U.S. diphtheria death

Rouser2 said:


According to yourlawyer.com, the DPT vaccine is still in use in the US.

"In the United States, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have recommended that children be immunized with the new vaccine, but many vaccination programs still use DPT because it is less expensive."


http://www.yourlawyer.com/practice/overview.htm?topic=DPT Vaccine

Let's see how well "yourlawyer" did with medical facts. Here is an interesting section of the web page you cited:
In 1977, British researcher Dr. Gordon T. Stewart, of the Department of Community Medicine at the University of Glasgow, documented adverse reactions to DPT vaccine and evaluated the benefit to risk ratio for children in the United Kingdom. His research demonstrated that 1 of every 54,000 children receiving the vaccine suffered encephalopathy (brain dysfunction) with rare instances of mental retardation ensuing.

Of the 160 adverse cases he examined, 40 percent demonstrated hyperkinesias (increased muscle movements accompanying brain dysfunction), infantile spasms, flaccid paralysis, and partial or complete amentia (severe mental retardation).

He determined that adverse events were severely underreported or overlooked, that no protection from the disease was demonstrable in infants, and that claims by official bodies that risks of whooping-cough exceeded those of vaccination were very questionable. He estimated the risk of transient brain damage and mental defect to occur in 1 out of every 10,000 vaccinated, and risk for permanent brain damage to occur in 1 out of every 20,000 to 60,000 vaccinated.
"Stewart documented" is a weasel description that introduces a letter yet makes it appear that Stewart did research. He did not. Lancet published a two-page letter from Stewart in which he inteprets the research of others. He claimed that pertussis vaccination did very little to protect and that the risks outweighed the benefits. His letter (pp 234-237) was immediately followed by a response from Malleson, et. al. (pp. 237-239). They utterly refuted Stewart's claims by pointing out that "fewer immunized children were admitted [for pertussis infection] than would be expected if immunization were ineffective."

Now let's dig deeper, though. One of the central claims here is that "1 in 54,000" figure. Not from Stewart, though. That comes from Strom, whose original 1960 paper claimed a 1 in 6,000 neurological complications rate. The Swedish Medical Association viewed his figure with suspicion and set a task force to go over Strom's data after it was published. Strom apparently had some problems with math, and was off by an order of magnitude. They published a correction, using his same criteria Those criteria, however, were also suspect. His criteria were simply that a neurological condition presented within a certain period post-vaccination. He did not correct for baseline presentation rates. That is, he did not attempt to distinguish correlation from causation. That, however, is the sad story of the 1 in 54,000 figure, specious from the beginning, distorted by an order of magnitude by the original researcher, and not originating with Stewart's letter. Other than that, the web page got it right. :rolleyes:
 
Rouser2 said:


According to yourlawyer.com, the DPT vaccine is still in use in the US.

"In the United States, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have recommended that children be immunized with the new vaccine, but many vaccination programs still use DPT because it is less expensive."


http://www.yourlawyer.com/practice/overview.htm?topic=DPT Vaccine


One cannot address their assertions from sometime before 2002 when this website was copyright. Nor can one address their advertising for vaccine related injury clients that this site is aimed at. However as of TODAY, DTaP and TD are the only two vaccines with a CDC approved immunization schedule on their website. DPT is just not there.
I think any vaccine program would be hard pressed to continue to administer or use up DPT stocks in light of this and probably do deserve to be sued if a serious adverse event occurs.

-------------------------------------------------
Insofar as Hoyt's continued and bizaare use of ad hominous nicknames such as whale, golem, troll'dini, etc., taking this off topic...Bill, do you do this at work and at home as well? Does everyone have some bizarre Tolkienan nick name
based on your personal opinion of them? Is this a sign of affection or contempt? If you do this all the time without noticing it, you should really get help for this affectation. If you are aware of it, keep in mind that it makes one question your motivations.

Yes, I am aware of the fact that the U.S. and worldwide stats on serious neurological sequelae from the old DPT
or DwPT (whole cell pertusssis) vaccine
are debatable. Nevertheless officially in the U.S., per CDC, DPT is out; DTaP is in. That's the bottom line. What exactly is your point? Are you defending the NVICP now against claims arising out of DPT? The compensation program doesn't want anybody giving the old DPT either...for good reason.
--------------------------------------------------

Here are some very brief abstracts/biblios on this dating back to '92 and before:

DPT VACCINE AND CHRONIC
NERVOUS SYSTEM DYSFUNCTION

The evidence remains insufficient to implicate the presence or absence of a causal relation between DPT and chronic nervous system dysfunction under any over circumstances.
That is, because the NCES is the only systematic study of chronic nervous system dysfunctions after DPT, the committee can only comment on the causal relation between DPT and those chronic nervous system dysfunctions under the conditions studied by the NCES.

In particular, it should be noted that the chronic nervous system dysfunctions associated with DPT followed a serious acute necrologic illness that occurred in children within 7 days after receiving DPT.

REFERENCES

Alderslade R.
Bellman MH, Rawson NSB, Ross EM, Miller DL.
The National Childhood Encephalopathy Study: A report on 1000 cases of serious neurological disorders in infants and young children from the NCES research team.
In: Department of Health and Social Security.
Whooping Cough: Reports from the Committee on the Safety of Medicines and the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation.
London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office; 1981.
Fine PEM, Chen RT.
Confounding in studies of adverse reactions to vaccines.
American Journal of Epidemiology 1992;136:121-135.
Gale JL, Thapa PB, Bobo JK, Wassilak SGF, Mendelman PM, Foy HM.
Acute Oregon.
In: Manclark CR, ed.
Sixth International Symposium on Pertussis, Abstracts.
DHHS Publication No.
(FDA) 90-1162.
Bethesda, MD:
U.S. Public Health Service,

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 1990.
Gale JL, Thapa PB, Wassilak SGF.
, Bobo JK, Mendelman PM, Foy HM.
Risk of serious acute neurological illness after immunization with diphtheria-tetanuspertussis vaccine.

Journal of the American Medical Association 1994; 271:3741.

Griffin MR, Ray WA, Mortimer EA, Fenichel GM, Schaffner W.

Risk of seizures and encephalopathy after immunization with the diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine.

Journal of the American Medical Association 1990;263:1641-1645.

Howson CP, Howe CJ, Fineberg HV, eds.
Adverse Effects of Pertussis and Rubella Vaccines.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1991.
Institute of Medicine.
Stratton KR, Howe CJ, Johnston RB, eds.
Adverse Events Associated with Childhood Vaccines: Evidence Bearing on Causality.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1994.
Madge N.
Miller D, Ross E, Wadsworth J.
The National Childhood Encephalopathy Study: A 10-year Followup.
In: Manclark, CR.
(ed.)

Sixth International Symposium on Pertussis, Abstracts.
DHHS Publication No.
(FDA) 90-1162.
Bethesda, MD: U.S.
Public Health Service,

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 1990.
Madge N.
Diamond J.
Miller D, Ross E, McManus C, Wadsworth J.
Yule W.

The National Childhood Encephalopathy Study: A 10-year follow-up.

A report of the medical, social, behavioural and educational outcomes after serious, acute, neurological illness in early childhood.
Developmental Medicine and Child

and on the other side of this coin:

DPT VACCINE Al CHRONIC NERVOUS SYSTEM DYSFUNCTION 17 Neurology 1993;Supplement No.
68;35(7):1-118.
Marcuse EK, Wentz KR.
The NCES reconsidered: Summary of a 1989 workshop.
Vaccine 1990; 8:531-535.
Miller D, Wadsworth J.
Diamond J.
Ross E.

Pertussis vaccine and whooping cough as risk factors in acute neurological illness and death in young children.


In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Pertussis, Geneva, 1984.
Developments in Biological Standardization 1985;16:389-394.
Miller DL, Ross EM, Alderslade R.
Bellman MH, Rawson NSB.
Pertussis immunization and serious acute neurological illness in children.
British Medical Journal 1981 ;282:1595-1599.
Miller DL, Madge N.
Diamond J.
Wadsworth J.
Ross E.
Pertussis immunization and serious acute neurological illnesses in children.
British Medical Journal 1993; 307:1171-1176.
Walker AM, Jick H.
Perera DR, Knauss RA, Thompson RS.
Neurologic events following diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis immunization.
Pediatrics 1988;81:345-349.
--------------------------------------------------
excerpted/quoted from the yourlawyer's site:

British researcher Dr. Gordon T. Stewart, Department of Community Medicine at the University of Glasgow, (1977) documented (weaseled acc to Hoyt) that 1 of every 54,000 children receiving the vaccine suffered encephalopathy (brain dysfunction) with rare instances of mental retardation ensuing.

He examined 160 adverse cases where 40 percent demonstrated hyperkinesias (increased muscle movements accompanying brain dysfunction), infantile spasms, flaccid paralysis, and partial or complete amentia or severe mental retardation.

"He estimated the risk of transient brain damage and mental defect to occur in 1 out of every 10,000 vaccinated, and risk for permanent brain damage to occur in 1 out of every 20,000 to 60,000 vaccinated."

Sweden banned the pertussis vaccine from its vaccination program in 1979.

In 1980, German researchers, Tonz and Bajc, compared incidences of seizures caused by the pertussis vaccine in Germany with those in America. German children suffered seizures at the rate of 1 per every 4800 infants immunized.

(rate higher in the U.S. re incidence of seizures ...... seizures can cause brain damage by the way)


Japan replaced the traditional whole-cell pertussis vaccine with the purified, acellular vaccine. By 1983, studies indicated that the efficacy of Japanese acellular vaccines was equal that of the whole-cell vaccines and complication rates had been cut by 83 percent.

reference:

http://www.yourlawyer.com/practice/...c=DPT Vaccine
 
And pop goes the weasel.....

DPT VACCINE AND CHRONIC
NERVOUS SYSTEM DYSFUNCTION

The evidence remains insufficient to implicate the presence or absence of a causal relation between DPT and chronic nervous system dysfunction under any over circumstances.
That is, because the NCES is the only systematic study of chronic nervous system dysfunctions after DPT, the committee can only comment on the causal relation between DPT and those chronic nervous system dysfunctions under the conditions studied by the NCES.

In particular, it should be noted that the chronic nervous system dysfunctions associated with DPT followed a serious acute neurologic illness that occurred in children within 7 days after receiving DPT.


Now that's what I call an example of weaseling.



Hoyt wrote: "Stewart documented" is a weasel description that introduces a letter yet makes it appear that Stewart did research.


And what exactly do you think researchers and reviewers doing epidemiologic studies do exactly? They study other people's reports. So what? Documenting what others wrote and collating that information is perfectly acceptable.

And they are free to comment on those reports including in lengthy letters in medical jurnals such as The Lancet. Stewart reviewed the data of others and wrote a report as a letter based on that. No, not a thorough meta-analysis, but clearly an opinion and review based on research of others on whom he relied. Medical journals publish such letters precisely because they have something to offer and forgo the necessity of building a formal paper.
It speeds up getting urgent information out there for everyone's consideration. Letters can also be used to disagree as well as agree with the findings of others. This does not require a formal submission either.

Calling this a "weasel" description is an example of neurolinguistic programming
at its finest.
 
I'd still like Rouser to tell us how he figures getting vaccinated against diptheria is more dangerous than going to Haiti without being vaccinated.

Rolfe.
 
Anecdotal, but my older son could not tolerate full doses of the DPT vaccine. Even half doses made him ill. Unfortunately, DPT vaccine was required before he could enter school. Ultimately, he never did complete the injection series. Primary symptoms were fever and obvious discomfort.

Unrelated, but similar thing happened when we briefly tried Ritalin for his ADHD. Seemed to work fine during the day. In the evening it wore off. One sight of my son smacking his head against the wall was enough for me to end the Ritalin.

My point is, while vaccines and other drugs do have a demonstrated benefit, they don't work equally for all people. We cannot pretend that vaccines do not cause disease in some people, but we also cannot pretend that they are necessarily the cause of widespread disease. People might point at my son's DPT experience as the cause of his ADHD, but I'd have to explain that there are other factors to consider, in particular his very difficult birth.

This is not a simple issue. There are no simple answers. I and my family prefer to minimize the use of drugs as much as possible, while at the same time recognizing the definite benefits they have.
 
Rolfe said:
I'd still like Rouser to tell us how he figures getting vaccinated against diptheria is more dangerous than going to Haiti without being vaccinated.

Rolfe.

Anyone going to Haiti today has the option of taking TD rather than DTaP. However, DTaP has all along been determined as better tolerated than DPT in older children and adults who need it. If I or my family were going to Haiti we'd consider TD at the least, and DTaP if pertussis was a reported problem there. The CDC and State Department both track disease prevalence rates in overseas destinations and it would be wise to access these prior to departure.

I may be wrong here but Rouser's insistence on the problem with this vaccine was based on DwPT and fails to recognize that a stand-alone tetanus toxoid containing diptheria vaccine is available.
 
Pyrrho said:
This is not a simple issue. There are no simple answers.
Absolutely. But one of the main points about trying to maximise vaccine uptake among the people who have no problem with the vaccine is precisely to protect people like Pyrrho's son, who have a problem. So long as the percentage of vaccinated individuals is kept at a high enough level, the few unvaccinated individuals are also protected while they remain within this population.

Pyrrho's son will have to take account of the fact that he may not be immune if he is thinking of going somewhere like Haiti, of course, but apart from that he should be OK.

Rouser is against the vaccine even for people who have no problem with it, because he has been reading the propaganda of those who grossly exaggerate its risks. Personally, it seems he would like to avoid vaccination and hide within the immune population to take the same advantage as Pyrrho's son relies on. He doesn't seem to realise this will mean that foreign travel could well be lethal to him.

However, he goes further. He observes the virtual disease-free status of the US population, and declares that against this background the perceived risks of vaccination (whch he grossly exaggerates) are unjustifiable. He seems totally incapable of understanding that while one or two selfish individuals may be able to join the genuinely vaccine-averse people like Pyrrho's son without jeopardising the whole system, as soon as the percentage of unvaccinated individuals falls below a certain level, the disease (which cannot be kept out because you can't stop people going on foreign holidays) will be able to stage a comeback.

His various attempts to explain how it might be possible to deal with the reintroduction of disease to an insufficiently immune population include:
  • I propose to cross that bridge when we come to it
  • Just ingest the pathogen and don't get sick
  • I'm not suggesting that the vaccination programme should be stopped :confused:
You see what we're up against?

Rolfe.
 
I would second Rolfes point and add that included in the vulnerable group are those to young to have recieved the vaccines as well as those that for one reason or another cannot have the vaccine. The problem with "conscientous objectors" is that they endanger not just themsleves but all the vulnerable groups as well.

PJ
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: U.S. diphtheria death

Rouser2 said:
More factually incorrect drivel along with more tiresome mindless ad hominem attack thrown in. The NVIC does not base their informational reports on "hearsay" as you claim, but on reports from parents and victims. That is not hearsay, but direct witness testimony.


-- Rouser

The "NVIC" conducts no research and writes reports that have no significance. All they have are post hoc fallacy statements. Worthless - just like your arguments.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: U.S. diphtheria death

Rouser2 said:
Originally posted by Eos of the Eons [/i]


>>NVIC are morons with heresay. You like heresay? Figures. All of your sources are basing their moronic ideals on heresay. Some even make stuff up. That's always a great source. Not.

More factually incorrect drivel along with more tiresome mindless ad hominem attack thrown in. The NVIC does not base their informational reports on "hearsay" as you claim, but on reports from parents and victims. That is not hearsay, but direct witness testimony.


-- Rouser


It is is hearsay because the parents have been convinced by liars that 'symptoms' are because of the vaccines when they are totally unrelated. Even when an autopsy is done on the child, they will call the doctors liars and part of the conspiracy when they find the deaths are due to other causes (neglect by using unproven 'remedies' for common illnesses).

They get angered when they hear the truth and go on about vaccines instead. It's sad sad sad. Then they put up this NVIC site.

It is just like the site james has aired his rantings on. "Come here and tell us your story on being a victim of mind control"

Are you saying their stories are true because of their "experiences"?? It's direct witness testimony.


The same thing with UFO "kidnap victims".

No proof, only dillusion and finger pointing that are misplaced.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: U.S. diphtheria death

Originally posted by Eos of the Eons [/i]

>>It is is hearsay because the parents have been convinced by liars that 'symptoms' are because of the vaccines when they are totally unrelated.

Direct witness testimony is not hearsay. Nor does your sweeping hypothetical concerning "liars" and "symptoms... totally unrelated" have any substance, but more evidence of your own sophomoric ranting.


Hearsay: Legal Definition: Statements by a witness who did not see or hear the incident in question but heard about it from someone else.

-- Rouser
 
Rouser you seemed obsessed by the word Sophomore.

Direct witness testimony is not hearsay.

Don't mean its true either.

Theres a high index of suspicion that most of NVIC is fictional, exagerated or just ill informed opinion. Not exactly reliable sources of information to base public health on.
 
SteveGrenard said:
Insofar as Hoyt's continued and bizaare use of ad hominous nicknames such as whale, golem, troll'dini, etc., taking this off topic...Bill, do you do this at work and at home as well? Does everyone have some bizarre Tolkienan nick name
based on your personal opinion of them? Is this a sign of affection or contempt? If you do this all the time without noticing it, you should really get help for this affectation. If you are aware of it, keep in mind that it makes one question your motivations.

whale

Nincompoop.
 
Re: And pop goes the weasel.....

SteveGrenard said:
Now that's what I call an example of weaseling.
Read it again. This time, try to understand it.
And what exactly do you think researchers and reviewers doing epidemiologic studies do exactly? They study other people's reports. So what? Documenting what others wrote and collating that information is perfectly acceptable.
I never said that the style of Stewart's paper was fundamentally wrong. I said that the presentation on that website makes it appear Stewart did research he did not do.

And they are free to comment on those reports including in lengthy letters in medical jurnals such as The Lancet. Stewart reviewed the data of others and wrote a report as a letter based on that. No, not a thorough meta-analysis, but clearly an opinion and review based on research of others on whom he relied. Medical journals publish such letters precisely because they have something to offer and forgo the necessity of building a formal paper.
It speeds up getting urgent information out there for everyone's consideration. Letters can also be used to disagree as well as agree with the findings of others. This does not require a formal submission either.

Calling this a "weasel" description is an example of neurolinguistic programming
at its finest.
I didn't say anything suggesting Stewart's report shouldn't have been published. I commented on the website's highly distorted and selective use of anti-vax reports. Stewart's paper was immediately followed by Malleson's. Malleson's paper utterly refuted Stewart's analysis.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: U.S. diphtheria death

Rouser2 said:
Originally posted by Eos of the Eons [/i]



Hearsay: Legal Definition: Statements by a witness who did not see or hear the incident in question but heard about it from someone else.

-- Rouser
3


The people putting up the site are putting up hearsay. They put up these stories that they hear from other people and profess it to be truth.

They are also then liars when they refuse to tell the truth in their stories and prefer to ignore doctors and call them mainstream murderers instead of accepting the facts.

If I tell you that I got kidnapped by aliens and now have a deadly microbe implanted in my brain that will infect every human on earth when I die...will you believe me? It is my 'experience'. It was not a dream. I'm a witness.

Why don't you believe me?

Well, there is no PROOF!! That's why.

That is the problem with NVIC.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: U.S. diphtheria death

Rouser2 said:
Direct witness testimony is not hearsay. Nor does your sweeping hypothetical concerning "liars" and "symptoms... totally unrelated" have any substance, but more evidence of your own sophomoric ranting.


Hearsay: Legal Definition: Statements by a witness who did not see or hear the incident in question but heard about it from someone else.

-- Rouser

This is rouser's "once a week has to get something right" post. So it's not hearsay - it's poppycock, drivel, pablum, what have you...
 
PS It appears the withering attack on rouser is finally paying dividends. He seems to be reduced to squabbling over petty definitions and such and has abandoned any semblance of trying to prove his original notion that vaccines do more harm than good.
 

Back
Top Bottom