45 years of socialist social engineering of the "oh sweety darling thinking the doctor knows best is so old fashioned and uncool - just do what you want" variety - despite the mountain of evidence that the Doctor actually does know best (for a fairly obvious reason) - has resulted in enormous parental neglect of children's health in so many areas.
Not only with immunisation, but in other areas the myths can be demolished so easily, yet you will no doubt still get youthful parents refusing to do what is best (lest they be thought 'uncool' by other morons)
Viewing this video should be compulsory; I also think it should not be free to treat children when (inevitably) the chickens come home to roost - make the parents pay.
The thing which is breathtaking is I bet they all expressed their horror at the deaths of the 'Kahui Twins' not thinking for a second their own parental behaviour is just as bad.
"The odds of getting polio or tetanus for example would be very low."
The odds of getting polio are very low in most countries these days. When the last 2 or 3 war torn countries that have been hard to vaccinate get fully vaxxed we could possibly stop vaccinating for polio?
Tetanus? It kills in a most horrible way. Not vaccinating against tetanus in any country is likely to be a bad idea as we have no way of (almost) wiping it out like we have with polio.
Young Alijah Williams would surely scoff at doubting what tetanus can do...
Oddly enough, the most prevalent form of polio around today is the variant sourced from the vaccine itself. Wild polio is rare. Your greatest risk of exposure and infection is to virus shed from the recently vaccinated.
There is also another issue to be considered. Well under 1% of the unvaccinated population exposed to polio (whether it be the vaccine or wild species) develop symptoms and vanishingly few of them experience paralysis (even temporarily). What is it that generates that result? Clue: it has nothing to do with commercial vaccines.
Caringmum According to medsafe.govt the tetanus booster shots cause neurological disorders and anaphylactic reactions. No rate is given for neurological disorders but anaphylactic reactions are said to occur at a rate between 1/1000 and 1/10000.
Hard to find good stats on deaths from anaphylactic reactions but somewhere between 0.7% and 20% according to wikipedia.
Taking the best case from these stats means the chance of dying from getting a tetanus booster is about 1 in 1.5 million. A tetanus booster is said to provide protection for 10 years.
The chances of getting tetanus in a ten year period is about 1 in 10 million (according to US stats) and according to the article you linked to it's fatal 10% of the time - that gives a 1 in 100 million chance of death by tetanus.
The risk of death by tetanus booster vaccine looks to be at least 65 times the risk of death by tetanus.
I think a lot of people are missing the point with vaccinations. Widespread vaccinations in the developed world are the reason polio, tetanus etc are now so rare. To prevent them spreading exponentially again we need to stay on top by continuing vaccinations.
And no Amit; you will not catch polio from a vaccinated person. Stay away from whatever crackpot website you got that from.
Scott I don't see how the scarcity of tetanus could be related to its vaccine.
Tetanus is caused by a toxin that a certain bacteria excretes. The tetanus vaccine is that toxin and its anti toxin.
As I understand it the tetanus vaccine does not stop a person from getting the bacteria that causes tetanus it just reduces the symptoms.
Regarding Polio - The Polio "sip" vaccine contained live polio virus and was the major (only) cause of polio in the western world for many years. Vaccinated people contracted polio from "sip" vaccinated babies' poop. The polio sip vaccine is no longer used in NZ and the current vaccine does not contain live polio virus.
I think the likely reason for the decline in polio is the decline in polio contaminated poop in the drinking water.
"And no Amit; you will not catch polio from a vaccinated person".
And you know this for certain? You should stop relying on your copy of the "Big Bright Colour Book of Doctor and Nurse Stories for Children". Face it, you have no real knowledge on this topic and have spent fuck-all effort learning about it.
Scott, a recently vaccinated person sheds virus (in particular if they are taking the oral vaccination). The vacine form of the virus is the most common form encountered. The wild virus is now rare. The majority of people who end up with an infection present with the vaccine variant, not the wild variant. Perhaps you might care to research why this is. You might also care to look up the efficacy of the vaccine. The statistics are quite sobering- not what you'd be expecting, that's for sure.
You say this, "Widespread vaccinations in the developed world are the reason polio, tetanus etc are now so rare." That's arguable. You ignore modern context completely. You ignore modern sewerage and sanitation systems, municipal rubbish collection and disposal processes, the modern methods of food storage and packaging and preparation, nuitrition, housing and living conditions, quality of reticulated water, HVAC and so on.
And you come to this collectivist conclusion,"To prevent them spreading exponentially again we need to stay on top by continuing vaccinations."
We? You speak only for yourself and not any other person. Leave everyone else alone you wanna-be fuhrer.
"You ignore modern sewerage and sanitation systems, municipal rubbish collection and disposal processes"
All state provided, which you oppose as evil. That's kind of amusing when you think about it isn't it? And can you please provide some evidence for your assertion that vaccines have done nothing to contribute to the almost total all elimination polio, small pox, mumps etc? Thanks.
Chaz The effectiveness of the tetanus vaccine is largely irrelevant with the disease being so rare (and the disease scarcity is not due to the vaccine).
Getting the tetanus booster vaccine is riskier than not getting the vaccine.
The bacteria can not pass from one person to another - the bacteria that causes tetanus exists in the soil and in the gut of animals.
Do you think a person getting a toxin and anti-toxin will affect the prevalence of the toxin causing bacteria in the soil and in the gut of animals? The power of positive thinking perhaps. ;-)
When approximately 40% of the US population has not had a tetanus shot in the previous 10 years the rate of tetanus disease is about 30 people per year (1 in 10 million).
"A marked decrease in mortality from tetanus occurred from the early 1900s to the late 1940s. In the late 1940s, tetanus toxoid was introduced into routine childhood immunization and tetanus became nationally notifiable. At that time, 500–600 cases (approximately 0.4 cases per 100,000 population) were reported per year. After the 1940s, reported tetanus incidence rates declined steadily. Since the mid-1970s, 50–100 cases (~0.05 cases per 100,000) have been reported annually. From 2000 through 2007 an average of 31 cases were reported per year. The death-to-case ratio has declined from 30% to approximately 10% in recent years. An all-time low of 18 cases (0.01 cases per 100,000) was reported in 2009."
and
"Almost all reported cases of tetanus are in persons who have either never been vaccinated, or who completed a primary series but have not had a booster in the preceding 10 years."
An astounding coincidence then.
"Do you think a person getting a toxin and anti-toxin will affect the prevalence of the toxin causing bacteria in the soil and in the gut of animals?"
It's going to lower reporting, for fairly obvious reasons.
I think the tetanus vaccine is effective - it's the vaccine that I considered for the longest time when I was deciding which vaccines to give it to the kids but there's no mechanism for this vaccine to cause a decrease in the vulnerable population.
A large percentage of people are vulnerable to tetanus but very few suffer and die - according to my rough estimate from the stats a larger number suffer and die from the vaccine.
"A large percentage of people are vulnerable to tetanus but very few suffer and die..."
Because of the vaccine.
"...according to my rough estimate"
Which is almost certainly completely wrong as it contains a number of guesses, but go right ahead and expose your kids to potentially fatal diseases on this basis.
It is the 21st century: Your wilful ignorance on vaccinations is ridiculous. There is no debate in the medical community about the issues you have raised, only on the internet.
reed: hopefully none of your unfortunate children get cut by rusty metal, but if they do I can imagine the look on the doctors face when you explain to him how you considered all the evidence and decided a tetanus vaccination wasn't necessary.
Not vaccinating your children is child abuse by abject stupidity.
I agree with Scott. Unfortunately for their children, libertarians seem to view their children as property. Couple this ideology with arrogance and an inability to think clearly and the results are tragic.
You're saying that those not protected by the vaccine are protected by the vaccine.
You are correct that there are lots of assumptions but the alternative is to not think and just trust the doctors. I've noticed that people, even professionals, don't think very well.
"You're saying that those not protected by the vaccine are protected by the vaccine."
No. Everyone who contracts it didn't have the vaccine.
"You are correct that there are lots of assumptions but the alternative is to not think and just trust the doctors."
Did you build your own car? Do you trust bridges or go around the long way? Do you only enter buildings you yourself constructed? The alternative is not to think and just trust the engineers.
"There is no debate in the medical community about the issues you have raised". Scott, you are wrong. The facts oppose you.
The inversion of species population is important and steps are being taken to try to alleviate it by pharma. For a start, the vaccination and its delivery are being altered as a matter of priority. Oral delivery is phasing out in favour of syringe, live virus by inert. The cynical may ascribe that as driven by commercial reasons such as patent expiration or profitability (oral is much cheaper than needle). Still, various researchers have been pushing for change as they are highly concerned about issues such as iatrogenic polio and what that could lead to. As with many other vaccines there is on-going research into efficacy which, as it happens, is not well understood (it is not known for how long the vaccine based immunity persists, assuming the vaccine delivered/developed/caused an immunity in the first instance). Something else you'd do well to consider is the question of why it is that such a tiny minority of people who are exposed never go on to develop symptoms, and of those who do why only a small minority present with paralysis (even temporarily). There is some important research going on into this area presently and some interesting results have been published (you are referred to your local medical school library- way cheaper than journal subscriptions).
There seem to be a preponderance of young fools around and about recently. It seems that the present product of the education system are quick to adopt whatever mythologies they were exposed to while lapping the cracked dry teats of their school teachers or while brown-nosing lecturers and tutorial assistants during their undergraduate years. The inability to do simple research for themselves is incredible (such as going to the library, or even spending a few hours doing web searches and reading some articles, or even discussing matters with known leaders in research). Perhaps it is the arrogance of youth (although I know none of my cohort who were ever like this) or simply self-indulgent laziness. Scott, do not continue as you have been or you will doom yourself to be but one of their number.
Assuming you actually have some children, Scott, and are not merely blow-arsing, then you'd understand (or ought to understand) that not doing your own thorough research and finding out as much as you can PRIOR to taking a decision in regards to vaccinating your children is child abuse by abject stupidity.
The CDC recommends..."All persons aged 6 months and older should be vaccinated annually, with rare exceptions."
From wikipedia... "Influenza spreads around the world in seasonal epidemics, resulting in about three to five million yearly cases of severe illness and about 250,000 to 500,000 yearly deaths"
Very few people give their children annual flu vaccines.
That's far more likely than tetanus... are people that don't get their children the flu vaccine annually child abusers?
(FYI: I don't think any of my four children have ever had the flu - a good diet has been their health care)
Amit - you claim Scott is wrong by saying there is no debate within the medical community.
Can you please provide a link to the relevant page/s of the American Medical Association, or Royal Australasian College of Surgeons websites, which state they are against immunisations?
If Scott is wrong it should be easy enough for you to do so...
To clarify, I am saying yes there is debate in the medical community (especially within the research specialisation of the medical community). Scott is in error when pretending there is no debate. For a start, pharma are concerned. They have been and are expending significant resource trying to come to terms with some of the problems, understand them and seek solution (in the case of polio vaccine I pointed out to Scott some of the changes to the vaccine that are in process worldwide- this is not a minor issue). They are also active in other areas as well- notably with marketing, political lobbying, political action, education and there have been product withdrawals. There is active debate between organisations as well as inside them. This is not going to be easy to sort out. Too much has been assumed of an area which turns out to be one where there is an acute lack of specific knowledge. An analogy would be to the area of anti-biotics where the unexpected occurred and now there are all sorts of anti-biotic resistant bugs around and about (perhaps bacteriophages will address some of this rapidly emerging trouble spot). Anyway, if the science were settled (and I am of the opionion it is far from settled) and there was no debate, then none of the research we are presently undertaking would be at all necessary, nor would any of the actions being undertaken by pharma be required either. Pharma recognise there are issues and they are voting with their wallets big time. They are looking to research to find out more (as they have to if they want to continue in the line of work they are presently enagaged in) since even their own experts are not certain and far from in agreement. There is debate going on alright.
Mr Lineberry, how is it relevant to the existence of the debate what position the AMA or the Royal College takes at any particular point in time? Surely it is not your position that once these august bodies of guild take a position then "the science is settled" and all debate ceases to exist.
Meanwhile may I suggest you review the literature. Since it would appear that polio is of interest to you, begin by studying iatrogenic polio in, say, India. There is an an unwelcome surprise in the data and once you recognise it you'll be asking all sorts of uncomfortable questions. Be not afraid to do that, for therein lies the path to being a sound researcher. I wish you the best with your enquiry. Let me know how you go.
Lastly, my position on vaccines remains as outlined to you on a previous thread where we discussed them.
27 comments:
Excellent video!
45 years of socialist social engineering of the "oh sweety darling thinking the doctor knows best is so old fashioned and uncool - just do what you want" variety - despite the mountain of evidence that the Doctor actually does know best (for a fairly obvious reason) - has resulted in enormous parental neglect of children's health in so many areas.
Not only with immunisation, but in other areas the myths can be demolished so easily, yet you will no doubt still get youthful parents refusing to do what is best (lest they be thought 'uncool' by other morons)
Viewing this video should be compulsory; I also think it should not be free to treat children when (inevitably) the chickens come home to roost - make the parents pay.
The thing which is breathtaking is I bet they all expressed their horror at the deaths of the 'Kahui Twins' not thinking for a second their own parental behaviour is just as bad.
The easiest mistake to point out is that the guy compares the risks of getting a disease against the risks of getting a vaccine for the disease.
The odds of getting polio or tetanus for example would be very low.
"The odds of getting polio or tetanus for example would be very low."
The odds of getting polio are very low in most countries these days. When the last 2 or 3 war torn countries that have been hard to vaccinate get fully vaxxed we could possibly stop vaccinating for polio?
Tetanus? It kills in a most horrible way. Not vaccinating against tetanus in any country is likely to be a bad idea as we have no way of (almost) wiping it out like we have with polio.
Young Alijah Williams would surely scoff at doubting what tetanus can do...
http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10855638
Oddly enough, the most prevalent form of polio around today is the variant sourced from the vaccine itself. Wild polio is rare. Your greatest risk of exposure and infection is to virus shed from the recently vaccinated.
There is also another issue to be considered. Well under 1% of the unvaccinated population exposed to polio (whether it be the vaccine or wild species) develop symptoms and vanishingly few of them experience paralysis (even temporarily). What is it that generates that result? Clue: it has nothing to do with commercial vaccines.
Amit
Caringmum
According to medsafe.govt the tetanus booster shots cause neurological disorders and anaphylactic reactions. No rate is given for neurological disorders but anaphylactic reactions are said to occur at a rate between 1/1000 and 1/10000.
Hard to find good stats on deaths from anaphylactic reactions but somewhere between 0.7% and 20% according to wikipedia.
Taking the best case from these stats means the chance of dying from getting a tetanus booster is about 1 in 1.5 million. A tetanus booster is said to provide protection for 10 years.
The chances of getting tetanus in a ten year period is about 1 in 10 million (according to US stats) and according to the article you linked to it's fatal 10% of the time - that gives a 1 in 100 million chance of death by tetanus.
The risk of death by tetanus booster vaccine looks to be at least 65 times the risk of death by tetanus.
Oops... US stats show a 1 in 10 million chance ** per year **.
Correction: The risk of death by tetanus booster vaccine looks to be at least 6.5 times the risk of death by tetanus.
I think a lot of people are missing the point with vaccinations. Widespread vaccinations in the developed world are the reason polio, tetanus etc are now so rare. To prevent them spreading exponentially again we need to stay on top by continuing vaccinations.
And no Amit; you will not catch polio from a vaccinated person. Stay away from whatever crackpot website you got that from.
Scott
I don't see how the scarcity of tetanus could be related to its vaccine.
Tetanus is caused by a toxin that a certain bacteria excretes. The tetanus vaccine is that toxin and its anti toxin.
As I understand it the tetanus vaccine does not stop a person from getting the bacteria that causes tetanus it just reduces the symptoms.
Regarding Polio - The Polio "sip" vaccine contained live polio virus and was the major (only) cause of polio in the western world for many years. Vaccinated people contracted polio from "sip" vaccinated babies' poop. The polio sip vaccine is no longer used in NZ and the current vaccine does not contain live polio virus.
I think the likely reason for the decline in polio is the decline in polio contaminated poop in the drinking water.
"As I understand it the tetanus vaccine does not stop a person from getting the bacteria that causes tetanus it just reduces the symptoms."
Thus preventing your death, thus the low death rate from tetanus. This isn't rocket science.
Scott
"And no Amit; you will not catch polio from a vaccinated person".
And you know this for certain? You should stop relying on your copy of the "Big Bright Colour Book of Doctor and Nurse Stories for Children". Face it, you have no real knowledge on this topic and have spent fuck-all effort learning about it.
Scott, a recently vaccinated person sheds virus (in particular if they are taking the oral vaccination). The vacine form of the virus is the most common form encountered. The wild virus is now rare. The majority of people who end up with an infection present with the vaccine variant, not the wild variant. Perhaps you might care to research why this is. You might also care to look up the efficacy of the vaccine. The statistics are quite sobering- not what you'd be expecting, that's for sure.
You say this, "Widespread vaccinations in the developed world are the reason polio, tetanus etc are now so rare."
That's arguable. You ignore modern context completely. You ignore modern sewerage and sanitation systems, municipal rubbish collection and disposal processes, the modern methods of food storage and packaging and preparation, nuitrition, housing and living conditions, quality of reticulated water, HVAC and so on.
And you come to this collectivist conclusion,"To prevent them spreading exponentially again we need to stay on top by continuing vaccinations."
We? You speak only for yourself and not any other person. Leave everyone else alone you wanna-be fuhrer.
Amit
"You ignore modern sewerage and sanitation systems, municipal rubbish collection and disposal processes"
All state provided, which you oppose as evil. That's kind of amusing when you think about it isn't it? And can you please provide some evidence for your assertion that vaccines have done nothing to contribute to the almost total all elimination polio, small pox, mumps etc? Thanks.
Chaz
The effectiveness of the tetanus vaccine is largely irrelevant with the disease being so rare (and the disease scarcity is not due to the vaccine).
Getting the tetanus booster vaccine is riskier than not getting the vaccine.
"(and the disease scarcity is not due to the vaccine)."
Yeah, but you're wrong about that one, chief.
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/tetanus.pdf
The bacteria can not pass from one person to another - the bacteria that causes tetanus exists in the soil and in the gut of animals.
Do you think a person getting a toxin and anti-toxin will affect the prevalence of the toxin causing bacteria in the soil and in the gut of animals?
The power of positive thinking perhaps. ;-)
When approximately 40% of the US population has not had a tetanus shot in the previous 10 years the rate of tetanus disease is about 30 people per year (1 in 10 million).
From the CDC:
"A marked decrease in mortality from tetanus occurred from the early 1900s to the late 1940s. In the late 1940s, tetanus toxoid was introduced into routine childhood immunization and tetanus became nationally notifiable. At that time, 500–600 cases (approximately 0.4 cases per 100,000 population) were reported per year.
After the 1940s, reported tetanus incidence rates declined steadily. Since the mid-1970s, 50–100 cases (~0.05 cases per 100,000) have been reported annually. From 2000 through 2007 an average of 31 cases were reported per year. The death-to-case ratio has declined from 30% to approximately 10% in recent years. An all-time low of 18 cases (0.01 cases per 100,000) was reported in 2009."
and
"Almost all reported cases of tetanus are in persons who have either never been vaccinated, or who completed a primary series but have not had a booster in the preceding 10 years."
An astounding coincidence then.
"Do you think a person getting a toxin and anti-toxin will affect the prevalence of the toxin causing bacteria in the soil and in the gut of animals?"
It's going to lower reporting, for fairly obvious reasons.
I think the tetanus vaccine is effective - it's the vaccine that I considered for the longest time when I was deciding which vaccines to give it to the kids but there's no mechanism for this vaccine to cause a decrease in the vulnerable population.
A large percentage of people are vulnerable to tetanus but very few suffer and die - according to my rough estimate from the stats a larger number suffer and die from the vaccine.
"A large percentage of people are vulnerable to tetanus but very few suffer and die..."
Because of the vaccine.
"...according to my rough estimate"
Which is almost certainly completely wrong as it contains a number of guesses, but go right ahead and expose your kids to potentially fatal diseases on this basis.
@Amit & reed
It is the 21st century: Your wilful ignorance on vaccinations is ridiculous. There is no debate in the medical community about the issues you have raised, only on the internet.
reed: hopefully none of your unfortunate children get cut by rusty metal, but if they do I can imagine the look on the doctors face when you explain to him how you considered all the evidence and decided a tetanus vaccination wasn't necessary.
Not vaccinating your children is child abuse by abject stupidity.
I agree with Scott. Unfortunately for their children, libertarians seem to view their children as property. Couple this ideology with arrogance and an inability to think clearly and the results are tragic.
"Because of the vaccine."
You're saying that those not protected by the vaccine are protected by the vaccine.
You are correct that there are lots of assumptions but the alternative is to not think and just trust the doctors. I've noticed that people, even professionals, don't think very well.
"You're saying that those not protected by the vaccine are protected by the vaccine."
No. Everyone who contracts it didn't have the vaccine.
"You are correct that there are lots of assumptions but the alternative is to not think and just trust the doctors."
Did you build your own car? Do you trust bridges or go around the long way? Do you only enter buildings you yourself constructed? The alternative is not to think and just trust the engineers.
"There is no debate in the medical community about the issues you have raised".
Scott, you are wrong. The facts oppose you.
The inversion of species population is important and steps are being taken to try to alleviate it by pharma. For a start, the vaccination and its delivery are being altered as a matter of priority. Oral delivery is phasing out in favour of syringe, live virus by inert. The cynical may ascribe that as driven by commercial reasons such as patent expiration or profitability (oral is much cheaper than needle). Still, various researchers have been pushing for change as they are highly concerned about issues such as iatrogenic polio and what that could lead to. As with many other vaccines there is on-going research into efficacy which, as it happens, is not well understood (it is not known for how long the vaccine based immunity persists, assuming the vaccine delivered/developed/caused an immunity in the first instance). Something else you'd do well to consider is the question of why it is that such a tiny minority of people who are exposed never go on to develop symptoms, and of those who do why only a small minority present with paralysis (even temporarily). There is some important research going on into this area presently and some interesting results have been published (you are referred to your local medical school library- way cheaper than journal subscriptions).
There seem to be a preponderance of young fools around and about recently. It seems that the present product of the education system are quick to adopt whatever mythologies they were exposed to while lapping the cracked dry teats of their school teachers or while brown-nosing lecturers and tutorial assistants during their undergraduate years. The inability to do simple research for themselves is incredible (such as going to the library, or even spending a few hours doing web searches and reading some articles, or even discussing matters with known leaders in research). Perhaps it is the arrogance of youth (although I know none of my cohort who were ever like this) or simply self-indulgent laziness. Scott, do not continue as you have been or you will doom yourself to be but one of their number.
Assuming you actually have some children, Scott, and are not merely blow-arsing, then you'd understand (or ought to understand) that not doing your own thorough research and finding out as much as you can PRIOR to taking a decision in regards to vaccinating your children is child abuse by abject stupidity.
Amit
Evidence, Amit. You've never provided any, just bluster, followed by abuse. It's impossible to take you seriously. I pity your kids, though.
The CDC recommends..."All persons aged 6 months and older should be vaccinated annually, with rare exceptions."
From wikipedia... "Influenza spreads around the world in seasonal epidemics, resulting in about three to five million yearly cases of severe illness and about 250,000 to 500,000 yearly deaths"
Very few people give their children annual flu vaccines.
That's far more likely than tetanus... are people that don't get their children the flu vaccine annually child abusers?
(FYI: I don't think any of my four children have ever had the flu - a good diet has been their health care)
Amit - you claim Scott is wrong by saying there is no debate within the medical community.
Can you please provide a link to the relevant page/s of the American Medical Association, or Royal Australasian College of Surgeons websites, which state they are against immunisations?
If Scott is wrong it should be easy enough for you to do so...
Mr Lineberry
To clarify, I am saying yes there is debate in the medical community (especially within the research specialisation of the medical community). Scott is in error when pretending there is no debate. For a start, pharma are concerned. They have been and are expending significant resource trying to come to terms with some of the problems, understand them and seek solution (in the case of polio vaccine I pointed out to Scott some of the changes to the vaccine that are in process worldwide- this is not a minor issue). They are also active in other areas as well- notably with marketing, political lobbying, political action, education and there have been product withdrawals. There is active debate between organisations as well as inside them. This is not going to be easy to sort out. Too much has been assumed of an area which turns out to be one where there is an acute lack of specific knowledge. An analogy would be to the area of anti-biotics where the unexpected occurred and now there are all sorts of anti-biotic resistant bugs around and about (perhaps bacteriophages will address some of this rapidly emerging trouble spot). Anyway, if the science were settled (and I am of the opionion it is far from settled) and there was no debate, then none of the research we are presently undertaking would be at all necessary, nor would any of the actions being undertaken by pharma be required either. Pharma recognise there are issues and they are voting with their wallets big time. They are looking to research to find out more (as they have to if they want to continue in the line of work they are presently enagaged in) since even their own experts are not certain and far from in agreement. There is debate going on alright.
Mr Lineberry, how is it relevant to the existence of the debate what position the AMA or the Royal College takes at any particular point in time? Surely it is not your position that once these august bodies of guild take a position then "the science is settled" and all debate ceases to exist.
Meanwhile may I suggest you review the literature. Since it would appear that polio is of interest to you, begin by studying iatrogenic polio in, say, India. There is an an unwelcome surprise in the data and once you recognise it you'll be asking all sorts of uncomfortable questions. Be not afraid to do that, for therein lies the path to being a sound researcher. I wish you the best with your enquiry. Let me know how you go.
Lastly, my position on vaccines remains as outlined to you on a previous thread where we discussed them.
Amit
For someone so forthright you've been unable to provide a solitary link or citation, Amit. Not one. That's telling.
Post a Comment