SadKangaroo wrote on Apr 6^th, 2019 at 11:45am:


many blessings sad one ,

you simply quote fake news and " studies / data " paid for by interest groups that are an extension of the pharmaceutical apparatus

you repeat this and think you are clever .. its funny to watch .. we continue

it_is_the_light wrote on Apr 6^th, 2019 at 12:54pm:


You quote memes without sources and we do not continue.

I've shown you the truth about the inaccuracies of the information you posted and rather than acknowledge that you cite conspiracy?

Really?

And you just continue to post more falsehoods.

Unlike you, I don't find this funny.

Again, you're exploiting a very serious issue for your own personal gratification without a care of the danger it may put others in.

Timeline Entry: 4/24/1955

The Cutter Incident

Just a few weeks after the landmark press conference announcing success of the vaccine trials, an Idaho doctor reported a case of paralytic polio in a recently vaccinated girl. Over the next few weeks, similar reports trickled in to local health authorities. All involved a disturbing detail: paralysis began in the vaccinated arm, rather than in the legs as was more common.

It soon emerged that most of the cases of paralytic polio occurred in children inoculated with vaccine produced by Cutter Laboratories in California.


Timeline Entry: 10/15/1999

Rotavirus: First Vaccine Withdrawn

The first vaccine for rotavirus, a common cause of severe childhood diarrheal illness, RotaShield, was licensed and recommended for routine childhood immunization in 1998. Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, however, withdrew the vaccine in 1999 due to safety concerns. Scientists associated the vaccine with a rare intestinal problem called intussusception, a potentially fatal telescoping of part of the bowel.


Timeline Entry: 1948

Kyoto Disaster

In Kyoto, Japan, 68 of 606 children died after diphtheria immunization as a result of improper manufacture of toxoid.

Toxoid in the preparation reverted to toxin, with disastrous effects. Toxoid manufacturers instituted safeguards after this event to prevent similar incidents. No similar cases have since been reported.

https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/articles/vaccine-side-effects-and-adve...

poor people trusted vaccine manufactures

this is one of the main problems that vaxers never acknowledge

Sudden Infant Death Syndrome is Vaccine related in many cases  ..





https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/infant-deaths-following-vaccination-the-...

Infant Deaths Following Vaccination: The Numbers Don’t Lie—Or Do They?

By the Children’s Health Defense Team


National and international health agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the World Health Organization (WHO) routinely and emphatically claim that serious adverse events following vaccination are rare. Nowhere is officialdom’s minimization of vaccine risks more apparent than in these agencies’ position on vaccine-related deaths. The WHO, for example, states that “so few deaths can plausibly be attributed to vaccines that it is hard to assess the risk statistically.” Nevertheless, once regulators have deemed that a given vaccine is safe enough to be licensed and widely marketed, vaccine manufacturers are supposed to do just that—that is, continue to statistically assess a vaccine’s risks, including the risk of death—and regulators are supposed to carefully review the postlicensure data that pharmaceutical companies submit.

…GlaxoSmithKline neglected to report to regulatory authorities that there was a statistically significant increased risk of sudden infant death in the four days after administration of its hexavalent vaccine…

A 2017 commentary by India-based physicians Jacob Puliyel and C. Sathyamala in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics describes a shocking dereliction of duty on the part of regulators who were presented with vaccine data carefully tailored to obscure serious risks. Tackling concerns about infant deaths that have occurred following hexavalent vaccination in several European countries, the authors of the commentary show that GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) neglected to report to regulatory authorities that there was a statistically significant increased risk of sudden infant death in the four days after administration of its hexavalent vaccine—and the regulatory agency in question (the EMA) ignored the omission and accepted GSK’s apparently whitewashed data at face value.

Problematic hexavalent vaccines and problematic analyses
Among world regions, European countries have taken the lead in incorporating hexavalent vaccines into their childhood vaccine schedules. Hexavalent vaccines are potent six-in-one combination shots covering diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, polio and Haemophilus influenzae type B. In 2000, the European Union (EU) approved two hexavalent vaccines—GSK’s Infanrix hexa and Sanofi Pasteur’s Hexavac—but suspended Hexavac five years later after a detailed analysis suggested that children who received the vaccine in their second year of life had an elevated risk of sudden death. The analysis by Drs. Puliyel and Sathyamala suggests that Infanrix hexa may be just as problematic as the discredited Hexavac vaccine.

In Europe, vaccine manufacturers routinely provide the EMA with pharmacovigilance documents called periodic safety update reports (PSURs). The PSURs are intended to be critical medical analyses that evaluate “new or changing safety data,” and the EMA relies on them to make or uphold its vaccine-related policies. In its PSURs for Infanrix hexa, GSK typically compares “expected” and “observed” deaths following hexavalent vaccination. If the observed deaths were to significantly exceed the expected deaths, GSK would be forced to report “an increased risk of sudden infant death following vaccination with Infanrix hexa.”

According to Drs. Puliyel and Sathyamala, GSK’s analyses have been marred by statistical maneuvers and flawed assumptions that enable the company to mask probable risks. For example, GSK’s calculation of expected deaths relies on assumptions that overestimate expected deaths, while the company gleans its figures for observed deaths through passive surveillance reports that are not actively solicited or investigated and are notorious for underestimating the true magnitude of adverse events. In the U.S., the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) estimates that passive surveillance captures about one percent of vaccine-related adverse events. A study in Africa that compared passive with active surveillance found that passive surveillance “failed to identify half of all AEFIs [adverse events following immunization] that were identified through active surveillance, including all of the serious AEFIs.”

Reviewing and reanalyzing GSK’s sudden death data from five PSURs (numbers 15-19), Drs. Puliyel and Sathyamala start with the earliest PSUR (number 15) and note a “clustering” of sudden deaths among infants (under age one) in the first three days following vaccination—with 72% of the deaths (42/58) taking place in that time frame and nearly all (93% or 54/58) occurring within 10 days of vaccination. The authors state:

“The fact that the rate of death decreases rapidly with the passage of time following immunization suggests that the deaths could be related to vaccination.”

https://thevaccinereaction.org/2019/01/over-4-billion-paid-for-vaccine-injuries-...

Over

$4 Billion

Paid for Vaccine Injuries and Deaths

A Dec. 1, 2018 update by the U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) on the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) reported that the total amount of awards to children and adults who have been injured or died after receiving federally recommended childhood vaccines has surpassed $4 billion.1 2

The VICP was created by Congress under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 as a federal compensation system alternative to vaccine injury lawsuits filed in civil court.3

According to an article published in Fair Warning, almost no media attention has been given to payouts made to vaccine victims by the government, which are adjudicated in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (also known as “Vaccine Court”).1 Fair Warning points out that one of the reasons that the “Vaccine Court” works in relative obscurity is because public health officials maintain that “vaccines provide vast public health benefits” and are reluctant to talk about vaccine casualties for fear that publicity about vaccine injury compensation awards would dissuade the public from getting vaccinated.1

The HRSA report reveals that over the past 30 years (since 1989), the VICP has received 20,123 petitions claiming vaccine injury and death, out of which 18,000 claims have been resolved. Of those 17,576 cases, 6,313 cases (about two out of three claims) have received compensation awards via settlements or judgments.1 2 Nevertheless, HRSA does not acknowledge that vaccine injuries are rare and estimates that one person has been compensated for every million doses distributed in the United States.1 However, HRSA fails to acknowledge that there is no mechanism for measuring how many injuries and deaths after vaccination have occurred but have never been reported.

According to Christina Ciampolillo, president of the Vaccine Injured Petitioners Bar Association (lawyers that file cases in to the VICP), “The vast majority of people that are coming to my office because they suffered an injury are people who did not even know these types of injuries were a possibility.”1

The issue at hand is that the number of petitions to the VICP has dramatically increased over the last few years. Approximately $1 billion (a quarter of the total amount of payout since 1989) has been given out to vaccine-injured victims in just the last four years.1

While some insist that the VICP has safeguarded the public health by protecting the vaccine supply and keeping vaccine injury lawsuits out of the courts, while protecting the public perception that vaccine are very safe, consumer advocates have a different view.1

Fair Warning quotes Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of The National Vaccine Information Center, who said, “We’re bitterly disappointed. In my view, this has been turned into stockholder’s dream and a consumer’s worst nightmare,”1 She noted that two thirds of petitioners to the VICP are turned away, which deviates from the original purpose of the VICP—to presume causation unless there is another biologically plausible explanation for the injury or death following vaccination.1

In 2014, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) was critical of the VICP, pointing out that most claims took multiple years—some more than a decade—to be resolved.4

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_syphilis_experiment

Tuskegee syphilis experiment

The Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male[a] was an infamous and unethical clinical study conducted between 1932 and 1972 by the U.S. Public Health Service.[1][2] The purpose of this study was to observe the natural history of untreated syphilis; the African-American men in the study were told they were receiving free health care from the United States government.[3]

The Public Health Service started working on this study in 1932 in collaboration with Tuskegee University, a historically black college in Alabama. Investigators enrolled in the study a total of 600 impoverished, African-American sharecroppers from Macon County, Alabama. Of these men, 399 had previously contracted syphilis before the study began, and 201 did not have the disease.[2] The men were given free medical care, meals, and free burial insurance for participating in the study. The men were told that the study was only going to last six months, but it actually lasted 40 years.[2] After funding for treatment was lost, the study was continued without informing the men that they would never be treated. None of the men were told that they had the disease, and none were treated with penicillin even after the antibiotic was proven to successfully treat syphilis. According to the Centers for Disease Control, the men were told that they were being treated for "bad blood", a colloquialism that described various conditions such as syphilis, anemia, and fatigue. "Bad blood"—specifically the collection of illnesses the term included—was a leading cause of death within the southern African-American community.[2]

The 40-year study was controversial for reasons related to ethical standards. Researchers knowingly failed to treat patients appropriately after the 1940s validation of penicillin was found as an effective cure for the disease that they were studying. The revelation in 1972 of study failures by a whistleblower, Peter Buxtun, led to major changes in U.S. law and regulation on the protection of participants in clinical studies. Now studies require informed consent,[4] communication of diagnosis, and accurate reporting of test results.[5]

By 1947, penicillin had become the standard treatment for syphilis. Choices available to the doctors involved in the study might have included treating all syphilitic subjects and closing the study, or splitting off a control group for testing with penicillin. Instead, the Tuskegee scientists continued the study without treating any participants; they withheld penicillin and information about it from the patients. In addition, scientists prevented participants from accessing syphilis treatment programs available to other residents in the area.[6] The study continued, under numerous US Public Health Service supervisors, until 1972, when a leak to the press resulted in its termination on November 16 of that year.[7] The victims of the study, all African American, included numerous men who died of syphilis, 40 wives who contracted the disease, and 19 children born with congenital syphilis.

The Tuskegee Syphilis Study, cited as "arguably the most infamous biomedical research study in U.S. history",[8] led to the 1979 Belmont Report and to the establishment of the Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP).[9] It also led to federal laws and regulations requiring Institutional Review Boards for the protection of human subjects in studies involving them. The OHRP manages this responsibility within the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).[10]

On May 16, 1997, President Bill Clinton formally apologized on behalf of the United States to victims of the experiment.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 12^th, 2019 at 9:28am:


how sad ,

you really have no idea do you ..

government officials and institutions do not care about your welfare

they will use you as fodder to achieve their objectives.. very cold and inhumane to say the very least , yet you do not care ,

seeings you get paid to espouse their propaganda ..

you are exposed yes ..

we continue

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK236284/

Adverse Events Associated with Childhood Vaccines: Evidence Bearing on Causality.

10Death
The Vaccine Safety Committee was charged with assessing a causal relation between all of the vaccines that it reviewed and death. The myriad possible causes of death made this a difficult task. To facilitate review of this serious adverse event, the committee used a categorization scheme, which is discussed below. Because the vast majority of reports of death following vaccination reside in passive surveillance systems, the committee used the scheme to analyze data from a currently operating one, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). A description of the system is included in this chapter, and the results of this analysis are also discussed. All evidence reviewed by the committee (published literature and reports from the passive surveillance systems of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC] and U.S. Food and Drug Administration [FDA]) regarding deaths in association with immunization is discussed later in this chapter.

To answer the question "Can any deaths be attributed to the use of the vaccines discussed in this review?," the committee categorized reports of death following immunization into seven categories:

deaths for which the available data were insufficient to allow a judgment of cause;
deaths associated with vaccine administration but attributable to inappropriate handling, contamination, production error, or error of medical care;
deaths temporally associated with vaccine administration but clearly caused by something other than the vaccine;
deaths classified as sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS);
deaths that are a consequence of vaccine-strain viral infection (applies to measles, mumps, or oral polio vaccine [OPV] for this report);
deaths that are a consequence of an adverse event that itself is causally related to a vaccine reviewed in this report; and
deaths temporally associated with vaccine administration and the cause of death is other than those listed above.
Go to:
Examples
Deaths for Which the Available Data Were Insufficient to Allow a Judgment of Cause
The reports from passive surveillance systems accessed by the committee vary in the quantity and quality of the information that they contain. Many of the reports contained phrases such as "died" or "found dead at baby-sitter's." Reports with more information frequently had no additional documentation submitted with them, so assessment of the diagnosis was not possible. The information in VAERS is discussed below in great detail. The published literature contains reports of deaths following immunization that lack sufficient information for a causality assessment as well. This is most common in uncontrolled observational studies intended to give a broad picture of the results of immunization campaigns.

Deaths Associated With Vaccine Administration but Attributable to Inappropriate Handling, Contamination, Production Error, or Error of Medical Care
This category includes a wide range of contamination or handling problems; vaccines, like any other pharmaceutical agent, are subject to mishandling that might, in extreme cases, lead to death. The Cutter incident is a well-known example of vaccine contamination caused by errors in quality control by the manufacturer and lack of clear guidelines from a regulatory agency; 60 vaccine recipients and 89 contacts of recipients contracted polio as a result of contamination of two production pools of inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) with live virus in 1955 (Nathanson and Langmuir, 1963). Contamination can occur at a more local level. Sokhey (1991) reported several deaths following administration of measles vaccine in India. The report lists the cause of death as "toxic shock syndrome" and notes that contamination was likely because syringes and needles were reused and the sterilization procedures were unsatisfactory. Staphylococcus aureus was isolated from a few available implicated vials. That report is discussed later in this chapter.

Deaths Temporally Associated with Vaccine Administration but Clearly Caused by Something Other Than the Vaccine
Passive surveillance systems contain many reports that fall into this category. Reports to the manufacturer or to the government regarding the death of a vaccine recipient in temporal relation to vaccination can be made before a cause of death is established. Once an autopsy is performed, it is sometimes clear that the death was temporally but not causally related to vaccination. An example of such a death is one that was reported to VAERS. This report describes the death of a 5-year-old 10 days after receipt of diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and pertussis vaccine (DPT), OPV, and measles-mumps-rubella vaccine (MMR). The cause of death was Haemophilus influenzae type b meningitis,