Re: [new-a-p] Re: ie's been cleared by a jury of his peers

[Guest guest]

All,

At least two Independent studies [Geier DA, King PG,

Sykes LK, Geier MR. RotaTeq vaccine adverse events

and policy considerations. Med Sci Monit. 2008 Mar;

14(3): PH9-PH16 and Geier DA, King PG, Sykes LK,

Geier MR. The temporal relationship between RotaTeq

immunization and intussusception adverse events in

the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

Med Sci Monit. 2012 Feb; 18(2): PH12-PH17] in which

this reviewer is a minor author have clearly shown

that the current RotaTeq and, by inference, Rotarix

rotavirus vaccines are NOT sufficiently safe (and

coupled with an estimate that, to be medically cost

effective to use in a mass vaccination program in the

USA, these vaccines would have to have a “health care

system” cost, allowing for inflation, of no more

than twice $ 9.00 a dose [or up to twice $ 27.00 for

3 doses in the initial inoculation sequence] {Tucker

AW, Haddix AC, Bresee JS, Holman RC, Parashar UD.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of a Rotavirus Immunization

Program for the United States. JAMA 1996 May; 279(17):

1371-1376}), these vaccines are NEITHER safe NOR,

with a current per-dose cost of $72.339 for RotaTeq

[$217.017 per 3-dose regimen] and $106.57 [$213.14

per 2-dose regimen] for Rotarix, medically cost-

effective by about a factor of 4.

But NEITHER of these independent papers are

reported in the " news " NOR does the mainstream

media report the realiy that, for the USA,

the rotavirus vaccination programs are a

waste of healthcare dollars.

All the RotaTeq rotavirus vaccine is EFFECTIVE

for in the USA, where the disease was declining

even before the first vaccine was introduced

in the late 1990s, is to line the pockets of

Merck and those who Merck directly or, in the

case of Dr. Offit, indirectly employs.

In contrast to the " tobacco " science offered by

the Establishment study, the independent studies

clearly shows that the vaccination program

causes more, not less, serious injuries than

were observed in the USA prior to there being

any rotavirus vaccine.

If the vaccine were safe, then the rate of

" intussusception " following vaccination would

have to be at least an order of magnitude less

than the true, not estimated or inflated by

having the clinical trials conducted on an

" American Indian " reservations where sanitation,

clean water, and even hygiene are significantly

more problematic than anywhere else in the USA

besides inner-city slums and shanty towns.

When is the public going to wake up and realize

that public health is more concerned about its

financial " health " and the vaccine makers'

fiscal " health " than it is concerned about

protecting the health of our children or the

fiscal health of the families and taxpayers

who, one way or the other, pay for vaccines

that do more overall harm to the public's

fiscal and physical health than than the

claimed but theoretical benefits from a 3-dose

RotaTeq or 2-dose Rotarix vaccination program

that probably protects no more than 80% of

those inoculated with either of these rotavirus

vaccines at 2, 4 and/or 6 months (and a

significantly lower percent of those babies

who are, as " nature' intended, being breastfed

[http://www.naturalnews.com/034911_breastfeeding_lungs_infants.html,

Breastfeeding absolutely vital for strengthening

the developing lungs of children, research finds

Thursday, February 09, 2012 by: Benson,

staff writer ... Learn more:

http://www.naturalnews.com/034911_breastfeeding_lungs_infants.html#ixzz1lwSL3w5q\

]).

Hopefully, after reading this e-mail, all will

understand just how bankrupt our uncaring

" health care " system has become -- a system

operated for the benefit of the insurers,

" health care " providers, vaccine makers, and

public health officials where our babies are

the intentional collateral damage in the

vaccination wars that fuels the ever-younger

and ever-growing chronic disease patient pool.

Respectfully,

G. King, PhD

unworthy servant of Elohim

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Quoting ejhmom :

>

>

> Well...Not entirely:

>

> " We can't rule out that a low-level risk could exist, " Harvard Medical

School's Irene Shui told

> Reuters Health, particularly in a bigger sample. However, she added, " our

results do add to the

> message that even if there was a low-level risk of intussusception, the

benefits of the vaccine

> far outweigh those risks. "

>

> I appreciate this statement from Shui too:

>

> " I think it's important for both parents and physicians to realize that

vaccines like the

> rotavirus vaccine have had a tremendous public health benefit, but every

treatment or vaccine has

> some risk, " Shui concluded.

>

>

>

>

> >

> >

>

http://www.fiercevaccines.com/story/mercks-rotateq-not-linked-bowel-problems/201\

2-02-09?utm_medium=nl & utm_source=internal

> >

>

>

>

>

> ------------------------------------

>

>