Vaccine Injury Anecdotes are No Joke - Mothering Forums

Thread Tools
#1 of 5 Old 04-18-2013, 01:46 PM - Thread Starter
Mirzam's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sophia's Correction
Posts: 9,064
Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 646 Post(s)

Another great article from MDC member Sandy Gottstein.







Who’s there? 

Vaccine-Injury Anecdotes!

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.

applejuice likes this.

I am Rhome
Mirzam is offline  
Sponsored Links
#2 of 5 Old 05-23-2013, 09:44 PM
tracyamber's Avatar
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 4,267
Mentioned: 547 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 96 Post(s)


applejuice likes this.
tracyamber is offline  
#3 of 5 Old 05-24-2013, 05:23 AM
kathymuggle's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,128
Mentioned: 238 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2327 Post(s)

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."

applejuice likes this.

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 2 teens and one young adult.
kathymuggle is offline  
#4 of 5 Old 05-24-2013, 06:21 AM
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Fortunately vaers is not the only source for estimates on frequency of adverse events.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#5 of 5 Old 05-27-2013, 11:45 AM
Taximom5's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,350
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 112 Post(s)

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.

applejuice and Marnica like this.
Taximom5 is offline  

User Tag List

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

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

Online Users: 14,234

30 members and 14,204 guests
autumngrey , Deborah , greenemami , Greg B , healthy momma , hillymum , Janeen0225 , Josiah , katelove , Katherine73 , Kelleybug , lhargrave89 , Michele123 , moominmamma , Motherof3already , MountainMamaGC , psimmons , redsally , RollerCoasterMama , sciencemum , sniffmommy , sutton_02 , tapatio , verticalscope , Wendybird42
Most users ever online was 449,755, 06-25-2014 at 12:21 PM.