Anti-vaxxers

knipex

xzanti wrote: »

Good point.

But, with vaccines being such a hotly debated and loaded subject among parents. Would it not be in the interest of the Pharmacy industry to provide some sort of reassurance for parents who may be on the fence, or just plain terrified of vaccinating? If they could be told that their child will have an allergy test before the shot is given? If it was even available upon request only.

If it even boosted the rate of vaccinations by a few percent, and saved a few lives, wouldn't it be worth it?

For each vaccine ?? For each component of each vaccine ??

What would be the difference between this and giving them the vaccine ??

How many kids have a severe allergic reaction to vaccines ? I am not aware of any on a personal level, or even anecdotally, but know dozens that have had a minor reaction, (rash on injection site etc).

There is a reason that you cannot self administer a vaccine, it has to be done at a clinic, or a doctors office, or a pharmacy where they have the drugs and ability to respond IF there is a sever allergic reaction..

kylith

A girl in my secondary school died of meningitis. When my college offered the vaccine you bet I was first in line.

Guy:Incognito

Presumably the 50% of parents who are choosing to prevent their daughters from getting the hpv vaccine will be completely up front and honest in reporting all the cases of chronic fatigue syndrome and whatever else they say it's causing (when it occurs even though they haven't had the vaccine)

knipex

steddyeddy wrote: »

In fairness A that was years ago. We know for a fact a large part of antibiotics are prescribed for the wrong bacteria. They should keep up with relevant science. It's not some cutting edge science that dictates how antibiotics are effective.

The problem is. You have a patient with high fever, obvious infection do you

Take a blood culture send it to hospital, send your patient home, wait 48 hours (minimum) for sensitivity test results. get results, call in patient, (hoping they have developed secondary infection pneumonia, septicemia etc) give then antibiotic.

or

Give them a broad spectrum antibiotic that you are 95% sure will be effective with a warning that if they don't see an improvement within 48 to 72 hours to come back at which point you can prescribe an alternative..

now imagine if it was you with your kid.. What would you want them to do..

Antibiotic resistance is a serious issue. Far more so than most people (including many doctors) realise BUT it is not one that has a single source or a simple fix..

steddyeddy

knipex wrote: »

The problem is. You have a patient with high fever, obvious infection do you

Take a blood culture send it to hospital, send your patient home, wait 48 hours (minimum) for sensitivity test results. get results, call in patient, (hoping they have developed secondary infection pneumonia, septicemia etc) give then antibiotic.

or

Give them a broad spectrum antibiotic that you are 95% sure will be effective with a warning that if they don't see an improvement within 48 to 72 hours to come back at which point you can prescribe an alternative..

now imagine if it was you with your kid.. What would you want them to do..

Antibiotic resistance is a serious issue. Far more so than most people (including many doctors) realise BUT it is not one that has a single source or a simple fix..

It's a lot simpler than that. A survey of 1000 GPs knowingly wrongly prescribe antibiotics. I can understand there's pressure from patients but there should also be guidelines in to stop GPs knowingly prescribing the wrong drug.

I'm aware it's a multi factorial problem involving, agricultural, research, patient and clinical routes. The American health care system also contributes to antibiotic resistance and needs to change.

Nearly half of GPs admit to prescribing ‘useless’ antibiotics just to get pushy patients to leave their surgeries, a report has revealed.
Thousands of family doctors are believed to be needlessly dishing out the drugs to patients who do not need them, fuelling concerns about the rise of superbugs.
The survey of more than 1,000 GPs found that older doctors were more likely to prescribe antibiotics despite knowing the drugs would have little or no effect.
More than a quarter of doctors admitted offering the drugs to patients who did not need them “several times a week” – equivalent to tens of thousands of prescriptions across the country.
Forty four per cent of GPs admitted handing out antibiotics simply to get patients who repeatedly demanded them to leave their surgeries.

The survey, commissioned by the charity Nesta, also revealed that ninety per cent of doctors often felt under pressure to prescribe the drugs.
Rosemary Leonard, a London-based GP, said it was tough to refuse requests for antibiotics, especially when a worried parent was asking for treatment for their child.
“If you don’t give the antibiotics they’ll just come back the next day to see another doctor,” she told The Times.
“The reality is we just do it to get the patients off our backs.”
About 25,000 people die annually across Europe because of infections that are resistant to antibiotics.

In July, David Cameron warned the world could be "cast back into the dark ages of medicine" where people die from routine procedures because deadly bacteria are becoming resistant to the drugs.
And in March, the country’s top medical adviser said family doctors were fuelling the spread of superbugs by needlessly ‘dishing out’ antibiotics.
Professor Dame Sally Davies accused GPs of prescribing powerful drugs to patients who are reluctant to take time off work with minor illnesses.
Speaking at the Cambridge Science Festival, she said: “There is evidence that some GPs are dishing out more than they need to for medical clinical disease.
“We’ve clearly got it wrong, and I would argue that GPs do need more training. If we don’t take action, deaths will go up and up and modern medicine as we know it will be lost.”

steddyeddy

Danbo! wrote: »

My two year old is not vaccinated because she cannot be, so she relies on herd immunity not just to stay well, but to survive.

Before she came along, I always had a hatred of anti-vaxxers due to their stupidity, ignorance and selfishness. But now, I've a whole new level of absolute disgust for them. I've never knowingly met one face-to-face, but therein lies the problem, they don't go around with Anti-Vax t-shirts, so you never know which sniffly little feckers to avoid at the playground.

I have no idea how the issue could be stopped, but it's great to hear of creches refusing children without them. A step in the right direction.

The ones I've known have generally been quite vocal about their hatred of all things vaccine.

Ghekko

knipex wrote: »

There is a reason that you cannot self administer a vaccine, it has to be done at a clinic, or a doctors office, or a pharmacy where they have the drugs and ability to respond IF there is a sever allergic reaction..

Not so in the case of HPV - this is given in schools.

Annasopra

Have to agree strongly with Tony O Brien. All the anti gardasil crap is emotional terrorism


http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/hse-hits-out-at-emotional-terrorism-tactics-of-hpv-vaccine-opponents-803877.html

kylith

Ghekko wrote: »

Not so in the case of HPV - this is given in schools.

But it's not given by teachers, it's given by a medical professional with the appropriate training. And just like all the vaccines given in schools, everyone vaccinated will be kept round for a while to make sure they don't have a reaction.

_Whimsical_

I don't know a great deal about the science behind the illness claims around the HPV vaccine other than its been debunked. I know someone living near me who was involved in setting up the REGRET campaign though and have heard her say that they've been unfairly treated by the media and I have vehemently disagreed with her.

However today I have read one article in the Irish Times on HPV and heard a man from the HSE on two radio shows. On each one it was suggested that the people who are anti hpv are actually religious extremists who don't want their daughters having sex and denying them HPV vaccine is part of this ideology .
Id have to say the one thing I could say about the person I know involved in the campaign would be that this is so far from the truth as to be laughable,she would be one of the most intolerant atheists you could meet. She would not be open to mixing with religious people, another thing I've disagreed with her on.Her daughter is genuinely very ill, I've seen her for myself, I wouldn't comment on what the cause of her condition is but I definitely could speak to the mothers motivation, wether misled or not, for being involved in starting the whole thing.

If that's a new string to the HSE bow in trying to dissuade parents from listening to the campaign I think it is worrying as it it is blatant propaganda. I would definitely like to see anti science sentiment robustly refuted where necessary but I feel really uncomfortable seeing something completely made up being used by a government body to defend a healthcare practise.

Danbo!

steddyeddy wrote: »

The ones I've known have generally been quite vocal about their hatred of all things vaccine.

I’ve luckily avoided them so far. Though you avoid lots of people when you’ve a kid with a ropey immune system

Army_of_One

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

I don't know a great deal about the science behind the illness claims around the HPV vaccine other than its been debunked. I know someone living near me who was involved in setting up the REGRET campaign though and have heard her say that they've been unfairly treated by the media and I have vehemently disagreed with her.

However today I have read one article in the Irish Times on HPV and heard a man from the HSE on two radio shows. On each one it was suggested that the people who are anti hpv are actually religious extremists who don't want their daughters having sex and denying them HPV vaccine is part of this ideology .
Id have to say the one thing I could say about the person I know involved in the campaign would be that this is so far from the truth as to be laughable,she would be one of the most intolerant atheists you could meet. She would not be open to mixing with religious people, another thing I've disagreed with her on.Her daughter is genuinely very ill, I've seen her for myself, I wouldn't comment on what the cause of her condition is but I definitely could speak to the mothers motivation, wether misled or not, for being involved in starting the whole thing.

If that's a new string to the HSE bow in trying to dissuade parents from listening to the campaign I think it is worrying as it it is blatant propaganda. I would definitely like to see anti science sentiment robustly refuted where necessary but I feel really uncomfortable seeing something completely made up being used by a government body to defend a healthcare practise.

oddly enough there is a poster who always brings that campaign up on breaking news.ie(check the research section of RESPECT...all debunked studies by anti-vaxxers) and has suggested abstinence from sex as a fix.

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome effects slightly more girls than boys and generally manifests it self in the age group that is also recommended that they get the HPV vaccination.

The Europena Medical Association done a study of 2 groups of girls (one with the vaccination and one without) and there was very little difference between the 2..ergo its not the HPV vaccination.

snowflaker

I would see a correlation between religious extremists and HPV anti vaxxers. They push the non REs front and centre to hide their real agenda.

Anti Vaxxers are Quacks

neonsofa

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

I don't know a great deal about the science behind the illness claims around the HPV vaccine other than its been debunked. I know someone living near me who was involved in setting up the REGRET campaign though and have heard her say that they've been unfairly treated by the media and I have vehemently disagreed with her.

However today I have read one article in the Irish Times on HPV and heard a man from the HSE on two radio shows. On each one it was suggested that the people who are anti hpv are actually religious extremists who don't want their daughters having sex and denying them HPV vaccine is part of this ideology .
Id have to say the one thing I could say about the person I know involved in the campaign would be that this is so far from the truth as to be laughable,she would be one of the most intolerant atheists you could meet. She would not be open to mixing with religious people, another thing I've disagreed with her on.Her daughter is genuinely very ill, I've seen her for myself, I wouldn't comment on what the cause of her condition is but I definitely could speak to the mothers motivation, wether misled or not, for being involved in starting the whole thing.

If that's a new string to the HSE bow in trying to dissuade parents from listening to the campaign I think it is worrying as it it is blatant propaganda. I would definitely like to see anti science sentiment robustly refuted where necessary but I feel really uncomfortable seeing something completely made up being used by a government body to defend a healthcare practise.

They also keep mentioning facebook. I don't know a lot about the vaccine because I won't need to make any decisions regarding it for another while yet. It's purely based on a lack of knowledge at this point in time in my case. Once she is getting the vaccine they will give the info leaflets etc and my questions will be answered. But any questions/worries I may have around it atm has nothing to do with Facebook fear mongering or religion. I have no religion and no facebook.

Admittedly I'm not actively against the vaccine like the people theyre referring to, but generalising like that does nothing to support their argument. Like you say, it would be a lot more productive to debunk the content rather than try to assume the motive and make generalisations.

branie2

Edward Jenner would be turning in his grave!

Ipso

snowflaker wrote: »

I would see a correlation between religious extremists and HPV anti vaxxers. They push the non REs front and centre to hide their real agenda.

Anti Vaxxers are Quacks

I think there a few broad categories; New Agey types (emphasis on "natural", holistic and fear of chemicals), libertarian types who don't like to be told what to do (especially by government bodies) and the conspiracy theory idiots (de-population etc).

Ipso

Ipso wrote: »

I think there a few broad categories; New Agey types (emphasis on "natural", holistic and fear of chemicals), libertarian types who don't like to be told what to do (especially by government bodies) and the conspiracy theory idiots (de-population etc).

4. Morons, who wouldn't understand "holistic", "libertarian" or "conspiracy theories" but this gives them a trendy cause. They are the classic "you haven't done your research" and you want to respond "seriously, you don't even understand big words, did Penguin produce a book about it"...but just move on to a new topic.

_Whimsical_

snowflaker wrote: »

I would see a correlation between religious extremists and HPV anti vaxxers. They push the non REs front and centre to hide their real agenda.

Anti Vaxxers are Quacks

Well drawing correlations is exactly the problem here.

If you wouldn't even express surprise, much less horror, that a government agency would be using something that's not even part of the debate in Ireland to rebut concerns on the vaccine I'd have to question your own impartiality on this one. Suggesting parents are religious extremists who'd rather their daughters die than take a safe vaccine is a frankly frightening leap to make in the absence of ANY evidence. The anti HPV campaign most definitely is not advocating abstinence or any religious mores.

I'm not suggesting the campaign is right but I certainly would be concerned that the HSE would entertain wildly fanciful claims without evidence to support any health policy.

Would we be ok with them telling us next week that patients demanding a new treatment or refusing a new treatment are doing so because they are secretly witches?
It's that ridiculous.

Ipso wrote: »

I think there a few broad categories; New Agey types (emphasis on "natural", holistic and fear of chemicals), libertarian types who don't like to be told what to do (especially by government bodies) and the conspiracy theory idiots (de-population etc).

Deleted User wrote: »

4. Morons, who wouldn't understand "holistic", "libertarian" or "conspiracy theories" but this gives them a trendy cause. They are the classic "you haven't done your research" and you want to respond "seriously, you don't even understand big words, did Penguin produce a book about it"...but just move on to a new topic.

On the HPV issue there's also a category of parents with genuinely very ill daughters. They may be misled as to the cause of the illness but they are not malicious in their desire to promote their experience. I can only really talk about one person I've met and others she has spoke about and they're genuinely heartbroken people who think they can save other kids the same fate as their daughters. All their kids are vaccinated, younger kids in the family are receiving their other vaccines. Dismissing them as morans isn't addressing them or going to change them.

_Whimsical_

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

On the HPV issue there's also a category of parents with genuinely very ill daughters. They may be misled as to the cause of the illness but they are not malicious in their desire to promote their experience. I can only really talk about one person I've met and others she has spoke about and they're genuinely heartbroken people who think they can save other kids the same fate as their daughters. All their kids are vaccinated, younger kids in the family are receiving their other vaccines. Dismissing them as morans isn't addressing them or going to change them.

But then feel free to add that as another category. I was suggesting one more, not saying that all are morons.

endacl

[Deleted User] wrote: »

But then feel free to add that as another category. I was suggesting one more, not saying that all are morons.

I'll say it. They're all morons.

Capt'n Midnight

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-41104629

A US author who bills himself as the "world's #1 anti-vaxxer" has been denied a visa to enter Australia for a speaking tour.

Thanks to more people moving these days we will continue to be exposed to preventable diseases. And thanks to Anti-Vaxxers we no longer have herd immunity for many of them.


Vaccines save lives. It's that simple.

Orion

endacl wrote: »

I'll say it. They're all morons.

I wouldn't consider any of them morons. There are two types of antivaxxers in Ireland:

1. The likes of Regret and Parents for Informed Consent (founded by a former member of Regret btw). These people are very well organised, very vocal,liars and frauds. They have direct links to christian fundies in the US who do preach abstinence to protect against HPV (as does Mattie McGrath). They use bull like homeopathy to "treat" these girls. I'm sure its complete coincidence that the husband of the founder of Regret is a homeopath who is making ~50k p.a. from this.
These people are not morons - they are dangerous predators who deserve any "abuse" they get from the DoH and HSE.

2. Parents - ordinary Joe Soaps like you or me. These people have sick children, are clutching at straws and are vulnerable as a result. They get swept up in the lies that the likes of Regret push out due to their vulnerability. If you've ever had a sick child you will know what I'm talking about. You would do anything to get them better.
These people are not morons. They are vulnerable prey for the predators above. They need help not abuse. The HSE wasn't referring to this group of people.

So don't simplify this and dismiss them as morons. They aren't.

ohnonotgmail

Somebody i follow on twitter posted a pic of an anti-hpv vaccine poster that is being put up in Kerry. The poster contains a URL for for information. Whoever created the poster got the URL wrong (it is quite clear what the URL should have been) and somebody has registered the domain they did print and redirected it to the HSE page on the HPV vaccine.

Orion

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Somebody i follow on twitter posted a pic of an anti-hpv vaccine poster that is being put up in Kerry. The poster contains a URL for for information. Whoever created the poster got the URL wrong (it is quite clear what the URL should have been) and somebody has registered the domain they did print and redirected it to the HSE page on the HPV vaccine.

That group is Don Myers. Founder of Parents for Informed Consent and former member of Regret

_Whimsical_

Orion wrote: »

I wouldn't consider any of them morons. There are two types of antivaxxers in Ireland:

1. The likes of Regret and Parents for Informed Consent (founded by a former member of Regret btw). These people are very well organised, very vocal,liars and frauds. They have direct links to christian fundies in the US who do preach abstinence to protect against HPV (as does Mattie McGrath). They use bull like homeopathy to "treat" these girls. I'm sure its complete coincidence that the husband of the founder of Regret is a homeopath who is making ~50k p.a. from this.
These people are not morons - they are dangerous predators who deserve any "abuse" they get from the DoH and HSE.

2. Parents - ordinary Joe Soaps like you or me. These people have sick children, are clutching at straws and are vulnerable as a result. They get swept up in the lies that the likes of Regret push out due to their vulnerability. If you've ever had a sick child you will know what I'm talking about. You would do anything to get them better.
These people are not morons. They are vulnerable prey for the predators above. They need help not abuse. The HSE wasn't referring to this group of people.

So don't simplify this and dismiss them as morons. They aren't.

Do you have any links to substantiate that claim? I honestly don't know myself but I'd be very interested to hear if that was the case.

As I've mentioned I know one REGRET member living locally in the second category of people you describe above. She has a very ill daughter, she has countless tales of other similarly ill girls. She is an avowed atheist and I know she herself is in no way profiting from her membership of the group. I feel like the HSE is making a big mistake applying blanket labels like "emotional terrorists" to all affected people, some are just people sharing stories of confusion and despair. If there's proof that these groups are tied to some fundamentalist ideology that needs to be put in the public domain but I've seen no proof of it at all anywhere so far.

_Whimsical_

Orion wrote: »

That group is Don Myers. Founder of Parents for Informed Consent and former member of Regret

I had a look for Don Myers online and found his page. There's nothing on his information leaflet about abstinence or religion or anything like that. The leaflet is just pieces from the medicines.ie page and Merck page on Gardasil side effects. He makes the point that a full list of potential side effects is not supplied to parents, personally I think it should be myself. A newspaper article on his twitter says he has a sick daughter. I don't see what the problem with any information he is providing. With all medical interventions, treatments and vaccines there are side effects. I've read worse than this on the antibiotics I'm taking atm. It's far from scare mongering and certainly couldn't be construed as any sort of religious based advice. If it's funded by American groups then they aren't contributing much, this doesn't look like any money was put into it.


https://informparents.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/hpv-info-for-outlook-magazine.gif?w=825

mountai

Strange calling the Regret people " Anti Vaxx " . It is my understanding that everyone in this group are there because their children are believed to have been injured by this Vaccine . I suppose the best thing for them is abuse and vilification . Who the hell cares about their problems.

ancapailldorcha

Orion wrote: »

2. Parents - ordinary Joe Soaps like you or me. These people have sick children, are clutching at straws and are vulnerable as a result. They get swept up in the lies that the likes of Regret push out due to their vulnerability. If you've ever had a sick child you will know what I'm talking about. You would do anything to get them better.
These people are not morons. They are vulnerable prey for the predators above. They need help not abuse. The HSE wasn't referring to this group of people.

So don't simplify this and dismiss them as morons. They aren't.

Right but what sort of help would you prescribe? I don't have a kid so I can't relate to the agony of having one that's seriously ill but if someone is going to disregard the advice of the HSE and doctors in favour of quacks then I'm struggling to think of a better word.

bullvine

Can someone point me in the direction of as single reputable scientist or doctor that mentions not to take the HPV..

Asking for a friend

jh79

mountai wrote: »

Strange calling the Regret people " Anti Vaxx " . It is my understanding that everyone in this group are there because their children are believed to have been injured by this Vaccine . I suppose the best thing for them is abuse and vilification . Who the hell cares about their problems.

According to their website they are certain the vaccine caused the illnesses. The best research available show this is not the case.

Their scaremongering will lead to people dying. Simple as.

jive

mountai wrote: »

Strange calling the Regret people " Anti Vaxx " . It is my understanding that everyone in this group are there because their children are believed to have been injured by this Vaccine . I suppose the best thing for them is abuse and vilification . Who the hell cares about their problems.

Yeah it probably is seeing as they are spreading dangerous misinformation. The amount of R&D and scrutiny from agencies to get a drug to the market means that anything which reaches the market, in this day and age, has been proven to be efficacious and safe.

mountai

If anyone cares to examine the Merck Pil ( the one the HSE refuse to give to parents) it is clear that the listed possible side effects SHOULD worry any parent . Trust the HSE ?? Oh yeah .

Canis Lupus

jive wrote: »

Yeah it probably is seeing as they are spreading dangerous misinformation. The amount of R&D and scrutiny from agencies to get a drug to the market means that anything which reaches the market, in this day and age, has been proven to be efficacious and safe.

I don't know if that's entirely accurate. I'm open to correction but I thought you can't say for sure until it's used 'in the wild'.

I just googled

https://prescriptiondrugs.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=005528

One drug released in 2000 Lotronex (Alosetron) was withdrawn after a 8 months due to causing 49 cases of ischemic colitis (inflammation and injury of the large intestine); 21 cases of severe constipation (10 requiring surgery); 5 deaths; mesenteric ischemia (inflammation and injury of the small intestine)

Assuming of course we accept 2000 as 'recent'.

Raptiva (Efalizumab) Used for psoriasis but caused: progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML; a rare and usually fatal disease that causes inflammation or progressive damage of the white matter in multiple locations of the brain) 2003 to 2009

kylith

mountai wrote: »

Strange calling the Regret people " Anti Vaxx " . It is my understanding that everyone in this group are there because their children are believed to have been injured by this Vaccine . I suppose the best thing for them is abuse and vilification . Who the hell cares about their problems.

They believe that their child was injured by the vaccine but, according to all available research, that is not the case.

I'm sorry for their troubles, but if it's not the case that the vaccine caused it then they are just misinformed and unfortunate.

kylith

Canis Lupus wrote: »

I don't know if that's entirely accurate. I'm open to correction but I thought you can't say for sure until it's used 'in the wild'.

I just googled

https://prescriptiondrugs.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=005528

One drug released in 2000 Lotronex (Alosetron) was withdrawn after a 8 months due to causing 49 cases of ischemic colitis (inflammation and injury of the large intestine); 21 cases of severe constipation (10 requiring surgery); 5 deaths; mesenteric ischemia (inflammation and injury of the small intestine)

Assuming of course we accept 2000 as 'recent'.

Raptiva (Efalizumab) Used for psoriasis but caused: progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML; a rare and usually fatal disease that causes inflammation or progressive damage of the white matter in multiple locations of the brain) 2003 to 2009

I hate to sound callous, but what kind of numbers are we talking about? If 500,000 people took the tablets then the chances of a reaction are tiny. I looked into the measles vaccine a while ago and despite how vocal the people who's kids have had reaction are you're 27,000 times more likely to be injured by measles than by the vaccine.

knipex

mountai wrote: »

Strange calling the Regret people " Anti Vaxx " . It is my understanding that everyone in this group are there because their children are believed to have been injured by this Vaccine . I suppose the best thing for them is abuse and vilification . Who the hell cares about their problems.

Because THEY Believe.. With no evidence, that injured their children despite multiple studies deciding otherwise they have started or become part of an orchestrated campaign, peddling miss-truths, half truths, downright lies and nonsense as scientific fact. Which has the effect of reducing vaccine uptake across the board and uptake of the HPV virus has halved.

The HPV vaccine can prevent 70% of cervical cancers.. 70%

These people will be directly responsible for thousands of deaths over the next 20 to 30 years. They are a danger to all future

bullvine

200,000 girls have the HPV vaccine, 300 have supposedly had side effect.. Nothing is 100% safe

mountai

kylith wrote: »

They believe that their child was injured by the vaccine but, according to all available research, that is not the case.

I'm sorry for their troubles, but if it's not the case that the vaccine caused it then they are just misinformed and unfortunate.

The manufacturer of this drug Gardasil , is the
the same company that were responsible for Vioxx . We all know how corrupt they were then , now in bed with the HSE , fine bedfellows indeed .

ancapailldorcha

mountai wrote: »

The manufacturer of this drug Gardasil , is the
the same company that were responsible for Vioxx . We all know how corrupt they were then , now in bed with the HSE , fine bedfellows indeed .

That's not evidence of anything. Merck is one of the world's biggest companies and has a huge portfolio.

kylith

bullvine wrote: »

200,000 girls have the HPV vaccine, 300 have supposedly had side effect.. Nothing is 100% safe

That's a 0.15% chance of side effects.

mountai

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

That's not evidence of anything. Merck is one of the world's biggest companies and has a huge portfolio.

So Merck didn't produce Vioxx , didn't kill 30000 Americans , didn't get fined one billion dollars ??
Do your research and while you are at it look at their Pil.

_Whimsical_

jive wrote: »

Yeah it probably is seeing as they are spreading dangerous misinformation. The amount of R&D and scrutiny from agencies to get a drug to the market means that anything which reaches the market, in this day and age, has been proven to be efficacious and safe.

I would also love to agree with this but unfortunately it really is not true and there are countless examples.

Commonly used ones you may have heard in the media in recent years being the morning after pill sold under different names to the mass market but being found to be ineffective in women over 12 stone. It's no longer sold to women of that weight and over. That's probably half the female population.

Domperidone, sold OTC as Motilium here for nausea and stomach bugs, found to be implicated in heart related deaths and having to have its use curtailed.

Many antidepressant drugs and antihistimines sold OTC have been found substansially to increase memory loss and risk of dementia.

Then there are older ones:
The contraceptive pill increasing clotting risk
HRT increasing breast cancer risk
The H1N1 vaccine increasing risk of narcolepsy in children.

The truth is drugs are released onto the market having R&D yes but real life experience is what ultimately judges their safety and efficacy and a lot of people have been casualties of unexpected side effects. That may be due to alot of things including genetic variation governing how people react to different drugs. It's the chance we take taking any drug, you weigh risks and benefit. It's really not true that you can assume anything coming onto the market is completely safe though.

Canis Lupus

kylith wrote: »

I hate to sound callous, but what kind of numbers are we talking about? If 500,000 people took the tablets then the chances of a reaction are tiny. I looked into the measles vaccine a while ago and despite how vocal the people who's kids have had reaction are you're 27,000 times more likely to be injured by measles than by the vaccine.

That wasn't an argument against vaccines btw. I fully support vaccines just pointing out my understanding that just because something passes the lab tests and human trials doesn't mean it's going to be 100% safe like the poster I quoted said.

Also riskwise I would assume if the FDA withdraws a drug then surely they must consider the side effects to be serious and wide ranging enough to take that action.

super_furry

I’d love to know what the conspiracy theorists actually think the conspiracy is? Why would vaccine makers want to give kids autism for example?

ancapailldorcha

mountai wrote: »

So Merck didn't produce Vioxx , didn't kill 30000 Americans , didn't get fined one billion dollars ??
Do your research and while you are at it look at their Pil.

It's not my job to back up your argument. One bad drug doesn't mean the entire Merck portfolio is worthless. Unless you have proof that Gardasil is harmful then you point can be dismissed.

Canis Lupus

super_furry wrote: »

I’d love to know what the conspiracy theorists actually think the conspiracy is? Why would vaccine makers want to give kids autism for example?

Money, silly billy.

njs030

kylith wrote: »

That's a 0.15% chance of side effects.

Any idea what the statistical chance of dying from cervical cancer is?
A woman who has all her smears etc.

I wonder is it less than 0.15% because if so that means a child is more likely to become seriously ill from a vaccine.

kylith

Canis Lupus wrote: »

That wasn't an argument against vaccines btw. I fully support vaccines just pointing out my understanding that just because something passes the lab tests and human trials doesn't mean it's going to be 100% safe like the poster I quoted said.

Also riskwise I would assume if the FDA withdraws a drug then surely they must consider the side effects to be serious and wide ranging enough to take that action.

I agree with you totally there, its just that some people would latch onto "X amount have a reaction" as 'proof' that a vaccine is bad, and sure for that X amount it is, but neglect the fact that X is 0.01% of the amount of people who have had the vaccine and that X^10 lives were saved because of it.

ancapailldorcha

notjustsweet wrote: »

I wonder is it less than 0.15% because if so that means a child is more likely to become seriously ill from a vaccine.

Except that the vast majority of side effects are quite trivial compared to the disease being vaccinated against. Here's the NHS' list of side-effects for Gardasil:

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/vaccinations/Pages/hpv-vaccine-cervarix-gardasil-side-effects.aspx

kylith

notjustsweet wrote: »

Any idea what the statistical chance of dying from cervical cancer is?
A woman who has all her smears etc.

I wonder is it less than 0.15% because if so that means a child is more likely to become seriously ill from a vaccine.

The American Cancer Society estimates that in 2006, about 9,710 cases of invasive cervical cancer will be diagnosed in the United States and about 3,700 women will die from the disease

According to this: about 30% of women diagnosed will die from it.

CancerResearchUK wrote:

1 in 135 women will be diagnosed with cervical cancer during their lifetime.

So a 0.74% of being diagnosed, and a 30% chance of dying from it.