|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
UknowsI
Joined: 16 Apr 2009
|
 Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:18 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| UknowsI wrote: |
This Dr. Gary Null, PhD seems to be against all the major vaccines and his main argument seems to be that the benefits are small for one person as long as everyone else takes the vaccine, which is of course true but selfish.
http://www.garynull.com/home/gary-null-phd-and-nancy-ashley-vmd-ms-all-vaccines-are-dange.html
He asks " If They Admitted You Had a 99.2% Chance of Never Getting Cervical Cancer, Would You Get this Vaccine?".
I would get the vaccine even though it is 100% sure that I can't get Cervical Cancer since I'm a boy, if that meant it would reduce the chance of my spouse getting Cancer by 0.8%. |
Nice article. I see from the article that I still can get cervical cancer even though I'm a boy, but I still stand by my initial statement. I don't really understand your question since the article explains it rather well. Giving the HPV vaccine to boys is an effective way to prevent girls from getting HPV. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ineverlie&I'malwaysri
Joined: 09 Aug 2011
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 11:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The 14-year-old in the OP is only the tip of the iceberg:
Judicial Watch Uncovers FDA Gardasil Records Detailing 26 New Reported Deaths
Washington, DC -- October 19, 2011
Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it has received new documents from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), detailing reports of adverse reactions to the vaccination for human papillomavirus (HPV), Gardasil. The adverse reaction reports detail 26 new deaths reported between September 1, 2010 and September 15, 2011 as well as incidents of seizures, paralysis, blindness, pancreatitis, speech problems, short term memory loss and Guillain-Barr� Syndrome. The documents come from the FDA�s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) which is used by the FDA to monitor the safety of vaccines. The documents were obtained pursuant to a September 15, 2011 FOIA request for reports made from September 1, 2010 through September 15, 2011.
So which would you rather do: die now from the vaccine, or 40 years from now from cervical cancer while you have all that time to detect and prevent it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
UknowsI
Joined: 16 Apr 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ineverlie&I'malwaysri wrote: |
The 14-year-old in the OP is only the tip of the iceberg:
Judicial Watch Uncovers FDA Gardasil Records Detailing 26 New Reported Deaths
Washington, DC -- October 19, 2011
Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it has received new documents from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), detailing reports of adverse reactions to the vaccination for human papillomavirus (HPV), Gardasil. The adverse reaction reports detail 26 new deaths reported between September 1, 2010 and September 15, 2011 as well as incidents of seizures, paralysis, blindness, pancreatitis, speech problems, short term memory loss and Guillain-Barr� Syndrome. The documents come from the FDA�s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) which is used by the FDA to monitor the safety of vaccines. The documents were obtained pursuant to a September 15, 2011 FOIA request for reports made from September 1, 2010 through September 15, 2011.
So which would you rather do: die now from the vaccine, or 40 years from now from cervical cancer while you have all that time to detect and prevent it? |
In the article they pick out 3 of the serious incidents to illustrate their point. I would guess that they picked the cases were they were most likely to find a link between the vaccination and the complications, because that is the link they are looking for. But this is one of the cases:
| Judicialwatch wrote: |
Additional information was received from a newspaper article concerning a 18 year old female�who on 10-MAY-2007 was vaccinated with GARDASIL�in the right arm�The patient who was a college freshman travelled on 05-OCT-2007 to visit her family for the weekend. The patient reportedly felt "slightly ill" upon her arrival and subsequently took an aspirin and went to bed awakening at 1:30 PM the following afternoon "appearing refreshed". The patient became feverish again that night and woke at 1:00 AM the morning of 07-OCT-2007 with chills and a severe headache complaining that "my headache is about to explode". The patient was taken to a local hospital, where a brain computed axial tomography (CAT) scan was performed and the brain revealed meningococcal disease in her brain and brain stem. The patient was immediately transferred to another hospital and died the evening of 07-OCT-2007 due to complications of meningitis.
|
She got a vaccine on the 10th of May and died the 7th of October from a disease with a 4-5 day incubation time. They do not even mention how they were able to link this with the vaccine. I suspect most of the other 26 deaths to be of similar character, which would support this statement:
| Centers for Disease Control wrote: |
In response to the concern about death reports among those who received Gardasil, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) insists that �there was no unusual pattern or clustering to the deaths that would suggest that they were caused by the vaccine.
|
I don't doubt that the vaccine has some negative side effects, but this report was also taking numbers completely out of context. They had detailed reports of death for 26 people included in the study, which shows that they monitor the procedure, but without context its impossible to know what cause those 26 deaths. The article you showed does nothing to provide any link between these deaths and the vaccine and does not even use statistics to show that it statistically significant. The only thing the article show is that there exists data and documentation, but does not use that data to prove that the vaccine is a health risk.
| Ineverlie&I'malwaysri wrote: |
So which would you rather do: die now from the vaccine, or 40 years from now from cervical cancer while you have all that time to detect and prevent it? |
How did you get anything like this out of the article you quoted? You have to start reading the articles you quote and then apply some critical thinking and trying to find some evidence that the vaccine is a significant health threat. Searching for "Side effects of HPV vaccine" and posting the articles here will not prove that the vaccine is dangerous. I don't want to sound too harsh, but I assist with reviewing articles submitted to scientific journals, and the kind of reasoning used in this article wouldn't get published in any respectable journal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ineverlie&I'malwaysri
Joined: 09 Aug 2011
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 2:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| UknowsI wrote: |
| Ineverlie&I'malwaysri wrote: |
The 14-year-old in the OP is only the tip of the iceberg:
Judicial Watch Uncovers FDA Gardasil Records Detailing 26 New Reported Deaths
Washington, DC -- October 19, 2011
Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it has received new documents from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), detailing reports of adverse reactions to the vaccination for human papillomavirus (HPV), Gardasil. The adverse reaction reports detail 26 new deaths reported between September 1, 2010 and September 15, 2011 as well as incidents of seizures, paralysis, blindness, pancreatitis, speech problems, short term memory loss and Guillain-Barr� Syndrome. The documents come from the FDA�s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) which is used by the FDA to monitor the safety of vaccines. The documents were obtained pursuant to a September 15, 2011 FOIA request for reports made from September 1, 2010 through September 15, 2011.
So which would you rather do: die now from the vaccine, or 40 years from now from cervical cancer while you have all that time to detect and prevent it? |
In the article they pick out 3 of the serious incidents to illustrate their point. I would guess that they picked the cases were they were most likely to find a link between the vaccination and the complications, because that is the link they are looking for. But this is one of the cases:
| Judicialwatch wrote: |
Additional information was received from a newspaper article concerning a 18 year old female�who on 10-MAY-2007 was vaccinated with GARDASIL�in the right arm�The patient who was a college freshman travelled on 05-OCT-2007 to visit her family for the weekend. The patient reportedly felt "slightly ill" upon her arrival and subsequently took an aspirin and went to bed awakening at 1:30 PM the following afternoon "appearing refreshed". The patient became feverish again that night and woke at 1:00 AM the morning of 07-OCT-2007 with chills and a severe headache complaining that "my headache is about to explode". The patient was taken to a local hospital, where a brain computed axial tomography (CAT) scan was performed and the brain revealed meningococcal disease in her brain and brain stem. The patient was immediately transferred to another hospital and died the evening of 07-OCT-2007 due to complications of meningitis.
|
She got a vaccine on the 10th of May and died the 7th of October from a disease with a 4-5 day incubation time. They do not even mention how they were able to link this with the vaccine. I suspect most of the other 26 deaths to be of similar character, which would support this statement:
| Centers for Disease Control wrote: |
In response to the concern about death reports among those who received Gardasil, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) insists that �there was no unusual pattern or clustering to the deaths that would suggest that they were caused by the vaccine.
|
I don't doubt that the vaccine has some negative side effects, but this report was also taking numbers completely out of context. They had detailed reports of death for 26 people included in the study, which shows that they monitor the procedure, but without context its impossible to know what cause those 26 deaths. The article you showed does nothing to provide any link between these deaths and the vaccine and does not even use statistics to show that it statistically significant. The only thing the article show is that there exists data and documentation, but does not use that data to prove that the vaccine is a health risk.
| Ineverlie&I'malwaysri wrote: |
So which would you rather do: die now from the vaccine, or 40 years from now from cervical cancer while you have all that time to detect and prevent it? |
How did you get anything like this out of the article you quoted? You have to start reading the articles you quote and then apply some critical thinking and trying to find some evidence that the vaccine is a significant health threat. Searching for "Side effects of HPV vaccine" and posting the articles here will not prove that the vaccine is dangerous. I don't want to sound too harsh, but I assist with reviewing articles submitted to scientific journals, and the kind of reasoning used in this article wouldn't get published in any respectable journal. |
Uknows, I do NOT get my info by googling like that. And I did not get everything I know just from that article. I got the 26 deaths in a short time after vaccination from there, but I know about cervical cancer. It does not generally occur in young women; median age of diagnosis is 48.
You criticize because there was a 5-month delay between vaccination and death, and incubation of the disease is 4-5 days. But she didn't die from HPV, and she was symptomatic almost continuously since vaccination. In fact, her complications may have been from the live or attenuated HPV in the vaccine (which Merck originally denied, but then in April of this year silently removed claims to the contrary on the product's insert after studies found 100% contamination in samples from several different countries including the US), but also possibly from toxins it contains (like mercury) or contaminants.
I appreciate what you are saying though, but I suggest you apply some of that critical thinking advice yourself. Case in point: Judicial Watch did not uncover those 26 cases by 'reading the newspaper;' if you read carefully, they got additional information that way. The original course was VAERS, the federal government's Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System, a government data bank to which doctors can report. That's just 26 deaths in a year recently ended; VAERS reports a total of 82, and in some reports it is as high as 105. Search the database yourself at medalerts.org. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OneWayTraffic
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 5:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't want to get drawn overly in to the discussion on this particular vaccine, as I'm not willing to put in the time to inform myself on the issues, but I will jump in to say this.
In my hometown of Nelson NZ, there's a record of the colonist sailing ships that arrived in the mid 19th century. It's very common to see several deaths on each ship over the weeks it took to sail to NZ. One particular ship lists over 50 deaths of children to Whooping cough. 50! Several families lost all of their children.
It used to be that the average family could count on losing at least one child to disease. It was unfortunate but expected. Now deaths to either disease, or vaccines are so rare that they get lost in statistical noise. Smallpox used to kill a good sized city full of people every year. Now it's gone, erradicated thanks to vaccines.
Vaccines are the biggest health advance ever made, with the possible exception of hand washing. Far bigger than antibiotics. If you want to point out the risks that's fine. But it's not enough to say 'vaccines are dangerous.' You need to find a solution that's better. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
UknowsI
Joined: 16 Apr 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 12:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ineverlie&I'malwaysri wrote: |
Uknows, I do NOT get my info by googling like that. And I did not get everything I know just from that article. I got the 26 deaths in a short time after vaccination from there, but I know about cervical cancer. It does not generally occur in young women; median age of diagnosis is 48.
You criticize because there was a 5-month delay between vaccination and death, and incubation of the disease is 4-5 days. But she didn't die from HPV, and she was symptomatic almost continuously since vaccination. In fact, her complications may have been from the live or attenuated HPV in the vaccine (which Merck originally denied, but then in April of this year silently removed claims to the contrary on the product's insert after studies found 100% contamination in samples from several different countries including the US), but also possibly from toxins it contains (like mercury) or contaminants.
|
Well, the article you quoted did not provide any link between the vaccine and her death. If she became symptomatic right after the vaccine, that is interesting and I wonder why they didn't mention it. The person in question died from meningitis, is there any connection between vaccines and meningitis?
| Ineverlie&I'malwaysri wrote: |
I appreciate what you are saying though, but I suggest you apply some of that critical thinking advice yourself. Case in point: Judicial Watch did not uncover those 26 cases by 'reading the newspaper;' if you read carefully, they got additional information that way. The original course was VAERS, the federal government's Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System, a government data bank to which doctors can report. That's just 26 deaths in a year recently ended; VAERS reports a total of 82, and in some reports it is as high as 105. Search the database yourself at medalerts.org. |
The big problem is that those numbers are taken out of context. A number has no value unless you have something to compare it with. How many people got the vaccine? How many where expected to die from unrelated causes? How many cases of cancer is the vaccine expected to prevent? How many patient who got the vaccine got serious side effects? How is the vaccine linked to those side effects?
Those are the questions they should have asked. Telling detailed stories about people who took the vaccine and became ill only target our emotions and not our logic. It might be possible to find the answers to the questions I asked in the database you linked too, but I wont make the effort. If it is indeed true that the serious side effects is a large percentage and is close to the number of people the vaccine is expected to help, then I agree with you that the vaccine is very questionable.
| http://www.hu.ufsc.br/projeto_hpv/Cervical%20Cancer%20and%20HPV%20Vaccines%20in%20Developing%20Countries.pdf wrote: |
...In 2006, about 500,000 new cases of cervical cancer were reported and it was predicted that 280,000 of them led to death...
...Vaccination is able to reduce up to 70% of cervical cancer related to HPV infection and even prevents precancerous and cancerous lesions of the genitalia...
|
That kind of data from a medical journal speaks louder to me than 105 death which may or may not be related to the vaccine. Of course accurate numbers for how many people will suffer from side effects and how many percentage of the cervical cancer cases are related to HPV are also needed to make the decisions, but at least they have real numbers and discuss the cause and effect.
| Ineverlie&I'malwaysri wrote: |
Uknows, I do NOT get my info by googling like that.
|
Nothing wrong with Googling as long as you're critical to the sources, but in case you are not familiar with it, I will recommend scholar.google.com as a better search engine. You might need a university IP to access the full version of some of the articles though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
