You got confused again, and mistakenly claimed that 6 out of 100 kids have a severe reaction.
But it was 6 out of 100 reported reactions that were severe.
There were 36,000,000 people vaccinated. There were 772 severe reaction reports. That’s 0.002%, not 6%.
People die every day. When the number of people who die after taking a vaccine are no greater a percentage than the number of deaths in the comparative population, it is not “dunno” to say the vaccine does not appear to have increased the risk of death.
You obviously are smart enough to at least find links, if you read them and tried to make sense of them so you wouldn’t make mistakes like claiming that 6% of children have severe reactions, you might educate yourself better.
You’ve disposed of my percentages of young girls seriously harmed by HPV vaccines based on an error in my methodology.
AERs are reported to Government Regulators on a voluntary basis, and very few of them are actually reported.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16689555
“Drug Saf. 2006;29(5):385-96.
Under-reporting of adverse drug reactions : a systematic review.
Hazell L, Shakir SA.
Source
Drug Safety Research Unit, Southampton, UK.
Abstract
The purpose of this review was to estimate the extent of under-reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to spontaneous reporting systems and to investigate whether there are differences between different types of ADRs. A systematic literature search was carried out to identify studies providing a numerical estimate of under-reporting. Studies were included regardless of the methodology used or the setting, e.g. hospital versus general practice. Estimates of under-reporting were either extracted directly from the published study or calculated from the study data. These were expressed as the percentage of ADRs detected from intensive data collection that were not reported to the relevant local, regional or national spontaneous reporting systems. The median under-reporting rate was calculated across all studies and within subcategories of studies using different methods or settings. In total, 37 studies using a wide variety of surveillance methods were identified from 12 countries. These generated 43 numerical estimates of under-reporting. The median under-reporting rate across the 37 studies was 94% (interquartile range 82-98%). There was no significant difference in the median under-reporting rates calculated for general practice and hospital-based studies. Five of the ten general practice studies provided evidence of a higher median under-reporting rate for all ADRs compared with more serious or severe ADRs (95% and 80%, respectively). In comparison, for five of the eight hospital-based studies the median under-reporting rate for more serious or severe ADRs remained high (95%). The median under-reporting rate was lower for 19 studies investigating specific serious/severe ADR-drug combinations but was still high at 85%. This systematic review provides evidence of significant and widespread under-reporting of ADRs to spontaneous reporting systems including serious or severe ADRs. Further work is required to assess the impact of under-reporting on public health decisions and the effects of initiatives to improve reporting such as internet reporting, pharmacist/nurse reporting and direct patient reporting as well as improved education and training of healthcare professionals.
PMID: 16689555 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
And based upon that, I’ll stick with my 6 out of every 100 number. Thank you for helping me refine this issue into better documented and clearer focus.