Studies Show Unvaccinated Children Healthier

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
301

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]ActivitiesGuy wrote:
One other comment: on edge, you have obviously put a great deal of thought into this, not just clicked a few autism links, so I give you credit for that even if I disagree with your course of action.

I do have a question to pose as a follow up to your listing of the specific diseases and the general belief that your kids are low-risk because of where you live and what your kids do in their free time.

Do you ever plan to travel internationally?
Do you frequent any tourist attractions?
What if your kids decide to study abroad in college?

Because while they might be safe in your home with their stay at home mom, chances are that SOMEDAY they will leave the nest, right?

We spend a lot of time talking about he outbreaks among kids right now because “kids” have a lower vaccination rate than today’s adult population, but if anti-vaxers persist we will soon have an adult population with lower vax rates than the previous generation, and we’ll start seeing some of these diseases in adults, too.[/quote]

We’ve never left the country. We do take two trips a year. I fly, the wife & kids drive. Haha That’s not due to germ fear or anything. It’s because it’s expensive to fly 5 and I can’t miss that much work by doing a long road trip just to get to our destination.

One of our trips is to Southern California and we go to Laguna Beach every single day. The other trip is deep into the heart of Mormon country where we hike every day. We’re not afraid to go to ammusment parks or anything. We just like the outdoor activities. We used to go to a lot of kid places around town but by the time we had #3 those excursions were too much of a pain in the ass. We do get a lot less colds since we stopped that.

The stories we hear occasionally of college kids and meningitis are scary as fuck and I’d consider vaccines going into college. My oldest boy is 13 now and I know who he is and the course he’s on very well. He’s such a homebody I suspect he will live at home and go to JC until he’s 20. If he chooses to leave home and go off to college at 18 you will hear my jaw hit the floor. It won’t surprise me if he goes thru life and never gets drunk. I won’t worry about this stuff too much for him but he will be be old enough to make such choices by that time.[/quote]

It’s funny how you assume you have total control over the kind of pathogens you and your family are exposed. Because most of the time you don’t. It just needs one infected individual and a little bit of bad luck, which based on the number of interactions anybody has with other people, is not impossible at all. E.g. I heard about a waitress getting hepatitis because a diabetic forgot his insulin needle under a napkin. Somebody sneezes on you or whatever and all you planning goes down the toilet.

I really hope the anti-vaxxing movement will not hit Europe as hard, but I have heard of cases in Berlin as well… But I guess it’s just the same with any other bullshit claim around these days… somebody still believes in it. I work at a pharmaceutical company (just as a working student, no big money involved) and they are all very, very concerned about “bad medication” and side effects. “Big Pharma” is not trying to poison you, they just try to make money by curing diseases. Sure sometimes the way some companies do it may seem questionable, e.g. pushing new, not more effective medication for a high price on patients, but in the case of vaccines, a big company could be forced to shut down if there were SERIOUS counts of bad side effects which could lead to lawsuits costing billions.

302

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]Davinci.v2 wrote:
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/11/99[/quote]

Ok…what was it you were trying to say? We know this already. This is a 16 year old study, this is information we already know. I posted a number of pages back about aluminum accumulating in bone and lungs. I didn’t mention the brain but it happens there too, and all the accumulation is unavoidable because aluminum is in food, water, and air. And antiacids, and anti-diarrheal meds. And its unavoidable for 100% of the human race.

If you have a comment I’d rather you say it instead of linking to a study with no comment underneath the linm.[/quote]

Aragorn, you posted a graph showing a marked increase in total body aluminum due to vaccines. Those marked increases would be 3 or 4 times higher for just blood serum levels. After all, we (or at least me) are less concerned over aluminum accumulated in bones. I’m concerned about blood serum levels feeding the brain.

Dietary sources of aluminum are poorly absorbed but obviously account for gradual accumulation in total body load. The graph you posted shows jumps in the load due to vaccines.[/quote]

That’s not at all what the graph was indicating. It was indicating the magnitude of the gap between the established daily minimum safe intake of aluminum, adjusted for infant metabolism, and vaccine + food. The upper lines are not the vaccine tracks. Yes, there are stair steps on the vaccine track. That is not the key function or key feature of the graph illustration.

I also tried to explain what was going on rather than just post a link with no comment at all underneath it. Furthermore I was asking davinci what he was getting at with the study link.

Brain accumulation is also unavoidable in all humans. I thought I covered this.

303

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]Davinci.v2 wrote:

Ok…what was it you were trying to say? We know this already. This is a 16 year old study, this is information we already know. I posted a number of pages back about aluminum accumulating in bone and lungs. I didn’t mention the brain but it happens there too, and all the accumulation is unavoidable because aluminum is in food, water, and air. And antiacids, and anti-diarrheal meds. And its unavoidable for 100% of the human race.

If you have a comment I’d rather you say it instead of linking to a study with no comment underneath the linm.[/quote]

Aragorn, you posted a graph showing a marked increase in total body aluminum due to vaccines. Those marked increases would be 3 or 4 times higher for just blood serum levels. After all, we (or at least me) are less concerned over aluminum accumulated in bones. I’m concerned about blood serum levels feeding the brain.

Dietary sources of aluminum are poorly absorbed but obviously account for gradual accumulation in total body load. The graph you posted shows jumps in the load due to vaccines.[/quote]

That’s not at all what the graph was indicating. It was indicating the magnitude of the gap between the established daily minimum safe intake of aluminum, adjusted for infant metabolism, and vaccine + food. The upper lines are not the vaccine tracks. Yes, there are stair steps on the vaccine track. That is not the key function or feature of the graph illustration.

[/quote]

Well yeah, I know that’s not what the graph or you intended to show. That’s what I wanted to point out. I don’t know much about how they derive the MRL. For all I know they might be using the level they first start observing lethargy or something like that in rats. I’m not comfortable assuming lower doses have no detrimental effects on a child. Minor detrimental effects can be very hard to observe.

Again, I don’t like using a total body minimum risk level. I’m more interested in a blood serum risk level.

304

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]Davinci.v2 wrote:

Ok…what was it you were trying to say? We know this already. This is a 16 year old study, this is information we already know. I posted a number of pages back about aluminum accumulating in bone and lungs. I didn’t mention the brain but it happens there too, and all the accumulation is unavoidable because aluminum is in food, water, and air. And antiacids, and anti-diarrheal meds. And its unavoidable for 100% of the human race.

If you have a comment I’d rather you say it instead of linking to a study with no comment underneath the linm.[/quote]

Aragorn, you posted a graph showing a marked increase in total body aluminum due to vaccines. Those marked increases would be 3 or 4 times higher for just blood serum levels. After all, we (or at least me) are less concerned over aluminum accumulated in bones. I’m concerned about blood serum levels feeding the brain.

Dietary sources of aluminum are poorly absorbed but obviously account for gradual accumulation in total body load. The graph you posted shows jumps in the load due to vaccines.[/quote]

That’s not at all what the graph was indicating. It was indicating the magnitude of the gap between the established daily minimum safe intake of aluminum, adjusted for infant metabolism, and vaccine + food. The upper lines are not the vaccine tracks. Yes, there are stair steps on the vaccine track. That is not the key function or feature of the graph illustration.

[/quote]

Well yeah, I know that’s not what the graph or you intended to show. That’s what I wanted to point out. I don’t know much about how they derive the MRL. For all I know they might be using the level they first start observing lethargy or something like that in rats. I’m not comfortable assuming lower doses have no detrimental effects on a child. Minor detrimental effects can be very hard to observe.

Again, I don’t like using a total body minimum risk level. I’m more interested in a blood serum risk level.[/quote]

We already have observable levels of said toxins in our system. A slight increase in blood serum levels of aluminum and other neurotoxins won’t substantially increase the total load.

305

[quote]jenz wrote:
Sure sometimes the way some companies do it may seem questionable, e.g. pushing new, not more effective medication for a high price on patients, but in the case of vaccines, a big company could be forced to shut down if there were SERIOUS counts of bad side effects which could lead to lawsuits costing billions.[/quote]

Vaccine suits are largely governed by statute in the U.S., with a compensation fund to cover victims. Vaccines are generally exempted from traditional products-liability tort law and state laws to the contrary are federally preempted.

"In passing the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, Congress sought to strike a balance that would protect vaccine manufacturers from open-ended liability from private lawsuits while also creating a special fund to compensate those who suffer side effects from vaccines.

Roughly 100 to 200 claims for compensation are submitted each year to a special vaccine court. To date, the compensation fund has paid out $1.8 billion to 2,500 petitioners. The average award is about $750,000."

306

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]jenz wrote:
Sure sometimes the way some companies do it may seem questionable, e.g. pushing new, not more effective medication for a high price on patients, but in the case of vaccines, a big company could be forced to shut down if there were SERIOUS counts of bad side effects which could lead to lawsuits costing billions.[/quote]

Vaccine suits are largely governed by statute in the U.S., with a compensation fund to cover victims. Vaccines are generally exempted from traditional products-liability tort law and state laws to the contrary are federally preempted.

"In passing the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, Congress sought to strike a balance that would protect vaccine manufacturers from open-ended liability from private lawsuits while also creating a special fund to compensate those who suffer side effects from vaccines.

Roughly 100 to 200 claims for compensation are submitted each year to a special vaccine court. To date, the compensation fund has paid out $1.8 billion to 2,500 petitioners. The average award is about $750,000."

[/quote]

This cannot be true. Studies have shown that vaccines are safe and effective. If this were true, this could potentially mean there is more left to learn about the implications of modern vaccines and that the science surrounding vaccine research is fallible.

307

[quote]Davinci.v2 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]jenz wrote:
Sure sometimes the way some companies do it may seem questionable, e.g. pushing new, not more effective medication for a high price on patients, but in the case of vaccines, a big company could be forced to shut down if there were SERIOUS counts of bad side effects which could lead to lawsuits costing billions.[/quote]

Vaccine suits are largely governed by statute in the U.S., with a compensation fund to cover victims. Vaccines are generally exempted from traditional products-liability tort law and state laws to the contrary are federally preempted.

"In passing the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, Congress sought to strike a balance that would protect vaccine manufacturers from open-ended liability from private lawsuits while also creating a special fund to compensate those who suffer side effects from vaccines.

Roughly 100 to 200 claims for compensation are submitted each year to a special vaccine court. To date, the compensation fund has paid out $1.8 billion to 2,500 petitioners. The average award is about $750,000."

[/quote]

This cannot be true. Studies have shown that vaccines are safe and effective. If this were true, this could potentially mean there is more left to learn about the implications of modern vaccines and that the science surrounding vaccine research is fallible. [/quote]

You aren’t being serious are you?

308

[quote]Davinci.v2 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]jenz wrote:
Sure sometimes the way some companies do it may seem questionable, e.g. pushing new, not more effective medication for a high price on patients, but in the case of vaccines, a big company could be forced to shut down if there were SERIOUS counts of bad side effects which could lead to lawsuits costing billions.[/quote]

Vaccine suits are largely governed by statute in the U.S., with a compensation fund to cover victims. Vaccines are generally exempted from traditional products-liability tort law and state laws to the contrary are federally preempted.

"In passing the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, Congress sought to strike a balance that would protect vaccine manufacturers from open-ended liability from private lawsuits while also creating a special fund to compensate those who suffer side effects from vaccines.

Roughly 100 to 200 claims for compensation are submitted each year to a special vaccine court. To date, the compensation fund has paid out $1.8 billion to 2,500 petitioners. The average award is about $750,000."

[/quote]

This cannot be true. Studies have shown that vaccines are safe and effective. If this were true, this could potentially mean there is more left to learn about the implications of modern vaccines and that the science surrounding vaccine research is fallible. [/quote]

Better let your kid’s fever just work itself out then… Naturally.

309

[quote]Davinci.v2 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]jenz wrote:
Sure sometimes the way some companies do it may seem questionable, e.g. pushing new, not more effective medication for a high price on patients, but in the case of vaccines, a big company could be forced to shut down if there were SERIOUS counts of bad side effects which could lead to lawsuits costing billions.[/quote]

Vaccine suits are largely governed by statute in the U.S., with a compensation fund to cover victims. Vaccines are generally exempted from traditional products-liability tort law and state laws to the contrary are federally preempted.

"In passing the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, Congress sought to strike a balance that would protect vaccine manufacturers from open-ended liability from private lawsuits while also creating a special fund to compensate those who suffer side effects from vaccines.

Roughly 100 to 200 claims for compensation are submitted each year to a special vaccine court. To date, the compensation fund has paid out $1.8 billion to 2,500 petitioners. The average award is about $750,000."

[/quote]

This cannot be true. Studies have shown that vaccines are safe and effective. If this were true, this could potentially mean there is more left to learn about the implications of modern vaccines and that the science surrounding vaccine research is fallible. [/quote]

No. There is a risk that anything you put in your body could cause a bad reaction, for any number of reasons, including, for example, allergies, bad manufacturing, adulteration/tampering, or bad administration of the vaccine from something like a dirty needle, etc. Nobody has ever said vaccines carry no risk. Everything carries risk, vaccines included. 100 to 200 claims per year (not valid, but total filed) is an insanely low number considering the number of vaccines administered.

310

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Davinci.v2 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]jenz wrote:
Sure sometimes the way some companies do it may seem questionable, e.g. pushing new, not more effective medication for a high price on patients, but in the case of vaccines, a big company could be forced to shut down if there were SERIOUS counts of bad side effects which could lead to lawsuits costing billions.[/quote]

Vaccine suits are largely governed by statute in the U.S., with a compensation fund to cover victims. Vaccines are generally exempted from traditional products-liability tort law and state laws to the contrary are federally preempted.

"In passing the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, Congress sought to strike a balance that would protect vaccine manufacturers from open-ended liability from private lawsuits while also creating a special fund to compensate those who suffer side effects from vaccines.

Roughly 100 to 200 claims for compensation are submitted each year to a special vaccine court. To date, the compensation fund has paid out $1.8 billion to 2,500 petitioners. The average award is about $750,000."

[/quote]

This cannot be true. Studies have shown that vaccines are safe and effective. If this were true, this could potentially mean there is more left to learn about the implications of modern vaccines and that the science surrounding vaccine research is fallible. [/quote]

No. There is a risk that anything you put in your body could cause a bad reaction, for any number of reasons, including, for example, allergies, bad manufacturing, adulteration/tampering, or bad administration of the vaccine from something like a dirty needle, etc. Nobody has ever said vaccines carry no risk. Everything carries risk, vaccines included. 100 to 200 claims per year (not valid, but total filed) is an insanely low number considering the number of vaccines administered.
[/quote]

Yeah, I know. It is insanely low. I could die walking out to my car tonight after work. I could get into a wreck on the way home, hell I could get struck by lightning, and nobody would think twice. All of those things carry greater likelihoods of happening, including lightning striking me dead, than vaccine injury of any kind.

You could die doing anything at any time. You could choke on food. But somehow the vaccines are still to blame.

311

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Davinci.v2 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]jenz wrote:
Sure sometimes the way some companies do it may seem questionable, e.g. pushing new, not more effective medication for a high price on patients, but in the case of vaccines, a big company could be forced to shut down if there were SERIOUS counts of bad side effects which could lead to lawsuits costing billions.[/quote]

Vaccine suits are largely governed by statute in the U.S., with a compensation fund to cover victims. Vaccines are generally exempted from traditional products-liability tort law and state laws to the contrary are federally preempted.

"In passing the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, Congress sought to strike a balance that would protect vaccine manufacturers from open-ended liability from private lawsuits while also creating a special fund to compensate those who suffer side effects from vaccines.

Roughly 100 to 200 claims for compensation are submitted each year to a special vaccine court. To date, the compensation fund has paid out $1.8 billion to 2,500 petitioners. The average award is about $750,000."

[/quote]

This cannot be true. Studies have shown that vaccines are safe and effective. If this were true, this could potentially mean there is more left to learn about the implications of modern vaccines and that the science surrounding vaccine research is fallible. [/quote]

No. There is a risk that anything you put in your body could cause a bad reaction, for any number of reasons, including, for example, allergies, bad manufacturing, adulteration/tampering, or bad administration of the vaccine from something like a dirty needle, etc. Nobody has ever said vaccines carry no risk. Everything carries risk, vaccines included. 100 to 200 claims per year (not valid, but total filed) is an insanely low number considering the number of vaccines administered.
[/quote]

Yeah, I know. It is insanely low. I could die walking out to my car tonight after work. I could get into a wreck on the way home, hell I could get struck by lightning, and nobody would think twice. All of those things carry greater likelihoods of happening, including lightning striking me dead, than vaccine injury of any kind.

You could die doing anything at any time. You could choke on food. But somehow the vaccines are still to blame.[/quote]

The medicine “concerned parents” give their children to tame fevers can and do more damage to a child than any vax or combination of vax correct?

So shouldn’t the leeches, oops I mean concerned parents just let their kids spike to say 105-106?

312

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Davinci.v2 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]jenz wrote:
Sure sometimes the way some companies do it may seem questionable, e.g. pushing new, not more effective medication for a high price on patients, but in the case of vaccines, a big company could be forced to shut down if there were SERIOUS counts of bad side effects which could lead to lawsuits costing billions.[/quote]

Vaccine suits are largely governed by statute in the U.S., with a compensation fund to cover victims. Vaccines are generally exempted from traditional products-liability tort law and state laws to the contrary are federally preempted.

"In passing the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, Congress sought to strike a balance that would protect vaccine manufacturers from open-ended liability from private lawsuits while also creating a special fund to compensate those who suffer side effects from vaccines.

Roughly 100 to 200 claims for compensation are submitted each year to a special vaccine court. To date, the compensation fund has paid out $1.8 billion to 2,500 petitioners. The average award is about $750,000."

[/quote]

This cannot be true. Studies have shown that vaccines are safe and effective. If this were true, this could potentially mean there is more left to learn about the implications of modern vaccines and that the science surrounding vaccine research is fallible. [/quote]

No. There is a risk that anything you put in your body could cause a bad reaction, for any number of reasons, including, for example, allergies, bad manufacturing, adulteration/tampering, or bad administration of the vaccine from something like a dirty needle, etc. Nobody has ever said vaccines carry no risk. Everything carries risk, vaccines included. 100 to 200 claims per year (not valid, but total filed) is an insanely low number considering the number of vaccines administered.
[/quote]
This risk includes carrots, coffee, hamburgers, water, eggs, meat, etc…

If those numbers are correct, then more people are hospitalized for complications due to ibuprofen than are for vaccinations on a percentage basis.

313

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Davinci.v2 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]jenz wrote:
Sure sometimes the way some companies do it may seem questionable, e.g. pushing new, not more effective medication for a high price on patients, but in the case of vaccines, a big company could be forced to shut down if there were SERIOUS counts of bad side effects which could lead to lawsuits costing billions.[/quote]

Vaccine suits are largely governed by statute in the U.S., with a compensation fund to cover victims. Vaccines are generally exempted from traditional products-liability tort law and state laws to the contrary are federally preempted.

"In passing the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, Congress sought to strike a balance that would protect vaccine manufacturers from open-ended liability from private lawsuits while also creating a special fund to compensate those who suffer side effects from vaccines.

Roughly 100 to 200 claims for compensation are submitted each year to a special vaccine court. To date, the compensation fund has paid out $1.8 billion to 2,500 petitioners. The average award is about $750,000."

[/quote]

This cannot be true. Studies have shown that vaccines are safe and effective. If this were true, this could potentially mean there is more left to learn about the implications of modern vaccines and that the science surrounding vaccine research is fallible. [/quote]

No. There is a risk that anything you put in your body could cause a bad reaction, for any number of reasons, including, for example, allergies, bad manufacturing, adulteration/tampering, or bad administration of the vaccine from something like a dirty needle, etc. Nobody has ever said vaccines carry no risk. Everything carries risk, vaccines included. 100 to 200 claims per year (not valid, but total filed) is an insanely low number considering the number of vaccines administered.
[/quote]

Yeah, I know. It is insanely low. I could die walking out to my car tonight after work. I could get into a wreck on the way home, hell I could get struck by lightning, and nobody would think twice. All of those things carry greater likelihoods of happening, including lightning striking me dead, than vaccine injury of any kind.

You could die doing anything at any time. You could choke on food. But somehow the vaccines are still to blame.[/quote]

The medicine “concerned parents” give their children to tame fevers can and do more damage to a child than any vax or combination of vax correct?

So shouldn’t the leeches, oops I mean concerned parents just let their kids spike to say 105-106?
[/quote]

Yes, the medicines given by prescription and sometimes over the counter can cause serious reactions.

Somehow people never think twice then.

Interestingly enough, I was in a medical journal for a severe adverse reaction to an unrelated medicine category when I was young (kindergarten). I was in the hospital with a fever of 105. But you don’t hear me bitching and moaning about adverse reactions because I know the science is sound and it is a useful medication for the particular condition I was afflicted with. I am also aware I was a freak occurrence.

314

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
Yes, the medicines given by prescription and sometimes over the counter can cause serious reactions.

Somehow people never think twice then.[/quote]

So… People that refuse to vax out of fear it is harmful, yet give their kids ibuprofen and Tylenol are really just massive hypocrites?

Please, go on… I’m fascinated lol. I’m also allergic to penicillin.

315

I am in an ENT medical journal for extremely swollen tonsils…photos and everything.

That sucked…too big to remove.

316

[quote]Loftearmen wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Davinci.v2 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]jenz wrote:
Sure sometimes the way some companies do it may seem questionable, e.g. pushing new, not more effective medication for a high price on patients, but in the case of vaccines, a big company could be forced to shut down if there were SERIOUS counts of bad side effects which could lead to lawsuits costing billions.[/quote]

Vaccine suits are largely governed by statute in the U.S., with a compensation fund to cover victims. Vaccines are generally exempted from traditional products-liability tort law and state laws to the contrary are federally preempted.

"In passing the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, Congress sought to strike a balance that would protect vaccine manufacturers from open-ended liability from private lawsuits while also creating a special fund to compensate those who suffer side effects from vaccines.

Roughly 100 to 200 claims for compensation are submitted each year to a special vaccine court. To date, the compensation fund has paid out $1.8 billion to 2,500 petitioners. The average award is about $750,000."

[/quote]

This cannot be true. Studies have shown that vaccines are safe and effective. If this were true, this could potentially mean there is more left to learn about the implications of modern vaccines and that the science surrounding vaccine research is fallible. [/quote]

No. There is a risk that anything you put in your body could cause a bad reaction, for any number of reasons, including, for example, allergies, bad manufacturing, adulteration/tampering, or bad administration of the vaccine from something like a dirty needle, etc. Nobody has ever said vaccines carry no risk. Everything carries risk, vaccines included. 100 to 200 claims per year (not valid, but total filed) is an insanely low number considering the number of vaccines administered.
[/quote]
This risk includes carrots, coffee, hamburgers, water, eggs, meat, etc…

If those numbers are correct, then more people are hospitalized for complications due to ibuprofen than are for vaccinations on a percentage basis.[/quote]

You’re damned right. I wrote a whole long post and the computer ate it, so here:

The WHO estimates that 1.5 million kids die every year from diseases that are vaccine preventable.

Let’s play a game. Let’s assume that all vaccine related compensations from lawsuits for the time we have data for (1989-2014) were deaths. That’s not even close to realistic, in fact it’s BS. But ok lets say that. Now lets compare it to total NSAID deaths in ONE year.

Estimates of up to 16,500 people dying from complicational gastrointestinal bleeding from NSAIDs use exist in peer reviewed literature (this is early 1990s study).

Taking more current 2000s UK statistical data pro rata, there exists an estimate of approximately 5000 people per year. Paring down even further, studies report that of all people hospitalized for NSAID induced gastrointestinal bleeding who died, an estimated 3400 were preventable (FDA).

Ok, lets use 3400 as the TOTAL yearly deaths from all NSAID attributable use from all causes both gastrointestinal and otherwise across all age brackets everywhere. Lets go conservative.

Data suggest that between aspirin and ibuprofen about 65% of overdose exposures are unintentional. Let’s use that number.

3400 deaths, conservatively Of that let’s say 65% are unintentional. That’s 2200 unintentional deaths EVERY YEAR. The total injury compensation rate for vaccines across 26 years is ~3500 and remember, we are assuming 100% of these people died, which is bullshit. Settlements are included in this figure and we are also assuming that all settlements (meaning non-health entity or government endorsed decisions) made are due strictly to health reasons and not PR or other business related calls. Settlements cannot be considered a conclusion by the courts that the vaccine caused injury.

So across 26 years, the total injury…er “death”…rate of vaccination is approximately equal to ONE YEAR of total NSAID death and to less than two years of accidental NSAID death using the most conservative population estimate I could find (also borne out by some data).

You will find that in reality NSAID deaths are greater, and not nearly 100% of these vaccine lawsuits were deathly.

Extrapolating out 26 years, we have 57,000 accidental NSAID deaths; 88,000 total NSAID deaths…and 3400 BS vaccine “deaths” and 1.5 million deaths A YEAR from things vaccines could save the kids from.

EDIT: and if you get your information from the types of sites that hate vaccines, I’ve seen quotes of “40,000 deaths per year” due to NSAIDs. L.O.L.

317

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
Yes, the medicines given by prescription and sometimes over the counter can cause serious reactions.

Somehow people never think twice then.[/quote]

So… People that refuse to vax out of fear it is harmful, yet give their kids ibuprofen and Tylenol are really just massive hypocrites?

Please, go on… I’m fascinated lol. I’m also allergic to penicillin. [/quote]

Bwahaha. I love it beans. It wasn’t even penicillin for me, it was anti-seizure medication. However, I am allergic to penicillin as well.

318

The data is vastly more damning if we go by hospitalization rates for causally related NSAID use vs. vaccines. But I’m not doing another extrapolation and typing all that shit out again.

319

600×545 47.9 KB

Saw this horse shit this morning…

320

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Saw this horse shit this morning…[/quote]

What the hell? That is one of the stupidest things I have ever seen. I would love to see that “study”.