Paralysis Cases Continue to Rise; Experts Speak Out Against WHO and Gates

[BeckyBird]

http://pharmabiz.com/NewsDetails.aspx?aid=68352&sid=1

Title:

Experts call WHO & Bill Gates Foundation's role in India's polio eradication campaign unethical

"The authors noted that while India was polio-free in 2011, in the same year, there were 47500 cases of NPAFP (non-polio acute flaccid paralysis). While data from India’s National Polio Surveillance Project showed NPAFP rate increased in proportion to the number of polio vaccine doses received, independent studies showed that children identified with NPAFP “were at more than twice the risk of dying than those with wild polio infection.”

While this might seem like an attack on Gates and the WHO, this is a cry for help. It is painfully clear that the vaccine program needs a change, for the sake of the people who are being destroyed by it. What is it going to take? How many people will be harmed before we acknowledge there is a problem?

[hippy mum]

?  Thanks for the link.  Dh is finally realizing that Mr. Gates isn't the saint he thought he was.  What I tend to find interesting is that there are other countries who will halt a vaccine when they see harmful effects/deaths and the USA will not.  That's when I ask the same question-what's it going to take?

[Taximom5]

Good question. Too many people in positions of power have too much at stake. And tthere are too many people who have devoted their lives to a health care system based on the flawed methodology produced by those with a financial stake--they will never be able to admit that anything they. Did was wrong.

What it's going to take, sadly, is for enough children of those in the medical profession to have severe reactions to vaccines. And we're seeing the very beginning of that now (the Polings, for instance). But we're also seeing an increasing number of doctors opting for selective/delayed vaxes for their own children; they're playing it safe, while continuing to recommend the mandated schedule for their patients.

[member234098]

W

Edited by member234098 - 5/25/12 at 10:47pm

[Bokonon]

Originally Posted by bbrandonsmom 

?  Thanks for the link.  Dh is finally realizing that Mr. Gates isn't the saint he thought he was.  What I tend to find interesting is that there are other countries who will halt a vaccine when they see harmful effects/deaths and the USA will not.  That's when I ask the same question-what's it going to take?

Did you read about Bill Gates being a large shareholder in Monsanto, and recommending GMOs to "prevent starvation"?  Uh huh.

[BeckyBird]

But, Mr.Gates looks nice. He doesn't have a black moustache, cape, and tophat. So he can't be a bad guy.

You can have FAITH, and BELIEVE he's doing good deeds. Or, ignore your preconceptions, and look at the evidence.

This is what you need to do: Investigate Monsanto. Investigate GMO (this is essential). Investigate the OPV injuries, and the relentless vaccine campaign. Heck, if you feel frisky, investigate Monsanto, bee collapse, and their purchase of Beelogics (Beelogics’ company information states that the primary goal of the firm is to study the very collapse disorder that is thought to be a result — at least in part — of Monsanto’s own creations.)

Maybe Gates is misinformed, and truly believes he's helping. But, even if his intentions are pure, he is still involved with these programs and companies.

[Rrrrrachel]

The situation in India is not comparable to the vaccine program here in the us. They use the live virus oral polio vaccine and we do not.

[member234098]

T

Edited by member234098 - 5/25/12 at 10:46pm

[Bokonon]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

The situation in India is not comparable to the vaccine program here in the us. They use the live virus oral polio vaccine and we do not.

That's right.  We just send the version that is known to be more dangerous to Third World countries.  Talk about first-world privilege.

[Rrrrrachel]

It's still much less dangerous than actual polio. It is used because it's less expensive, more easily administered, and more effective. From a public health perspective it's the better choice.

[Rrrrrachel]

In the us we use ipv because polio is so uncommon the trade off in effectiveness is not as important. In places like India where polio is still endemic the extra effectiveness is still important.

[Bokonon]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

In the us we use ipv because polio is so uncommon the trade off in effectiveness is not as important. In places like India where polio is still endemic the extra effectiveness is still important.

India has been free from wild polio for well over a year, and 2 years ago had only 741 cases in a population of 1 billion.  Vaccine-induced polio is widespread, however.

Isn't it more important that parents are given informed consent, and the choice of which vaccine their children receive?

[Bokonon]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

It's still much less dangerous than actual polio. It is used because it's less expensive, more easily administered, and more effective. From a public health perspective it's the better choice.

Except that it CAUSES polio.

[Rrrrrachel]

Yes, in around one in 2.5 million doses it causes polio. Which is why countries that have eradicated polio switch. However, opv is more effective at preventing the spread of polio so in countries here it has not been eradicated I is the better tool for the job. It provides a kind of instant herd immunity by fighting wild polio in the gut.

One year is not enough to say polio has been eradicated in India, but in the next few years they have a choice to make, for sure.

I'm not sure how widespread the paralysis is. I haven't seen the 40k whatever number anywhere I see as a reliable source. The numbers I've seen are more like 100-200. Thats still a lot, but compared to thousands of infections a year from wild polio that seems like the better choice.

[Bokonon]

Originally Posted by Bokonon 

India has been free from wild polio for well over a year, and 2 years ago had only 741 cases in a population of 1 billion.  Vaccine-induced polio is widespread, however.

Isn't it more important that parents are given informed consent, and the choice of which vaccine their children receive?

That figure of 741 came from an article, but I just found a figure of 28 cases in 2009.  28 cases of wild polio in a population of 1 billion.  

[Bokonon]

http://www.searo.who.int/vaccine/LinkFiles/vpd_sur_bulletin.pdf

I'm sure the WHO is a reliable source for this information, no?

It looks like there were over 60,000 cases of AFP in India in 2011.

[Rrrrrachel]

Those are not all related to the polio vaccine. If you look on the right side of the chart you can see that the total afp rate is 13.56 per 100k and the non-polio afp rate is 13.23 per 100k.


28 was the count for a week 2009, 741 is the accurate number for that year. The numbers being so low is largely thanks to the fact that the vaccine program had already started at that time. It started in the mid 90s. According to UNICEF, before the vaccination effort started polio crippled 200,000 children a year in India.

[Rrrrrachel]

By the way, there were 7 cases of vaccine derived polio in India last year. Seven.

[slmommy]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

By the way, there were 7 cases of vaccine derived polio in India last year. Seven.

Where's that number from? In his book, Dr. Sears says when OPV was stopped in US after about 8 kids were being paraylzed/year... so... just by population size... you would expect a bit more.  (well, I'm pretty sure of that number, I don't have my copy of his book handy, correct me if I'm wrong)

[Rrrrrachel]

Sorry, 7 cases of polio, I was responding to the statement that vaccine derived polio is widespread. From what I've seen there were 100-180 cases of vaccine associated afp.

You can find the numbers from a variety of sources. I've seen them from the Indian academy of pediatrics as well as various news outlets including NPR and the telegraph (Indian newspaper based in Calcutta)