Another great article from MDC member Sandy Gottstein.
Guess there’s nobody at the door!
Q. How many anecdotes does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A. You can never have enough.
Anecdotes are the neutrinos of the vaccine-injury world. No matter how many of them there are, they will always go unnoticed.
"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci
That was a great article.
Several months ago, numerous posters asked where the "only 10% of adverse reactions are reported" stat cam from - and this article does give something of an answer:
"Under-reporting is understood to be a limitation of a passive reporting system like VAERS. In light of the fact that a vaccine manufacturer reported a 2% rate and that David Kessler, former FDA head, reported that one study found that only 1% of evenserious adverse events were reported to the agency, proposing a reporting rate of 10% might be considered “conservative”, i.e., a low-ball estimate. Under such a “conservative” scenario, 3,825,400 possible adverse vaccine-associated reactions could be projected. That’s a lot of nothing."
There is a battle of two wolves inside us. One is good and the other is evil. The wolf that wins is the one you feed.
Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?). We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...
It's a very sad state of affairs when all we have are a few severely flawed sources for estimating frequency of adverse reactions to vaccines--VAERS, industry studies that were fixed to downplay adverse reactions, and post-marketing surveillance data that has likewise been fixed. In addition, the vaccine industry has put a lot of time and money into training doctors to baasically FAIL to recognize and therefore report serious vaccine reactions.