Jump to content

Kimmo

Members
  • Content count

    1741
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kimmo

  1. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    what about one's daughter (the original topic)? (i haven't looked at incidence in males, so won't comment.)
  2. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    joe, it doesn't sound like you read the articles. "The number of women who die from cervical cancer in the US every year is small but real. It is small because of the success of the Pap screening program." "The risks of serious adverse events including death reported after Gardasil use in (the JAMA article by CDC's Dr. Barbara Slade) were 3.4/100,000 doses distributed. The rate of serious adverse events on par with the death rate of cervical cancer. Gardasil has been associated with at least as many serious adverse events as there are deaths from cervical cancer developing each year. "Pap smears have never killed anyone. Pap smears are an effective screening tool to prevent cervical cancer. Pap smears alone prevent more cervical cancers than can the vaccines alone. Gardasil is associated with serious adverse events, including death. If Gardasil is given to 11 year olds, and the vaccine does not last at least fifteen years, then there is no benefit - and only risk - for the young girl. Vaccinating will not reduce the population incidence of cervical cancer if the woman continues to get Pap screening throughout her life. "The informed consent/full disclosure as I described initially must be disclosed to parents and young women. The questions should be raised, 'How do you want to prevent cervical cancer? Pap screening? Vaccination? Both?" the cumulative incidence of HPV infections for women in the U.S. through the age of 50 years old is 80%. That statement is true. That statement infers that nearly every one is infected with HPV at least one point in their life. What is left out is that 95% of all HPV infections are cleared spontaneously by the body's immune system. The remaining 5% progress to cancer precursors. Cancer precursors, specifically CIN 3, progresses to invasive cancer in the following proportions: 20% of women with CIN 3 progress to invasive cervical cancer in five years; 40% progress to cervical cancer in thirty years. There is ample time to detect and treat the early precancers and early stage cancers for 100% cure. here's an interesting excerpt, about vaccines in general: Are the protocols of the CDC and VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) properly processing reports of adverse reactions and deaths due to the vaccine? What do you see as the weak link in the VAERS system of collecting data? "VAERS is biased in both directions, not allowing any veritable conclusions to be drawn about vaccine safety. If an association with an adverse event is detected statistically, there is not enough information collected in VAERS to determine causation, which is a multi-step process. Likewise, if no association with an adverse event is detected statistically, there is not enough information to reassure the public that no serious adverse events occur. the above hpv stats indicate TOTAL hpv incidence (among those tested!!), NOT the strains that gardasil offers (very good) protection for: those strains are less than 5%, closer to 2% i believe. that's fine, but make sure you are sharing correct information about the vaccine, and you simply are NOT doing that right now (whether it's because you simply misunderstand, or are willfully "disagreeing" with me (this gets my vote), i don't know). PLEASE read the articles, and understand that the efficacy period is 4-6 years! i believe dr. harper states 5, specifically. don't have the false impression that your daughter is protected for longer. also keep in mind the vaccine does not protect against all types of cancer-causing hpv's, so women still need pap smears (which are more effective than the vaccine in preventing cervical cancer!). i'm glad you were comfortable. it's a challenge being a parent and navigating a path through a world rife with decisions regarding every aspect of one's child's life and safety!
  3. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    joe, i think you were pretty unequivocal regarding your support for the hpv vaccine, and jayb, vaccines in general: Dr. Harper helped design and carry out the Phase II and Phase III safety and effectiveness studies to get Gardasil approved, and authored many of the published, scholarly papers about it. She has been a paid speaker and consultant to Merck. It's highly unusual for a researcher to publicly criticize a medicine or vaccine she helped get approved. excerpts from an interview with her: Yes, (merck's) marketing campaign was designed to incite the greatest fear possible in parents, so that there would be uptake of the vaccine. If parents and girls were told the benefits and harms of Pap screening and HPV vaccines as described above, an informed and valued decision would have been able to be made. Many may have chosen to continue with a lifetime of Pap screening and forgo the vaccines, with the unknowns of duration of efficacy and safety unable to be answered for many more years." Dr. Scott Ratner and his wife, who's also a physician, expressed similar concerns as Dr. Harper in an interview with CBS News last year. One of their teenage daughters became severely ill after her first dose of Gardasil. Dr. Ratner says she'd have been better off getting cervical cancer than the vaccination. "My daughter went from a varsity lacrosse player at Choate to a chronically ill, steroid-dependent patient with autoimmune myofasciitis. I've had to ask myself why I let my eldest of three daughters get an unproven vaccine against a few strains of a nonlethal virus that can be dealt with in more effective ways." Merck also says it's looking into cases of ALS, commonly known as Lou Gehrig's Disease, reported after vaccination. ALS is a progressive neurodegenerative disease that attacks motor neurons in the brain and spinal cord. Merck and the CDC say there is currently no evidence that Gardasil caused ALS in the cases reported. Merck is also monitoring the number of deaths reported after Gardasil: at least 32. Merck and CDC says it's unclear whether the deaths were related to the vaccine, and that just because patients died after the shots doesn't mean the shots were necessarily to blame. "Parents and women must know that deaths occurred. Not all deaths that have been reported were represented in Dr. Slade's work, one-third of the death reports were unavailable to the CDC, leaving the parents of the deceased teenagers in despair that the CDC is ignoring the very rare but real occurrences that need not have happened if parents were given information stating that there are real, but small risks of death surrounding the administration of Gardasil." link and link would you say, joe, that the deaths mentioned were simply an unavoidable part of our response to an infectious disease?
  4. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    more or less!
  5. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    So, which vaccine will save more lives? Bayesian statistics. Do the math, report back. interesting stats on those most affected by cervical cancer and what increases risks, in the following link. really no surprises.... -hispanic/latino highest risk. -african american second. -smoking doubles the incidence rate. -number of sexual partners; can't get it without unprotected (generally) sex. i would guess that other factors weight the stats: general health, alcohol use, diet, etc. so here we have an illness that affects 1 in approximately 1,500 women, and this is WITHOUT accommodating for the above factors. yet the merck/cdc phalanx pushes this vaccine as a response to an "epidemic of preventable deaths". (obviously, without unprotected sex, one's risk goes to +-0.) link and no, gspotter, your point isn't lost. the vaccines will save lives. it's just that there are other just as effective ways to do it, without paying pharma $400 every 4 years. now if one doesn't want to take responsibility for one's health and health decisions, sure go for it. $400 every few years isn't a huge fee to allay one's concerns (no matter how small the risk might be).
  6. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    Okay. Sounds like the best we can do is wave across the chasm. If you read the IOM report - I'd be curious to know which particulars/specifics you don't accept/disagree with. i doubt it's as deep a chasm as one might surmise. there's a lot of nuance to (most) things in this life; rarely are they black and white. but i'll wave a friendly wave regardless. i'll take a look at your links....
  7. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    what are you rambling about? put the 1950's national geographic down and come back, joe. come back to 2012. Dude, if you can't figure out the essential, unyielding truth in that statement and acknowledge it you are completely adrift in any discussion about infectious disease in general and vaccines in particular. Completely adrift and lost, babbling without the slightest grounding in reality. joe says: "Actions in the face of infections". we share about as much in common with the animals you listed above in this regard as we do with their anatomy. maybe you have fins and wings and a really small brain, sure, but in the "face of infections", humanoids have a massive response repertoire, whilst the animals you listed? well, it's pretty much let "nature" run its course.
  8. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    what are you rambling about? put the 1950's national geographic down and come back, joe. come back to 2012. come back to the world of reflective humans, the ones capable of making informed decisions based on facts and actual events, joe, the ones capable of making vaccines in the face of deadly illnesses, joe, and then actually making them safer as our thinking evolves. yeah that's right joe, SAFER. did you know we've made our vaccines safer? far out, man, don't gotta be like them birds and fish forever. is that right, joe? always? i admire your talents of prognostication. ACCEPT THE STATUS QUO! brilliant. let's do this with politics also. and in our personal lives. and we'll teach our children this lesson too: SOME THINGS ARE UNAVOIDABLE, SO PLEASE DON'T EVEN TRY. ACCEPT WHAT YOU ARE TOLD.
  9. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    I agree that most "anti-vaccine/anti-science" types are, by definition, "irrational." even "pro-science/pro-vaccine" types sometimes fall into that category.
  10. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    it laughs and rolls around, all at the same time!
  11. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    i know, a strange uncommon position. at this point in amerigo, a vaccination is not for the safety of the individual per se, but for the safety of cdc's vaccination regime (and its implications).
  12. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    sure, i got your point, but we disagree on the particulars that make up your metaphor (we disagree on vaccine risk assessments and how they are arrived at). and, as stated before, i think the individual risk currently is near zero from the vaccinatable illnesses (that vaccines have no doubt helped eradicate), but it is the potential collective risk that undervaccination might lead to that causes me concern.
  13. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    hey bob, check this out, it's pretty cool (cooler after a bong toke):
  14. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    this is definitely an improvement over the idaho compound accent, but i'm afraid you might have missed checking some outlets.
  15. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    depends on numerous variables and not so variables. check on these, report back.
  16. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    what was the actual trouble you had with my asperger's analysis of the situation? i thought it to be quite robust in methodology and result. my BF is around 10%, i quit smoking years ago, and i even stopped alcohol. now if i could somehow get over this interwebs thing.... but seriously, not really sure what you think the elephant in the room is that i'm avoiding? thanks for links. looking forward to reading.
  17. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    some context on the hpv vaccine: The Human Papilloma Virus occurs as more than 100 subtypes, only four of which are associated with cervical cancer. When Merck created the first HPV vaccine, Gardasil, in 2006, the company engaged in an aggressive marketing and lobbying campaign to get governments to mandate vaccination of all girls ages 11 and older. Merck was in a hurry to establish Gardasil’s market dominance because it knew its competitor, GlaxoSmithKline, was not far behind with an HPV vaccine of its own. Interestingly, this first high-pressure marketing campaign was launched before there was widespread experience with the vaccine to assess safety, and the attempt to ramrod HPV vaccination into the menu of government-mandated vaccines was met with substantial resistance. she goes on to say: Proponents of mandatory vaccination will point to studies showing HPV to be the most prevalent sexually transmitted disease with nearly 45% of women ages 20 to 24 being infected. However, this includes all of the various subtypes. When looking at the subtypes that are considered high risk for cervical cancer and covered by the HPV vaccine (subtypes 16 and 18), the prevalence rate drops to 2.3%.] furthermore (bear with me): Adding to the scandal of the promotion of these vaccines is the fact that at least 30% of all cases of cervical cancer are associated with HPV types that are not covered by vaccines. Therefore, getting the vaccine does not lessen the need to get regular pap smears.The Center for Disease Control (CDC) states that getting these regular pap smears alone will prevent most cases of cervical cancer because precancerous changes can be detected and successfully treated before they develop into actual cervical cancer. and, thank god, finally: What does this series of three shots costing $400 provide? It does not save women any money or time with regards to preventive care because they still need the same cervical cancer surveillance as those who are not vaccinated. And it does not change your ability to fight HPV subtypes not covered by the vaccine. All it does is prevent the need for treatment of precancerous lesions in that small percentage of women who contract subtypes 16 or 18 and do not clear the infection on their own. she goes on to say that the vaccine is quite safe, and either path taken, in her eyes, is a reasonable one. pretty balanced and informative take, imo. i suppose a concern might be that girls will think they are protected, therefore skipping out on regular pap smears? conjecture.... link
  18. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    meaning, that isn't a good argument against it. there are much better ones.
  19. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    some did, some didn't. a heck of a lot more didn't than did.
  20. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    from joe's link: Diagnoses have increased tenfold, although a careful assessment suggests that the true increase in incidences is less than half that. don't confuse diagnosis with actual incidence.
  21. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    that's a mighty fine, um, idaho accent you got there, but care to run the numbers?
  22. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    hi oly, i agree, but then you kinda did by saying you're not an "anti-vaccine person". very few are "anti-vaccine" per se. of course there's a fringe that vocally and hysterically decries everything about vaccines: gov plot, big pharma conspiracy, aliens, etc etc., but don't automatically assume that anyone who questions any aspect of vaccines as they are currently promulgated by the cdc, nih, offit, etc. falls either into the above group, or is "anti-vaccine".
  23. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    oh and i think the article mis-stated the rise in autism: hasn't it gone from a 1 in 10,000 diagnosis rate 50 years ago to a in in 88 rate now? much greater than a ten-fold increase....
  24. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    interesting article. a few little misgivings: At least a subset of autism — perhaps one-third, and very likely more — looks like a type of inflammatory disease. And it begins in the womb. doesn't completely jibe with: What does stopping the insanity entail? Fix the maternal dysregulation, and you’ve most likely prevented autism. nitpicking, sure, but interesting article. now if a similar study would include a vax vs non-vax component. it'd be pretty easy to find 'em, since we all know about those crazies who aren't vaccinating.
  25. Had Your Flu Shots Yet?

    #5 i think absolutely plays a role. but the only role? how many of the other correlatives can create symptoms that fall within the autism spectrum?
×