The highly charged debate over vaccines took an unusual turn late last month when a widely quoted anti-vaccine crusader, Barbara Loe Fisher, filed a lawsuit against Wired magazine and one of its writers, along withPaul Offit, an infectious disease specialist at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, over a recent story.
The November piece quotes, Offit, who is regularly villified by those questioning vaccines especially in connection with the debate over autism, as criticizing Fisher, who runs the National Vaccine Information Center, a self-described vaccine watchdog. Specifically, Offit says that Fisher "lies" (here is the lawsuit).
In her suit, Fisher complains the article wrongfully portrays Offit, who is credited as one of the developers of Merck's Rotateq vaccine, and "adheres to a bias in favor of the general safety of vaccines and a presumed medical necessity for mandatory vaccination and against informed consent. The article likewise lionizes Dr. Offit and ridicules those who oppose the view he espouses on mandatory vaccination."
The story, however, has won kudos from vaccine supporters for conveying the message that the Wired writer, Amy Wallace, correctly wrote that science supports the safety and effectiveness of vaccines and folks who argue against vaccination are undermining public health with emotionally laden and incorrect facts. Several blogging scientists, meanwhile, say the lawsuit is another attempt to intimidate anyone who challenge the anti-vaccine crowd. "They can't win on the science; so they try to suppress criticism through legal action," writes Orec on Respectful Insolence.
56 Comments
Hm . . . truth is a defense to libel, but evidence showing that not only that Fisher's statements are false, but that she knows them to be false, may be difficult to obtain. In other words, Dr. Offit's statement that Fisher "lies," in order to be true, would seem to require that Fisher have knowledge that her statements are false. I don't follow this stuff that closely, though, so perhaps he does in fact have evidence of that.
What's happening with people thinking that they've got a right to defame all and sundry all of a sudden just 'cos they happen to be scientists?
I highly recommend Michael Specter's book: "Denialism: How Irrational Thinking Hinders Scientific Progress, Harms the Planet, and Threatens Our Lives". Specter makes the point that opponents of scientific progress, i.e. the "denialists" yearn for a "simpler time", which in the case of the anti-vaccine people meant pandemics of smallpox, polio, diphtheria, etc. Such people should read the book and analyze their own biases, which always fall apart under the weight of critical thinking.
Offit slandered Fisher - she absolutely should sue him. Also, where there's smoke there's fire - there is plenty of science linking autism to vaccines, even though Orec would like to pretend there is not.
In scientific debates, people call lawyers when the research doesn't support their statements. Fisher appears to be another example of this trend.
If you have legitimate concerns about a scientist, fight him/her in the scientific literature with evidence, not in the courts. Going to the legal system in the first place implies you don't have a strong enough case scientifically, and have to recruit a bully (the legal system) to do your harassment for you.
AnneS: as a neuroscientist, I've heard from antivaccinationists that there is "plenty of science linking autism to vaccines," but when I ask them for that evidence, what they give me is not science but thinly veiled propaganda. Perhaps you are different and have actual evidence...if so, please provide it for the world to see.
If you could cite the studies please, AnneS?
It would be nice not to have every single vaccine forced on our children. I am for informed consent but unfortunately the state of NJ does not believe in that!
Harpy: If you wait for the anti-vaccine folks to come up with reputable data linking vaccines to autism you'll be waiting until this is an "older post'. The CDC has flatly refuted the link between autism and vaccines based on many studies. Here'e the link to pediatric journal citing the respected science refuting the link between vaccines and autism. You can go on Pubmed gto find others.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19614825?itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum&ordinalpos=7
Why do those touting the efficacy and truth of vaccine use have to go back to the first few? Is that the last time there was a vaccine that was effective for strain and type and evenly mildly met the marketing hype?
Disclaimer: I am the mother of a child who nearly died and was hospitalized (among hundreds of children similarly affected) from the measles vaccine that was flawed. I use that word because I don't know what the scientific word would be.
It's just not helpful to ridicule any questioning.
If it wasn't for clear heads making sure we knew the marketing didn't meet the road about Gardasil and the 2006/7 vaccines, how many more? How many? One is too many, for any parent. I have to assume those flinging feces on vaccine, any, are not parents, and are in COI in some way to pharma.
"vaccine questioners".
The anti-vaccine folks actually do have an alternative route of gaining immunity. To wit, mothers around the country are taking their disease-naive children to "pox parties" where they are exposed to one or more children with a florid case of chicken pox, measles, etc. The children prance about, sneezing and coughing on each other, virtually guaranteeing transmission of these highly communicable diseases. Thus they are getting the "natural" virus instead of a vaccine. After a brief incubation period the children reliably develop the disease. Except that trouble for the parents is that if they themselves have not had the disease the child will have to be quarantined so that the parent doesn't get one of these viral diseases, which carry much higher morbidity and mortality in adults. This means missed school, missed work, lost income, albeit "peace of mind" to the vaccine questioners. Sorry, I'll take my chances with the vaccines.
Autism is a tragic illness. The scientific community has studied and rejected causation from vaccines. As we learned from the recent mammogram debacle and the USPSTF, it's not the science or medical evidence that matters, it's what we want or what we think is right. www.MDWhistleblower.blogspot.com
That's just completely illogical. Not the "vaccine party" (that's just stupid and comes out of the mind of someone who's never actually raised a child, but that the parent wouldn't most likely have had whatever sometime in their years up to 30 or so. Where did they grow up, in the Biosphere?
I'm an anti vaccine person.....
And I agree with the poster on the other thread who pointed out that there is something fundamentally wrong when we try to inoculate people against all sorts of things.
What I find questionable about the whole process is the amount of "junk" that gets put in the actual vaccine and gets passed off as a harmless dose with no known side effects.
Do I agree with what the CDC says about there being no link to vaccines and autism - not on your life or my child's... Most of the vaccination for H1N1 was done because health care workers complained that they would never be able to treat the people showing up to emergency rooms with the flu, they threatened, goverments took action, pharma fanned the fires...
We should have all been instructed on how to take care of ourselves at home and what specific signs and symptoms were more serious. Don't tell me that we wouldn't be able to treat ourselves, I happen to know of a few people who either did get the vaccine or didn't and still go the flu anyway....They never went near the ER, but they did get tested...
But no, as usual the scent of "fresh money" led us all down the wrong track.... We did what we always do, we made people believe that a "magical" little vaccine was going to protect them. Quick fix band aids rather then addressing the real issues...
Pharma and health care people are really in bed with one another - Doctors who advocated the most and loudest for vaccines are probably cashing in their checks as we speak, and reporting to their research lab bosses how they were actually able to bring home the bacon....
Just like they do for most everything....
Been there done that, wrote the stupid checks and watched them being cashed.....
http://14studies.com/ourstudies.html
I need some advice from From Former Pharma Marketing Director. I contribute to a foundation that supports research into a vaccine for Onchocerciasis (River Blindness), which is one of the leading infectious causes of blindness in the world. Over 500,000 people in Africa have been blinded by this parasite, and another 37 million have been infected. According to your theory, these efforts will probebly be co-opted by a greedy pharmaceutical company seeking to make a buck off the impoverished people of Africa. I guess that I should stop contributing to this humanitarian effort, since someday a successful vaccine company may actually eke out a profit.
AnneS promotes the website 14studies sponsored by the anti-vaccination advocacy groups Age of Autism and Generation Rescue.
Readers wanting a closer and more factual reading of the "science" presented by the anti-vaccine activists may want to read:
David Gorski, M.D., at ScienceBased Medicine "Welcome back, my friends, to the show that never ends, part II: Generation Rescue, the anti-vaccine propaganda machine, and “Fourteen Studies”" http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=451
Steven Novella, M.D., at ScienceBased Medicine "More on 14 Studies" http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=459
Mark Crislip, M.D., ScienceBased Medicine "14 Studies Later" http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=466
These are just a few of the articles written by health care professionals and lay writers refuting the assertion that vaccines are somehow causal in autism.
Of course, the original assertion was that "autism was a novel form of mercury poisoning" and that the source of the mercury was thimerosal, an ethylmercury-based preservative used in some multi-dose vaccines.
That assertion has been debunked again and again and again.
The goalposts moved to just "something about vaccines" (hence the "Green Our Vaccines" catchphrase introduced by anti-science actress Jenny McCarthy.)
Former Pharma Marketing Director attests to the effectiveness of the "Green Our Vaccines"
"What I find questionable about the whole process is the amount of “junk” that gets put in the actual vaccine and gets passed off as a harmless dose with no known side effects."
I don't know what FPMD means by "junk".
According to the CDC,
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/additives.htm
Additives used in the production of vaccines may include
1. suspending fluid (e.g. sterile water, saline, or fluids containing protein); 2. preservatives and stabilizers to help the vaccine remain unchanged (e.g. albumin, phenols, and glycine); and 3. adjuvants or enhancers that help the vaccine improve its work.
Sure, some of the additives have chemical names. Does that make them junk?
The Institute for Vaccine Safety has a very detailed and informative list of pages on vaccine ingredients and their safety.
http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/components.htm
In response to "Fourteen Studies:"
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=451 http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=466
In other words, Generation Rescue (a major anti-vaccine propaganda group) doesn't know what it's talking about.
Pharmavet, here is my advice - you are schizophrenic, I am sure you can find a pill for it.
Either stop working in Pharma or stop funding the vaccine foundation. Or maybe you're just one of those people who goes to church and confession on the weekend, and wreaks havoc all week...
They are not willing to fix the blindness of the Africans form purely altruistic leanings....
There is something in it for them - what bargain with the devil have you struck?
The link between vaccines and autism is an open question. A very interesting interview with former NIH head Dr. Bernadine Healy is here http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/05/12/couricandco/entry4090144.shtml
Dr. Healy notes......"Lastly, Healy says the government has a long way to go to even do basic research that could get at the heart of what she believes is an open question. For example: why in the past decade hasn't the government compared the autism/ADD rate of unvaccinated children with that of vaccinated children? If the rate is the same, it tends to point away from vaccines. If the rate is markedly lower in unvaccinated children, it tends to point toward vaccines."..
Dear Former Pharma Marketing Director. Talk about schizophrenia. With your anti-Pharma views, you must have had a lot of inner turmoil. If you truly "saw the light", why did you wait until you were a Director until you quit? It took me about 12 years to reach Director in Medical. If it was similar for you, then you must have spent a lot of time in the confessional yourself. At least my views are consistent, and not subject to the charge of hypocrisy, which you could be subject to. Tell me, when you were Marketing Director, how many detail pieces did you reject because of poor science?. I worked with guys like you my entire career. Their attitude was we'll put out the violative detail pieces, slim jims and other stuff until we get the first warning letter from DDMAC. Then we'll turn around and look at each other quizzically and say "who approved that?". Or more simply hang the blame on Medical or Regulatory. I spent 28 years on the Medical side actually rejecting detail pieces that the sleazeballs in Marketing were trying to push through. My decisions were based on science. What were yours based on?
As an educational and public service to the readers of this board, I have attached a link to the American Academy of Pediatrics 2010 recommended immunization schedule, including the list of contributors to the policy. I have researched the backgrounds of each of the members, and none of them have any conflicts of interest with the vaccine industry as far as I can glean. If some people wish not to accept the recommendations of the most respected pediatric society in the United States, then far be it from me to try to change their minds.
http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;125/1/195?rss=1
There is no science behind vaccines, only dogma. The educated do not vaccinate. I KNOW how these disgusting concoctions are made and I wouldn't give that crap to my dog.
Dear Pharmavet,
Actually, I worked very close with medical, unlike my colleagues. It wasn't just a job for me, I constantly thought about the patients on the other end of the drug. In fact, I worked very closely with he government regulatory process as well. I audited every single piece of marketing material and scrutinized every marketing program to ensure that we were doing nothing to interfere with the integrity of the doctors we worked with us and the patients who take the drugs. This is not happening today.
We know that vaccines have been changed and some vaccines are being combined.
There are increasing links between vaccinations and serious immune system problems later on in life.
But the issue of the article written here by Ed is about a law suit for a case of professional slander. Fischer is right to sue Offit - who was well OFF IT!!!
But like I say, vaccinations ensure that there will always be a number of people in the population who get serious immune diseases and will need to be treated and cared for and that will keep people in jobs who pay taxes, and buy off doctors who will have more money to spend and buy things, which is good for the economy....
Caveat Emptor.
There are self serving biases everywhere....
My decisions are based on science, but I also know how corrupted science is.
Speaking of science [let’s not demonize the word], our blood obeys Non-Newtonian fluid dynamics. Andrew Moulden’s work in this area is very interesting, because if his theories are correct, we cannot afford to consider the risk-benefit of vaccines on a case-by-case basis. That is, we cannot take a nuanced approach to evaluating vaccine safety. As a former bio-organic chemist, nuclear medicine physician, pharma medical director, and now practicing general internal medicine physician, I am completely convinced that Moulden’s theories are of extreme importance to public health and must be validated. I will briefly try to quote some of the most salient features of his theories:
“Specific germs do not cause disease...it is the body’s generic immune response that causes disease”.
“All vaccines are causing ischemic lack of blood flow for everybody.”
“All vaccines are causing ischemic strokes and chronic ailments.”
“It is not “germs” that are causing human disease in and of themselves, it is the bodies non-specific immune response to ANY foreign substances entering the body that is causing disease and disorders. This was the only logical conclusion to account for the observation that all vaccines, irrespective of strain, were causing the exact same neurological damages in the vaccine recipient, irrespective of emergent diagnosis. The common mechanism of injury, and disease, for all is anoxia at the microcirculatory level.”
I am still trying to fully grasp all of the ramifications of his [Moulden’s] work. I have read enough, however, to conclude that the time is at hand for us to revisit some of the long-held, but perhaps erroneous, doctrine upon which so more of mainstream medical practice is currently based.
Dear Patrons99
That is quite fascinating.
I think I shall be spending my weekend reviewing Moulden's printed work on the matter.
Hope Barbra Fisher finds out about Moulden's work....
Thanks for your open minded contributions here.
Here's an article from another Canadian journalist on the The "Birth" of the Vaccine "Market"
Good reading!
The CDC investigates autism an interesting account "Deadly Immunity" by Robert F. Kennedy http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/06/16/thimerosal/index.html ... "The CDC "wants us to declare, well, that these things are pretty safe," Dr. Marie McCormick, who chaired the IOM's Immunization Safety Review Committee, told her fellow researchers when they first met in January 2001. "We are not ever going to come down that [autism] is a true side effect" ....
I have a 5 year old daughter who has never been vaccinated. She has never been to a doctor for any type of sickness. She has gotten colds, coughs, and some low grade fevers.. but she has never had an ear infection and has never had to take an antibiotic. I don't know any vaccinated children that can claim the same. Most of them get chronic ear infections and are constantly on antibiotics. The proof is in the pudding.
Patrons99, I assume that somewhere in grad school or medical school you learned about the germ theory of disease, as I did, and how it has become the cornerstone of all microbiology teaching. I'm sure you also learned about Koch's Postulates, which are the experimental evidence proving the germ theory of disease. Are you saying that you reject these fundamental principles of science? please explain.
BTW, before Marketing Director gets too involved with Moulden, you should know that Moulden was thrown out of a psychiatric residency program in Canada because of his "erratic bahavior". Psychiatrists are a pretty forgiving lot. Therefore, Moulden must have really been off the beam to get ejected from a Psych residency.
Joe is your kid in daycare?
Pharmavet: I’m not saying throw out Pasteur’s theory. I am saying that Pasteur’s theory should be revisited, however. It might be wrong. Moulden’s theory may be correct. Similarly, I would not throw out the statin theory of atherogenesis. I am saying the statin theory should be revisited, however. It might be wrong. The hemorheologic-hemodynamic theory of atherogenesis may be correct. Have you ever wondered why we see nonspecific small vessel ischemic changes on brain MRIs so often? Moulden’s theory and the hemorheologic-hemodynamic theory have a lot in common. Both theories need validation, urgently. It is conceivable that quantitative perfusion imaging (positron emission tomography) may be sensitive enough to detect microvascular ischemia and subclinical infarctions.
No, she wasn't in daycare but she's in school. She did attend lots of playgroups and pre-school classes. She was breast fed for her first 3 years, so I'm sure that helped. Injecting foreign proteins and neurotoxins directly into the bloodstream bypasses many of the bodies detoxification processes. I like to use the anaolgy of a drug that is injested, snorted or injected. Injecting the drug gives a far more powerful effect, don't ya think? So, I don't buy the tuna in the can theory. I also wondered why a doctor would tell you not to introduce certain foods to early because of possible allergic reactions, but it was ok to inject vaccines into a newborn?? Maybe someone here could explain how this wouldn't cause allergic reactions or autoimmune disease.
Patrons99 is right on statins and atherogenesis. My training is in Pathology, and I've examined many coronary arteries. In addition to the cholesterol deposits in MI patients we almost always saw inflammatory cells in the walls of these blood vessels. We just assumed that these cells got there due to the normal increase in vascular permeability seen with any type of injury. No one ever thought that inflammation might actually be a cause rather than a result of the ischemia. Likewise we were taught to pretty much ignore CRP since it was such a non-specific marker of inflammation until its role in atherogenesis and the role of statins in lowering CRP became clear. I even had a prominent cardiology professor who believed that the initial insult to the arterial wall was viral in origin. Since this was pre-electron microscope, he couldn't prove his theory, but maybe someone should go back and take a look.
Interesting discourse.. keep it up.. since I'm only a lightweight here (B.Sc. in neurobiology) I will just gently follow the discussion. I find Moulden's work really interesting. (And just because someone is erratic doesn't mean that their theories are.. lets stay away from the straw man shall we?) I also believe Pasteur had some interesting dying words on his Germ Theory as well..
P.S. In conflict of interest I had a son regress after his 6 month DTaP.. I was full vaccine/full pharma all the way until I started digging. My daughter is unvaccinated (the horror) and is also 3, without an amoxil script nor any script to her name. Proof in the pudding here too.
How certain are we that Mad Cow disease is not a vaccinosis? How certain are we that Gulf War Syndrome is not a vaccinosis? With regard to the former, it would be interesting to radiolabel various vaccines employed in veterinary medicine, and study their biodistribution in detail. How did Mad Cow disease spread? in clusters?
In humans, the blood brain barrier is immature (functionally incompetent) at birth. Yet, the recommended immunization schedule begins at birth.
http://www.ema.europa.eu/pdfs/human/paediatrics/18137706en.pdf http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/recs/schedules/downloads/child/2009/09_0-6yrs_schedule_bw.pdf
My assessment, anti-vaxxers 100, vaxxers ZERO...
Hey "harpy", you asked for it, you got it from "Anne S", but you of course ignored the 14 studies, like all the other vaccinators
maybe you should change your id from "harpy" to "harpo", as in the loony Marx brother...
I am in neither the antivax nor vax group, but went ahead and vaccinated my kid based on knowing a family with an unvaccinated child that died from measles. Remember that people can always ask for the thimerosal free vaccines if that is what peopel think the cause is, though most of the vaccines out there are free of thimerosal.
My kid has a cold often, but never on antibiotics and he wasn't breastfed (due to some complications during birth for my wife).
The whole allergy thing bothers the snot out of me as well....
To be clear, I am not completely anti vaccine. I am really against the "one size" fits all theory. In that sense I like what Moulden is thinking about. I think we need to look at how these things work so that we can determine and predict better how they will interact on an individual basis.
Not surprised what Pharmavet says about Moulden, People who don't tow the corporate line and do exactly as they are dictated to by industry usually find themselves in this position....It's all part of the game....Actually it could work more in Moulden's, anyone who is "too" friendly to industry is no "friend" of mine.... We need more objectivity - thats is what science was supposed to be about...
When numerous metals are present in the body, they have a “synergistic toxicity.”
http://www.whale.to/vaccine/synergistic_toxicity_q.html
Dr. Boyd Haley, professor and chair of the chemistry department at the University of Kentucky, performed a study on rats and found that the mortality rate of rats exposed to a small dose of mercury or aluminum killed only 1 rat in 100. However, when the rats were exposed to both mercury and aluminum at the same time, all 100 rats died–a 100% mortality rate.
Aluminum is found in both cervarix and gardasil.
Why would pre-market clinical trials of Gardasil have included aluminum in the placebo arm of double-blind placebo controlled studies?
http://www.generationrescue.org/binstock/090318-GardasilPlacebo-Binstock.htm
In a letter to Senator Grassley on March 18, 2009, Teresa Binstock, a researcher in developmental & behavioral neuroanatomy, stated [excerpted, in part, here] “Although I personally am not entirely anti-vaccine and am very much for vaccinations to be proven safe and for vaccination schedules to be proven safe, I am astounded that Merck was allowed to include aluminum compounds in the placebo. Junk science at its profitable best.”
Katherine Davison, 20, went public about the problems she suffered after receiving the controversial cervical cancer vaccine. Davison, who had two Gardasil shots along with her two younger sisters in November 2007 and January 2008, suspects it caused her to suffer a stroke.
http://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/August-2009/Gardasil-Swine-Flu-Vaccines-Inconvenient-Truths.aspx http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/VaccineSafety/ucm187810.htm http://www.whale.to/vaccine/aluminum666.html
Why is aluminum in some vaccines? According to the FDA website, “Aluminum salts are incorporated into some vaccine formulations as an adjuvant to enhance the immune response in the vaccinated individual. The aluminum salts in some U.S. licensed vaccines are aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate, alum (potassium aluminum sulfate), or mixed aluminum salts. For example: aluminum salts are used in DTaP vaccines, the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, and hepatitis B vaccines.”
Are other adjuvants used in US vaccines? Again, according to the FDA website, “Yes, there is one other adjuvant used in one U.S. licensed vaccine. Cervarix, a vaccine licensed by FDA on October 16, 2009, to prevent cervical cancer caused by human papillomavirus types 16 and 18, includes AS04 in its formulation. AS04 is a combination of aluminum hydroxide and monophosphoryl lipid A (MPL). MPL is a purified fat-like substance.”
Perhaps, we can take up the topic of safety of the "uncertain biologic recombinants" found in many vaccines, in another thread. Suffice it to say, its not just the metals and adjuvants in vaccines, that need to be properly evaluated for safety.
A few years ago they were talking about synergistic toxicity with regard to silver mercury fillings. Dentists' phones were ringing off the wall. Fortunately that one has been put to rest.
Uh Pharmavet,
No it hasn't been put to rest, many of us have had the fillings removed and replace with other products...Have you been to the dentist lately, mine doesn't do mercury...
CONTROVERSY
“Roll up your sleeve…er, sorry, meant to say bend over…”
6,300,000.00 EUR = 9,019,455.30 USD
Amount received by Finnish vaccine researcher, Juhani Eskola, from GSK, but Not disclosed by WHO. http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/?p=1215
To FPMD, my silver-mercury fillings have been in for 40 years without a problem, and my 92 year old retired dentist shows no signs of mercury toxicity. Based on durability testing, it is questionable whether your non-silver mercury fillings will last as long as mine. Better play it safe and stay away from the tootsie rolls.
Anon: I read the link. It seems that the money was research funding awarded to THL - Eskola's employer, not to Eskola as implied. Does Eskola own or have a financial interest (other than salary) in THL? Was it not disclosed by WHO because Eskola didn't report it for the reasons he gave ie because it is research funding not consultancy fees?
Christopher: The article states, “Yet another researcher on the WHO vaccine expert group withholds information on financial support from the pharmaceutical industry. Professor Juhani Eskola is the head of the Finnish research on vaccines (THL), and a recent member of the WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) which reports to WHO Director-General Margaret Chan. The SAGE provides recommendations for the types and volume of vaccines that member states must purchase in the event of a pandemic....
“According to a freedom-of-information-request disclosure, Professor Juhani Eskola Finnish Institute, THL, received in 2009 nearly 6.3 million euros, the equivalent of 47 million Danish KRONER from GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) for research into vaccines. Such an amount makes GlaxoSmithKline THL’s primary source of income. GlaxoSmithKline produces the H1N1 vaccine ‘Pandemrix’ that the Finnish Government, by recommendation from THL and WHO, has purchased for national pandemic preparedness."
Professor Eskola is involved in a national scandal. “The Finnish Minister of Health is now on the case and demands full transparency regarding government researchers financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry.”
Pharmavet, good for you, here's to your health, but we are not all cut from the same cloth. Some of us are allergic to peanuts for example, others of us seem to have sensitivities to these things.
What's good for the goose is not always what is good for the gander and vice versa.
Mindful exploration of topics and subjects is required in all things.
Tootsie rolls, toffee, and candied apples occasionally and I still have my filings, although not many filings and admittedly, mine are probably not as old as yours...
I hope that it is clear to everyone why the choice of the non-inferiority margin as the control for studies of new vaccines is absolutely ludicrous. This is virtually certain to result in waves of dangerous new vaccines being introduced into the marketplace.
We should all be asking whether our state has a “philosophical exemption for vaccinations”. Attending public schools is very much a “check point” regarding vaccinations. A cogent medicolegal perspective is provided by Mayer Eisenstein, M.D., J.D., M.P.H. in a video presentation titled “Don’t Vaccinate before You Educate”.
http://homefirst.com/info-1/vaccine-choice.html/?___store=default
http://www.vaccineinfo.net/releases/parent_groups_support_texas_law.shtml
Pages