Posted on 09/22/2011 10:13:51 AM PDT by ZGuy
As you might know, Michele Bachmann claimed that a woman came up to her, crying, saying that her child suffered mental retardation after being vaccinated for HPV. A couple of professors question her claim. The story is reported by Chris Moody.
Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann's story about a woman who claimed that her daughter suffered 'mental retardation' after receiving a vaccine against HPV could fetch the woman's family thousands of dollars. But the family can only collect if Bachmann or the unnamed woman can prove the story is true.
Two bioethics professors have offered to pay more than $10,000 for medical records that prove the anecdote Bachmann told after Monday night's Republican presidential debate is true[.]
I'd like to collect that $10,000 now, professors.
I ask the professors to look up a case in the CDC's VAERS database. Specifically, VAERS number 380440. The case was reported in Oregon on February 15, 2010. The patient was 12 years old. The symptoms in that case were reported in the VAERS database as follows. . .
The professors might also look up VAERS case number 396852. That case was reported in New York on August 8, 2010. The patient was 20 years old.
The professors might also look up VAERS case number 339718. That case was reported in Indiana on February 17, 2009. The patient was 13 years old.
Do I get my $10,000 yet?
As of June 22, 2011, approximately 35 million doses of Gardasil® were distributed in the U.S. and VAERS received a total of 18,727 reports of adverse events following Gardasil® vaccination. 8% were considered serious*...
*"Serious" means "hospitalization, permanent disability, life-threatening illness, congenital anomaly or death."
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
There is so much wrong in your post that I’m not going to comment on it all, other than to say I’m sad that such ignorance runs rampant on FR these days.
The one thing I will comment on is that the junk science of global warming has literally nothing to do with medical trials of FDA-approved medicines and vaccines.
Remember that those cancer deaths happen every year. Most women live signifcantly longer than one year.
Also the most common adverse reactions are:
* Syncope (or fainting)–common after need injections,
* Local reactions at the site of immunization (pain and redness)
* Dizziness
* Nausea
* Headache
Many people consider this risk better than actual cancer death.
Summary of HPV Adverse Event Reports Published in JAMA
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Vaccines/HPV/jama.html
Well, that and the offer of $10,000 was to the actual mother who told the story, not to some randome nobody who thinks he can “prove” it was true by pointing to anecdotal evidence.
So, what to think about a guy who not only doesn’t understand what he is talking about, but is trying to take $10,000 from a mother and her sick, mentally retarded child?
Politicized “science”. That’s what I’m talking about.
It’s how the medical community still claims that there is no abortion-breast cancer link. I think Australia finally adopted requirements that medical personnel advise about the ABC link after it was found that a large study regarding breast cancer had failed to report that the greatest correlation was found between first-trimester abortions and breast cancer - surpassing the significance of even family history of breast cancer. That result was suppressed because it was not politically correct. It’s been a long time since I examined that issue so I’m not up on all the details but I remember there was one pro-choice scientist whose sister had breast cancer so she was very interested in being honest about the science. Her studies consistently found that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer. She found out that her “friends” refused to listen to the science because it was not politically correct. She was pretty disgusted at the politification within the scientific community.
And that’s what I’m talking about. Are you denying that this stuff is real? I’m not a scientist and I would be happy to let the scientists come up with the best theories and models. But if they are going to be scam artists - in biological science as well as in climate science - and if the system of accountability has failed, then I’m not necessarily going to believe everything they tell me. My epistemology doesn’t allow me to, because I basically have an evidence-based epistemology, which is supposed to be what the scientific community also has.
The scientific community can poo-pooh my concerns and claim that the system is perfectly fine, but as long as the scientific community refuses to deal with the blatant failures within the system of accountability, color me skeptical.
The same issue holds true with law enforcement, which is the main issue I’ve concerned myself with recently. As long as the total failures in the system of accountability are poo-poohed and those of us who are concerned are totally blown off, they should not expect me to trust them.
You do know there are 30 HPV's that cause cancer. Gardasil protects against TWO. The other two are for warts.
Read the CDC Fats.
I'm trying to cook. I'll be back later.
Same place you got your stats. http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/stdfact-hpv.htm
You do know there are 30 HPV's that cause cancer. Gardasil protects against TWO. The other two are for warts.
Gardasil protects against the most common forms of HPV that lead to disease and cancer.
Read the CDC Facts.
I did.
I'm trying to cook. I'll be back later.
Ok.
I'm against downplaying what it may do. It's not mandatory when you can opt out of it. Strongly recommended, yes.
My sister-in-law is against all vaccines. She recently had a son and chose not to vaccinate him. Almost all of the vaccines she refused are "mandatory." The fact is, she had a choice and exercised it.
P.S. My pro-Gardasil stance has nothing to do with my support for Perry. I stand behind the vaccine enough to vaccinate my own children. My daughter is due for her third shot in a few weeks. When my son is old enough, he’ll get it too.
Touting it as a cancer drug is a BAD idea.
GARDASIL helps protect against 2 types of HPV that cause about 75% of cervical cancer cases, and 2 more types that cause 90% of genital warts cases
GARDASIL may not fully protect everyone, nor will it protect against diseases caused by other HPV types
They give cautions for a reason. And it seems to be more effective on genital warts.
It's not mandatory when you can opt out of it.
There is no "opt out" at private or Christian schools. And an opt out must be renewed every 2 years. I'm for freedom and NOT having to get governments permission NOT to do something.
I have no problem with your choices. They are YOURS to make. By the same token, no one should have to tell government to pound sand for a vaccine that they won’t need sitting next to someone in class.
Not only is it a bad idea, but also misleading.
There is no "opt out" at private or Christian schools.
Those schools can fix that problem. It's within their control. (i.e. They have a choice.)
And an opt out must be renewed every 2 years. I'm for freedom and NOT having to get governments permission NOT to do something.
I can appreciate that position. Personally, I don't see the opt-out as very different from exercising other choices that must be made repeatedly.
Info at link.
Personally, I don't see the opt-out as very different from exercising other choices that must be made repeatedly.
WHY should someone have to get permission from a government body NOT to do something?!
That report from the AAPS is from 2005 and was in response to the specific method of mandate that Perry ordered. For the record, his method was wrong-headed.
If the Texas legislature decided to mandate Gardasil with an opt-out, they could do so effectively while respecting parental rights and not requiring a renewal of the opt-out form. (They could also require private schools and physicians to accept the opt-out.)
We shouldn’t have to get permission from the government to abstain. But ... sometimes our freedoms (choices) must be exercised rather than assumed. That’s not to say it’s right, just that it’s an actuality.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think we disagree on anything other than the effectiveness and potential benefits of Gardasil.
My original objection to your post was concerning the prevention of 4000 annual cervical cancer deaths versus 6,000,000 cases of HPV (or 600,000 if you consider only 10% to be legitimate/necessary)
On a side note, as a kid in the 50's I had all the vaccines. And I still had whooping cough, chicken pox and German measles.
Litsten...I am with you morally and philosophically. But the prevalent influences have destroyed all thought of ‘responsibility’, delayed gratification, morality....and entitlement (sex, et al) runs through our entire society.
AND the parent can opt the gal OUT. But there are those who would benefit from the low cost mandate....who would otherwise not be able to afford it.
Well...thats okay then, it is so few, they can just go ahead and die. No one will miss them.
There was an OPT OUT.
More melodrama rather than facts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.