Are getting no vaccines right for us? - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 109 Old 01-25-2012, 06:45 PM
 
WildKingdom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 667
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by slmommy View Post

WildKingdom,

 

According to wikipedia, Lester Crawford was a FDA deputy commissioner since Feb. 25, 2002.  It was for 2 months in 2005 he was "Commissioner of Food and Drugs"

 

He resigned and plead guilty to conflict of interest and false reporting, serving 3 years probation and paying a fine.

 

 

 



Ok.  What Marnica said is still not true.  She said that he was the  FDA Commissioner who approved Vioxx.  Even if he started at the FDA in 2002, he did not approve drugs as a deputy commissioner, and Vioxx was approved in 1999.

 

Not that I'm defending Crawford.  Clearly NOT a paragon of virtue.

WildKingdom is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#62 of 109 Old 01-25-2012, 06:51 PM
 
Kelly1101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 3,801
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Um... From the article?

 

 

 

Quote:
The Buenos Aires Herald reported that 14 children died during the study, but GSK said the babies were given placebos and that no links were found between the vaccine and the deaths - a position supported by Argentine health officials.

"Any deaths in the study have been thoroughly and independently investigated, and it has been concluded that none of the deaths were related to the vaccine they were given," a GSK said in a statement.

"ANMAT has also concluded that there was no causality between the administration of the vaccine and the deaths that have occurred in the study. We offer our full sympathy to their families."

Yes, I think that it is unethical to do trials where the parents are illiterate or not legal guardians.  But I also think that you deliberately misrepresented what happened, by implying that the vaccines had killed the infants.


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokonon View Post



Stop with the condescension.  Your questions and tone say more about you than they do about any of the rest of us.  

 

I guess you missed the recent news of the 14 Argentinian infants who died while enrolled in a clinical vaccine trial whose parents were not aware of the trial.  What do I think vaccine manufacturers should do?  Start with having a shred of ethics.

http://news.sky.com/home/world-news/article/16142354



 


Kelly (28), in love with husband Jason (38) and our awesome babies:  Emma 4/09, and Ozzy 8/10

Kelly1101 is offline  
#63 of 109 Old 01-25-2012, 06:55 PM
 
Bokonon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,948
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly1101 View Post

Um... From the article?

 

 

 

Yes, I think that it is unethical to do trials where the parents are illiterate or not legal guardians.  But I also think that you deliberately misrepresented what happened, by implying that the vaccines had killed the infants.


 



 



I apologize if that is how it came across.  The initial articles that I had read also implied that the vaccines had killed the infants.  I linked a different article and didn't go back and find the original one I had read.

 

I think we all know that when a doctor or pharmaceutical company claims that a person's death was not caused by a vaccine, they may or may not be telling the truth.  I don't know what happened to those babies.  But the deaths are not an irrelevant detail.


A, jammin.gif mama to a boy (2005) and a girl (2009)
Bokonon is offline  
#64 of 109 Old 01-25-2012, 06:55 PM
Banned
 
stik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

OK, so, the article isn't as informative as I would like, I suspect because of stonewalling from GSK.  I'd like to know what was being tested and how and how the study group was selected and a million other things.  GSK has been fined, though, so the courts in Argentina evidently feel slightly less than 150,000 GBP strongly about this (GSK's fines, plus fines for two doctors).  

 

I feel strongly about the Nuremburg Conventions.  But here I'm finding myself in a bind I've found myself in on several issues lately.  To what extent do I benefit from human rights abuses, to what extent is it practical for me to stop benefiting from those abuses, and how can I help the victims of those abuses?  I use BCPs.  I don't know who they were tested on, but I know several versions were tested on poor women in developing nations.  My contraceptives control the crippling PMS I began to experience after the birth of my second child.  They control it really well, with minimal unwanted side effects.  Who does it help if I stop taking them?  I find the stats from the CDC and the WHO compelling evidence that vaccines work.  For my particular family, with our complex of needs and medical issues, several of those VPDs would be devastating if we got them.  I'd have to check, but I think some of the vaccines we use were developed before the Nuremburg Conventions, and I imagine that with no ethical standards in place, they were tested on whoever, possibly without knowledge of the test subjects.  How could those ethical lapses be repaired to the victims?  If I didn't vaccinate, would I be helping those people, or would I just be putting my family at higher risk than they would otherwise be at to make an ethical point to myself?  My strong preference would be to use only medical technology that has been tested ethically.  But to be honest, as I sit here typing this on two electronic devices that most likely contain components that were manufactured by slave labor, I wonder if that's possible.  And drug companies are not the most unethical companies involved in my day-to-day life.  I also eat chocolate, purely for my own pleasure, and I KNOW that slave labor was involved in that.  

 

I'd like to build the world where everyone is treated fairly.  I don't know where to start.  I don't know that making the choice not to vaccinate will make drug companies behave better.  We are talking about the corporations that jacked the price of a drug that prevents preterm labor to roughly a thousand times its actual cost.  I do not believe that they are saints.  I don't know that ending vaccination and allowing disease to spread (as they do, in ways that the US and western Europe are often privileged to be isolated from) would help GSK's victims or anyone else.  

 

I think higher fines would be a start - 100,000 GBP is pocket change to GSK.  

stik is offline  
#65 of 109 Old 01-25-2012, 07:09 PM
 
Bokonon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,948
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

OK, so, the article isn't as informative as I would like, I suspect because of stonewalling from GSK.  I'd like to know what was being tested and how and how the study group was selected and a million other things.  GSK has been fined, though, so the courts in Argentina evidently feel slightly less than 150,000 GBP strongly about this (GSK's fines, plus fines for two doctors).  

 

I feel strongly about the Nuremburg Conventions.  But here I'm finding myself in a bind I've found myself in on several issues lately.  To what extent do I benefit from human rights abuses, to what extent is it practical for me to stop benefiting from those abuses, and how can I help the victims of those abuses?  I use BCPs.  I don't know who they were tested on, but I know several versions were tested on poor women in developing nations.  My contraceptives control the crippling PMS I began to experience after the birth of my second child.  They control it really well, with minimal unwanted side effects.  Who does it help if I stop taking them?  I find the stats from the CDC and the WHO compelling evidence that vaccines work.  For my particular family, with our complex of needs and medical issues, several of those VPDs would be devastating if we got them.  I'd have to check, but I think some of the vaccines we use were developed before the Nuremburg Conventions, and I imagine that with no ethical standards in place, they were tested on whoever, possibly without knowledge of the test subjects.  How could those ethical lapses be repaired to the victims?  If I didn't vaccinate, would I be helping those people, or would I just be putting my family at higher risk than they would otherwise be at to make an ethical point to myself?  My strong preference would be to use only medical technology that has been tested ethically.  But to be honest, as I sit here typing this on two electronic devices that most likely contain components that were manufactured by slave labor, I wonder if that's possible.  And drug companies are not the most unethical companies involved in my day-to-day life.  I also eat chocolate, purely for my own pleasure, and I KNOW that slave labor was involved in that.  

 

I'd like to build the world where everyone is treated fairly.  I don't know where to start.  I don't know that making the choice not to vaccinate will make drug companies behave better.  We are talking about the corporations that jacked the price of a drug that prevents preterm labor to roughly a thousand times its actual cost.  I do not believe that they are saints.  I don't know that ending vaccination and allowing disease to spread (as they do, in ways that the US and western Europe are often privileged to be isolated from) would help GSK's victims or anyone else.  

 

I think higher fines would be a start - 100,000 GBP is pocket change to GSK.  


My point was that you vilified an individual mentioned earlier in this thread and deemed his published works unworthy of discussion because of his affiliation with an organization you felt was disreputable.  But Big Pharma's expertise, research, and recommendations are apparently without reproach.

 

I'm sorry you missed that and took valuable ukelele practicing time to go off on this tangent.


A, jammin.gif mama to a boy (2005) and a girl (2009)
Bokonon is offline  
#66 of 109 Old 01-25-2012, 07:32 PM
Banned
 
stik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

In what way did my post leave Big Pharma without reproach?  I think I was pretty harsh given that the infants who died turned out to be in the placebo group.  

 

If you are not finding the same joy in hearing my ideas that I have found in hearing yours, there is an "ignore" button in my profile.  You can be forever free of the need to post eye-roll smileys with just one click.  

stik is offline  
#67 of 109 Old 01-25-2012, 08:56 PM
 
peds101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

A different perspective.

 

I'm a Pediatrician currently in practice. Ignoring all of the mudslinging from previous posts, I'll just throw a few things out for the parents who are trying to make up their minds on vaccinating.  I've only worked in the continental US. I've seen children die from Whooping cough they acquired from and Uncle. I've seen children who are deaf after having chicken pox encephalitis. I will tell you these things when you come to my office. It's my job to let you know what the risks of not vaccinating your child. I won't kick you out of my practice for not getting these vaccines. (I'd prefer you would get them, it would make my life easier as I wouldn't have to treat your child for something we can prevent). That being said, I do believe that they are your child, and it's your decision. For parents trying to make a choice the CDC has great information on vaccines and the diseases.

 

Please expect from me, at least once in my office to tell you that your child could potentially die from not getting the vaccines. That's my job and I will tell you the worst possible outcome (full disclosure).

 

And FYI, Jenny McCarthy's child actually has a seizure disorder and not Autism caused by vaccines.

 

 

peds101 is offline  
#68 of 109 Old 01-25-2012, 09:20 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by peds101 View Post

A different perspective.

 

 

 

Please expect from me, at least once in my office to tell you that your child could potentially die from not getting the vaccines. That's my job and I will tell you the worst possible outcome (full disclosure).

 

And FYI, Jenny McCarthy's child actually has a seizure disorder and not Autism caused by vaccines.

 

 


Do you, at least once in your office, tell your patients' parents that their child could potentially die FROM getting the vaccines?  Do you tell them that there have been 1297 admitted and compensated cases of vaccine-induced brain damage?  

 

Do you tell them that only a tiny percentage of parents of vaccine-injured children ever elect to go to Vaccine Court, because

#1) it is extremely expensive and time-consuming (and parents of vaccine-injured children have neither time nor money to spare,

#2) very few lawyers want to go up against government-paid lawyers and government-paid "experts," because it is almost a sure thing that they will lose

#3) EVERY parent who has gone on record about their experience in Vaccine Court reports that it was extremely adversarial and therefore stressful, and that they felt like THEY were the ones on trial.

 

Please tell us when you examined Jenny McCarthy's child.

 

Also, please tell us how you concluded that the seizure disorder was not caused by vaccines, and did not cause autistic symptoms, when a large percentage of the cases compensated in vaccine court actually include vaccine-induced seizure disorder, with accompanying autistic symptoms, and a large percentage of parents of autistic children also report vaccine-induced seizures accompanied by sudden onset of autistic symptoms which coincide with the vaccines and their induced seizures.

 

 

 

Taximom5 is online now  
#69 of 109 Old 01-25-2012, 09:26 PM
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,771
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I always find it odd when people come on and say they had a patient die of xyz or know someone who died of xyz recently.

 

Here is the breakdown of deaths from pertussis from the CDC (5th paragraph down)

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5450a3.htm

 

Among persons of all ages with pertussis, 33 cases of encephalopathy and 56 pertussis-related deaths were reported during 2001--2003. Fifty-one (91%) of the deaths were among infants aged <6 months, and 42 (75%) of the deaths were among infants aged <2 months.

 

here is another one: http://www.chop.edu/service/vaccine-education-center/a-look-at-each-vaccine/dtap-diphtheria-tetanus-and-pertussis-vaccine.html

 

"... Now about 10 children die every year from pertussis"

 

 

There are what - 300 million people in the USA and you saw a death from pertussis???  

 

I know it is possible, but lets face it - it is darn unlikely.  If you saw  a pertussis death  you were an exception.  

 

I am not sure what the Jenny McCarthy reference was for? headscratch.gif  Did someone bring it up?

 

 

purslaine is offline  
#70 of 109 Old 01-25-2012, 10:28 PM
 
peds101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Look, I'm not trying to be a *itch on here. I'm not putting any of this on here is a condescending tone. I do discuss risks of vaccines. There is a federal law that mandates a VIS form be provided with all vaccinations. They list the common to rare side effects, including seizures. However, have you actually looked at all those "Deaths" on the VAERS reporting. You are not required to provide any actual information or evidence. There is a lot of third or fourth hand reporting. I'm not exactly sure how car accident deaths are due to a vaccine. Atrial rupture after a TV falling on a child is not likely due to the vaccine. I am not saying this is a bad system. I do think everything should be reported. Afterall, we don't always put leeches on people or drill holes in their head anymore. Medicine changes.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landau%E2%80%93Kleffner_syndrome

No, I have not personally examined Jenny McCarthy's child, but I have seen her later interviews after his seizure disorder is being treated.

There are also seizures in children who haven't been vaccinated.

 

Kathy, I don't know what to tell you. I'm not a liar. I can not obviously give out names due to HIPPA ,and well, I'm not going to due to patient confidentiality. I think we will see more of these diseases over the next few years. There are a lot of people who are afraid of vaccinating their children. When Michele Bachmann says things like, I know a Mom who told me HPV vaccine gave her child MR, how can you not be afraid. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/michele-bachmanns-hpv-claims-just-latest-in-gardasil-debate/2011/09/14/gIQA9FjESK_blog.html. Nevermind later she retracts by pointing out she's not a Doctor and you should really consult and discuss with your physician.

 

To clairify, I've seen 1 death due to Pertussis in the past 5 years. I've had 2 patients in the past 2 years test positive for Pertussis that didn't die. 1 acutally had the full DTAP series except for his 4 yr old booster. I've also had a patient with Hemophagocytic Lymphohystiocytosis which is Incidence is reported to be 1.2 cases per million persons per year. http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/986458-overview#a0199. I live in a midwest state, hardly exotic. I also have never seen a death that was thought to be vaccine related. I'm thankful for that. It's bad enough to see the ones that happen for other preventable reasons.

peds101 is offline  
#71 of 109 Old 01-26-2012, 07:59 AM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,470
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post



I ask quite a lot of my health care providers.  Significantly more than I have asked of the posters in this forum, but since we tend to see eye-to-eye on what constitutes a decent source of information, we have spent way less time discussing AIDS and Holocaust denialists than this forum has, so those conversations have tended to be quicker.  While I don't know their religious or political leanings, I do ask where they get their information, and they have been totally willing to share. And if I had the slightest suspicion that my doctor belonged to a hate group or accepted and passed on information that come from a hate group, I would find a new doctor.  

 

I don't think anyone needs to agree with me.  However, this forum has a specific purpose - to serve the needs of parents who are just beginning to research their vaccination decisions.  I feel strongly that this purpose is well-served when posters explain where their ideas and information are coming from.   I think opinions that come with an explanation of their origin are substantially more useful than opinions that don't.  For example, I don't think homeopathy has any medical value, because it's been scientifically tested and shown not to work.  Another poster has said that she trusts homeopathy, believes it works in a way that isn't scientifically understood, and has used homeopathic remedies all her life, as did her parents.  For readers who like to see scientific evidence, my beliefs are probably more appealing.  To people who find family tradition and other people's experience reassuring, her beliefs are probably more appealing.  Because we've been open about where our beliefs come from, it's easier for readers of this forum to evaluate our ideas and decide how to apply them to their own lives.  

 

Marnica, Vioxx isn't a vaccine.  You and I have already been asked to stay on topic in the forum, so I'm not going to answer your very interesting question.  

I think the idea behind this new forum is really cool, and I'd like to see it work the way it was intended.  


Really? I had no idea. No what was asked by mods on this thread is not to link to whale.to. YOU are particularly concerned with discussing the source of any information posted here where parents that are just beginning to look at this issue are coming to ask questions. The source of the info presented is totally relevant to the purpose of this board. The FDA is involved in licensing vaccines and relies totally 100% on the clinical trials conducted by the pharmacutical company seeking licensure for their product. There is ample evidence of corruption and conflict of interst within the agency. You don't think a new parent looking into this issue for the first time should be aware of that? You don't think the concerns people have about the curruption in the FDA and how this effects licensing of drugs and medical devices includes vaccines? A huge part of becoming informed on this controversial issue is looking at the bigger picture.
 

 


If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

Marnica is offline  
#72 of 109 Old 01-26-2012, 08:45 AM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,470
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)


This is how I am feeling banghead.gif.  I feel your comments are incredibly short sighted.

For 12 years, Mendelsohn was an instructor at Northwest University Medical College, and was associate professor of pediatrics and community health and preventative medicine at the University of Illinois College of Medicine for another 12 years. He acted as Chairman of the Medical Licensing Committee of Illinois. He was authur of a syndicated newspaper column called The People's Doctor for many years. He was often on the radio and TV programs being interviewed. He has written several books. His opinions and his work are obviously other places besides a website you find offensive. For pete sake the man died BEFORE THE INTERNET was even around. And your comment about the NHF being founded with the express purpose  to commit fraud is your opinion and not fact. I also think that just because the NHF was founded by a guy who was into radionics in the 1950's doesn't mean that every perosn who has every supported health freedom has found radionics to be a valid treatment. Sounds like radionics from what Ive read was a bunch of hooey, but I still support health freedom.  Personally I think this is a watchdog group. Just because they want people to have the freedom to have access to supplements and other alternative treatments that improve their health without the government taking away that right doesn't mean they are committing fraud. Look at my signature tag. I bet Thomas Jefferson would have been a member winky.gif This group was largely involved in the fight to get chiropractors legally licensed in the United States - shame on them because we all know chiropractic is quakery and all of the millions and millions of people in this country who benefit from chiropractic care are just poor victims of fraud. I think I'm done now because I know I'm wasting my energy, time and breath - all of which I need to be conserving now for my baby! sometimes I just can't help myself.....sigh


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post



No, I felt it OK to discredit him because he was associated with a group that was founded with the express purpose of committing fraud, which I consider the supplement thing to be one example of (radionics is another).  I'm also more than willing to discredit a doctor whose ideas have found currency on whale.to, but apparently nowhere else on the web.  Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas.  Do you really need an article from a hate site to prove your point?  In the vastness of the web, is there no-one who didn't perpetuate an organization that once claimed that distance-healing was a great way for people to spend their money who supports your view?  Why are you clinging to this guy?  

 

I also discount the opinions of sales websites, so I have dissed people who have been mainly flogging supplements in a bunch of convos lately.  But mainly, I just think that if the purpose of a website is to sell capsules of miracle substances that may or may not contain unpredictable quantities of unpredictable substances of unpredictable potency, people should know that when they evaluate the value of the views presented therein.  



 


If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

Marnica is offline  
#73 of 109 Old 01-26-2012, 09:24 AM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,470
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by WildKingdom View Post

 

Well, I'll tell you what I make of it.

 

It's not true.

 

Lester Crawford was the FDA commissioner from July 2005 to September of 2005.  Vioxx was approved in 1999 and pulled from the market in 2004, a full year before Crawford even became commissioner.
 

 



 My mistake - He was Deputy Commissioner from 2002 - July 2005. In Feb 2005 after a federal inquiry, the FDA recommended that Vioxx be returned to the market despite all of the evidence of harm that had come to light. The first wrongful death suit was filed shortly thereafter in the spring of 2005 so Merck did not return it to the market (Thank God). I guess his abrupt resignation had to do with the fact that he had been caught filing false financial reports since 2002. But you are right - he had no hand in originally approving vioxx in 1999.


If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

Marnica is offline  
#74 of 109 Old 01-26-2012, 09:26 AM
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 2,033
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 75 Post(s)


Marnica, you're not wasting your time. I would like to thank you for making the post. You never know what new parent will read this and decide to look up the information you brought forward. Mendelsohn was a great doctor, and maybe parents will be inspired to learn more about him.


 
 
 "Medical propaganda ops are, in the long run, the most dangerous. They appear to be neutral. They wave no political banners. They claim to be science. For these reasons, they can accomplish the goals of overt fascism without arousing suspicion.” — Jon Rappoport
 
 
 
beckybird is online now  
#75 of 109 Old 01-26-2012, 09:59 AM
 
Slmommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 875
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Marnica, I am also getting tired here... already, haha.

 

I guess at least any parent new to the issue can really see from this thread,

 

1. the resistance they will face from some in any alternative vax decisions they make, (get ready parents, or better yet, don´t tell people in real life!), and,

2. the total worship of mainstream med and their agencies, it is too scary for some to believe that they do not really have your child´s (or your) best interest at heart, that is the only thing I can think of to justify why any questioning vax source is immediately dismissed for whatever reason, but the FDA and pharm companies are allowed to continually make mistakes and be forgiven.

 

also, for the record, ive never been to this whale.to site, i dont know what it is, but based on what everyone said here, im not going to go there. i jumped in because i have read and own that Mendelsohn book. i dont know what material of his they have posted there.

Slmommy is offline  
#76 of 109 Old 01-26-2012, 10:59 AM
 
Slmommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 875
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Stik, based on your standards for dismissing other sources, you should dismiss any information from the FDA, that is the point everyone is trying to make.

 

You stated Mendelsohn participated in deceptive marketing practices, quakery and deception. He was involved in NHF for one year and I can´t find anything in his writing towards the beliefs that group has that you find objectionable. Their "deception" is your opinion of the topic.

 

the Lester Crawford business at FDA has plenty of info on mainstream media sites.

 

He did commit deception, personally. No, we are not discussing his personal view of vax, but he was invovled and the head of an organization that is supposed to ensure vaccine safety, purity, effectiveness.

Vioxx is not a vaccine, but supplements are not vaxes either, and you were ok using that to discredit Mendelsohn.  What about fast tracking Gardasil? (you can google it yourself, and it is a well discussed topic in The Greater Good documentary, I doubt I can find *any* source you will not have a problem with). What about problems with vax contamination, rotavirus vaccines (2010), flu vaccine contaminations 2004 (Chorion), etc. 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/18/health/18flu.html

Slmommy is offline  
#77 of 109 Old 01-26-2012, 01:05 PM
 
vforba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: PA
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Wow a lot has happened since I last posted, and I apologize for posting an article from a banned website. But it was informative.

I have to say that it is always interesting when people post about injuries from disease and sometimes even deaths. But aside from that where are the statistics of death from the vaccines that are meant to prevent these diseases. I have found from all the things I have read online they are much harder to come by and unless the person who died from the supposed vaccine, and had a very thorough autopsy, it's much harder to prove that they died from a vaccine and less likely to be proven. I mean I keep thinking of the at least 100 or so girls that have died from Gardasil and the 1000's who have been injured and ask what more proof do you need than that not to give this vax?

vicky

vforba is offline  
#78 of 109 Old 01-26-2012, 01:48 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by vforba View Post

 I mean I keep thinking of the at least 100 or so girls that have died from Gardasil and the 1000's who have been injured and ask what more proof do you need than that not to give this vax?

vicky



But the makers of Gardasil are quick to insist that there is no "proof" that Gardasil caused the deaths.  The fact that these previously healthy, athletic girls dropped dead within a few days of a shock--"coincidence!"

 

They are also quick to point out that one or more of these girls died in a car crash (but neglect to mention that they crashed the car because they either went into seizures while driving, or died before they actually crashed the car).  So their conclusion is that Gardasil had nothing to do with it.

Taximom5 is online now  
#79 of 109 Old 01-26-2012, 03:23 PM
Banned
 
stik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by slmommy View Post

Stik, based on your standards for dismissing other sources, you should dismiss any information from the FDA, that is the point everyone is trying to make.

 



The FDA is not without its own problems.  I don't know any other agencies or organizations that could do what they are supposed to do, though.  Drug companies aren't going to regulate themselves.  I think scrutiny of the FDA can only improve their work.   

stik is offline  
#80 of 109 Old 01-27-2012, 10:03 AM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,470
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by WildKingdom View Post



Ok.  What Marnica said is still not true.  She said that he was the  FDA Commissioner who approved Vioxx.  Even if he started at the FDA in 2002, he did not approve drugs as a deputy commissioner, and Vioxx was approved in 1999.

 

Not that I'm defending Crawford.  Clearly NOT a paragon of virtue.



 Umm didn't I pretty much acknowledge my mistake in my last response to you??

 

Quote:
My mistake .... But you are right - he had no hand in originally approving vioxx in 1999.

 

Yes I believe I did....perhaps yuou might want to read it again


If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

Marnica is offline  
#81 of 109 Old 01-27-2012, 10:37 AM
 
TCMoulton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Posts: 4,079
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marnica View Post



 Umm didn't I pretty much acknowledge my mistake in my last response to you??

 

 

Yes I believe I did....perhaps yuou might want to read it again


Pretty sure your acknowledgement came after the post you are quoting so there is no reason for you to be going after WilkKingdom in the above quoted post. Perhaps you may want to read the thread again to clarify.
TCMoulton is offline  
#82 of 109 Old 01-27-2012, 10:54 AM
 
WildKingdom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 667
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marnica View Post



 Umm didn't I pretty much acknowledge my mistake in my last response to you??

 

 

Yes I believe I did....perhaps yuou might want to read it again



 

Ummmm...perhaps you might want to read again. Your mea culpa came after what I wrote. 

WildKingdom is offline  
#83 of 109 Old 01-27-2012, 11:54 AM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,470
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by WildKingdom View Post


 



 

Ummmm...perhaps you might want to read again. Your mea culpa came after what I wrote. 



 Ah you are right! Sorry! I get these subscription things and then I respond. sometimes makes it difficult to see where posts are when you are not reading all the posts in between when youu last posted. Thanks for pointing that out and my apologies namaste.gif


If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

Marnica is offline  
#84 of 109 Old 01-27-2012, 12:54 PM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,470
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post


Do you decline vaccinations in order to protest human rights abuses in the testing process?  I think that's an admirable moral position.  Can you share your evidence of illegal human testing of vaccines?  What do you think vaccine manufacturers should do to address this issue?  

 

As you say, my opinions are just opinions.  I'm not an expert on the topic.  I don't think there's anything wrong with being idealistic, and neither do you, apparently, or human rights abuses in the vaccine testing process wouldn't bother you.  I'm picky about my sources.  I won't be fixing anyone's views - I've been around long enough to know that no one changes their mind on the internet.  But since the purpose of this forum is to provide resources for people who haven't made up their minds yet, I think it's informative to ask people to show their sources, and to point out major issues with those sources where they go unremarked.   

 

 

 


http://articles.latimes.com/1996-06-17/news/mn-15871_1_measles-vaccine

 

I realize this is not the same as conducting clinical trials without participant consent, but IMO just as bad.
 

 


If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

Marnica is offline  
#85 of 109 Old 01-27-2012, 01:32 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly1101 View Post

Um... From the article?

 

 

 

 

Quote:
The Buenos Aires Herald reported that 14 children died during the study, but GSK said the babies were given placebos and that no links were found between the vaccine and the deaths - a position supported by Argentine health officials.

"Any deaths in the study have been thoroughly and independently investigated, and it has been concluded that none of the deaths were related to the vaccine they were given," a GSK said in a statement.

"ANMAT has also concluded that there was no causality between the administration of the vaccine and the deaths that have occurred in the study. We offer our full sympathy to their families."

Yes, I think that it is unethical to do trials where the parents are illiterate or not legal guardians.  But I also think that you deliberately misrepresented what happened, by implying that the vaccines had killed the infants.


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokonon View Post



Stop with the condescension.  Your questions and tone say more about you than they do about any of the rest of us.  

 

I guess you missed the recent news of the 14 Argentinian infants who died while enrolled in a clinical vaccine trial whose parents were not aware of the trial.  What do I think vaccine manufacturers should do?  Start with having a shred of ethics.

http://news.sky.com/home/world-news/article/16142354

 

 

Yes, I think that it is unethical to do trials where the parents are illiterate or not legal guardians.  But I also think that you deliberately misrepresented what happened, by implying that the vaccines had killed the infants.


 



 

 

Kelly1101, I think you are mistakenly assuming that it's not possible for placebo vaccines to have killed those 14 babies.


Perhaps you are not aware that GSK, like all vaccine manufacturers, does not use a true placebo (such as saline or sugar water) during vaccine trials.

 

They use another vaccine--a vaccine with antigens, adjuvants, preservatives, and all the other potentially problematic ingredients.  It is very misleading for them to conclude that the vaccine being tested does not cause significantly more adverse reactions than the "placebo" if they don't bother to report that the "placebo" caused a significant number of adverse reactions.

 

The question we should be asking is, "What vaccines were given to the 14 babies who died?"

 

The next questions should be, "What exactly was the cause of death?" and "What reactions were reported for those 14 babies? Have similar reactions been reported in use of that particular vaccine?"

Taximom5 is online now  
#86 of 109 Old 01-27-2012, 01:48 PM
Banned
 
stik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Technically, denying a child a vaccine would also be unethical for a clinical trial.  If there was an outbreak of the disease, the placebo participant would then be completely unprotected and much more likely to suffer serious complications.  So what they actually should be doing in this case, given that they are supposed to follow some ethical standards, would be giving one group "standard treatment" - in this case the old vaccine that has already been tested and shown to be effective and all that jazz, and another group the "experimental treatment" - the new vaccine.  A similar approach is used to test new treatments for diseases - rather than recruiting a study group for something like breast cancer and giving one-half the study group no treatment at all (and thus basically guaranteeing that they all die), one group gets the current standard of treatment and one gets the experimental version. 

 

14 babies with a fatal vaccine reaction out of 7500 is well in excess of the kind of vaccine reaction rate that would be expected with the vaccines currently in use (I divided the 15,000 baby study group in half to just look at the control group that these infants were part of, but 14 out of 15,000 would still be huge).  I think it would be interesting to know what these infants died of.  And like any other entity, GSK should face serious penalties for any violations of ethical standards.  From the information available at this time, however, it seems unlikely that the deaths were caused by the vaccine. 

stik is offline  
#87 of 109 Old 01-27-2012, 02:39 PM
 
Bokonon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,948
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

 

Kelly1101, I think you are mistakenly assuming that it's not possible for placebo vaccines to have killed those 14 babies.


Perhaps you are not aware that GSK, like all vaccine manufacturers, does not use a true placebo (such as saline or sugar water) during vaccine trials.

 

They use another vaccine--a vaccine with antigens, adjuvants, preservatives, and all the other potentially problematic ingredients.  It is very misleading for them to conclude that the vaccine being tested does not cause significantly more adverse reactions than the "placebo" if they don't bother to report that the "placebo" caused a significant number of adverse reactions.

 

The question we should be asking is, "What vaccines were given to the 14 babies who died?"

 

The next questions should be, "What exactly was the cause of death?" and "What reactions were reported for those 14 babies? Have similar reactions been reported in use of that particular vaccine?"



Furthermore, since they illegally and unethically enrolled infants in the study, how can we trust that they are being honest that the babies who died WEREN'T given the trial vaccine?  Because lying would be wrong?


A, jammin.gif mama to a boy (2005) and a girl (2009)
Bokonon is offline  
#88 of 109 Old 01-27-2012, 02:43 PM
Banned
 
stik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Where did you hear about the study's enrollment procedures?  I didn't see that in the article you linked.

stik is offline  
#89 of 109 Old 01-27-2012, 02:53 PM
 
Bokonon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,948
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

Where did you hear about the study's enrollment procedures?  I didn't see that in the article you linked.


From the article:

"A source in Judge Marcelo Aguinsky's office said consent forms were signed by illiterate parents or people who did not have custody of the children."


A, jammin.gif mama to a boy (2005) and a girl (2009)
Bokonon is offline  
#90 of 109 Old 01-27-2012, 02:59 PM
 
Bokonon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,948
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Here's a longer, older article about the case:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/topstories/2008-08-14-1644565299_x.htm

 

"Ana Maria Marchesse, who heads one of two groups that notified the national food and drug administration, told The Associated Press that she'd witnessed "poor ethical management" of patient recruitment.

"They didn't explain to the parents that this was an experimental vaccine, and a lot of the parents who signed consent forms were illiterate," said Marchesse, a pediatrician who heads the Health Professionals' Labor Association in the northern Argentine province of Santiago del Estero, where she said seven of the 14 children died.

"In some cases, they first gave them the vaccine and then gave them a 13-page consent form to sign that I had to read three times to understand," she added."


A, jammin.gif mama to a boy (2005) and a girl (2009)
Bokonon is offline  
Reply

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off