Vaccination
Answering Pro-Vaccination Questions
I presented many valid points and studies but they were ignored, and instead I got this response:
There is no comparison between the scientific method and a bunch of yahoos who publish stuff over the internet.But I was quoting REAL, scientific studies. It made me realise the vaccine debate has been drawn away from facts - instead pitting people against hated stereotypes to gain a following. I'm not a hippy, I'm not easily sucked in, I like facts, logic, and clear, unbiased stats. So I said to her:
It's not a matter of anti-vax versus pro-vax, it's a matter of decifering common sense and accurate stats from a myriad of bull shit.But it fell on deaf ears. On and on the discussion went, back and forth, until I had to leave for a family outing - feeling mentally drained and wondering whether anything I'd said made any difference at all.
The draining discussion did present a gift though, it showed me what questions many pro-vax parents have about vaccines, that NEED to be addressed publicly. Below are statements taken from our conversation and answers to them:
"Thimerosal has not been used in childhood vaccines for 10 years."
Thimerosal (contains 50% mercury) HAS indeed been used in vaccines since the 1930's right through to today, and I'm sure will continue to until there is a law prohibiting it. Ten years ago there was a major enquiry into the effect thimerosal had on young children. As a result major health organizations issued a joint statement recommending it's removal as soon as possible (excerpt from the CDC website):
The Public Health Service (including the FDA, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) and the American Academy of Pediatrics issued two Joint Statements, urging vaccine manufacturers to reduce or eliminate thimerosal in vaccines as soon as possible (CDC 1999) and (CDC 2000).1Despite the above statement, no recall of the vaccines containing mercury was ever issued and companies continued to sell lots already manufactured with expiration dates as late as 2007. It is plausible then that vaccines containing large amounts of thermerosal were still being administered to children as recently as 2007. The removal of thimerosal in vaccines has been more of a gradual phasing out, than a sudden halt.
While most vaccines manufactured today have abided by the above recommendation to reduce or eliminate thimerosal, 11 different vaccines in the U.S still contain it, and some are part of the current childhood vaccine schedule:
(Table excerpts from the CDC)2
Vaccine
|
Trade Name
|
Manufacturer
|
Mercury
|
Pediatric Dose
|
DTaP
|
Tripedia2
|
Sanofi Pasteur,
Inc. |
≤ 0.3 µg
/0.5 mL dose |
Persons 6 weeks
to 7 years, same dose |
DT
|
No Trade Name
|
Sanofi Pasteur,
Inc. |
< 0.3 µg
/0.5mL dose |
Persons 6 weeks
to 7 years, same dose |
Sanofi Pasteur,
Ltd.3 |
25 µg
/0.5 mL dose | |||
Td
|
No Trade Name
|
Mass Biologics
|
≤ 0.3 µg
/0.5 mL dose |
Persons 7 years and
over, same as adult dose |
Decavac
|
Sanofi Pasteur,
Inc. |
≤ 0.3 µg
/0.5 mL dose |
Persons 7 years and
over, same as adult dose | |
TT
|
No Trade Name
|
Sanofi Pasteur,
Inc. |
25 µg
/0.5 mL dose | |
Influenza
|
Afluria
|
CSL Limited
|
0 (0.5mL
single dose) 24.5 µg (0.5 mL multidose) |
Persons 5 years and
over, same as adult dose |
Fluzone5
(multi-dose presentation) |
Sanofi Pasteur,
Inc. |
25 µg
/0.5 mL dose |
Persons 6 months and
over, N/A | |
Fluvirin
(multi-dose vial) |
Novartis Vaccines
and Diagnostics Ltd. |
25 µg
/0.5 ml dose |
Persons 4 years and
over, same as adult dose | |
FluLaval
|
ID Biomedical
Corporation of |
25 µg
/0.5 ml dose |
Persons 18 years and
over | |
Meningococcal
|
Menomune A, C, AC and A/C/Y/W-135
|
Sanofi Pasteur,
Inc. |
25 µg
/0.5 dose |
Same as adult dose
|
Table Footnotes
Thimerosal is approximately 50% mercury (Hg) by weight. A 0.01% solution (1 part per 10,000) of thimerosal contains 50 µg of Hg per 1 ml dose or 25 µg of Hg per 0.5 ml dose.
Sanofi Pasteur's Tripedia may be used to reconstitute ActHib to form TriHIBit. TriHIBit is indicated for use in children 15 to 18 months of age.
This vaccine is not marketed in the
COMVAX is not licensed for use under 6 weeks of age because of decreased response to the Hib component.
Children under 3 years of age receive a half-dose of vaccine, i.e., 0.25 mL (12.5 µg mercury/dose.)
| ||||
Is the level of Mercury in pediatric vaccines safe?
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recommends ingesting no more than 0.1mcg of methyl-mercury per kg of body weight per day to avoid toxicity.4 This recommendation is for methyl, not ethyl mercury, which is the type of mercury contained in vaccines. There are very few studies on ethyl-mercury, and as such, there is no other choice but to use the EPA's recommendations for methyl-mercury. Also keep in mind this is for 'ingesting' not 'injecting', injecting has a much more potent effect. Currently there are no recommendations for the limit of injected mercury to avoid toxicity, but bearing in mind the limit for ingested mercury, one would hope the limit for injected mercury should be well below it.
Using the EPA's guideline of 0.1mcg of mercury per kg of body weight per day, we can calculate that an average 7.5kg 6 month old infant therefore must not exceed 0.75mcg in a single day. With this example we can see that the current pediatric vaccines do finally fit within the EPA guidelines. Until recently this has not been the case. Many children in the past have received accumulated doses of mercury, most reaching between 30mcg and 100mcg by six months, exceeding the EPA's limit many times over throughout the infants first year.5 A study conducted by the CDC in 2000 examined these children and concluded:
"This analysis suggests that in our study population, the risk of tics, ADD, language and speech delays, and developmental delays in general may be increased by exposure to mercury from thimerosal containing vaccines during the first six months of life."5There is now a fund set up by the US government for those children and their families who have suffered the damaging effects of vaccinations, called the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program – a kind of ‘here's some money now shut up' fund.6
"Since the first Vaccine Injury Compensation claims were made in 1989, 3,149 compensation payments have been made, $2,396,574,630.52 disbursed to petitioners and $96,060,500.79 paid to cover attorney's fees and other legal costs."6But I can never imagine there will be any public accountability or indication of actual wrong doing from the government or pharmaceutical companies. In the face of insurmountable evidence, their stance will always be to deny.
"There has been no fall in the rate of Autism since thimerosal's removal from vaccines."
The removal of thimerosal from vaccines has been a gradual phasing out, not a sudden halt. And it is still in 6 different types of vaccines, in no way has it been entirely "removed". The below graph shows the prevalence of autism in Minesota from 2003 to 2008, grouped by birth year. (Click for a larger view)7
• Older children with autism are continuing to be identified.
• It takes from 2 to 7 years or longer for older children who have autism to be identified, with the highest peaks being around 7 to 8 years old.
• Children under three years of age lag in being diagnosed.
• Prevalence for each birth year will continue to rise until all persons in that birth year are identified.
The problem is current charts often show a continued dramatic increase in overall autism rates, which on the surface is misleading. It makes it seem as if each year the number of babies born with autism is sky rocketing. When in fact it is the older children who are only now being diagnosed with autism who are making up the bulk of the current statistics.
Still, we can see from the graph above that autism continues to gradually rise each year, so what's going on? The problem is that while thimerosal was being phased out of most vaccines, the amount of aluminium in vaccines multiplied exponentially to levels never seen before, well in excess of EPA and FDA safety levels. Aluminium is well known neurotoxin and studies show it is implicated in autism:
"A significant correlation exists between the amounts of aluminium administered to preschool children and the current prevalence of autism spectrum disorders in seven Western countries, particularly at 3–4 months of age." 17
"These current data implicate aluminium injected in early postnatal life in some central nervous system alterations that may be relevant for a better understanding of the aetiology (cause) of autism spectrum disorder." 18
"In young children, a highly significant correlation exists between the number of pediatric aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines administered and the rate of autism spectrum disorders." 19
"We propose that children with the autism diagnosis are especially vulnerable to toxic metals such as aluminum and mercury due to insufficient serum sulfate and glutathione. A strong correlation between autism and the MMR (Measles, Mumps, Rubella) vaccine is also observed." 20
"It may be that mercury and aluminium from vaccines as well as other sources, by accumulating in the brain, are acting as the innate (immune) trigger. It has been shown that both of these metals can trigger microglial activation and neurodegenerative (damage and death of nerve cells) effects." 21
For more information on aluminium in vaccines see the posts:
Vaccines & Autism: The Evidence
Childhood Vaccination: Aluminium
"All evidence that vaccines have caused autism has been refuted."
As mentioned earlier, a study by the CDC in June 2000 concluded:
"This analysis suggests that in our study population, the risk of ticks, ADD, language and speech delays, and developmental delays in general maybe increased by exposure to mercury from thimersoal containing vaccines during the first six months of life."Studies have continued to examine whether there is a link between vaccines or mercury and vaccines, and the link is very clear:
"A thorough review of medical literature and U.S. government data indicates (i) that many and perhaps most cases of idiopathic autism, in which an extended period of developmental normalcy is followed by an emergence of symptoms, are induced by early exposure to mercury; (ii) that this type of autism represents a unique form of mercury poisoning (HgP); (iii) that excessive mercury exposure from thimerosal in vaccine injections is an etiological mechanism for causing the traits of autism; (iv) that certain genetic and non-genetic factors establish a predisposition whereby thimerosal's adverse effects occur only in some children; and (v) that vaccinal mercury in thimerosal is causing a heretofore unrecognized mercurial syndrome." 8
"The overwhelming evidence from the peer-reviewed scientific and medical literature favours acceptance that mercury exposure is capable of causing some Autism Spectrum Disorders, particularly in children who are biochemically and/or genomically susceptible to mercury intoxication. A review of treatments suggests that Autism Spectrum Disorder patients who undergo protocols to reduce mercury and/or its effects show significant clinical improvements in some cases." 9
"The children with Autism Spectrum Disorder:
Had elevated levels of androgens.
Excreted significant amounts of mercury post chelation challenge.
Had biochemical evidence of decreased function in their glutathione pathways.
Had no known significant mercury exposure except from Thimerosal-containing vaccines/Rho(D)-immune globulin preparations.
Had alternate causes for their regressive Autism Spectrum Disorders ruled out.
Had a significant dose-response relationship between the severity of the regressive Autism Spectrum Disorder and the total mercury dose children received from Thimerosal-containing vaccines/Rho (D)-immune globulin preparations.
Were exposed to significant amounts of mercury from Thimerosal-containing biologic/vaccine preparations during their fetal/infant developmental periods, and subsequently, between 12 and 24 mo of age.
Were previously normally developing children prior to mercury exposure.
Suffered mercury toxic encephalopathies (brain injury) that manifested with clinical symptoms consistent with regressive Autism Spectrum Disorders." 10
"Boys aged 3 to 17 years (born before 1999 with a vaccination record) who received the first dose of hepatitis B vaccine during the first month of life were 3 times more likely to be diagnosed with autism, than boys either vaccinated later or not at all."11
"The higher the proportion of children receiving recommended vaccinations, the higher was the prevalence of Autism or Speech or Language Impairment. A 1% increase in vaccination was associated with an additional 680 children having Autism or Speech or Language Impairment. Aluminum, which is found in at least 20 U.S. childhood vaccines (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2010), is not only a neurotoxin, but also an immunosuppressant that may allow measles-containing vaccines to create cytokines that damage the brain.Enhanced exposure to aluminum via vaccines may be associated with an increase in the prevalence of neurological disorders such as autism, especially if an aluminum-containing vaccine is administered along with a measlescontaining vaccine." 12
"Children with severe Autism Spectrum Disorder had biomarkers consistent with mercury toxicity such as significantly increased mercury intoxication-associated urinary porphyrins (pentacarboxyporphyrin, precoproporphyrin, and coproporphyrin); significantly decreased plasma levels of reduced glutathione (GSH), cysteine, and sulfate; significantly increased plasma oxidized glutathione (GSSG). This study concluded mercury intoxication is significantly associated with autistic symptoms." 13
"Boys who were vaccinated with the Hep B triple series vaccine were 9 times more likely to need early intervention or special education services, than boys who were not vaccinated with the Hep B vaccine." 14"The anti-vaccination movement twist facts"
*Note: The Hep B triple series vaccine contained thimerosal at the time this data was collected
To that I replied, "ALL studies and publications twist facts. Yes that's right, every single study is funded by someone, and each person has their own personal point of view, their own bias." Again this was brushed off.
It's an illusion that because a study was conducted by a researcher the contents of it are pure truth. We can never be sure a study was accurately conducted, but often it's all we have to go on. And the stats themselves can be interpreted literally any way you like, the way in which it's delivered to you will sway you in whatever direction the commentator wants you to go.
For an example of the integrity of today's scientific studies, there was a recent study, ‘Early Thimerosal Exposure and Neuropsychological Outcomes at 7 to 10 Years' published in The New England Journal of Medicine on September 27, 2007 that was touted as a ‘Weight of Evidence Against Thimerosal Causing Neuropsychological Deficits' by many medical publications. But by looking just little closer major flaws in the study became self evident:15
- The study specifically eliminated any children with autism or a neurological condition. Children who had had encephalitis and meningitis were also eliminated. This literally makes the study null and void. And I'm quite dumbfounded every time I read it. They removed any child that would conflict with the outcome they wanted: to show thimersoal does not cause neuropsychological deficits. What a novel way to deal with the problem, just remove the evidence and continue as it you're conducting a valid study. If the study were conducted honestly these would have been the children they were specifically looking for, they were what the whole study was supposed to be about.
- The authors went on to eliminate 70% of the study participants. The authors themselves also acknowledge that selection bias might have been a factor in the findings. It really sounds more like it was an audition to find the healthiest children, than a valid, randomized group of study subjects.
- The primary concern about thimerosal, that it causes autism, was not addressed or included in the study. The study noted that autism itself - the condition most often connected with thimerosal - was not considered.
- The authors of the study had major conflicts of interest.
Dr. Offit
Serves on the scientific advisory board of Merck (major vaccine manufacturer). Holds a patent on the RotaTeq vaccine produced by Merck.
Dr. Thompson
The lead investigator, is a former employee of Merck.
Dr. Marcy
Has received consulting fees from Merck, Sanofi Pasteur, GlaxoSmithKline, and MedImmune.
Dr. Jackson
Received grant money from Wyeth, Sanofi Pasteur, GlaxoSmithKline, and Novartis. He received lecture fees from Sanofi Pasteur and consulting fees from Wyeth and Abbott. Currently, he is a consultant to the FDA Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee.
Dr. Lieu
Is a consultant to the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunication Practices.
Dr. Black
Receives consulting fees from MedImmune, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, and Merck, and grant support from MedImmune, GlaxoSmithKline, Aventis, Merck, and Novartis.
Dr. Davis - Receives consulting fees from Merck and grant support from Merck and GlaxoSmithKline.
As you can see you've got to be very careful which studies you tout as evidence.
Below is a large excerpt from WAVES NZ, with some rather damning info regarding the integrity of scientific studies:16
Conflict of Interest
The burgeoning problem of conflict of interest was discussed in a paper in a 2002 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association:
The vast majority of doctors involved in establishing national guidelines on disease treatment have financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry that could potentially sway their recommendations and inappropriately influence thousands of other physicians… 38% of respondents said they had served as employees or consultants for pharmaceutical companies and 58% had received financial support for medical research. In addition, 59% had links with drug companies whose medications were considered in the particular guidelines they authored… 19% said they thought their co-authors' recommendations were swayed by their relationships and 7% said they thought their own relationships influenced recommendations.On the same topic a Lancet editorial asks just how tainted by commercial conflicts has medicine become? The author concluded that the answer was heavily tainted, and damagingly so.
A paper published in the British Medical Journal in 2003 found that:
Research sponsored by the drug industry was more likely to produce results favouring the product made by the company sponsoring the research than studies funded by other sources. The results apply across a wide range of disease states, drugs, and drug classes, over at least two decades and regardless of the type of research being assessed.In another paper, published in the journal Psychological Medicine in 2006, Researchers found that in studies on psychiatric drugs favorable outcomes were significantly more common in studies sponsored by the drug manufacturer (78%) than in studies without industry sponsorship (48%) or sponsored by a competitor (28%).
Another study into bias in reported research on psychiatry drugs in 2007 "confirmed previous findings that industry-funded studies are less likely to report negative findings." The authors went on to say that their "novel finding is that this effect appears to be largely or exclusively due to the presence of a company employee among the authorship."
These are just three of many, many papers on conflict of interest within the pharmaceutical industry and the reporting of drug trial results. Such conflict of interest is so widespread and has become such a significant problem that is has begun to be addressed by the major peer-reviewed medical journals. Many medical journals have initiated stricter ethics codes for publishing research funded by pharmaceutical or medical device-makers, including many journals that have instituted zero-tolerance policies for study authors with financial ties to drug companies.
However, this doesn't avoid the problem of many studies that produce negative results never being published at all. Added to this is the use of spin to convince readers of a more favorable result.
In a 2009 report, Dr Isabelle Boutron said that more than 40% of studies with negative findings were "spun" and even in trials with favorable outcomes, 49% of phrases considered to be positive "spin" weren't accompanied by any mention of a statistically significant result.
The researchers defined spin as an attempt to "convince the reader that the treatment is important" even though the trial had nonsignificant findings.
Another problem can be the mismatch between what is reported in the media from a study, or even between an abstract and the rest of the paper. If possible don't just rely on reading an abstract as they can mislead and conclusions drawn may not match the actual results of research.
For example, in a 1998 study of the efficacy of the hepatitis B vaccine in Gambia, the researchers found that, 14 years after administration of the vaccine 37.4% of participants in the study in had been infected, and of the uninfected, 36% had undetectable levels of antibodies. In total, 61% of the adolescents and young adults had no immunity to hepatitis B only 14 years following vaccination. Incomprehensibly, the authors concluded in the paper and the abstract of the paper that vaccine efficacy was remarkably well maintained. Only by reading the full paper was it clear that the vaccine had a very low efficacy. No refusal to publish here, just conclusions that are diametrically opposed to the facts.
More Fraudulent Activity from Vaccine manufacturers
Major vaccine manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline has recently plead guilty in a massive fraud case. They have been fined $3 billion for bribing doctors with, “lavish trips and spa treatments in order to pursuade them to prescribe the drug for uses not approved of through testing.”
”Glaxo also hired a company to write a medical journal article downplaying the risks. The company admitted illegally marketing the popular antidepressants Paxil and Wellbutrin and also withholding the data on the health risks of its best-selling diabetes drug, Avandia. For seven years Glaxo failed to report data showing drug Avandia increased the risk of heart attack by as much as 40 per cent.” 22Another major vaccine manufacturer Merck has been accused by two of their own scientists of trying to...
"...defraud the United States through Merck’s ongoing scheme to sell the government a mumps vaccine that is mislabeled, misbranded, adulterated and falsely certified as having an efficacy rate that is significantly higher than it actually is." 23I hope this info has answered some of the questions that linger around in vaccination debates. I know there's plenty more questions, so I'll continue researching.
Sources:
1. Thimerosal in Vaccines
2. Mercury in Vaccines Chart, FDA
3. New Zealand Immunisation Schedule, New Zealand Ministry of Health
4. Thimerosal in Vaccines
5. Risk of neurologic and renal impairment associated with thimerosal containing vaccines
Thomas Verstraeten et al, 2000
6. National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program
7. Changes in the California Caseload An Update: June 1987 – June 2007
Andrew T. Cavagnaro, Ph.D.
8. Autism: A Unique Type of Mercury Poisoning
Sallie Bernard et al, 2000
9.A comprehensive review of mercury provoked autism
D.A. Geier, 2008
10.A Case Series of Children with Apparent Mercury Toxic Encephalopathies Manifesting with Clinical Symptoms of Regressive Autistic Disorders, , David A. Geier et al, 2007
11. HEPATITIS B VACCINATION OF MALE NEONATES AND AUTISM DIAGNOSIS
NHIS 1997–2002
12. A positive association found between Autism prevalence and childhood vaccination uptake across the U.S. population
Gayle Delong, 2011
13.Biomarkers of environmental toxicity and susceptibility in autism
14. HEPATITIS B TRIPLE SERIES VACCINE AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITY IN US CHILDREN AGED 1‐9 YEARS
15. Dissecting a Thimerosal Study
Heidi Stevenson
16. Making an Informed Decision
17. Do aluminum vaccine adjuvants contribute to the rising prevalence of autism?
Lucija Tomljenovic et al. J Inorganic Biochemistry Vol 105, Issue 11, 2011, Pg 1489–1499
18. Administration of aluminium to neonatal mice in vaccine-relevant amounts is associated with adverse long term neurological outcomes. Shaw CA, et al. J Inorg Biochem. 2013 Jul 19. pii: S0162-0134(13)00177-3.
19. Aluminum in the central nervous system (CNS): toxicity in humans and animals, vaccine adjuvants, and autoimmunity. Shaw CA, et al. Immunol Res. 2013 Jul;56(2-3):304-16.
20. Empirical Data Confirm Autism Symptoms Related to Aluminum and Acetaminophen Exposure
Stephanie Seneff, et al. Entropy, November 7, 2012
21. A possible Central Mechanism in Autism Spectrum disorders, Part 1,2 & 3
Russell L Blaylock. Altern Ther Health Med. 2008 Nov-Dec;14(6):46-53.
22. GlaxoSmithKline fraud case: Does crime pay?
Suzanne Humphries, MD. July 4th 2012
http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/scientists-sue-merck-allege-fraud-mmr-vaccine
Other sources:
Autism - Statistics, Incidence, Prevalence, Rates
by Thoughtfulhouse.org
Critique of CDC's Thimerosal Study
by Thoughtfulhouse.org
by CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES
by Generation Rescue
19 comments
Such good stuff... all my 4 have been vacinated but I do have my concerns. Have met a few children that have major mental/physical issues that the parents swear were not present until after their first vaccinations. Very interesting and rather concerning.
ReplyDeletePaisley,
ReplyDeleteNZ childhood vaccines have not included mercury for I think about 10 years, with the exception of the influenza shot which is given yearly and contains 25mcg mecury - I wouldn't touch it.
However, if your children were vaccinated before 2007, it is possible vaccines manufactured before 2002 (when vaccines contained mercury) were still in circulation.
All vaccines contain very large amounts of aluminum, which also causes neurological damage. I haven't written about it yet, but it's next on the list.
I know this post isn't a ray of sunshine, it's a very somber subject, but it's the information as a parent that I would want to be told.
Thanks for your comment :)
Great reading. There was a study which apparently linked the MMR vaccine to autism that has recently been discredited. The suggestion is that the author may have been paid to make it appear as though there was a link. Presumably the connection he was talking about was separate from the issues surrounding mercury? (I'm sorry I don't know much about the subject, I'm hoping you know a bit more than me).
ReplyDeleteMummyzilla,
ReplyDeleteThere was a lot of press about that study. I haven't looked into it yet, but it will be interesting to find out the real details compared to what the head lines said. I have a hard time believing studies in general, statistics I think are a little more reliable if they're read in context.
Thanks :)
From my research on Vaccinations in Australia, which was about a year ago and I don't have any sources to link back to, so I'm willing to accept wrong.
ReplyDeleteThe only vaccinations I could find that contained thimerosal were the Hepatitis B at birth Vaccination, Swine Flu and Influenza Vaccinations.
I've avoided all those so far. And I delayed vaccinations til my baby was older. It took us a lot to get to that decision. But we still have the MMR to contend with. I am not inclined to get it at all, but it's something I need to discuss with hubby. I plan to put a lot of time and effort into that decision though.
My first was fully vaccinated because I did not know to ask. (With the exception of the chicken pox vaccination.) I wish there was more positive lights towards pro-choice when it came to vaccinations. Instead we're expected and bribed by the government to vaccinate. Even GPs I've spoken to gloss over the side effects and negatives of vaccinations. But I've been told they're paid a bonus for every kid they get fully vaccinated? Not sure on the reliability of it, but I've heard it a lot here.
Karamine,
ReplyDeleteIn the U.S GP's are paid from $2-$18 per jab for the swine flu vaccine.
In Australia GP's are paid $12 per patient per year if 80% or more of their child patients are vaccinated; this increases to $14 per patient per year if more than 90% of the child patients are vaccinated.
In the UK GPs get £2000 if 90% of the children in their practice are vaccinated and this decreases to £700 for between 70% and 90%; below 70% the doctors get nothing.
Financial incentives are also provided to doctors in the Netherlands, France, Japan and Germany.
They say the money is to pay for administrative costs, but in the UK, where doctors risk getting paid nothing, it seems more like a race to the 100%-vaccinated-child-patient-cash-prize finish line.
Hope that helps :)
Thank you for such a well-written, well-researched article. I feel that the media has played a huge role in making those of us who choose not to vaccinate as hippie-freak lunatics who are opposed to logic and science. Frankly, the science supporting the safety and efficacy of vaccines just isn't there. Not that I have found, anyway.
ReplyDeleteI do hope you'll write that piece about the aluminum in vaccines and the dangers of it. My son was born at 37 weeks. He was healthy, weighed 7lb, 7oz and had an APGAR of 9. The hospital gave him the hep B vaccine when he was 28 minutes old, without my knowledge or consent. (When I got his birth records and looked up the actual shot he got, I learned it had 500mcg of aluminum in it. While testing has never been done by the FDA to determine exactly how much aluminum is toxic, the general consensus is that 20 mcg is toxic for the average infant.) Within the hour, he was in NICU, on oxygen. He screamed, writhing and arching his back, for 3 days. It was so bad the nurses complained that he shouldn't have the lung development to scream like that.
The true extent of the damage done by that vaccine would take months for us to realize. The first thing I noticed was his inability to suckle, latch on. He choked easily. Later, when he began to crawl, he did an odd kind of combat crawl. Though he could move his legs, he couldn't make them do what he needed them to do. When he started on table food, he began to have severe GI problems. Though we noticed problems early on, doctors refused to listen. He was 3 yrs. 3 months old when he was finally diagnosed with autism. That was on October 16, 2008 - 6 days before I gave birth to his younger brother. It would take another year for him to finally be diagnosed with ataxic cerebral palsy. He is now 5 1/2 yrs. and still cannot walk, feed himself using utensils, and his speech is limited.
On another note, I had an almost identical pregnancy with my younger son. Same complications, same type of birth. The only difference? I refused all vaccines, vitamin K, eye ointment, etc. He is 2 now. He has been ill only twice in his life. He had over 200 words when he was 18 months old. Since then, I've lost count.
The point of all this is that, while mercury gets all the attention, aluminum is just as dangerous and people need to be aware.
Now how can I transfer this amazing knowledge from here to the minds of the media/propaganda programmed moms I meet everyday! Such a frustration! Your beginning article was especially helpful today. I was on a social site today and feeling attacked, bombarded and ridiculed. I'm drained. My feeling though, was not that they had facts to back it up, they mostly brought up media sites and so on, it's more of an emotional reaction to my facts. Like if they admit that I am right... then they have to admit that they are wrong and have made a mistake with their own children... in some cases. In other cases it's just they believe everything they have been told by the almighty doctor is correct. They are told they are irresponsible or a "bad mother"(by their peers) if they don't and that they need to protect individuals around them (that one never made sense to me). It's a social networking. We vaccinate, we are responsible... even if a mom is questioning it they want to be accepted and feel like we are part of something. We don't vaccinate and we are horrible human beings. They don't want to be talked about negatively or be singled out so social status is a huge factor. I felt quite ganged up on. These women were acting highly disrespectful and vindictive. It's plain bullying, and stands completely against freedom of choice. I urge all those that are against Vaccines to educate yourself thoroughly, know your facts and when someone comes along with a mouth full of untruths you can set them straight respectfully and when someone like minded is being attacked, help them out. Join them. Don't leave them standing all alone. We are fighting for our children as well as others. In the end it's personal choice, but don't let anyone tell you you are a bad person for it.
ReplyDeleteET's Mom,
ReplyDeleteI'm so, so sorry your son was injured, I can not imagine the emotions you must have gone through and still feel today. It's infuriating and saddening to read your son's story. Pro-vax advocates wonder why we are so passionate about not vaccinating, and it's because of children like yours we stand so staunch.
I dearly hope you get the compensation and apology you deserve. It seriously gets my back up when people question or deny the reality of what happened to your son or other vaccine injured children. I hope one day the public will be made aware of what happened to your son and millions of other children.
Thankyou for sharing your story, it's so important for other's to hear first hand why no child should ever be injected with the current vaccines. I wish you and your family all the best for the future :)
I was happy to see you compile this into a blog post. I was actually apart of the discussion you are speaking of and totally got that pull my hair out, bang my head on the wall feeling from it :o(
ReplyDeleteIt is so frustrating when statistics and studies do show one thing, but no matter how much information you give the "vaccines are 100% safe" crowd they seem to not even take the time to click on the links shared or read the info provided. Very frustrating because they are willing to share their "facts", but will not look at the real ones. This misinformation is so dangerous to parents and our children, so thank you for helping to spread the real truth in the fight for natural immunity and vaccine awareness!
Thanks for your comments mamas,
ReplyDeleteOnline discussions can get so heated, I've seen whiny, bitchy, rottenness on all sides. But non-vax parents in particular are up against a lot more than just online debate. We're fighting against decades of compliance, blind trust, and adoration of the vaccine industry (that REALLY doesn't deserve it).
It takes a strong mama to stand up against that and follow your instincts (and plain logic).
I've really just scratched the surface of what's involved in this industry and I can't wait to get more info for you.
Tamara, your site is wonderful. I visited your site back when I did another post about vaccines and got a bunch of useful links. A friend on twitter recommended it, I think @2bkate? Your article was profound, it described the high pitch squeal your wee bub made when he/she was vaccinated due to brain swelling, it was haunting.
My mother keeps harping on about how wonderful vaccines and modern medicine are. She lost half her siblings very early on and blames those losses on the lack of modern medicine (they were living in Eastern Europe at the time).
ReplyDeleteThen she whips out the "but did you ever go to school with someone who was in an iron lung?" comment (in reference to polio)....
All of her arguments are in reference to the small chance that one can die from these deadly diseases. Yet she constantly poo-poos the notion that one can die from vaccine adverse effects. And she refuses to admit that one's health generally arises from an interaction of genes and environment (including what it is that you shove into your mouth).
My debates, sadly, are very much more one-sidedly personal than scientific :/ Because, as a science PhD and as an apprentice ND, I can't possibly know more than an MD who doesn't have (or can't be bothered) to read scientific literature.
But thanks for your summary!
Yes, unfortunately it took my daughter having a reaction to get informed, but what amazes me is that I know so many people who have dealt with something similar and instead of taking the time to do what they know is right for their child they continue to follow the indoctrination we are force fed that "vaccines are safe". Everyone hates to be wrong and admit they made a mistake, but as a parent people need to put their egos aside and do right by their children. If I did not I know in my heart I would have lost my daughters. Yes, plural because if we had not made the change to being a non-vaccinating family our little one would have surely had a terrible reaction because we found out around her turning a year old that she had a severe egg allergy. Scary stuff.
ReplyDeleteFor anyone interested here is our daughter Eden's reaction story: http://moralescrew.blogspot.com/2010/08/vaccine-reaction_20.html
Thank you for being as outspoken as possible on this subject! Many hugs.
Tamara,
ReplyDeleteI can only imagine the horror of having to face that your child has been neurologically impaired through your own choice to vaccinate them. For some it could be that it's a guilt and sadness they just can't bear to face, so they just ignore it and stand behind their choice to vaccinate.
That's what makes vaccination conversations so touchy, no one wants to feel like a bad parent (no one is a bad parent).
For me it's a matter of presenting information in a factual, non-propaganda-like way, together with links and studies. I'm thinking of making up little fact cards or pamphlets, let me know if you want copies ;)
Yes please. Feel free to contact me anytime at evdakia @gmail .com (no spaces of course)
ReplyDeleteI read a quote the other day that really spoke to me... it said...
ReplyDelete"Have we traded measles, mumps and rubella for cancer and leukemia"
Thanks for your efforts towards this.
The journal articles listed are all from a small number of quack and non-qualified authors, heavily linked to the anti-vax community. Further, all but one of the journals listed are not accepted scientific journals, but rather vanity-press outfits outside the fringe.
ReplyDeleteYour opinions do not appear to be based on "science" and "REAL scientific studies", but instead largely on cherry-picked quack studies that confirm what you wish to believe. Passing such poor material off as legitimate science to other parents is fraud.
What a load of rubbish Anon. Not only are you totally wrong - these studies are from a range of journals, from the Journal of Toxicology & Environmental Health, the Journal of Toxicological & Environmental Chemistry, to the Journal of the Neurological Sciences. As reports & studies have shown some major journals are are not reliable sources - the majority of the pharmaceutical studies they publish are are paid for & authored by pharmaceutical companies & shown to be severely spun. This is not fear mongering, it's fact (if you bothered to read the studies above). And I remember reading that one of the major medical journals has just made a deal with a major pharmaceutical company - conflict of interest much? It's unfortunate that you can't see who the real quacks are (those that are in bed with the companies & spin every study they make), and have the arrogance & ignorance to trash the studies that are in fact honest & legitimate.
ReplyDeleteAnon, what an ignorant person you are. I find it hilarious that you distrust some researchers because of their "links" to the anti-vax community (as if there is a lot of profit to be made in doing so!); whereas you completely disregard the obvious, well-documented links between doctors and the pharmaceutical industry (where there is most certainly money to be made!).
ReplyDelete