with my doctor. She and I were to be vaccinated. They jabbed her and about 5 minutes later she went into convulsions.

My mom made me get the shot directly afterward. Talk about psychological torture.

Originally posted by mnmcandiez
I went to the sister with my doctor.

The flue shot obviously had no lasting effects.
*guilty grin*

sorry, i just couldn't resist.

Seems like it was so traumatic it still affects you today. Abuse by those in control over us is one of the most traumatic experiences and leads to lasting scars.

*hug*

reply to post by KILL_DOGG


I never got vaccinated for anything, healthy, never get sick (once every few years, and have no reason to ever get vaccinated.

reply to post by Griffo

Every vaccine related thread that you have posted that nonsense in about "vaccines haven't been proven to work", other posters have proven you wrong.

Nice facts and evidence...

Those links are just the tip of the iceberg, even so no one has refuted a single one of them.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

Yep - that lack of small pox was nothign to do with vaccination.

The lack of millions of measles deaths nothing to do with vaccination.

All het autistic kids in hte univese are clearly the result of vacination.

Good science there...

it is good science it is thier own data that proves those vaccines did nothing and inf fact caused the disease they were supposed to eradicate. it also does not account for how those dsiseases declined at even faster rates in non vaccinated countries. So where is your science proving vaccines eradicated any disease? The fact is THERE IS NONE! You are just repating rhetoric pop science that you have no clue about.

The article says vaccines don't cause autism.. yet they admit that there have been cases of brain inflammation. There is scientific evidence that autism can be caused by brain inflammation so how can they say for certain that vaccines don't cause autism? Aren't they the same thing?

reply to post by mnmcandiez


OMG! I had one child who reacted like that to a vaccine, after I had put them off as long as I could..after that, I never had any more vaccines, for any of my children!

I really didn't want them to have any, but I put them off for years before getting them. My first 4 children had some, but after my 4th child reacted like your sister, my last 2 children had none. They are the healthiest of all the kids.

I regret ever having any of my kids get any vaccines. My oldest, who had the most (even though delayed) gets the sickest of them all.

Not to mention, my brothers and sisters kids - who are autistic (and we are adopted so its not genetic). their children were fine up until the shots. I don't care what panel said they are safe...they are NOT!

Originally posted by marg6043
No manufacturer of drugs in the US is in the business of finding cures, they are in the business of creating as many drugs to "treat" illnesses without curing anything, because they are all for profits.

Vaccines do not fit into this paradigm, as they prevent diseases and obviate any opportunity to treat them. When is the last time you saw a new smallpox drug hit the market? Wouldn't you say that smallpox, having been eradicated, has been cured? Wouldn't it have been better for Big Pharma not to invent a smallpox vaccine, but to invent a smallpox treatment? Why did the drug manufacturers go against the profit motive in developing the vaccine? Why do they continue in this manner with more recent discoveries like the varicella, rotavirus, and HPV vaccines?

They get incentives from tax payer for research in cures but most of that incentive ends either on propaganda to push their drugs or in the pockets of whores in congress.

Hmm, Merck spent $11 billion on research in 2010, and $7.6 million on lobbying. The whores in Congress aren't getting a very big piece of the pie, are they? Not even one percent of what is spent on research is spent on the whores. Big Pharma probably spends more on their third world assistance efforts than they do on lobbying.

As for advertisement, it's a necessary component of any business. Incidentally, if you pay attention to the ads, you will see that most of them are targeted towards people of means with chronic illnesses. They don't really advertise vaccinations, because they are not a big money maker. So you're right about profit sometimes being put ahead of people, but you're wrong about vaccines being a part of that.

And for me don't you worry dear I have never had the need for big pharma drugs so far and for vaccinations, Big pharma can take their vaccines and shove them where the sun doesn't shine.

I don't worry about you. You are free to assume whatever risks you wish. My concern, and I freely admit there is no way to address this, is that you are a willing vector for infectious diseases that can seriously harm or even kill immunocompromised people. You could be an asymptomatic carrier of any number of diseases. You assume the risk of being unvaccinated, then share it with other people who do not consent to share your risk. I hope you avoid infants, the elderly, and hospitals. You should also avoid fellow anti-vaxers, to avoid infecting each other. Herd immunity can survive the isolated unimmunized, it's when you all get together and start sharing germs that we see outbreaks.

Most drugs in the US are pushed with blessings of the corrupted FDA without proper studies, many of them killing people in their existence until they are taken out of the markets.

"Most?" Are you sure about that? Who, precisely, in the FDA is corrupt? How do you know? Who corrupted them, and what has been the consequence of this corruption? Has this corruption spread to other national pharmaceutical licensing organizations? International health organizations? University-affiliated researchers? A lot of people publish research on pharmaceuticals, are they all corrupt?

The population is the guinea pigs

We certainly can't test human pharmaceuticals on actual guinea pigs, but that's not important right now. What is key is the fact that the populace at large is not, in fact, guinea pigs. The guinea pigs are volunteers who participate in clinical trials. The population at large is passively monitored for adverse effects, but you can't compare that to research on guinea pigs (or Norwegian rats, or whatever your favorite animal is).

Originally posted by beenupsince2007
I have a question... What are the names of these people who are claiming that vaccines are safe?

From nationalacademies.org:

Ellen Wright Clayton, J.D., M.D. (chair)
Craig-Weaver Professor of Pediatrics;
Director
Center for Biomedical Ethics and Society; and
Professor of Law
Vanderbilt University
Nashville, Tenn.


Inmaculada B. Aban, M.S., Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Biostatistics
University of Alabama
Athens


Douglas J. Barrett, M.D.
Professor
Departments of Pediatrics, Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, Pathology, Immunology, and Laboratory Medicine
College of Medicine
University of Florida
Gainesville


Martina Bebin, M.D., M.P.A.
Associate Professor of Neurology and Pediatrics
University of Alabama
Birmingham


Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, Ph.D., M.D., M.A.S.
Associate Professor and Attending Physician
University of California
San Francisco


Martha Constantine-Paton, Ph.D.
Investigator
McGovern Institute for Brain Research, and
Professor
Departments of Biology and Brain and Cognitive Sciences
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge


Deborah J. del Junco, Ph.D.
Senior Epidemiologist and Associate Professor of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Research Design
Health Science Center
University of Texas
Houston


Betty A. Diamond, M.D.
Head
Center for Autoimmune and Musculoskeletal Disease
Feinstein Institute for Medical Research
North Shore-LIJ Health System
Manhasset, N.Y.


S. Claiborne Johnston, M.D., Ph.D.
Associate Vice Chancellor of Research;
Director of Clinical and Translational Science;
Institute Professor of Neurology and Epidemiology; and
Director
Neurovascular Disease and Stroke Center
University of California
San Francisco


Anthony L. Komaroff, M.D.
Steven P. Simcox, Patrick A. Clifford, and James H. Higby Professor of Medicine, and
Senior Physician
Brigham and Women’s Hospital
Harvard Medical School
Boston


B. Paige Lawrence, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Departments of Environmental Medicine and Microbiology and Immunology
School of Medicine and Dentistry
University of Rochester
Rochester, N.Y.


M. Louise Markert, M.D., Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Pediatrics and Immunology
Division of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology
Department of Pediatrics
Duke University Medical Center
Durham, N.C.


Marc C. Patterson, M.D.
Chair
Division of Child and Adolescent Neurology;
Professor of Neurology, Pediatrics, and Medical Genetics; and
Director
Child Neurology Training Program
Mayo Clinic
Rochester, Minn.


Hugh A. Sampson, M.D.
Professor of Pediatrics and Immunology;
Dean for Translational Biomedical Sciences; and
Director
Jaffe Food Allergy Institute
Mount Sinai School of Medicine
New York City


Pauline A. Thomas, M.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Preventive Medicine and Community Health
New Jersey Medical School, and
Associate Professor
School of Public Health
University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey
Summit


Leslie P. Weiner, M.D.
Richard Angus Grant, Sr. Chair in Neurology, and
Professor of Neurology and Molecular Microbiology and Immunology
Keck School of Medicine
University of Southern California
Los Angeles



STAFF

Kathleen Stratton, Ph.D.
Study Director

You can read the report for free. It lists a few more staff members and a number of reviewers (whose input was only informative; they did not have approval authority).

Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli

Originally posted by marg6043
No manufacturer of drugs in the US is in the business of finding cures, they are in the business of creating as many drugs to "treat" illnesses without curing anything, because they are all for profits.

Vaccines do not fit into this paradigm, as they prevent diseases and obviate any opportunity to treat them. When is the last time you saw a new smallpox drug hit the market? Wouldn't you say that smallpox, having been eradicated, has been cured? Wouldn't it have been better for Big Pharma not to invent a smallpox vaccine, but to invent a smallpox treatment? Why did the drug manufacturers go against the profit motive in developing the vaccine? Why do they continue in this manner with more recent discoveries like the varicella, rotavirus, and HPV vaccines?

Vaccines are marketed at the entire population whereas treatments are only directed at those who actually have the disease and require treatment. Vaccines offer a way to make money off diseases when they aren't active so from a business perspective there'd be more money in vaccinating as sales are consistant and always in high demand without having to rely on outbreaks.

Originally posted by riley
Vaccines are marketed at the entire population whereas treatments are only directed at those who actually have the disease and require treatment. Vaccines offer a way to make money off disease when they aren't active so from a business perspective there'd be more money in vaccinating as sales are consistant and always in high demand without having to rely on outbreaks.

Vaccines are usually targeted toward widespread diseases which are continuously active or at least seasonal. Big Pharma didn't invent Rotateq because they were tired of waiting for an outbreak, they invented Rotateq because everyone gets a rotavirus eventually. They could have made a lot of money selling a course of drugs to every person who got a virus, every time they got a virus, but they invested in a multivalent vaccine instead. The flu virus hits every year, with consistently high demand for treatment. Everyone got chicken pox when I was growing up, and many who got it will get shingles, which is presently treated (not entirely successfully) with antivirals. Most people get HPV, which clears on its own, except when it causes cancer, etc. These are not diseases with sporadic outbreaks, they are widespread and consistent public health threats that may require expensive treatment.

When they do make vaccines that do not already have a consistently high demand, those vaccines languish in vaccine purgatory and are only trotted out for international travelers and other high-risk persons. They never make it onto the routine vaccination list, therefore there is no artificially inflated demand for them. Have you had your yellow fever or anthrax shots? Probably not--there's not much demand. Rabies? Japanese encephalitis? What about smallpox? That was vaccinated out of existence. ACIP handles all this stuff, and they seem pretty conservative. They've limited routine HPV vaccination to females only, because they figure males can only get HPV from females. This is obviously wrong, but it illustrates the fact that ACIP wants Merck and GSK to sell the minimum possible to reach the goal of herd immunity for diseases that exist in the US. Not all vaccines have the consistently high demand you believe they do, and those that do have a consistent demand are regulated so as to minimize costs to the public.

And even if Big Pharma is making obscene profits ... what's wrong with that? I want egghead scientists who are thinking of ways to make me healthier, and the investors behind them, to make obscene profits. I want them to be chauffered to work in golden limousines. Our country's ideas of who deserves to make big money are all wrong.

reply to post by FurvusRexCaeli


Big Placebo says Medicine never cures anything

www.sciencebasedmedicine.org...

Occurs this article is no funded by the government and is not approved by the FDA seems you are very fond of.

You are right, lobbying from big pharma to the whores in congress is more than just the pitiful incentives paid by the tax payer, after all with all the record profits they can afford it

Corruption at its finest.

Will $1.2 Million a Day Convince Congress to Buy Big Pharma's Rx for Change?

This story was updated on June 26, 2009, to reflect that the pharmaceutical and health products industry hired 1,814 lobbyists last year, not 2,322, and had 1,309 on the payroll during the first three months of 2009, not 1,641, as was originally reported. An adjustment has also been made to the percentage of all lobbyists this represents, which is 12 percent, not 15 percent as originally reported.)

www.opensecrets.org...

And this was in 2008 alone, when Obama got millions from them for comapaign to favor big pharma..

Yes, this how unecessary prescribed drugs and vaccines find their way into the population, Like I say the pigs do not cure ANYTHING and they do not PROLONG or exetend life they just treat symtoms.

What big pharma has able to buy in congress against the tax payer

Here's what the pharmaceutical industry has gotten on its political investment

:projects.publicintegrity.org...

If big pharma drugs were so good why they need to buy whores in congress for approval

Big Pharma The Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers of America, the trade association affectionately known as Big Pharma, spent $26.15 million lobbying last year, up from $20.22 million in 2008. Some individual drug makers didn't follow the trend:

Eli Lilly spent $11.21 million in 2009, down from $12.48 million in 2008.

Abbott Laboratories spent $4.64 million, the same it spent the previous year.

Bristol-Myers Squibb spent $3.42 million, down from $3.5 million.

Big Oil The American Petroleum Institute spent $7.32 million last year, up from $4.8 million in 2008.

Chevron: $20.8 million, up from $12.8 million.

ConocoPhillips: $17.88 million, way up from $8.4 million.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

Most drugs sold by big pharma do not even follow FDA guidelines and get away with it

Their side effects worst than specified in their brochures and adverstisments.

www.thenhf.com...

Big pharma tops list of lobbyist in Wahsington when it comes to spending in 2010

Cumulative expenditures by industry for 1998-2010 in the US for lobbying (www.opensecrets.org...).

The top six industry lobbyists:

Pharmaceuticals/Health Products $1,956,898,643
Insurance $1,427,862,637
Electric Utilities $1,345,479,505
Computers/Internet $1,080,849,699
Business Associations $1,068,462,638
Oil & Gas $1,003,530,221

www.quartertothree.com...

Yes, making record profits is can ensure that is enough millions to buy more whores in congress

I got more iformation on big corropted pharma and can post as it seems fit.

Vaccines Kill Children Every Year

The ugly Truth about what big pharma injects in the new born and our childrens indiscriminately, because one vaccine fix all.

Children are guinea pigs to trial and error

“Safe” vaccines kill 2,699 children in a year – and 101 develop autism, USA government admits

According to What The Doctors Do’t Tell You magazine,“Safe” childhood vaccines killed or injured 2,699 children last year in America, the USA government has admitted this week – and 101 children developed autism after vaccination, even though researchers continue to insist that no link exists. Parents received $110m in damages.

Many American vaccines are banned oversea but in the US where most vaccines are produced by big pharma they still very much making their rounds around American children.

www.mumzine.com...

Doctors do not have to tell parents about the mortality rates of the vaccines their children are taking.

US big pharma is all for profits even the death of children from vaccine is acceptable, even if they were perfectly healthy before vaccination

Why Doesn't the U.S. Ban a Vaccine that's Killing Children Overseas? .
Just How Common are Serious, and Deadly, Vaccine Reactions?
How Many Vaccine-Related Deaths are Acceptable?
How Much Risk Will Parents in the United States Accept to Obtain Vaccine Benefits?
With Many Vaccines, ANY Risk is Too Much
Why Most Physicians Fail to Understand Vaccines

www.nafwa.org...

Originally posted by malcr

Originally posted by Heartisblack
reply to post by KILL_DOGG

 

Some of these vaccines aren't necessary, who do you know in the USA or UK, wherever you at. Has polio ? Some of the stuff they vaccinate for are diseases from third world countries. When I got vaccines as a kid, they made me sick as a dog. I don't know about you, but vomiting, running high fevers and getting swollen lumps from where I got the Jab; isn't exactly fun.

edit on 25-8-2011 by Heartisblack because: (no reason given)

Maybe but it is considerably better than death! You do know how vaccines work don't you. Is it really so bad to feel no worse than a cold for a few days than some of the complications from these diseases and yes people do die of them as well. Given how you reacted to the vaccine my guess is Polio or Measles would probably have killed you.

I felt horrible for months after, you have no idea how. I was to the brink of unconsciousness at times. It was unreal

reply to post by hawkiye

Nice facts and evidence...

I shouldn't have to post any, considering that a multitude of people have refuted the claims you have made in previous threads.

Mate, you cited naturalnews.com, one of the most biased websites around. The last time you posted a link it said something like, "AIDS has never been proven to cause HIV". After citing utter lies like that, I find it hard to take things you say seriously

Originally posted by Griffo
reply to post by hawkiye

 

Nice facts and evidence...

I shouldn't have to post any, considering that a multitude of people have refuted the claims you have made in previous threads.

Mate, you cited naturalnews.com, one of the most biased websites around. The last time you posted a link it said something like, "AIDS has never been proven to cause HIV". After citing utter lies like that, I find it hard to take things you say seriously

No one has refuted any of it. You make lots of claims but never post any evidence. You can continue to blather but the fact is no one is taking you seriously...

Originally posted by JennaDarling

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by JennaDarling
So bascically only 10% of your children will die or get disorders.

That is acceptable.

Mercury.. bad.. k?

edit on 25-8-2011 by JennaDarling because: (no reason given)

Mercury not in most childhood vaccines...k? www.fda.gov...

It is in the UK. it is used in vaccines and dentistry.



I notice you said "most", well it shouldnt be in ANY.

edit on 25-8-2011 by JennaDarling because: (no reason given)

I agree, and just as the thread title says, "largely safe?"

Better be totally safe or else STOP FORCING IT ON CHILDREN DAMN IT!

reply to post by pianopraze


lol it wasn't even a flu shot. I was one of the main vaccines. MMR vaccine I'm pretty sure

Originally posted by DieBravely
I agree, and just as the thread title says, "largely safe?"

Better be totally safe or else STOP FORCING IT ON CHILDREN DAMN IT!

Right - so you want a totally risk free existance?

Do you drive your kids in a car? Do you let them play? Heck do you let them get out of bed even??
If you do then you are clearly a hypocrite since none of these things are totally safe either.

Measles KILLED about 3 child sufferers in every 1000 in the USA from 1987 - 2000. Fatality rates in the 3rd world or with already compromised patients can reach as high as 30%.

So which would you rather have - a slight chance your child will suffer some discomfort from a vaccine, or an smaller but still very real chance they will DIE from measles??