Guest guest Posted December 6, 2008 Report Share Posted December 6, 2008 One of the problems with CDC (and only one at this point that I care about) is that it is mandated to keep the WHOLE community safe. That means - from what I am seeing- give as many vaccinations as possible each time you get hold of a child because who knows if or when you will see them again. And this is pushed by the peds as well. My daughter has been going to a practice in METRO which she likes very much in general. Over the issue of immunizations she has butted heads wit them. Their spoke philosophy is that you will get your child immunized as we say - backed by the CDC- or you can find another Doctor. At this point (imminent arrival of another child) she is looking for another practice. What she has found is that after each round of immunizations, her daughter, now 4, becomes more and more OCD and sensory affected for a period of time (weeks). And there is no hint that there is autism as an issue . She even went so far as to take her to the public health department for her last shots so that she could get SEPARATE shots as the ped will not offer that. BTW - anyone know a ped in Dunwoody who is attune to this need for spacing and wathcing thimerisol? > > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/dod-and-cdc-our-study-sug_b_147792.htm\ l > > Kirby > Posted December 2, 2008 | 02:14 PM (EST) > DOD and CDC: Our Study Suggests a Possible Link Between Multiple Vaccines > and Injury > It looks like the CDC may have missed a memo to itself on vaccine safety. > One very contentious issue in the vaccine-autism debate has been whether a > certain subset of genetically susceptible children is unequipped to handle > the early and intensive US immunization schedule -- including kids like > Hannah Poling, who developed autism after receiving nine vaccines at once. > > The theory is that some people with abnormal immune or metabolic systems > might become overtaxed by the fever, inflammation and/or other stresses > sometimes caused by multiple vaccines. > > Many doctors and scientists scoff at the notion that someone could be > injured by getting too many shots at once. They say that people of all ages, > including babies, can handle multiple exposures at any given moment. > > For example, the CDC's website says that simultaneous multiple > immunizations are safe for children with " normal " immune systems. And Dr. > Offit, a prominent pediatrician and wealthy vaccine co-inventor, says > that kids can handle simultaneous exposure to the antigens contained in > 100,000 vaccines -- without any harm coming to them. > > So, the CDC says that multiple vaccines are safe for everyone (at least in > infants). > > But now, we learn that a collaborative program between the CDC and the > Department of Defense says that multiple vaccines may not be safe for > everyone (at least in adults being inoculated for military service). > > " We have preliminary findings from one of our many on-going research > studies that suggest a relationship between adverse events and multiple > vaccinations exist. These findings will require validation, but heighten our > concern for the current clinical practice of multiple vaccinations. " > That rather remarkable statement came from US Army Colonel Renata J. M. > Engler, MD, director of the Vaccine Healthcare Centers Network (VHCN) a > " collaborative network " of the Defense Department - and the CDC. She went on > to say this: > " The more drugs one is exposed to, the greater the likelihood of having an > adverse event so as vaccine numbers increase, and (sic) we will see more > people who have efficacy or safety issues. " > And later, this: > " The standard of care (in the context of mixing vaccines) is to minimize > drug exposures because of the recognition that the more drugs being used, > the greater the chance of a reaction and potentially a serious adverse > event. " > Col. Engler's candid statements (I've never heard anything like them from > any other senior vaccine official), were included in a November 26 letter to > Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY). Maloney had written to inquire about a 2007 > VHCN presentation suggesting that 1-2 percent of all service members were > suffering serious adverse effects from their shots. > > I first reported on this presentation in August, when someone alerted me to > a Government Accounting Office report saying that VHCN and CDC officials > " estimate that between 1 and 2 percent of immunized individuals may > experience severe adverse events, which could result in disability or death. > Some of these events may occur coincidentally following immunization, while > others may truly be caused by immunization. " > > I had never heard of the VHCN, so I went to their website, where I found > this Power Point presentation. > > The slides suggested that, among active duty and reserve service members, > up to 48,000 individuals may have sustained serious vaccine injuries which > might need to be classified as " casualties, " and may require teaching " new > skills " to some of those injured. > > But Col. Engler wrote that the slides had been misinterpreted. > > " Our program is not in a position to provide incidence data but rather to > refine case definitions and research questions to address the serious and > the rare adverse events questions, " she wrote. > > The 1-2% figure was merely an estimate of " who may need an immunization > healthcare consultation to address clinical questions raised, " she said. > > " The consultation does not prove or disprove causality association but it > is from these consultations that we have refined our understanding of the > questions, a critical first step to future refinement of research agendas. > It is our firm belief that increased research into side effects that are > more severe but may be short duration, may help us understand more severe > adverse events (more rare at 1 in 10-100,000). However, our work over the > past years has been humbling in relation to the knowledge gaps. " > > And what about the slide mentioning that up to 48,000 service members might > require " new skills " following vaccine injury? > > " This statistic refers to the potential number of service members, > experiencing more serious side effects (not serious disease with prolonged > duration), that may need a medical consultation about next dose and/or > pre-treatment to reduce the severity of the side effects, etc., " Col. Engler > explained, (I think). > > So what does any of this have to do with autism? Perhaps nothing. As Col. > Engler herself wrote: " The belief that vaccines are safe to mix is based > largely on pediatric experience and with a much more limited spectrum of > vaccines. " (In other words, apples and oranges, here folks). > > Now, it's hard to imagine how 35-to-40 or more shots in the US childhood > schedule could be " much more limited " than the military's regime. But then > again, babies don't get vaccinated against anthrax and smallpox. > > But it's also hard to imagine that there might be a " relationship between > adverse events and multiple vaccinations " in adults healthy enough to fight > a war, and yet, among babies and infants with immature immune systems and > developing brains, the practice is universally harmless - even for kids like > Hannah Poling who had an underlying mitochondrial dysfunction. > > In the meantime, let's hope the DOD and the CDC and get their message > straight. If they want to convince parents that multiple vaccines might be > risky for some soldiers but safe for all little kids, well, good luck. > > Or maybe, the government is finally going to look into the percentage of > people (however small) who might be genetically programmed against the > ability to withstand more than one or two shots at any given time. > > As Col. Engler notes, more work is needed in this regard: " The > recommendation for more research on subpopulation risk factors in relation > to multiple vaccine combinations has been included in the Institute of > Medicine Report on Multiple Vaccines. " > > a.. Autism > b.. Health > It looks like the CDC may have missed a memo to itself on vaccine safety. > One very contentious issue in the vaccine-autism debate has been whether a > certain subset of genetically susceptible children... > It looks like the CDC may have missed a memo to itself on vaccine safety. > One very contentious issue in the vaccine-autism debate has been whether a > certain subset of genetically susceptible children... > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.