One baby died using enfamil and its being pulled from the shelves. Reportedly, at least 26 have died from this shot and everything is hunky dory. strange
They are totally different circumstances. Walmart is pulling enfamil because they have no idea why a baby died from it, and fear there is some contaminent introduced in the production, or that the product is somehow flawed. It’s a normal reaction, like there is a bad batch or something. And enfamil is just one of a class of products, which is simply something to consume, not some drug that provides particular benefit.
Again, there is no indication that any person has actually died because of Gardasil. But as Gardasil prevents a significant number of deaths, it is accepted that it’s use might actually cause deaths. People do die from vaccines, and we treat that as an acceptable risk for the reward. Each vaccine must include a risk/reward determination.
People die from life-saving medical treatment all the time. Every surgery for example includes the risk of death, but people will have surgery to correct non-life-threatening problems. For example, people will do hip replacement surgery in order to be able to walk. But “in less than 1%” of the patients, the surgery results in nerve damage, and a little less than 1 out of 1000 die after surgery. Is it worth death to be able to walk? That is a determination each person makes, but by and large nobody skips the surgery because they are afraid they might die.
But tell people they can drink their brand of milk, but by the way it will kill one out of 10,000 people, and you will be laughed at. Almost nobody will risk a known possibility of death simply to partake of a certain product, unless it is some great delicacy. I say that because people DO risk death to eat some foods. Eating Sushi increases the risk of sickness or death, but people do it.
26 have not died due to the shot. 26 have died after having the vaccine, but there’s no plausible reason to believe that the vaccine is the cause of the deaths.
Did you hear the recent report from Australia?
Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Nov 24. [Epub ahead of print]
Cervical cancer in the human papillomavirus vaccination era.
Tay SK.
Source
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Republic of Singapore.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW:
To evaluate the potential changes in the epidemiology of cervical cancer based on recently emerged information from mass vaccination programs beyond clinical trials.
RECENT FINDINGS:
Limited sensitivity and unequal access to screening have resulted in an imbalance in distribution of the burden of cervical cancer between developed and developing countries, between metropolitan and rural areas in developed countries, and among women from different ethnic groups. In screened populations, there is a relative increase in incidence of cervical cancer in young and elderly women, and an increased proportion of adenocarcinoma. A high coverage of the target population has been achieved in human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programs in many countries. After 3 years of mass vaccination of adolescent girls, surveillance data in Australia confirmed a significant reduction in high-grade abnormalities for girls aged 18 years and below.