Chinese Study: 42 Percent of Drug Reactions Are Vaccine Related - Mothering Forums
1 2 
Vaccinations > Chinese Study: 42 Percent of Drug Reactions Are Vaccine Related
Mirzam's Avatar Mirzam 09:43 AM 03-09-2014
Quote:
"A male overrepresentation was observed regarding the total number of reports. The most frequently reported group of drugs were vaccines (42.15%). Skin rash and fever were the commonest symptoms reported in the total pediatric dataset. The proportion of children that suffered from a serious ADR was 2.16% and that for drug related deaths was 0.34%. And we found that the multiple drug exposure experienced a high proportion of serious ADRs compared with the single drug use (χ215.99, P<0.0001). Sixty-five percent of ADRs were for children less than 6 years of age. And more than half of reports were from doctors."

 

The data was amassed through spontaneous reports of physicians (52.03%, pharmacists (24.27%), other health care practitioners (15.46%). Only 2.25% came from 'consumers'. The criticism often leveled at VAERS reports presumably isn't the case here, as the reporters are overwhelmingly from the medical profession.

 

 

Here is a commentary from Greenmed Info, for those that choose not to read this, here is the actual study:

 

"Adverse Drug Reactions of Spontaneous Reports in Shanghai Pediatric Population

 

 

 

 

 



teacozy's Avatar teacozy 04:59 PM 03-09-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirzam View Post
 

 

The data was amassed through spontaneous reports of physicians (52.03%, pharmacists (24.27%), other health care practitioners (15.46%). Only 2.25% came from 'consumers'. The criticism often leveled at VAERS reports presumably isn't the case here, as the reporters are overwhelmingly from the medical profession.

 

 

Here is a commentary from Greenmed Info, for those that choose not to read this, here is the actual study:

 

"Adverse Drug Reactions of Spontaneous Reports in Shanghai Pediatric Population

 

 

 

 

 

 

Disclosure: I haven't actually read the study. But just from the little information you provided I don't see anything at all surprising or alarming about this.  If "reactions" include minor things like fevers, I think that's to be expected.   Fevers from a vaccine just mean you've had an immune response, and they are extremely common.  My son had low grade fevers with all his vaccines, IIRC.   

 

A fever of 101 for half a day in exchange for immunity to measles, diphtheria, polio, and hib is a pretty amazing trade off in my opinion.  


Taximom5's Avatar Taximom5 09:41 AM 03-10-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

 

A fever of 101 for half a day in exchange for immunity to measles, diphtheria, polio, and hib is a pretty amazing trade off in my opinion.  

 

If only the reactions to vaccines were limited to "just a fever!" I do think you are missing the fact that the experts don't actually know the extent of such reactions as inflammation and autoimmune activity, as those reactions were never studied; only recently has it been apparent that at least a subgroup of people have those reactions to vaccines.  We don't know how many.

It does seem like the people who don't have those reactions want to ignore the fact that those reactions do happen to others.


cwill's Avatar cwill 10:20 AM 03-10-2014

When they only looked at serious ADRs, vaccines still accounted for 16% of the reactions. Unfortunately, we don't know at what rate any of the reactions were occurring because they only looked at reaction reports. If China has a strong mandatory vaccination requirement, we might expect vaccines to make up a significant portion of drug reactions simply because every child is given a shot. Not every child is given antibiotics.

 

It would be nice to know which vaccines caused the most reactions.

 

The report did mention that China uses a lot of live vaccines and suggested that that might contribute to a higher reaction rate.


sassyfirechick's Avatar sassyfirechick 10:44 AM 03-10-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

Disclosure: I haven't actually read the study. But just from the little information you provided I don't see anything at all surprising or alarming about this.  If "reactions" include minor things like fevers, I think that's to be expected.   Fevers from a vaccine just mean you've had an immune response, and they are extremely common.  My son had low grade fevers with all his vaccines, IIRC.   

 

A fever of 101 for half a day in exchange for immunity to measles, diphtheria, polio, and hib is a pretty amazing trade off in my opinion.  


That would be great if that was the case, but IMO, the blood curdling screaming for days afterwards, the ongoing rashes and food sensitivities 2+ years later....definitely not something I wanted for my child.  Rashes for life vs a week of some spots and lifetime immunity....yah not really a fair tradeoff there.


teacozy's Avatar teacozy 03:03 PM 03-10-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyfirechick View Post
 


That would be great if that was the case, but IMO, the blood curdling screaming for days afterwards, the ongoing rashes and food sensitivities 2+ years later....definitely not something I wanted for my child.  Rashes for life vs a week of some spots and lifetime immunity....yah not really a fair tradeoff there.

 

Vaccines don't cause food sensitivities or ongoing rashes, but even if they did, I would still choose three days of crying (of which there is evidence can happen after certain vaccines) and food sensitivities over diphtheria, polio, tetanus, meningitis, and cervical cancer. Any day of the week. 


sassyfirechick's Avatar sassyfirechick 05:31 PM 03-10-2014

Wow.  Thank you doctor teacozy for that wonderful diagnosis but I have a doc already, and yah, her issues are vaccine related but you keep on doing what you're doing because three days of brain swelling is certainly healthier in the long run


Taximom5's Avatar Taximom5 06:40 PM 03-10-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

Vaccines don't cause food sensitivities or ongoing rashes, but even if they did, I would still choose three days of crying (of which there is evidence can happen after certain vaccines) and food sensitivities over diphtheria, polio, tetanus, meningitis, and cervical cancer. Any day of the week. 

 

 

Do you have any studies to support that?

Because

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8977505

 

"Results: Twenty-four of the 26 children with allergic reactions to vaccines had anti-gelatin IgE ranging from 1.2 to 250 Ua/ml. Seven had allergic reactions on ingestion of gelatin-containing foods. Of these, two had reactions before vaccination, and five had reactions after vaccination. All the control children without allergic reactions to vaccines had no anti-gelatin IgE

 

We reconfirmed a strong relationship between systemic immediate-type allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis, to vaccines and the presence of specific IgE to gelatin. Moreover, some of the Conclusion: children also had allergic reactions to food gelatin before or after vaccination."

 

and

 

http://jddonline.com/articles/dermatology/S1545961612P0260X/1#close

 

"After a literature search, we concluded that our case represents a rarely reported instance of GCS associated with hepatitis A and influenza vaccination. Our findings reinforce the link between highly immunogenic vaccines, such as hepatitis A, and GCS.2,3 To the best of our knowledge, only one other case of GCS in association with influenza vaccine has been published.4

A number of other immunizations have been implicated as a cause of GCS, such as hepatitis B, measles and polio.5,6 Our case supports the importance of obtaining a thorough history, including immunizations, when evaluating a patient with a rash of unknown origin. As vaccinations continue to become more prevalent worldwide, it is expected that more cases of GCS in association with immunization will be seen. A prompt diagnosis and reassurance to patients and their families may save unnecessary procedures and medical expenditures."


teacozy's Avatar teacozy 07:05 PM 03-10-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 

 

 

Do you have any studies to support that?

Because

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8977505

 

"Results: Twenty-four of the 26 children with allergic reactions to vaccines had anti-gelatin IgE ranging from 1.2 to 250 Ua/ml. Seven had allergic reactions on ingestion of gelatin-containing foods. Of these, two had reactions before vaccination, and five had reactions after vaccination. All the control children without allergic reactions to vaccines had no anti-gelatin IgE

 

We reconfirmed a strong relationship between systemic immediate-type allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis, to vaccines and the presence of specific IgE to gelatin. Moreover, some of the Conclusion: children also had allergic reactions to food gelatin before or after vaccination."

 

and

 

http://jddonline.com/articles/dermatology/S1545961612P0260X/1#close

 

"After a literature search, we concluded that our case represents a rarely reported instance of GCS associated with hepatitis A and influenza vaccination. Our findings reinforce the link between highly immunogenic vaccines, such as hepatitis A, and GCS.2,3 To the best of our knowledge, only one other case of GCS in association with influenza vaccine has been published.4

A number of other immunizations have been implicated as a cause of GCS, such as hepatitis B, measles and polio.5,6 Our case supports the importance of obtaining a thorough history, including immunizations, when evaluating a patient with a rash of unknown origin. As vaccinations continue to become more prevalent worldwide, it is expected that more cases of GCS in association with immunization will be seen. A prompt diagnosis and reassurance to patients and their families may save unnecessary procedures and medical expenditures."

 

As has been said many times, you cannot prove a negative.  The onus is on you to prove that vaccines cause X symptom, since that is what you are claiming. 

 

(Do you have evidence that eating pretzels during pregnancy *doesn't* cause autism?) 

 

I just barely glanced at your first link, and it had a sample size of 26.  Laughable.   Sorry, that's not evidence.   

 

Show me a peer reviewed study published in a high impact journal that shows that vaccines cause food or ongoing skin allergies and then we'll talk. 

 

I didn't even hardly look at your second link, except to notice that it was a case report with a sample size of one..... 


teacozy's Avatar teacozy 07:08 PM 03-10-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyfirechick View Post
 

Wow.  Thank you doctor teacozy for that wonderful diagnosis but I have a doc already, and yah, her issues are vaccine related but you keep on doing what you're doing because three days of brain swelling is certainly healthier in the long run

 

Interesting.  Please link your "doc's" peer reviewed studies published in high impact journals that support his/her assertion. 


kathymuggle's Avatar kathymuggle 07:35 PM 03-10-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

Vaccines don't cause food sensitivities or ongoing rashes, but even if they did, I would still choose three days of crying (of which there is evidence can happen after certain vaccines) and food sensitivities over diphtheria, polio, tetanus, meningitis, and cervical cancer. Any day of the week. 

false dichotomy.

 

It is extremely unlikely Sassyfirechick's daughter will face diphtheria, polio, or meningitis that is covered by the vaccine.  She is quite unlikely to face Cervical cancer as well, and it is somewhat unknown how much the vaccine would protect anyways.  CDC Pink  book, appendix G. 


kathymuggle's Avatar kathymuggle 07:38 PM 03-10-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

Interesting.  Please link your "doc's" peer reviewed studies published in high impact journals that support his/her assertion. 

I am not sure where you are going with this.

 

Are you claiming Sassyfirechick is lying about her doctors assertion?


sassyfirechick's Avatar sassyfirechick 08:45 PM 03-10-2014

Apparently, that or I'm seeing a voodoo witch doctor with no credentials with which to make a diagnosis?? Not every doctor out there gets a kick out of publishing studies although I believe mine has, not really something that comes up in conversation though because honestly I don't care if she has or not.  Do you interrogate everyone that you meet in line at the grocery store as to whom they see for medical care and whether or not they've published studies in main steam journals as well?  Seems quite irrelevant, and quite honestly unless you have a medical degree, who are you to even question that?

 

My child will probably never encounter any the diseases out there, or she may contract a few, who knows! If she does, then I will support her immune system like the "good ole days" and allow things to run their course and after which we will do a happy dance to celebrate her immunity, acquired at an age appropriate time, that will most likely surpass the vaccine immunity of her peers, and I'm totally ok with that :thumb


Taximom5's Avatar Taximom5 09:04 PM 03-10-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

As has been said many times, you cannot prove a negative.  The onus is on you to prove that vaccines cause X symptom, since that is what you are claiming. 

 

(Do you have evidence that eating pretzels during pregnancy *doesn't* cause autism?) 

 

I just barely glanced at your first link, and it had a sample size of 26.  Laughable.   Sorry, that's not evidence.   

 

Show me a peer reviewed study published in a high impact journal that shows that vaccines cause food or ongoing skin allergies and then we'll talk. 

 

I didn't even hardly look at your second link, except to notice that it was a case report with a sample size of one..... 

 

You didn't read the links I provided, but you sneer at them?  Hm, that doesn't sound like a good scientific attitude, does it?

 

Yes, the first one had a sample size of 26.  Not laughable.  Five children in that study who had had allergic reactions to gelatin-containing vaccines THEN had allergic reactions to gelatin-containing foods, AFTER they'd been vaccinated, when they had not had such reactions before vaccination. 

The second link, the case report, asserts that their case "reinforces the link between highly immunogenic vaccines, such as hepatitis A, and GCS. (Gianotti-Crosti Syndrome)"  They also say that a number of other vaccines have been implicated as a cause of GCS, including Hepatitis B, Measles, and Polio."

Gee, teacozy, it seems that the scientists have accepted that vaccines have caused long-term rashes and food allergies.  Perhaps you'd like to tell us why you disagree with the scientists?  I mean, it seems a bit...arrogant to assert that they don't, (as you did, remember?) when there is peer-reviewed, mainstream science showing that they do.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

Vaccines don't cause food sensitivities or ongoing rashes,


Mirzam's Avatar Mirzam 01:49 PM 03-11-2014
Quote:
Gee, teacozy, it seems that the scientists have accepted that vaccines have caused long-term rashes and food allergies.  Perhaps you'd like to tell us why you disagree with the scientists?  I mean, it seems a bit...arrogant to assert that they don't, (as you did, remember?) when there is peer-reviewed, mainstream science showing that they do.

 

 

Taxi, I think the answer is because SkepticalRaptor doesn't accept that vaccines cause long-term rashes and food allergies because he disagrees with the scientists.


beckybird's Avatar beckybird 03:02 PM 03-11-2014

Also, are you suggesting we believe your pediatrician, Teacozy, but not Sassyfirechick's? 

If a pediatrician cannot identify and report a vaccine reaction, then who can? Do you see how your line of thinking is exactly what we complain about on the forum? Who, in your opinion, is qualified to recognize and report reactions?


beckybird's Avatar beckybird 03:05 PM 03-11-2014

One more question--what is the magic number of people there should be in a study that you (or SkepticalRaptor) would find acceptable? 500 people? 2789? 10,376?


chickabiddy's Avatar chickabiddy 05:33 PM 03-11-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeckyBird View Post
 

Also, are you suggesting we believe your pediatrician, Teacozy, but not Sassyfirechick's? 

If a pediatrician cannot identify and report a vaccine reaction, then who can? Do you see how your line of thinking is exactly what we complain about on the forum? Who, in your opinion, is qualified to recognize and report reactions?

 

I'm sure this will open up a can of worms, but I am assuming teacozy's pediatrician is an actual medical doctor.  I seem to recall that sassyfirechick's doctor is not an MD.  That magical degree does add credibility for some of us.


teacozy's Avatar teacozy 06:15 PM 03-11-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

I am not sure where you are going with this.

 

Are you claiming Sassyfirechick is lying about her doctors assertion?

 

No, not at all. 

 

If her "doc" makes a statement/diagnosis that goes against the current scientific/medical consensus, he/she should provide evidence.   Just simply saying so is not evidence in and of itself.  Poke around the Mercola website for evidence of the kind of nonsense that some "doctors" buy into.  Just because "Dr." Mercola says something works doesn't make it true.  That's not how science based medicine works, nor should it be. 

 

I can't get the multi quotes to work, but this is a response to Taximom. 

 

Saying vaccines don't cause food allergies is not the same thing as stating that a person cannot be allergic to certain vaccine ingredients.  As per your first link, having an allergic reaction to an ingredient in vaccines is extraordinarily rare (around 1 in a million IIRC) but it does and can happen.   That doesn't mean the vaccine *caused* the allergy.  Peanut butter that triggers an allergic reaction in a child didn't cause them to have the peanut allergy. 

 

Per your second link, I clearly stated that vaccines don't cause ongoing, long term rashes. Temporary ones aren't all that uncommon. Sassy is claiming her child's vaccine caused long term rashes lasting over 2 years.  Gianotti-Crosti Syndrome is a harmless, non itching rash that lasts anywhere from a few days to a few weeks.  Not ongoing for years and years.   Here is a description of it from a dermatology site "Gianoti-Crosti syndrome is benign and self-limited, although it may last for several weeks. It typically is not itchy and does not have any symptoms, and thus treatment is often not needed."   I'm not sure why you are so concerned by this.  Even if this was a reaction that happened 100% of the time for every vaccine, it would still be worth it to get vaccinated.   This is a harmless and temporary rash. 


sassyfirechick's Avatar sassyfirechick 06:40 PM 03-11-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post
 

 

I'm sure this will open up a can of worms, but I am assuming teacozy's pediatrician is an actual medical doctor.  I seem to recall that sassyfirechick's doctor is not an MD.  That magical degree does add credibility for some of us.

Actually at the time of her vaccinations she was seeing an MD - she did say she was having vaccine reactions then quickly brushed my concerns off as nothing thus why I reported them all myself to be on he safe side.  PS Naturopaths don't exactly sit around the woods dressed in fairy wings singing songs about magical healing powers waiting to receive a magical degree in healing.


sassyfirechick's Avatar sassyfirechick 06:54 PM 03-11-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

Saying vaccines don't cause food allergies is not the same thing as stating that a person cannot be allergic to certain vaccine ingredients.  As per your first link, having an allergic reaction to an ingredient in vaccines is extraordinarily rare (around 1 in a million IIRC) but it does and can happen.   That doesn't mean the vaccine *caused* the allergy.  Peanut butter that triggers an allergic reaction in a child didn't cause them to have the peanut allergy.

 

Per your second link, I clearly stated that vaccines don't cause ongoing, long term rashes. Temporary ones aren't all that uncommon. Sassy is claiming her child's vaccine caused long term rashes lasting over 2 years.  Gianotti-Crosti Syndrome is a harmless, non itching rash that lasts anywhere from a few days to a few weeks.  Not ongoing for years and years.   Here is a description of it from a dermatology site "Gianoti-Crosti syndrome is benign and self-limited, although it may last for several weeks. It typically is not itchy and does not have any symptoms, and thus treatment is often not needed."   I'm not sure why you are so concerned by this.  Even if this was a reaction that happened 100% of the time for every vaccine, it would still be worth it to get vaccinated.   This is a harmless and temporary rash.

Funny you mention peanuts and vaccines but I know for a fact you will deny any correlation between vaccines containing peanuts (or parts thereof) and the magnanimous increase in anaphylactic peanut reactions.  Not like proteins injected into the body would have any chance at crossing blood barriers sending the body into alert....

 

The rashes coincide with food sensitivities which can absolutely be caused by vaccines, but again, you choose to not read anything not supported by skeptical raptor and the like and dismiss everything you read for one reason or another because you are too blinded by your own opinions to even conceive that there could be alternative ways out there.  Scientists learn new things everyday - some choose to ignore those findings, too self absorbed to accept change.  It's those who embrace and accept change that will continue on to be successful.


serenbat's Avatar serenbat 06:55 PM 03-11-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyfirechick View Post
 

Actually at the time of her vaccinations she was seeing an MD - she did say she was having vaccine reactions then quickly brushed my concerns off as nothing thus why I reported them all myself to be on he safe side.  PS Naturopaths don't exactly sit around the woods dressed in fairy wings singing songs about magical healing powers waiting to receive a magical degree in healing.

yes and those "kooks" are actually licensed in several states and prescribe meds too - jaw.gif shocking isn't it for a bunch of non-REAL doctors!


Taximom5's Avatar Taximom5 08:26 PM 03-11-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

 

I can't get the multi quotes to work, but this is a response to Taximom. 

 

Saying vaccines don't cause food allergies is not the same thing as stating that a person cannot be allergic to certain vaccine ingredients.  As per your first link, having an allergic reaction to an ingredient in vaccines is extraordinarily rare (around 1 in a million IIRC) but it does and can happen.   That doesn't mean the vaccine *caused* the allergy.  Peanut butter that triggers an allergic reaction in a child didn't cause them to have the peanut allergy. 

 

 

 

Too bad you didn't bother to read the links I provided.  You seem to have missed that there were children in the study who had not reacted to gelatin-containing foods before vaccination, but who had allergic reactions to the gelatin-containing vaccines--and then to gelatin-containing foods thereafter.

It actually makes sense, if the children were given adjuvanted vaccines; the adjuvant is meant to provoke an exaggerated immune response, and it does.  Unfortunately, that immune response seems to be out of control in a subgroup of people.

 

So hopefully you can now understand that it is not....scientific to claim that vaccines don't cause food allergies.


teacozy's Avatar teacozy 07:14 PM 03-12-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 

 

Too bad you didn't bother to read the links I provided.  You seem to have missed that there were children in the study who had not reacted to gelatin-containing foods before vaccination, but who had allergic reactions to the gelatin-containing vaccines--and then to gelatin-containing foods thereafter.

It actually makes sense, if the children were given adjuvanted vaccines; the adjuvant is meant to provoke an exaggerated immune response, and it does.  Unfortunately, that immune response seems to be out of control in a subgroup of people.

 

So hopefully you can now understand that it is not....scientific to claim that vaccines don't cause food allergies.

 

Once again, you are trying to put meaning into something that isn't there. 

 

The study in no way said or came to the conclusion that the vaccine caused the children to have anti-gelatin IgE.  That's absurd.   The presence of anti-gelatin IgE is what caused them to have a reaction to food with gelatin, not the vaccines. 

 

Additionally, your link didn't specify *which* vaccines caused the reaction.  The DTaP also contains gelatin, and that vaccine is given at 2 months of age.  It would be extremely unlikely for a 2 month old to have been exposed to any gelatin foods before receiving their two month vaccines (marsh mellows, gummy bears, jello, jolly ranchers etc) so the fact that they noticed a reaction to food after the vaccine isn't surprising. 

 

Your link says "Seven had allergic reactions on ingestion of gelatin-containing foods. Of these, two had reactions before vaccination, and five had reactions after vaccination." 

 

That does not mean "Five children who previously had no reaction to gelatin-containing foods before vaccination suddenly developed them after receiving the vaccination."  

 

You are adding meaning that isn't there.  


teacozy's Avatar teacozy 07:18 PM 03-12-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyfirechick View Post
 

Funny you mention peanuts and vaccines but I know for a fact you will deny any correlation between vaccines containing peanuts (or parts thereof) and the magnanimous increase in anaphylactic peanut reactions.  Not like proteins injected into the body would have any chance at crossing blood barriers sending the body into alert....

 

 

I always found the notion that vaccines have hidden peanut particles particularly amusing. 

 

The CDC will say that their vaccines contain formaldehyde, aluminum, and thimerosal but GOD FORBID people find out about the peanut particles!   

 

*giggle snort*


ma2two's Avatar ma2two 07:40 PM 03-12-2014

What's wrong with formaldehyde, aluminum, and thimerosal?

 

But seriously, the reason "peanut particles" would be a big deal is because vaccines are designed to elicit an immune response to what is in the vaccine. Inject peanut protein along with aluminum, and the body is going to become allergic to peanuts.


Turquesa's Avatar Turquesa 07:59 PM 03-12-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyfirechick View Post

Actually at the time of her vaccinations she was seeing an MD - she did say she was having vaccine reactions then quickly brushed my concerns off as nothing thus why I reported them all myself to be on he safe side.  PS Naturopaths don't exactly sit around the woods dressed in fairy wings singing songs about magical healing powers waiting to receive a magical degree in healing.

Only on the interwebs do completely anonymous strangers and laypeople feel qualified to play Monday Morning Quarterback to the vaccine reaction of a child they've never met. shake.gif

There's a double standard that emerges in vax debates: You shouldn't question doctors who demand that you vax on schedule. But always questions the ones who diagnose vaccine reactions. The vaccine risk denialism out there just baffles me. banghead.gif

I'm sorry you're getting interrogations instead of compassion. You really don't have to explain yourself to faceless MDC users. I'm a mother myself and cannot fathom the pain of a mother who tried to do the right thing only to have it backfire. hug.gif
ma2two's Avatar ma2two 08:08 PM 03-12-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

I would still choose three days of crying (of which there is evidence can happen after certain vaccines) and food sensitivities over diphtheria, polio, tetanus, meningitis, and cervical cancer. Any day of the week. 

 

So encephalitis is a-okay to you? And there's a reasonable chance an unvaccinated child in the U.S. or U.K. would get diphtheria, polio, or tetanus?


Turquesa's Avatar Turquesa 08:09 PM 03-12-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwill View Post

When they only looked at serious ADRs, vaccines still accounted for 16% of the reactions. Unfortunately, we don't know at what rate any of the reactions were occurring because they only looked at reaction reports. If China has a strong mandatory vaccination requirement, we might expect vaccines to make up a significant portion of drug reactions simply because every child is given a shot. Not every child is given antibiotics.

It would be nice to know which vaccines caused the most reactions.

The report did mention that China uses a lot of live vaccines and suggested that that might contribute to a higher reaction rate.

You make some good points. I'd also be curious to learn about China's vaccine adverse events reporting system--how reliable it is, how it compares to VAERS, etc. I'm not as dismissive of VAERS as are many in the radical pro-vax camp. It's a mixed bag. A report doesn't always mean a reaction. On the other hand, its administrators admit to the major foible of passive surveillance systems--under-reporting. Either way, I'd be interested in seeing this study replicated in the U.S.
Taximom5's Avatar Taximom5 09:36 PM 03-12-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by ma2two View Post

What's wrong with formaldehyde, aluminum, and thimerosal?

But seriously, the reason "peanut particles" would be a big deal is because vaccines are designed to elicit an immune response to what is in the vaccine. Inject peanut protein along with aluminum, and the body is going to become allergic to peanuts.

Actually, the vaccines are designed to trigger the immune system to have a stronger-than-usual reaction.

There's no way to control WHAT the immune system reacts to at the same time it's reacting to the antigen in the vaccine.

That would include undeclared derivatives of peanut oil, like adjuvant 65, which may be used as a proprietary ingredient in vaccines, with no need to declare it as an ingredient, since it's not a food.
1 2 

Up