tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6592607595936297457.post4142102833341019625..comments2024-03-27T05:14:13.995-04:00Comments on Anthrax Vaccine -- posts by Meryl Nass, M.D.: She didn’t think a flu shot was necessary — until her daughter died/ WaPoMeryl Nass, M.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/07001997291638442225noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6592607595936297457.post-79052401770321225822016-12-29T14:36:03.096-05:002016-12-29T14:36:03.096-05:00 If you vaccinated 80 million children with FluMis... If you vaccinated 80 million children with FluMist vaccine it is likely we would not have prevented any deaths. However, you probably would have caused several dozen cases of Guillen Barre syndrome and most likely other side effects as well.Meryl Nass, M.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07001997291638442225noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6592607595936297457.post-48873649848799895002016-11-09T10:14:32.649-05:002016-11-09T10:14:32.649-05:00Of course the CDC's numbers are not reliable. ...Of course the CDC's numbers are not reliable. Moreover, Wehn working in the hospitals and other clinics, I've read many of the vaccines inserts and one of the major things that's missed in this sad debate (as the term debate almost justifies that there is a legitimate 2nd side) is that these companies are not even testing their products against influenza; rather the more broad category of influenza-like-illnesses (ILIs). <br /><br />But even more importantly, it's been very well established in the literature over the past 30+ years that bacterial infections make up on average more than 85%-90% of ILIs (hence all viruses makeup no more than 15% of ILIs and the major influenzas a smaller percentage of that number). <br /><br />Yet, the inserts will claim that they're effective at preventing up to 60+% and 70+% (and some say as little as 9%, which is probably more accurate IF it's even that effective). <br /><br />Thus it comes down to how many scientists and doctors really believe how likely (or possible) for a 4-antigen, viral influenza vaccine to be 70% effective against a class of 85%+ bacterial infections (15% viruses, and say maybe 10% influenzas, including many more than the 4 antigens selected). If they do believe such efficacy, they have some statistical, microbiological, physiological, and immunological explaining to do. <br /><br />And if (somehow, against the teachings of all these fields of study) it's true, that sure is a powerful vaccine; maybe it can prevent car-accidents, suicides, and maybe even childhood bathtub drownings too! Let's go for herd-immunity for those too!SatyaPranavahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02422604006082536504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6592607595936297457.post-6247377003660579732016-11-08T19:41:08.318-05:002016-11-08T19:41:08.318-05:00I deliberately used the CDC's efficacy statis...I deliberately used the CDC's efficacy statistics to drive an average of 37 percent. I don't vouch for this number.<br /><br />There are no reliable data to tell us The frequency severity and scope of adverse reaction to influenza vaccines.Meryl Nass, M.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07001997291638442225noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6592607595936297457.post-22547436762937498832016-11-08T17:06:17.449-05:002016-11-08T17:06:17.449-05:00A comment and a question as we engage in this thou...A comment and a question as we engage in this thought process: <br /><br />First, do we even know how many of the 85 had been vaccinated against <br /><br />Second, with respect to (and in support of) your term "might," how do we know that the a successfully vaccinated child would prevent a single death? It could be argued just as easily that maybe the number of cases would drop, as a whole; but instead, it would have only prevented the 37% whose immune systems were on the cusp of being able to contain the disease from becoming a bigger problem, not simply of all those vaccinated. It would stand to reason that in such a case, maybe a small number, say 17((or 5) might not die (or 23 more might), but would still be pretty close. And this is not necessarily because of among the vaccination or not, but how destroyed one's immune system is.<br /><br />Again, to repeat, i would imagine that most of the gains (and none of the deaths) would be among the 37% of those who contracted, but were the least ill. <br /><br />Please feel free to answer or comment at your convenience.SatyaPranavahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02422604006082536504noreply@blogger.com