US Department of Defense: 1-2% of individuals may experience severe vaccine effects that "could result in disability or death."
American Academy of Pediatrics: 2+ % of children have "defects" that cause vaccine "risks"
On August 5th, the President of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Dr. Renee Jenkins, made a rather puzzling comment on Good Morning America, during a segment on vaccine safety and the risk of autism.
Dr. Jenkins said that, "97-plus percent of children don't have these kinds of defects, and so when you look at what the (vaccine) risk is to children, and then what the benefits are, the benefits far outweigh the risks that occur."
Many observers, myself among them, were startled by the comments. But due to awkward editing, it was left entirely unclear as to what Dr. Jenkins meant by "defects," and what sort of vaccine-related "risks" threatened the remaining two-plus percent of children.
Some in the autism community took the statement to mean that at least 2 percent of children (or 1-in-50) were somehow genetically destined ("defective" is such an ugly term) to be at-risk for serious vaccine injuries.
I didn't believe it. It was inconceivable to me that any pediatrician would so nonchalantly find it acceptable that somewhere between 1-in-50 and 1-in-33 children faced such severe risks. Certainly, Dr. Jenkins had misspoken.
So I emailed the AAP and, sure enough, they assured me that Dr. Jenkins had never intended to use the word "defects." Instead, I was told, she was referring to certain susceptibilities that some infants might have to very mild side effects - such as temporary fever, or localized pain or swelling.
The AAP official I spoke with said studies had shown that less than 3% of children encounter such non-serious side effects.
So I published this account on the "Age of Autism" blog, where I concluded that, "some people may not accept this explanation, but I do."
Well, a lot of people did not accept the explanation. Some insisted that Dr. Jenkins was not talking about minor side effects: She had been asked a question about vaccines and autism.
I called ABC and spoke with a producer who had worked on the segment. She confirmed that the question Dr. Jenkins had been asked was this: "Do you completely dismiss any connection between autism and vaccines?"
In other words, Dr. Jenkins was not speaking about mild side effects at all.
So I emailed the AAP once again, for a little further clarification. Did Dr. Jenkins stand by her original contention that she was actually talking about susceptibilities, and not "defects?" And were the "risks" she mentioned really related to simple pain and swelling, when the question posed to her was about autism?
It didn't make sense. And it still doesn't.
Which brings us to the military.
Following the Jenkins remarks, one parent directed me to a report, prepared last year by the Government Accountability Office, that contained this rather surprising statement:
"Officials from the VHC (the Department of Defense's Vaccine Healthcare Centers) Network and CDC 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 VHC, so I went to their website, where I found this Power Point presentation, and this slide in particular: Download file
This slide suggests many things to me. Namely:
1) Some 10.4 million service members, DoD employees and their beneficiaries (including children) have been vaccinated.
2) Up to 2%, or 1-in-50 service members (and it looks like DoD employees and beneficiaries as well - though I have yet to confirm this) have sustained "serious" adverse vaccine reactions, including disability and death.
3) 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."
4) These vaccine-related disabilities are often severe, and may require teaching "new skills" to the injured.
At first, I thought the injury rates might be so high because of the anthrax and smallpox vaccines. But military studies on both shots claimed that they were extremely safe. (For example, there were only 140 reports of inflamed heart muscle following smallpox vaccination, out of 1.2 million service members vaccinated).
But then I read that the possible cause of so much injury, for service members at least, was "multiple vaccines" or "drugs + vaccines," according to the VHC slide.
I wrote to the VHC, and to the GAO, seeking more information on these data, but did not receive any replies (so far, although I will be happy to update this column if I do).
The questions raised by this, by other slides in the series, and within the GAO report, are numerous. They could have serious implications for the military, and for the population at large. Here is what I asked the two agencies (GAO and VHC):
What, exactly, were the serious side effects found in the population?
What information is there on the impact of these effects, in terms of medical discharges, relocation and reassignments, teaching of "new skills," treatments, veteran care, etc?Of those service members injured, how many did not return to active duty or reserve assignments, and what impact, if any, is this having on our military?
What are the financial costs of training troops who may no longer be able to serve due to vaccine injuries?
If the 1-2% rate for serious side effects is the same for all 10.4 million DoD personnel and their beneficiaries, does that mean there have been 100,000-200,000 serious side effects within the DoD system?
The GAO said that some service members who received anthrax or smallpox vaccines experienced severe reactions such as the onset of diabetes and multiple sclerosis. How rare were these events and why don't they show up in the safety data?
Why does DoD believe that adverse events effecting up to 1 in 50 people are "rare?"
Is DoD stating that vaccines can cause diabetes, chronic fatigue syndrome and autoimmune disorders, however rare?
DoD says that possible risk factors for severe adverse events include "multiple vaccines." So why does the AAP and CDC say this is not a risk factor for infants?
DoD also says that gender and ethnicity may be risk factors as well. What evidence, if any, is available to support this?
One slide says that the "ever expanding" number of CDC-recommended vaccines is one of several "complex immunization exposures" to be considered - Could the DoD elaborate on that?
DoD says that "travel vaccines mixed in new ways" also need to be considered. What impact might they be having?
The military says that people who have adverse reactions to a vaccine may be exempted from further doses. Why doesn't the American Academy of Pediatrics adopt this approach as well?
If the rate of serious vaccine effects in this population is 1-2%, what is the rate in the general population?
Is autism more common in military families than the general population? (Some anecdotal reports, at least, estimate the rate at about 1-in-80 children of US military personnel).
These seem like sensible questions to me. But I am not sure anyone will get any answers that are any more sensible than those coming out of the AAP.
Dr. Jenkins spoke about 2-plus percent of children with "defects" putting them at risk for vaccine injury. Is that the same 1-2 percent risk found by the military? I have no idea.
But I did look up the rates for mild side effects from some common childhood vaccines. Many of them were much higher than the "2-plus" percent cited by Dr. Jenkins
The diphtheria -- tetanus-pertussis vaccine, for instance, carries a 25% risk for fever, 25% for localized redness or swelling, and 25% for soreness or tenderness where the shot was given. Haemophilus influenzae type b (HiB) vaccine causes redness, warmth, or swelling where the shot was given in up to 25% of children, and fever over 101 degrees Fahrenheit in up to 1 out of 20 children.
Which leads me to believe, sadly, that I defended Dr. Jenkins prematurely. It would appear the AAP President is either misinformed, or not telling the whole truth.
But we will never know. This afternoon, the AAP wrote to me to say they would have no further comment on Dr. Jenkins's appearance on Good Morning America.
Out of 450,000 military smallpox vaccinations between December 13, 2002, and May 28, 2003, reported adverse events were 1 encephalitis and 37 cases of acute myopericarditis. That's 0.008%. All recovered.
In 5.5 months, the DoD administered 450,293 smallpox vaccinations (70.5% primary vaccinees and 29.5% revaccinees). In 2 settings, 0.5% and 3.0% of vaccine recipients needed short-term sick leave. Most adverse events occurred at rates below historical rates. One case of encephalitis and 37 cases of acute myopericarditis developed after vaccination; all cases recovered. Among 19,461 worker-months of clinical contact, there were no cases of transmission of vaccinia from worker to patient, no cases of eczema vaccinatum or progressive vaccinia, and no attributed deaths.
Conclusions: Mass smallpox vaccinations can be conducted safely with very low rates of serious adverse events. Program implementation emphasized human factors: careful staff training, contraindication screening, recipient education, and attention to bandaging. Our experience suggests
that broad smallpox vaccination programs may be implemented with fewer serious adverse events than previously believed.
"they can get an infection of the brain, called encephalopathy or encephalitis. If they have eczema, they can have sometimes a severe and occasionally fatal disease called eczema vaccinatum. And this is very common that one can inadvertently touch the site that was inoculated and then touch the eye and have an infection of the eye, which can rarely be quite severe. In patients who have decreased capacities to fight infection, there is a disease called 'progressive vaccinia' where in fact the disease is overwhelming and it is the cause of death."
Encephalitis, eczema, and coming down with the virus being vaccinated against are some of the same adverse events that so many parents have reported in their children with autism after receiving other vaccines such as the MMR and DPT. Measles, mumps, rubella, and whooping cough are still prevalent in our environment, but the question is whether the risks of these diseases outweigh the risks of the vaccines, and whether the vaccines can be made safer (such as by separating and spacing them out), and whether high-risk populations can be identified. These questions cannot be answered if the adverse events are denied instead of being tracked and studied.
I agree. JAMA looked at the adverse effects of smallpox vaccines on 450,000 service people, and found serious injury in .008% of the cases, and all 38 victims recovered. Does this sufficiently answer your question about the relative safety of smallpox vaccine?
AP / The number of measles cases in the U.S. is at its highest level since 1997, and nearly half of those involve children whose parents rejected vaccination, government health officials reported Thursday.
The number of cases is still small, just 131, but that's just for the first seven months of the year and doctors are troubled by the trend. There were only 42 cases for all of last year.
-skip-
The CDC's review found that a number of cases involved home-schooled children not required to have the vaccines.
Measles, best known for a red skin rash, is a potentially deadly, highly infectious virus that spreads through contact with a sneezing, coughing, infected person.
Of this year's total, 122 were unvaccinated or had unknown vaccination status. Some were unvaccinated because the children were under age 1, making them too young to get their first measles shot.
In 63 of those cases _ almost all of them 19 or younger _ the patient or their parents refused vaccination, the CDC reported.
In June, the CDC interviewed 33 physicians about childhood vaccinations. Several complained about patient backlogs caused by parents stirred up by information of dubious scientific merit, according to the CDC report.
Questions commonly center on autism and the fear it can be caused by the mercury-based preservative that used to be in most vaccines. Since 2001, the preservative has been removed from shots recommended for young children.
http://tinyurl.com/5ve78l
So who's to blame for this outbreak, ken?
So what should people do? Keep talking to your Doctors about this issue. Talk to your State and Federal Representatives/Senators and tell them they need to get to bottom of the autism issue or we're going to have even bigger problems.
Tossing it back to you, AutismNewsBeat. How can we have "truly informed consent" when pro-vaccine activists tell us that everything is fine within the vaccine industry. All vaccines are safe and effective. All vaccines have been adequately tested for safety. There's no problem with injecting your body with neurotoxins. There's no problem with squalene, mercury etc. You don't have a problem with our military personnel being given the opportunity to CHOOSE vaccinations, do you? I can't imagine that you would consider it a good idea for our military personnel to be FORCED into getting vaccinations...
I see nothing wrong with a "truly informed consent" policy. Perhaps a list sent out to military personnel a few weeks prior to any physical exams (where vaccinations may be given) in order to read the list of vaccinations that they are offering or suggesting that the troops receive. Along with the list, they could have the ingredients listed for each vaccine. Then, perhaps any links/websites for researching the topic. Maybe a link to the CDC website along with a link to NVIC. Of course, the military personnel should be offered exemptions as well - either a philosophical exemption and/or religious exemption... no more of this forced crappola. People need to stop acting like sheep and start using their individual powers (and brains) to decide what to do with their own bodies.
Now back to my question - do you believe that vaccines contain anti-freeze and ether? The larger question is how do you expect pro and anti-vaccine activists to talk to one another when the anti-vaccine side prints up t-shirts that say vaccines contain anti-freeze and ether?
And while you're at it, please address the issue of formaldehyde in vaccines. The most formaldehyde an infant could ever receive via vaccines at one time is .2 mics. A 12-lb infant has about 1.2 mics of formaldehyde in her blood already, the result of single carbon metabolism. Furthermore, vaccines are not "injected into the bloodstream" as anti-vaccine activists like to say. they are injected into the subdermal tissue or into muscles, where any free formaldehyde will rapidly crosslink with proteins, rendering it unavailable for absorption into the bloodstream. It's a remarkably fast process, so there is little chance that any formaldehyde - even if it were accidentally injected into the blood - would be free by the time the blood made it back to the brain.
Are you claiming that the pro-vaccine activists are always pure and innocent and never make misleading comments? Let's hope that's not what you are saying, ANB.
Instead of going back and forth in regards to all the little differences and all the pieces of misinformation (from both sides) ... let's try to agree that we don't know all that we need to know on this topic as it relates to the immune system. People need to be given the ingredients. Then given resources to go look into the issues for themselves - on both sides - in order for them to make up their own minds whether or not they are interested in receiving these vaccinations. Would you agree that this isn't something that people should be FORCED into doing?
Well, where's your proof that vaccines are innocent of injuring our children and military? Do you have any proof? We want real science, Ken, not tobacco science.
I have proof that my son was injured. I have medical documentation that says that my son had an adverse reaction to vaccines that caused his brain to swell. I have the CAT scans of his brain as further evidence. My son now has Autism. Hannah Poling had an adverse reaction to vaccines that caused her brain to swell. She now has autism. Is it so far fetched to think that there could be a lot more like them, or do you think that these tens of thousands of parents are lying? The only data that you have that "backs up" your claim is epidemiological data, which is just number crunching. Where is the clinical data? Where is the data looking at these children who are labled as regressively autistic?
Do you still think vaccines contain anti-freeze and ether? Jenny McCarthy's science advisor, Dr. Jay Gordon, says they don't.
Here, we see the military getting completely neglected. They have barracks that are in such a state of poor repair that they are unliveable. You have soldiers that are getting injured by "life-saving" vaccines. These are the people who defend our country!! And they treat them like this?
Let's go one step further. What if the US is invaded in a few years? Who would want to join a military that doesn't care about its soldiers? Additionally, how would we fill the military if the vaccine injury rates in our children keep going the way they are going? In a few years, it will no longer be 1 in 150, but it will be every child.
What makes you think 1:150 children is severely vaccine injured? I am unaware of any solid evidence for that statement.
And no, my statement wasn't hyperbole. It was just an observation on how the Autism rates have climbed over the past 20 years.
"September 2001, when the VHC Network was created, through mid-April
2007, the VHC Network has provided clinical treatment to about 2,400
service members."
http://www.gao.gov/htext/d07787r.html
You're initial reaction was probably the correct one, that vaccines do not cause a serious, adverse reaction in 1:50 persons.
http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues/2004_5_18.html
Since the headquarters center opened in 2001 at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, the network has evaluated more than 1,000 patients — military personnel, contractors and civilians — and counseled far more personnel — 139,000 in fiscal 2003 alone —
In order to understand the GAO’s findings, one needs to understand how the VHC’s work. Pressured through congress in 2001 to treat those ill from the anthrax vaccine, VHC’s were created. (First VHC established at WR, sprawling 3 add'l arms due to case loads). Branch messages can go out service-wide for important issues (such as the situation to halt the anthrax vaccines when an injunction was placed on the program), however, this never occurred when the VHC was established. In fact, brochures were supposed to be handed out to members prior to receiving vaccines letting them know about the VHC and what to do if they felt they had an adverse reaction. Never happened. At the time I met those at the WRVHC, there were 2 doctors and 3 NP’s. Before thinking that only 2,400 were seen in 6 years, bare in mind a few things: 1) Many are still unaware of their existence, 2) Being treated at a VHC and being able to stay with one’s own physician while consulting takes place between VHC and private physician is a common occurrence, 3) Those being treated also do not account for those seeking help.
Thank you, Randice. I hope that AutismNewsBeat reads this. Clearly you sound as if you have much more first hand knowledge of this situation than the rest of us. Also, do you know if their is another website for the VHC... I see that www.vhcinfo.org is no longer a valid web address - has it moved? I'm looking for more info on this topic. Thanks!
I recommend that each person research each disease and its consequences in DEVELOPED nations and the known risks of vaccination (understanding that the risks are largely either ignored, dismissed or unstudied) and decide for themselves what risks they are going to take on.
The purpose of the website Vaccination News is to try and make it easier to do that research. (You can read the mission statement here: http://www.vaccinationnews.com/mission_statement.htm
This says it all-
"Which leads me to believe, sadly, that I defended Dr. Jenkins prematurely. It would appear the AAP President is either misinformed, or not telling the whole truth"
Your excellent facts and investigation of this is pointing more to the latter. How sick is that?
The Gulf vets have been trying to raise this issue since since the first gulf war.
Here's a hint. Look up your local city's population. Divide that number by 50. Add to that number $3.2 million dollars, which is the lifetime per capita estimated cost of caring for a person with autism.
Gee, who cares? Just like spinning a roulette wheel. Only other people win the prize.
"Scandals: On cheating the other guy''" - http://www.vaccinationnews.com/Scandals/2008/Feb_18_08/Scandal86.htm
All the best,
Sandy
That, of course, is not to explain Jenkins comment since there is obviously plenty to fill in. But it does suggest that most of the reaction to her comment does not seem to make a lot of sense.
Why would anyone think that comments made obliquely on Good Morning America are more revealing than arguments written out and submitted for peer review? It isn't clear what Jenkins was saying on GMA. The reactions here do not seem to follow from a natural reading. And the idea that some deep admission snuck out on national tv seems unlikely. So the placing of great importance on this comment does not reflect well on the scientific seriousness of the respondents.
David Welton, a medical doctor and republican Representative from Florida, who serves on the Congressional committee that is looking at vaccinations, was appalled at the methodology used and conclusions drawn from many of these "studies". "It's an important issue. As a physician, I've been surprised and frankly embarrassed about the overall lack of good research into vaccine safety," Weldon told FOXNews.com. Reps Welton and Carolyn Malony co-introduced a bill to The legislation would create a separate agency outside of the CDC to oversee vaccine safety issues, including research.
So, you see, this is not just some conspiracy theory cooked up by a bunch of sad parents that want something to blame their kid's autism on. There are people in very high places, Congress persons that have sat in on years of hearings, the former director of the National Institute of Medicine, and many others in high places that believe the CDC has not been forthcoming in what they know about vaccination safety.
As a mother and a staunch supporter of parents who do not vaccinate, (For such OBVIOUS reasons, don't you think!) I am very concerned. How will these parents obtain vaccination waivers if all their medical providers are turning them away and refusing to tell them where to go for help?
I am so fed up with the loss of medical freedom in America. My heart goes out to Tanner'sDad and all the rest of the families who have suffered and those who will continue to suffer in the name of profiteering.
Teresa
www.holler4health.com