Before we dive right into the preface, let’s count how many times the word rare is used. I count seven. Pay attention to this, it is a very sly way of downplaying things. If you haven’t kept up here it is simply; one side states that vaccines do cause reactions but very rarely, so the benefit outweighs the risk and the other side is asking for this issue to be looked at properly because what they are looking at shows, that adverse reactions are more common than we had past thought.
Since it is still in question –even after reading through this report- this is really a perfect example of how “they” are trying to constantly push that all this is rare, like winning the lottery. You may hear about it but the likelyhood of it ever happening to you is pretty slim.
Now there’s a lot I could nitpick about enough to fill up a couple of posts but instead I’ll just skim over them since we’ve all probably heard them several times already and we do have 667 pages to cover.
Thankfully we have a bullet system 😉
- Vaccines being the leading cause of dwindling outbreaks/us not seeing disease much anymore is in question
- Because we don’t see these outbreak of disease anymore and aren’t afraid of them is NOT the reason the majority choose to not vaccinate. This myth is also passed around very frequently
- This article reviewed 12,000 peer-reviewed articles, they did not conduct any new research
- It is interesting to note that this comes out shortly after a similar review of articles about vaccine safety, only they came to quite the opposite conclusion
- “….some issues simply cannot be resolved with currently available epidemiologic data…in addition even very large epidemiologic studies may not detect or rule out rare events”
- We know this already, have been saying it for years and yet the methods have not changed
- “Some adverse events caused by vaccines are also caused by the natural infection
- Please keep this in the back of your mind, it is very important. I’m working on a post for it but for now we should note that this only shows that some adverse events will go undetected.
- “Alleged adverse effects that appear to be immune mediated, as many of them are, are more challenging, in part because the biology is not completely understood”
- They proceed to go on about pre-existing conditions. These conditions that may have no ill effect on the individual if they were not vaccinated.
What you really get from this preface is that the methods for investigating adverse reaction claims cannot usually determine whether the reaction is from the vaccine or not. Add to the fact that most of the population isn’t even aware that you can report these reactions and that most doctors outwardly dismiss reaction claims and you get a whole different idea than the previous news article about this report is stating. This is not reassuring for the very rare reaction claims. It will be interesting to see if they take any action after this has made the rounds. We need better monitoring better investigation methods and better safety protocols before injection.
If 100,000 kids get a particular vaccine and 1,000 have reactions, the current methods would most likely determine that one or less had an actual reaction. Why? Because 300 had a pre-existing condition that without that vaccine no one would have known about or be affect by, 300 did not have enough data so was only concluded as correlation not causation and the remaining will be dismissed because it wasn’t that particular vaccine that caused the reaction but rather the accumulation of vaccine up till that point, with this last set showing visible reaction.
Like it or not, this is our current situation. Although the news about this report is only saying that this is a reassurance to those who are concerned for vaccine safety. So far I don’t find this reassuring at all.