There are 12 "facts" that they claim. Let's go thru them one by one.
"Did you know a child is 100 times more likely to get struck by lightning than have a severe allergic reaction to a vaccine?"
Vaccine adverse events are rarely documented. They make their claim based on an inadequate surveillance system, VAERS. This is addressed in the 2011 CDC's ISO Scientific Agenda publication. Pages 9 - 11 goes thru the many defects to this system and how they plan on improving surveillance. Under "1) Enhance VAERS reporting" the CDC discusses encouraging healthcare providers about reporting to VAERS. They also say; "We recognize that relying only on clinician reports may result in underreporting to VAERS." So they are trying to find ways to reach out to the public so they, the vaccine recipients can report their own injuries rather than rely on their clinicians.
This knowledge isn't new.
Kessler, et al. "Introducing MEDWatch: A New Approach to Reporting Medication and Device Adverse Effects and Product Problems." JAMA. 1993;269(21):2765-2768.
"Although the FDA receives many adverse event reports, these probably represent only a fraction of the serious adverse events encountered by providers. A recent review article found that between 3% and 11% of hospital admissions could be attributed to adverse drug reactions. Only about 1% of serious events are reported to the FDA, according to one study." - David A. Kessler MD, former head of the FDA
Let's gain some perspective here. According to the CDC's web page announcement of their 5-year research agenda, in 2007 there were more than 30,000 reports to VAERS. If that only represents around 10% of actual injuries that would mean there was really more than 300,000 for that year.
For anyone needing to report a vaccine injury please see the VAERS webpage.
Another thing I find striking, the vaccine manufacture in small print in their glif only lists two vaccines (MMR, HepB) out of the 14+ given. So the perception is that all vaccines have low risk of adverse events but they only list two. Also they do not support this claim with any peer-reviewed scientific evidence.
We cannot make risk assessments regarding vaccine injury because they are not actively tracked. Vaccine injury is often mis-diagnosed or waived away as a "phase". We do not know the true numbers of the injured so risk/benefit analysis cannot be done until proper surveillance is in place. What the vaccine manufacturer is doing in this article is basing a claim on under reported numbers. Sanofi Pasteur is misleading the public.
"It may seem like all the talk about vaccines has drowned out the benefits. But when you look at how far we've come at beating infectious disease, vaccines truly are amazing."
Their graphical analysis in disease cases in the 1900's are being compared to reported cases in 2010. A striking visual aid but what is missing here is the factual data in-between. Let's look at some peer-review for the details.
Guyer et al, "Annual Summary of Vital Statistics: Trends in the Health of Americans During the 20th Century", PEDIATRICS, 2000.
Excerpt from the study:
"Once again, nearly 90% of the decline in infectious disease mortality among US children occurred before 1940, when few antibiotics or vaccines were available."
So this vaccine manufacture is taking claim for these impressive declines when their product wasn't even available. You can tell by their carefully placed words that they are not outwardly claiming that vaccines created the decline but that is the impression that they are trying to make.
But that isn't even all of it.
We also know that diagnosis of infectious diseases have been reclassified. Coincidentally polio was reclassified the year they implemented the vaccine. Thereby decreasing polio by 90% at least on paper, but that is never talked about. The decline is attributed to vaccination not reclassification. Thousands of cases of viral and aseptic meningitis are reported every year, and these were routinely diagnosed as polio before the Salk vaccine.
Another coincidence is they plan on reclassifying ASDs in 2013 thereby considerably decreasing the statistical reporting of this affliction.
Vaccination cannot be attributed to the impressive declines of infectious disease mortality. Many factors are at play mostly access to clean drinking water, proper nutrition and sanitation. That is if you believe the peer-review that studied the associations. My question is what is the cost of vaccination? And why is it that they are not charting the explosive epidemics in childhood chronic disease? These epidemics have struck our children just in the past 20 years. Why are they so insignificant?
Here is some food for thought... Here is, in part what are children are fighting today.
Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis - routinely fatal in children
Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Melitus
Immune thrombocytopenia purpura
Infant Mortalilty is raising
Neuro Developmental Disability
Pediatric Autoimmune Neuropsychiatric Disorder
Pediatric Infection Triggered Autoimmune Neuropsychiatric Disorder
Sensory Integration Disorder
Where is the comparison between 1980 (when the vaccination schedule exploded) and today? I guess if one never looks then it just doesn't exist.
"This story of a measles outbreak in Minnesota starts in February 2011 with a single unvaccinated child. It then spreads to the child's daycare center, family members, emergency room workers and more. See how the facts unfold."
Now I just have to laugh at this. This is disease mongering at it's best. In the US measles is rarely if ever fatal and not an epidemic, it's not an issue. According to the CDC in 2011, 222 patients contracted measles - 51 of those patients were aged 1-4 years old. Out of those 222, "No cases of encephalitis and no deaths were reported."
If you look at the adverse events associated with with measles vaccine you will find there have been 63,366 events, 351 deaths. We need to know this information for balance. And we need to remember that this only accounts for a fraction of actual vaccine injuries as explained above.
Now the vaccine manufacturer clearly stated that the infection spread because of a single unvaccinated child. Here is my argument. How many unvaccinated adults are allowed to meander around without badgering? Let's look at some facts. The MMR requires boosters. It was once believed that the vaccine was good for life but it's not. They discovered this by noticing the vaccinated also contract measles. So instead of looking at the effectiveness of the vaccine they just decided to give more of it. And when that didn't stop the vaccinated from contracting the infection they increased the recommended boosters again. Today according to the CDC, 50 year old's should have received 4-5 injections in order to be "immune" or considered "vaccinated". How many 50 year old's are compliant with this recommendation?
Recommended 0-6 Immunization Schedule
Recommended 7-18 Immunization Schedule
Recommended Adult Immunization Schedule
And how is it that herd immunity can be established if there isn't 90+% vaccination coverage? I'm in my 30's and have received 2 injections of MMR. According to the CDC I'm not immune. The majority of the adults are not in compliant with their vaccine boosters thus they are unvaccinated. So here is my question. Where are all those measles cases that we keep hearing will spring up if there isn't good coverage? Where are all the death associated with the disease if we don't stay compliant with recommendations? They do not exist! Herd immunity is a myth.
Fear/Disease mongering is a tired old tactic that is cooled by factual data. But that doesn't stop vaccine manufacturers from utilizing it. Measles is rarely contracted in the US, and there are more deaths and adverse events associated with the vaccine.
"Like seat belts and car seats, vaccines can be lifesavers. In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has said immunization is the most important public health act in history, after safe drinking water."
Vaccines are described by our health authority as "unavoidably unsafe". You can find this language in the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act 42 U.S.C. 300aa-22(b)(1). Vaccines carry real risk of death and life-long disability. You can read the long list of known adverse events on the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services webpage, that are often not reported by pediatricians.
To compare a medical procedure that is known to cause death and described as unsafe to buckling your seat-belt is asinine. When I strap myself in my vehicle I'm not at risk for anaphylactic shock or delayed reactions that will cause death or disability.
Then they further state on their glossy visual aid: "Getting every newborn vaccinated on schedule helps prevent about 48,000 deaths and 20 million cases of disease, saves nearly $14 billion in direct costs, and saves society $69 billion."
The opinion that is the basis for the claim is held up on statistical analysis that all vaccinated will not contract the disease. Also the data is balancing risk/benefit on inadequate surveillance. It's flawed. Further it was a power point presentation and did not undergo stringent peer-review or was published in any substantial journal. I'm sure because it would fall under the weight of criticism.
Here is the CDC's exact quote: "A recent economic analysis indicated that vaccination of each U.S. birth cohort with the current childhood immunization schedule prevents approximately 42,000 deaths and 20 million cases of disease, with net savings of nearly $14 billion in direct costs and $69 billion in total societal costs (2)."
(2) Zhou F. Updated economic evaluation of the routine childhood immunization schedule in the United States. Presented at the 45th National Immunization Conference. Washington, DC; March 28--31, 2011.
Comparing medical procedures to buckling seat-belts is obviously absurd. The CDC and the pharmaceutical industry will have to do much better then a power-point presentation to prove risk/benefit analysis regarding vaccine safety and outcomes. They need better surveillance and truly study vaccine adverse events prior to making up numbers to sell products.
"In 1975, Japan stopped vaccinating against pertussis. Just five years later they went from having 373 cases of pertussis to 13,000 cases and 41 deaths. Take a look at how vaccination controls infectious disease."
I think that it's a bit simplistic to group all vaccines in one basket by using this pertussis in Japan example. I will further discuss pertussis below in point #9. I think contracting pertussis is not as substantial as suffering from the vaccine itself. Overall it should be the choice of the patient or parent to agree to this vaccine with proper guidance and informed consent.
According to the VAERS, there have been 92,746 reports of adverse events associated with the pertussis vaccine - 2241 deaths. Again this is only a fraction of true adverse events related to this vaccine as described above.
Again we find a vaccine manufacture succumbing to fear/disease mongering to sell their product.
"There may be a lot of controversy out there, but you may be surprised by how many parents feel about vaccination."
Then they link to this survey; Kennedy et al., "Vaccine attitudes, concerns, and information sources reported by parents of young children: results from the 2009 HealthStyles survey", Pediatrics. 2011.
Compliance with vaccine recommendations is hardly an indicator on how parents "feel about vaccination". The study that this vaccine manufacture links to also says: "The majority of parents reported believing that vaccines were important to children's health (79.8%) and that they were either confident or very confident in vaccine safety (79.0%)". So at least 21% of parents are not confident in vaccines or find them to be safe. That is not a small number.
Here are some more polls and surveys.
CU med study: Parents grow more wary of vaccination safety
Parents' Vaccine Safety concerns dominate Office Visits
A new study published online April 15 in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine shows that 53% of family practice physicians and pediatricians surveyed in 2009 report spending 10 to 19 minutes on vaccine discussions when parents harbor "substantial concerns" about adverse events. For another 8%, these conversations last 20 minutes or longer.
Harris Poll Shows Majority Support Parental Vaccination Choice, Say Pharma Has Too Much Influence
Associated Press, "1 in 4 parents think shots cause autism."
T.Neale, "Vaccine and Drug Safety Top Parents' Research Priorities," MedPage Today, October 12, 2010.
Public wants inquiry into MMR
Scientific Fraud May Be More Widespread Than Thought, Poll Says
Vaccine uptake rates do not measure parental feelings about vaccination. Parents are berated by MD's and pharmaceutical PR campaigns. In truth parents are fed up with the fear mongering and just want the truth. We love our children, and we want to protect them from infectious disease and vaccine injury. Let's get our independent scientists to work and answer the questions we've been asking for decades. It's time.
"Here in the United States, we are very fortunate to have high immunization rates. But it's important to remember we live in a global society. People and goods cross borders every day, and with them come another kind of frequent flyer: infectious disease germs. For example, from 2009 to 2010, 23 countries that had previously been certified "polio-free" were re-infected due to imported cases of the disease."
Then they link to this gem of an article with pharmaceutical add pop-ups: Heightened awareness, renewed commitment needed to eradicate polio.
Let's gain some perspective here. As stated above 90% of all polio cases were eliminated due to the reclassification of polio diagnosis. So if we look at statistical data today and compare it from the past we still have polio in this country it's just called meningitis. And polio is a water born disease. So to say it can be carried on airplanes by people is a bit of a stretch.
There are two types of polio vaccines given. Oral polio vaccines (OPV) and Injected polio vaccines (IPV). OPV was discontinued for use because it causes paralytic polio, so in 2000 IPV was recommended for use in the U.S. But outside the U.S. OPV's is given. What is particularly concerning is the vaccine manufacture contraindicates use of this vaccine in families that have a history of HIV or AIDS. There is no wonder there is such a distrust from these families in Africa given the knowledge of this vaccine.
But there's more.
In 1959, 77.5% of paralytic polio victims had received 3 doses of OPV in Massachusetts. - Hearing before the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, 87th Congress, Second Session on H.R. 10541, May 1962, p. 94.
Six New England states reported increases in polio one year after the Salk vaccine was introduced, ranging from more than doubling in Vermont to an increase of an astounding 642% in Massachusetts. - Hearings before the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, 87th Congress, Second Session on H.R. 10541, May 1962, p. 94.
In the USA 1960, two virologists discovered that both polio vaccines were contaminated with the SV 40 virus which causes cancer in animals as well as changes in human cell tissue cultures. Millions of children had been injected with these vaccines. (Med Jnl of Australia, 17/3/1973,p.555) - video
1962, not only did the cases of polio increase substantially after mandatory vaccination (a 50% increase from 1957 to 1958, and an 80% increase from 1958 to 1959), but the statistics were manipulated by the Public Health Service to give the opposite impression. - U.S. Congressional hearings, testimony of Dr. Bernard Greenberg, Head of the Dept. of Biostatistics for the University of North Carolina School of Public Health.
1956, "Official data shows that large scale vaccination has failed to obtain any significant improvement of the disease against which they are supposed to provide protection." - Dr. Albert B. Sabin, Developer of the Oral Polio Vaccine.
"From 1923 to 1953, before the Salk killed - virus vaccine was introduced, the polio death rate in the United States and England had already declined on its own by 47 percent and 55 percent, respectively." - VACCINES - Are They Really Safe & Effective? by Neil Z. Miller, sourced from: "International Mortality Statistics (1981)" by Michael Alderson.
There is a lot of controversy about this vaccine and there's no wonder why. We should not continue the use of OPV. The only reason given is due to finances not health outcomes. The Gates Foundation spends millions of dollars delivering this OPV to third world Countries who are saddled with health problems like HIV, poor nutrition and clean water shortages, that leads to oxidized stress and poor health outcomes. They further exacerbate their health by giving them a vaccine that is known to cause paralytic polio, particularly in patients with decreased immune systems.
Before the modern era, polio was a mild disease seldom resulting in paralysis. Today it is the go to disease to use in fear mongering to berate parents into vaccinating. According to the VAERS, in the U.S. there are 59,869 adverse events associated with the polio vaccine - 1,632 deaths. Again that is using an inadequate surveillance reporting system because of the problem of under-reporting, the true number is much higher.
This is fear mongering at it's best. Polio is not easily transported by plane, and was considered a mild disease prior to the invention of the the polio vaccine. The vaccine is attributed to the majority of paralytic polio cases but this is never mentioned publicly. The polio vaccines have been contaminated with cancer causing viruses but the vaccine recipients have never been tracked for long term health affects. A long look thru our medical history shows just how deep the deception has reached regarding this particular vaccine.
"Most people don't think of vaccines as a way to help prevent cancer. But some vaccines can. In fact, the first such vaccine was the Hep B vaccine. It prevents infection with Hep B virus, which is known to cause liver cancer."
Then they link to this webpage by The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. Here is the exact quote that does not link to any scientific evidence. "In addition to the HPV vaccine, the hepatitis B vaccine also prevents cancer. The hepatitis B vaccine prevents liver cancer caused by infection with hepatitis B; it was the first cancer-prevention vaccine available."
Here is some peer-review scientific evidence showing how Hepatitis B vaccine increases risk of diabetes, MS and autism. This vaccine is also shown to damage the liver, that's shocking since it's advertised as being a liver saver! Hep B vaccine is also shown to be ineffective. But we still inject it into newborns and continue to booster this vaccine thru the toddler years.
Hepatitis B Vaccine Linked to Onset of Diabetes
Hepatitis B vaccine May Be Linked to MS
Hepatitis B vaccine triples the odds of ASD in males
Hepatitis B vaccine does not prevent contraction of Hepatitis B
Hepatitis B vaccine kills liver cells
Newborns are at an extremely low risk of contracting Hep B. There is a risk if the mother is infected. It would appear safer to test the mother prior to delivery. We do tests like this for HIV etc, there is no reason why we can't for Hep B. According to VAERS there are 50,946 adverse events associated with the Hep B vaccine - 988 deaths.
Here is some information about the other vaccine they claim prevents cancer.
The HPV vaccine is experimental and controversial. According to VAERS this vaccines has caused cancer, disabilities and deaths. Please review the entire chart of adverse events and know these were healthy children, boys and girls. Dr. Diane Harper MD, MPH, MS was the principal investigator for clinical vaccines trials for Merck (Gardasil) and GlaxoSmithKline (Cervarix) is an outspoken critic for the use of HPV vaccines in the U.S. After Merck revealed their Gardasil advertising campaign she left the industry and is now involved in exposing the dangers of HPV vaccines. She has outlined the vaccines main faults being tiny antibody titers for all HPV types other then HPV 16; limited protection; limited duration of efficiency; and safety concerns. She encourages yearly pap smears over the vaccine because the vaccine kills and pap smears do not.
Here she is in full video
Here she is in audio
The pharmaceutical advertisement theorizes that vaccines prevent cancer. This is not based on peer-review evidence this is only a theoretical ideal. Scientific evidence has shown that the HepB vaccine actually damages the liver and causes death and disability. The HPV vaccine is experimental and the principal investigator for the trials is a critic of it's use. This is yet again another example of misleading PR with glossy visuals.
"Whooping cough, medically known as pertussis, is still alive and well. In recent years pertussis cases have been climbing.(25) In 2010, more than 21,000 cases of pertussis were reported to the CDC - a majority of them children and teens.(26) But that's just the tip of the iceberg. Experts estimate that there are up to 3.3 million adult and adolescents cases of pertussis (whooping cough) each year in the United States, but because pertussis is less severe in teens and adults, many can get misdiagnosed or undiagnosed.(56,125) That's a problem because it's also 1 of the diseases kids usually get from adults, which is why it's so important to vaccinate ourselves."(23)
Yes pertussis is climbing and the majority of the infected are fully vaccinated (evidence, evidence). Another fact that they are carefully leaving out is the vaccine created a virulent strain of the disease (evidence). The vaccinated are no longer protected from contracting pertussis, they just get a milder case of it (evidence 1, 2). Many of these vaccinated children/adults do not know that they are infected so they can spread the disease to the to young to be vaccinated and other members of the population. But in light of these facts what is recommended by our health authority? To vaccinate more even though the science shows "booster immunization of adults with acellular pertussis vaccines was not found to increase bactericidal activity over preimmunization levels.". So boosters are not going to solve this crisis. I'm perplexed by this suggestion because when we saw antibiotics creating super-strains of bacteria like Methicillin-aminoglycoside resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MARSA) the recommendations were to prescribe cautiously. The opposite is true regarding vaccines. I have a feeling it's because they are so fearful of any sign of weakness in the program. But they look like fools in light of the scientific data that is stacked against their policy. There are countries that are starting to abandon the pertussis vaccine. In Australia the "Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) had determined vaccinating parents was not effective in protecting newborns, after two pharmaceutical manufacturers made submissions to the PBAC."
In their photo: "9,120 cases of pertussis were reported last year in California with 10 infant deaths." (24)
This is tragic. It is terrible when a child dies whether it be from an infectious disease or a vaccine injury. Let's look at these numbers some more. The 10 deaths were in infants that were to young to be vaccinated. 8 of those infants were repeatability misdiagnosed which delayed their care and possibly worsened their outcome (evidence). Another thing that I find troubling about these numbers is only 59% of these patients had lab confirmed disease diagnosis. If we look at the accuracy of MDs diagnosing disease without any lab confirmation we find they are routinely not accurate. Let's look at the H1N1 scare back in 2009. 83+% of all lab work sent in to confirm H1N1 was negative. (evidence) That is why when shooting off statistics we should know the real numbers and not guess. Now how many of those children were unvaccinated? We know the 10 infants were to young to be vaccinated, but how many of the 9,120 cases were among the vaccinated? Dr. David Witt, chief of infectious diseases looked into it. Here is what he said: "The vast majority of these were fully-vaccinated children". So why isn't Sanofi Pasteur filling everyone in on the details of these cases? They are trying to create a perception that not vaccinating is creating a rise in pertussis outbreaks but the majority of the infected is fully-vaccinated. This isn't new. A CDC health offical had this to say, "most of Washington's children are vaccinated, and health officials said vaccine refusal doesn't appear to be playing a key role in the growing pertussis burden." The CDC's webpage for Pertussis Epidemic - Washington list the statistics; "Overall, 758 of 1,000 (75.8%) patients aged 3 months–10 years were up-to-date with the childhood diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and acellular pertussis (DTaP) doses."
For balance we should look at the package insert from the FDA for Diptheria Texoids and Pertussis Vaccine Tripedia, page 11 "Adverse events reported during post-approval use of Tripedia vaccine include idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, SIDS, anaphylactic reaction, cellulitis, autism, convulsion/grand mal convulsion, encephalopathy, hypotonia, neuropathy, somnolence and apnea. Events were included in this list because of the seriousness or frequency of reporting."
References From Sanofi Pasteur
(25) CDC. Preventing tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis among adults; use of tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid and acellular pertussis vaccine: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and recommendation of ACIP, supported by the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC), for use of Tdap among health-care personnel. MMWR. 206;55(RR-17):1-37.
(26) CDC. Data on file (2010 provisional pertussis surveillance report, weeks 1-52), January 7, 2011. MKT21761
It's true that pertussis is on the rise. The virulent strain was created by the vaccine and no longer protects the vaccinated from infection. Many blame the unvaccinated on this rise in disease, and post it proudly on a banner to show the need for vaccine compliance. But once again when you look at the evidence you find this is not prudent or factual. What is striking here is the amount of children who have died and became disabled after being vaccinated with this worthless drug. There isn't any cry for justice for those children.
More information on pertussis.
- deMelker et al, "Reemergence of Pertussis in the Highly Vaccinated Population of the Nehterlands: Observations on Surveillance Data", Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol. 6, No. 4 July-Aug 2000: 348-357 "The increase in pertussis incidence was higher among vaccinated than among unvaccinated persons of all ages."
- Bisgard et al, "Infant pertussis: who was the source?", Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2004 Nov; 23(11):985-9. "It is unknown whether immunizing adolescents and adults against pertussis will reduce the risk of transmission to infants."
- Charlotte Obsvr article ADMITS all 16 whooping cough cases WERE vaccinated November 23, 2008
- Acellular pertussis vaccination enhances B. perapertussis colonization 2010
- Whooping cough strain now immune to vaccine February 11, 2010
- More kids' hospital doctors get whooping cough Monday October 18, 2010
- Vaccinated People Getting Whooping Cough In SD Tuesday September 7, 2010
- Is Whooping Cough Vaccine Working? Tuesday September 7, 2010
- Even those fully vaccinated can still get whooping cough, health official says December 4, 2010
- Many whooping cough victims have been immunized; Experts spar over prospects of new disease strain December 13, 2010
- Grand Island has whooping cough outbreak Wednesday March 2, 2011
- District Dealing With Outbreak Of Whooping Cough In Schools August 17, 2011
- Vaccine a dud, says city doctor December 2, 2011
- County health, school officials learn from pertussis outbreak March 14, 2012
- Whooping cough outbreak in Bunbury April 5, 2012
- The current whooping cough epidemic could mean that the vaccine is not working July 25, 2012
- Whooping Cough Vaccine Failures Increasing Wednesday August 15, 2012
"In fact, they prevent the deaths of an estimated 3 million children each year worldwide (27). Because of vaccines, people living in the United States today don't see some of the serious diseases, such as polio and diphtheria that used to harm or kill many children in this country. However, some of our parents or grandparents may well remember these feared disease. It's important to keep vaccinating so these disease don't come back." (28,30)
Their snappy info-graphic is not based on actual numbers but an estimate, they are shaping another false perception here.
According to peer-review infectious disease mortality declined by 90% prior to any widespread use of vaccines or antibiotics. So to claim that vaccines saves lives is false. But that doesn't stop the industry from claiming they were implementable in that drop in numbers.
For clarity: Guyer et al, "Annual Summary of Vital Statistics: Trends in the Health of Americans During the 20th Century", PEDIATRICS, 2000.
Excerpt: "Once again, nearly 90% of the decline in infectious disease mortality among US children occurred before 1940, when few antibiotics or vaccines were available."
And we would see polio today if it wasn't reclassified. As stated above meningitis affects 1000s of children yearly and was previously diagnosed as polio. We no longer see scarlet fever either, I wonder if there was a vaccine invented the industry would take credit for that decline as well - probably....
Vaccines cannot be attributed to the impressive declines of infectious disease mortality based on when the vaccine was implemented and when the disease was phasing out. These are bogus claims used to scare parents into vaccinated. But once again the scientific data does not support the claim.
"This stat shows just how much has changed since 1991, when we started vaccinating children for Hep B. (31)"
I think it's wonderful that Hep B is dropping, but on their infographic they are using estimated numbers again. If you look at the link they provide confirmed cases is a much lower percentage. This is yet again another example of shaping a misconception of factual data. So Hep B is dropping but at what cost? Hepatitis B is linked to early onset diabetes, MS, ASDs. The vaccine is shown to not provide good protection of the disease and it kills liver cells. So are we creating more problems here? And why inject this vaccine on the first day of life if the mother is not a carrier? Can't we use prudence here and let an infant develop without an onslaught of neurotoxins on the first day of life? And how much of the disease decline is a result of the vaccine? What other factors could be at play here?
Throwing up estimated statistical data that fits in with an ideology isn't cause to celebrate. There are a lot more questions to be answered before demands are made for parental vaccine compliance.
"Despite what many people have heard, the flu shot can't give people the flu. The virus sample used in the flu shot has been killed, or inactivated, meaning it can no longer cause infection."
Let's look at some science here. These quotes are from Dr. Tom Jefferson who is a reviewer from the independant Cochrance Collaboration. "There is poor safety data available for other serious adverse events that might occur in young children in addition to febrile seizures (11). Evidence from systematic reviews show evidence of data suppression of vaccine-associated harms to small children by some pharmaceutical companies (12). Other reports suggest that influenza vaccines put children at higher risk of future influenza infection compared to acquiring natural infection (original antigenic sin) (13). In older children, unexpected adverse events such as narcolepsy have been reported from at least 12 countries (14). In Canada previous immunization with seasonal influenza vaccine doubled your risk of being infected with "swine flu" (15)". In 2005, when a new study demonstrated that influenza vaccines were not saving elderly lives (16), many argued that this underscored the importance of vaccinating more children (17). yet we have no evidence demonstrating that children are benefiting from this strategy but do have evidence that these vaccines are hospitalizing children. The recent H1N1 "pandemic" and our immunization response show that in children we likely caused more harm than good. Public health authorities should not continue to recommend (as in the U.S.), that all children receive routine influenza vaccines until we have much better safety and efficacy data." - link
Well I guess under the weight of the scientific evidence the flu vaccine manufacturers are beginning to update their product inserts. In this package insert they admit "there have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza disease after vaccination".
This is all very troubling.
The flu vaccine is incompletely studied for effectiveness and safety. Yet our children are targeted for injection. In the multi-dose presentation this vaccine contains the full compliment of thimerosal the neurotoxic mercury derivative. Based on the scientific evidence we should not continue our aggressive flu vaccination policy. According to VAERS there have been 81,969 adverse events associated with this vaccine - 952 deaths.