The point I was trying to make was that the information that is presented to the public is one sided. As per the web address I provided, the Minnesota Department of health has all the potential adverse effects of the disease listed, but NOTHING ON THE POTENTIAL ADVERSE EVENTS ASSOCIATED WITH A VACCINE. If you want the information on vaccines you need to search for it. This is the same way you rationalize. You state that I only discuss the “side effects of the vaccine, not the benefits.” Often the only thing parents are told that “fever and soreness at the site can be expected” and that is where it ends. There are lots more side effects that are never discussed. However, the medical profession goes to great lengths to tell us about every potential complication of the disease in order to scare us to vaccinate. For example the latest one I read was in relation to necrotizing fascitis and chickenpox. So now we are told to vaccinate for chickenpox, because these severe reactions can be prevented. Fear is a great motivator, and keeps the vaccine manufacturers in business.
I’m not sure where those statistics came from that you gave me, but something does not add up here. According to the CDC at http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5450a3.htm
The estimated incidence of whooping cough is 570 per 100,000 population (in the age range of 10-49 years) Actual reported cases are only a fraction of the actual incidence of pertussis.
Upon checking US census data at http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/c2kprof00-us.pdf I found the number of people in this age group.
The number of 10-54 year olds in 2000 was 182,730,266 ( I was unable to calculate the exact number of people in the age group of 10-49 as this was not provided, so the total reflects 10-54 year age group)
The estimated incidence of pertussis among this age group is 570 per 100,000. (This was the rate for 1995-1996 and the incidence has increased since that time) This gives an incidence rate of 0.57%. Based on the estimated cases the total number of cases would be 1,041,562.
Applying your statistics we should be seeing:
Pneumonia 5.2% or 52,078 cases
Seizures 0.8% or 8,332 cases
Encephalopathy 0.1% or 1,041 cases
Hospitalization 20% or 208,312 cases
Death 0.2% or 2,083 cases
Your adverse reaction percentages make no sense at all. The reported incidence of death for pertussis is only 19 per year, a far cry from 2083 cases according to your statistics of adverse events associated with pertussis. It is reasonable to assume that if a 20 year old died of pertussis that this would be reported, particularly by our “pro vaccine” medical professionals.
The mortality rate from pertussis using CDC figures from the above report would be less then 0.00182% - 19 deaths versus an estimated 1,041,562 cases. (estimated numbers are only based on 10-49 year olds, so there are probably more cases as there are other age groups in the country)
*******91% of deaths occur in infants less then 6 months of age*******
According to the same US census report there were 19,175,798 children under 5 years of age in the US in 2000. For purposes of calculating approximate adverse reactions lets assume 25% have received all doses of DTP. That means that 4,793,949 children are fully vaccinated. Each child received 5 doses or 23,969,745 total doses.
Considering your vaccination Statistics:
Anaphylaxis - 2 cases per 100,000 doses (0.002%) or 479 cases
Seizures – 0.057% or 13,662 cases
Hypotonic / hyporesponsive state – 0.057% or 13,622 cases
Crying for 3 hours – 9% or 2,157,277 cases
Local soreness – 60% or 14,381,848 cases
Local redness / swelling – 4,793,949 cases
Death - No rate provided, however you state that “perhaps the death rate is 0.0004%” (don’t know how accurate this is, considering all your other calculations were incorrect) this would still be 95 cases. A lot more then the 19 deaths associated with pertussis reported by CDC.
These statistics do not include brain damage or other side effects associated with vaccines. On a previous post we were informed that VAERS reports the incidence of an adverse reaction at 11.2 per 100,000 doses or 0.0112%, for EACH dose. When you look at 5 doses the risk for an adverse event is 0.056%. Considering that only 2% - 10% are ever reported, the possibility of adverse reactions are closer to 0.56% - 2.8%, just for pertussis. Using the numbers discussed 23,969,745 doses would be equivalent to 134,530 to 671,152 adverse reactions.
“The results of all infant vaccine-associated deaths which occurred in 1998 and were reported to VAERS as of the end of the year 2000…
There were 57 DTaP-vaccine associated infant deaths. (Unfortunately, it is not possible to know whether it was DTaP vaccine alone which might have been responsible, since every single infant who died after receiving DTaP, except one, had received 2 or more vaccines.)
Former FDA commissioner David Kessler has said that it is thought 1% of serious drug reactions are reported to the FDA. A vaccine manufacturer testified that in their experience, a passive system (which is what VAERS is) results in around 2%. Consequently it may well be that only 1-2% of serious adverse vaccine associated reactions are reported to VAERS. The more conservative figure of 10% is widely regarded to be the minimum percent reported to VAERS.”
I don’t understand your rationale in regards to vaccines. “Correlation is not proof of causal relationship”
Your rationale is: high incidence of pertussis – vaccination – low incidence of pertussis
Yet you do not believe that there are high incidences of adverse reactions. For example:
Low autism rates-vaccination-high autism rates (the incidence is now 1 in 166 kids)
Low SIDS rates-vaccination-high SIDS rates
Your thinking is a one way street and you only believe reports that disprove any correlation, which conforms to your line of thinking. Anyone who opposes your view is considered a “quack”. Anyone who discusses potential side effects is “misinformed”
There are thousands of adverse reactions reported each and every year to VAERS, however nothing is done about it. As a quick comparison lets look at Tylenol, which was recalled in 1982 because 7 people died. http://www.ou.edu/deptcomm/dodjcc/groups/02C2/Johnson & Johnson.htm
There are numerous reports of death associated with vaccines and there are no recalls, just more vaccines added (except the rotavirus vaccine)
I have never stated that the disease is treatable with antibiotics, however, when antibiotics are given early on in the disease, adverse events are much less.
And, finally, I do think that if we stopped immunizing for pertussis altogether there would be an increase in the incidence of pertussis. However I believe it is wrong to expect parents to “sacrifice” their child to these vaccine “expirements”. You can argue that this is not the case, however, the FDA admits that a vaccine is tested on the population during the final phase. If they no longer appear effective then another dose is added, or the name of the disease is “redefined” to give the appearance the disease is decreasing. Why?
Regarding Hepatitis B - http://www.whale.to/vaccines/belkin.html