Comments on: Is Immunization Worth The Risks? http://the-health-gazette.com/63/is-immunization-worth-the-risks/ Your interactive source for health news, views and reviews Thu, 29 Mar 2012 17:48:23 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Health Gazette http://the-health-gazette.com/63/is-immunization-worth-the-risks/comment-page-1/#comment-109 Health Gazette Fri, 17 Nov 2006 07:04:13 +0000 #comment-109 Here is an update on this story. After a ponderous silence for months during which most watchers have lost interest, the FDA and CDC have slipped the following notification quietly onto the obligatory public places. Their agend appears to be unfolding as per normal. <blockquote> FDA and CDC updated an October 2005 alert to consumers and health care providers regarding reports of Guillain Barre Syndrome (GBS) following administration of Meningococcal Conjugate Vaccine A, C, Y, and W135, manufactured by Sanofi Pasteur. To date a total of 15 confirmed cases of GBS among individuals 11-19 years of age occurring within six weeks of vaccination with Menactra have been reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Two additional cases have been confirmed in persons 20 years of age and older. All individuals are reported to be recovering or have recovered. While the cases reported suggest a small increased risk of GBS following immunization with Menactra, the limitations in VAERS, and the uncertainty regarding background incidence rates for GBS require that these findings be viewed with caution. At this time, CDC and FDA cannot determine with certainty whether Menactra does increase the risk of GBS in persons who receive the vaccine and, if so, to what degree. At the present time, there are no changes in recommendations for vaccination and individuals should continue to follow their doctors' recommendations. FDA asks any persons with knowledge of possible cases of GBS occurring after receiving Menactra to report them to VAERS at http://www.vaers.hhs.gov or by phone at 1-800-822-7967. Read the complete MedWatch 2006 Safety summary, including links to the FDA and CDC update documents, at: <a href="http://www.fda.gov/medwatch/safety/2006/safety06.htm#Menactra" target="_blank">http://www.fda.gov/medwatch/safety/2006/safety06.htm#Menactra</a></blockquote> Seventeen confirmed cases of GBS following vaccination may seem to be a small number to health bureaucrats (including the clinicians who have retreated to become pen pushers). It is a very large number if you happen to be one of the 17 or part of their family or one of their friends. The biased and somewhat defensive tone of this statement by the CDC and FDA reminds me of similary documents when the claims were that "there is no conclusive scientific proof that smoking causes lung cancer" ... yeah, right. Peter ________________ Dr Peter Tylee Editor Here is an update on this story. After a ponderous silence for months during which most watchers have lost interest, the FDA and CDC have slipped the following notification quietly onto the obligatory public places. Their agend appears to be unfolding as per normal.

FDA and CDC updated an October 2005 alert to consumers and health care providers regarding reports of Guillain Barre Syndrome (GBS) following administration of Meningococcal Conjugate Vaccine A, C, Y, and W135, manufactured by Sanofi Pasteur. To date a total of 15 confirmed cases of GBS among individuals 11-19 years of age occurring within six weeks of vaccination with Menactra have been reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Two additional cases have been confirmed in persons 20 years of age and older. All individuals are reported to be recovering or have recovered.

While the cases reported suggest a small increased risk of GBS following immunization with Menactra, the limitations in VAERS, and the uncertainty regarding background incidence rates for GBS require that these findings be viewed with caution. At this time, CDC and FDA cannot determine with certainty whether Menactra does increase the risk of GBS in persons who receive the vaccine and, if so, to what degree. At the present time, there are no changes in recommendations for vaccination and individuals should continue to follow their doctors’ recommendations. FDA asks any persons with knowledge of possible cases of GBS occurring after receiving Menactra to report them to VAERS at http://www.vaers.hhs.gov or by phone at 1-800-822-7967.

Read the complete MedWatch 2006 Safety summary, including links to the FDA and CDC update documents, at:

http://www.fda.gov/medwatch/sa.....m#Menactra

Seventeen confirmed cases of GBS following vaccination may seem to be a small number to health bureaucrats (including the clinicians who have retreated to become pen pushers). It is a very large number if you happen to be one of the 17 or part of their family or one of their friends.

The biased and somewhat defensive tone of this statement by the CDC and FDA reminds me of similary documents when the claims were that “there is no conclusive scientific proof that smoking causes lung cancer” … yeah, right.

Peter
________________
Dr Peter Tylee
Editor

]]> By: Health Gazette http://the-health-gazette.com/63/is-immunization-worth-the-risks/comment-page-1/#comment-66 Health Gazette Sun, 09 Apr 2006 01:04:57 +0000 #comment-66 An update relating to the period from October 2005 to February 2006 has been <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5513a2.htm?s_cid=mm5513a2_e" target="_blank">posted by the CDC</a>. It is an interesting report that artfully treads the line between scientific honesty and transparent reporting on the one side and a clear agenda to find no reasons suggesting that the vaccine should be withdrawn. However, it is clear that a strong bias towards the latter exists. The bias is understandable, though regrettable. The CDC is motivated by a need to control meningococcal disease and would doubtless feel that withdrawal of the vaccine would leave the population without defences. This is a scary prospect for the CDC and given its love of vaccination I should think it would take a quite demonstrable level of harm before withdrawal would be seriously contemplated. This is all well and good if you happen to be a health planner safely ensconced in a bureaucracy. It is not good however for the people who <em>do have adverse ractions</em> to the vaccines or for their loved ones. Seeing distressed family members sitting in an intensive care unit by a ventillated patient whose GBS has rendered them unable to breathe and realizing that this situation has been caused by a vaccination "mishap" is a very different experience. It is interesting to note that while CDC 'scientists' look at the big picture and explain such events away as mere statistical happenstance, clinicians have no such difficulty in recognizing a definite link between vaccination and disease. Of course, not many have the courage to say so publicly. Peter ________________ Dr Peter Tylee Editor An update relating to the period from October 2005 to February 2006 has been posted by the CDC. It is an interesting report that artfully treads the line between scientific honesty and transparent reporting on the one side and a clear agenda to find no reasons suggesting that the vaccine should be withdrawn. However, it is clear that a strong bias towards the latter exists.

The bias is understandable, though regrettable. The CDC is motivated by a need to control meningococcal disease and would doubtless feel that withdrawal of the vaccine would leave the population without defences. This is a scary prospect for the CDC and given its love of vaccination I should think it would take a quite demonstrable level of harm before withdrawal would be seriously contemplated.

This is all well and good if you happen to be a health planner safely ensconced in a bureaucracy. It is not good however for the people who do have adverse ractions to the vaccines or for their loved ones.

Seeing distressed family members sitting in an intensive care unit by a ventillated patient whose GBS has rendered them unable to breathe and realizing that this situation has been caused by a vaccination “mishap” is a very different experience. It is interesting to note that while CDC ‘scientists’ look at the big picture and explain such events away as mere statistical happenstance, clinicians have no such difficulty in recognizing a definite link between vaccination and disease. Of course, not many have the courage to say so publicly.

Peter
________________
Dr Peter Tylee
Editor

]]>