Multiple vaccine doses have resulted in up to 145,000 child deaths in past 20 years Study Confirms.

Originally posted by alkali

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by alkali

 

so let me get this straight ... using your numbers, 94,000 (potentially) infant/youth deaths directly resulting from vaccines is acceptable ??

just checking

Absolutely not. That's the number stated by beckybecky in this post if you multiply the number of infant deaths reported to VAERS by 50. I don't think the number of infant deaths is anywhere remotely close to 94,000.

As I said in my previous posts, I do admit that under reporting is likely (virtually certain), but the extent of under reporting is unknown. To say only 1 or 2 percent of adverse events (which includes everything from soreness to death) are reported to VAERS is entirely speculative and does nothing to pinpoint the rate of under reporting of each specific adverse event. Furthermore, the data that is reported to VAERS is inaccurate to begin with by their own admission. Making bold assumptions based off of speculation and poor quality data is irresponsible, absurd, and entirely meaningless.

More simply, just because adverse events are under reported does not mean that deaths are under reported by an equal ratio.

Bur are ALL deaths reported to VAERS.

I understand "An analysis by Wald & Shojan [2001] found that only 1.5% of all adverse events result in an incident report, and only 6% of adverse drug events are identified properly....The Psychiatric Times noted that the AMA is strongly opposed to mandatory reporting of medical errors...Dr Jay Cohen, who has extensively researched adverse drug reactions (ADR), commented that because only 5% of ADRs are being reported, there are in reality, 5 million medications reactions each year." Death by Medicine----Carolyn Dean, MD, ND, Martin Feldman, MD, Gary Null, PhD, Debora Rasio, MD (2003/4).

only 5% are reported.

""In New Zealand, after the Menomune A, they were forced to set up hotlines, and then when they compared parent reporting, with reactions that the parents said that the doctors had been asked to report, that doctors only reported .9%."--Hilary Butler

And straight from the horse mouth.

"Former FDA Commissioner David Kessler estimated in a 1993 article in the Journal of the American Medical Association that fewer than 1 percent of all doctors report injuries and deaths following the administration of prescription drugs. This estimate may be even lower for vaccines. In one survey that our organization conducted in New York in 1994, only 1 doctor in 40 reported to VAERS."--Barbara Loe Fisher.

so there you have it VAERS is voluntary not mandatory and your assertion is wrong.

www.whale.to...


"VAERS reported "11 developed intussusception within 1 week of receiving RRV-TV" out of 1.8 million doses administered, which is a rate of about 0.6 out of 100,000. Kaiser Permanente studied the rate for its patients and found that "Among children who had received RRV-TV during the previous week, the rate was 314 per 100,000 infant-years." Minnesota did a study in its state and found that "the observed rate of intussusception within 1 week of receipt of RRV-TV was 292 per 100,000 infant-years." Hence the actual rate of this adverse effect from the rotavirus vaccine was about 300/0.6 = 500 times the rate reported through VAERS! From the CDC at www.immunize.org... "VAERS currently receives approximately 800-1000 reports each month." Based on the above data, the actual adverse effects following vaccines could easily be 500 times the reported effects, or 500,000 per month (Source: AVN mailing list).

there you have it.nail in your argument.

reply to post by beckybecky

You've managed to quote six different sources without countering a single argument I've made. If anything, you've strengthening my argument. Out of all of the sources you quoted, only one referenced death.

Let's look at that one.

"Former FDA Commissioner David Kessler estimated in a 1993 article in the Journal of the American Medical Association that fewer than 1 percent of all doctors report injuries and deaths following the administration of prescription drugs. This estimate ***may*** be even lower for vaccines. In one survey that our organization conducted in New York in 1994, only 1 doctor in 40 reported to VAERS."--Barbara Loe Fisher.

In 1993, VAERS had just been developed. The internet was in its infancy at the time and reporting anything was significantly more of a pain than it is now. I would expect reporting to be low, especially on minor reactions. Furthermore, Kessler's estimate was in regards to prescription drugs. Not vaccines. Your quote goes on to say that it may be even lower than 1 percent regarding vaccines, but then says 1 in 40 report to VAERS, which is not less than 1 percent.

You then go on to argue in your last paragraph, using intussusception as an example, that adverse reactions are under reported. This is a straw man argument. As I've said repeatedly, no one is disputing that adverse reactions are under reported. They are.

What is disputed is:
1.) How extensive is under reporting of adverse events in infants?
2.) What proportion of those non-reported adverse events are infant deaths?

You went on to mention at the end of your last paragraph that adverse reactions could be as much as 500 times greater than what is reported. This is what gives more credence to my argument and detracts from yours. You have absolutely no idea what the extent of under reporting is. You've said 50 times greater, 100 times greater and now 500 times greater than what is reported. Pick one. You can't have them all.

To further drive my point home, not one number that you referenced in your last paragraph is related to infant death.

Any number you produce is entirely unfounded because there is no hard evidence to back it up. Hence, this thread has been moved to the hoax forum.