Vaccines *Truth*

Jan Drew wrote:
"Mark Probert"

snip
Jan Drew wrote:
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...
Max C. wrote:
I've always been curious to know... could you explain to me why it is
felt necessary to give the HepB vaccine on the day of birth?
Because there is an extremely high risk of mother-to-child transmission,
child-to-child transmission, and children represent the primary
reservoir for HepB. Not to mention that HepB is far more deadlier in
infants then in older persons.

And if you look at the schedule you'll see that if a mothers HepB status
is known to be negative then vaccination can be delayed, although this
delay is strongly recommended against:

http://www.keepkidshealthy.com/welco..._schedule.html


Why the
rush? Shouldn't parents be given a chance to get to know their babies'
personalities before giving such a questionable shot? Sure you've
provided evidence that there are no causes for concern, but then others
like Jan have given evidence that there *IS* cause for concern. To me,
a study showing no cause for concern does not negate one showing cause
for concern unless it specifically and fully addresses the reasons that
are of concern.
It's a matter of risk management. Nothing we do, including being born,
is without risk. And like everything else in life, vaccination does
carry risks. But the risks far outweigh the risk of not being
vaccination. In the case of HepB it is particularly damaging to
children - whereas 1-2% of adults infected with HepB develop chronic and
deadly disease, 30-50% of infected infants will develop chronic and
deadly disease.

We put our kids into child seats in the car, put sunscreen onto them to
protect them from UV, make them wear helmets when they ride a bike, all
in the name of risk management. Vaccination is the same thing, a way to
protect our children. And like everything else we do to protect our
kids, it is not perfect, but it is better then doing nothing at all.

Bryan
Ohh, looky what the AAPS has taken down from Canada, since 2003!

With Thunderbird, it is SOOOOOO easy to find Jan's snips.

The anti-vac AAPS which is fully explained he

http://tinyurl.com/pxsq9

Surely not a reputable organization.

"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Jan Drew wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Jan Drew wrote:
Hep B #1 in the hospital (first day of life)
2 Months - Hep B, Hib, DTaP, IPV, PCV
4 months - Hib, DTaP, IPV, PCV
6 months - Hep B, Hib, DTaP, IPV, PCV
That's 5 types of shots, 15 actual shots, and 21 immunizations if you
count the D, T, and acellular P separately.
Wonderful. All that protection so early in life.

Anti-vac websites deleted.

Jan added nothing worth quoting.

Sad.. that Mark believes these children lives are worthless.

Wonder why he hates children so much?

Restored the truth:

http://www.909shot.com/Kids/terry.htm

http://www.909shot.com/Kids/richie.htm

http://www.909shot.com/Kids/nicky.htm

http://www.909shot.com/Kids/anna.htm


http://www.healing-arts.org/children...database.htm#d...



"Sdores" wrote in message
. ..
I'm sorry but I disagree with this form of vaccination at this age. I
am not sure about it being an everyday thing done to people except
those who might be at risk. My son got a major cocktail of who knows
what in the army. I fear what all of it will do to him in the future
esp. since he already is injured through his service to this country.
UM MOM Susan
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...
Max C. wrote:
I've always been curious to know... could you explain to me why it
is
felt necessary to give the HepB vaccine on the day of birth?
Because there is an extremely high risk of mother-to-child
transmission, child-to-child transmission, and children represent the
primary reservoir for HepB. Not to mention that HepB is far more
deadlier in infants then in older persons.

And if you look at the schedule you'll see that if a mothers HepB
status is known to be negative then vaccination can be delayed,
although this delay is strongly recommended against:

http://www.keepkidshealthy.com/welco..._schedule.html


Why the
rush? Shouldn't parents be given a chance to get to know their
babies'
personalities before giving such a questionable shot? Sure you've
provided evidence that there are no causes for concern, but then
others
like Jan have given evidence that there *IS* cause for concern. To
me,
a study showing no cause for concern does not negate one showing
cause
for concern unless it specifically and fully addresses the reasons
that
are of concern.
It's a matter of risk management. Nothing we do, including being
born, is without risk. And like everything else in life, vaccination
does carry risks. But the risks far outweigh the risk of not being
vaccination. In the case of HepB it is particularly damaging to
children - whereas 1-2% of adults infected with HepB develop chronic
and deadly disease, 30-50% of infected infants will develop chronic
and deadly disease.

We put our kids into child seats in the car, put sunscreen onto them
to protect them from UV, make them wear helmets when they ride a
bike, all in the name of risk management. Vaccination is the same
thing, a way to protect our children. And like everything else we do
to protect our kids, it is not perfect, but it is better then doing
nothing at all.

Bryan

"Mark Probert"

snip
Jan Drew wrote:
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...
Max C. wrote:
I've always been curious to know... could you explain to me why it is
felt necessary to give the HepB vaccine on the day of birth?
Because there is an extremely high risk of mother-to-child
transmission, child-to-child transmission, and children represent the
primary reservoir for HepB. Not to mention that HepB is far more
deadlier in infants then in older persons.

And if you look at the schedule you'll see that if a mothers HepB
status is known to be negative then vaccination can be delayed,
although this delay is strongly recommended against:

http://www.keepkidshealthy.com/welco..._schedule.html


Why the
rush? Shouldn't parents be given a chance to get to know their
babies'
personalities before giving such a questionable shot? Sure you've
provided evidence that there are no causes for concern, but then
others
like Jan have given evidence that there *IS* cause for concern. To
me,
a study showing no cause for concern does not negate one showing
cause
for concern unless it specifically and fully addresses the reasons
that
are of concern.
It's a matter of risk management. Nothing we do, including being
born, is without risk. And like everything else in life, vaccination
does carry risks. But the risks far outweigh the risk of not being
vaccination. In the case of HepB it is particularly damaging to
children - whereas 1-2% of adults infected with HepB develop chronic
and deadly disease, 30-50% of infected infants will develop chronic
and deadly disease.

We put our kids into child seats in the car, put sunscreen onto them
to protect them from UV, make them wear helmets when they ride a bike,
all in the name of risk management. Vaccination is the same thing, a
way to protect our children. And like everything else we do to
protect our kids, it is not perfect, but it is better then doing
nothing at all.

Bryan

Ohh, looky what the AAPS has taken down from Canada, since 2003!

[Mark does not want it to be shown, too bad]

Ohh, looky what the AAPS has taken down from Canada, since 2003!

I still have it..because *I* posted it!


http://64.41.99.118/vran/vaccines/he...accine_hep.htm


VACCINES HEPATITIS-B
HEP-B VACCINE, an UNJUSTIFIED HEALTH HAZARD


Across Canada each year, thousands of school children are lined up and
injected
with hepatitis B vaccine. Parents are not adequately informed of the risks
associated with the vaccine nor are they told that children in Canada have
an
extremely low risk of contracting the disease. Hepatitis B is not a common
childhood disease. The risk according to recent statistics from Health
Canada
is minute, with only 25 cases reported in 1998 in children under the age of
14
in the entire country, yet thousands of children every year are exposed to
the
hazards of the vaccine. Parents are not told that hepatitis B vaccine is
genetically engineered, that it contains thimerosal a known neurotoxin, and
that no long term follow up for adverse reactions has been done.
Pre-marketing
clinical trials lasted only 4-5 days, not long enough to determine
automimmune
reactions that can take weeks and months to emerge.


According to vaccine researcher, Dr. Bonnie Dunbar, "The pathologies that
are
common to hepatitis B virus infections are the same types of symptoms that
are
associated with both the plasma derived (old vaccine) and the new yeast
derived
recombinant hepatitis B vaccine. These include rheumatoid arthritis type
symptoms, optic neuritis, multiples sclerosis like symptoms, demyelinating
disorders and a variety of vascular disorders and chronic fatigue syndrome."
Dr. Dunbar reports that "we re finding there are 3 basic categories of
adverse
reactions. When you look at the published reports in the literature we have
a
majority of neurological type of symptoms, rheumatic/rheumatology,
autoimmune
types of symptoms and a variety of others vascular, etc."


In a resolution voting against mandatory childhood vaccines, members of the
Association of American Physicians and Surgeons stated that "children under
the
age of 14 are three times more likely to suffer adverse effects -- including
death -- following the hepatitis B vaccine than to catch the disease
itself."
While Canadian statistics are sparse on vaccine associated adverse events,
the
VAERS adverse events reporting system in the United States offers the
following
statistics. To be sure, a similar trend would be expected in Canada.


http://www.aapsonline.org/aaps/


Overall, VAERS has received a total of 17,497 reports of adverse reactions
to
the hepatitis B vaccine, reactions that occurred after people received the
vaccine alone, rather than in combination with other vaccines, during the
period between July 1, 1990 and October 21, 1998. Moreover, fully 5,983 of
these reports chronicled such serious events as hospitalizations, while 146
of
them told of deaths. VAERS, furthermore, is a passive system, not a
mandatory
one. This suggests that only a fraction of adverse events are actually
reported, a fraction estimated by FDA officials to be as low as 1% to 10%.


http://www.biospace.com/articles/111199.cfm


Until recently the vaccine was given in a three dose schedule - the first
dose
usually started in the fall at the begining of the new school term, a second
injected dose about a month later, and the third dose approximately 6 months
later. In July 2000, The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI)
announced a revised schedule under the heading "The Statement on Alternate
Adolescent Schedule for Hepatitis B Vaccine", published in the Canada
Communicable Diseases Report - Vol. 26 (ACS-5), July 1, 2000. This brief
report
announces that children age 11-15 will have available a two dose schedule to
be
given in the school setting, and identifies the vaccine as Merck Frosst's
Recombivax HB, but omits pertinent product information and does not disclose
details of how the new 2 dose hepatitis B vaccine differs from the old 3
dose
vaccine. The NACI statement can be viewed online at:


http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hpb/lcdc/publ...6sup/acs5.html


The timeline of the hepatitis B vaccine program varies from province to
province. Some provinces start injecting children in Grade 3, others start
in
grade 4, 5, 6, or 7, and high schools offer catch up campaigns for students
who
missed their shots in elementary school.


New Brunswick, and the North West Territories routinely inject newborn
infants
within hours of birth with hepatitis B vaccine, while also offering it with
the
early infant shots starting at two months. Prince Edward Island includes it
in
the infant shots and also offers it in schools. British Columbia recently
also
has added hepatitis B vaccine to its routine infant vaccination program,
starting at two months.


According to the Canadian Immunization Guide - Fifth edition (1998), " HBV
infection is usually associated with exposure to blood or infectious bodily
fluids. Common means of transmission include heterosexual and homosexual
contact, injection drug use, and perinatal transmission (mother to infant).
The
risk of transfusion-related hepatitis B is extremely low because of routine
HBsAg screening of donated blood and rejecting of donors at risk of
infection.
Infections also occur in settings of close personal contact through
unrecognized contact with infective fluids." People at high risk for getting
hepatitis B disease are intravenous drug users who share contaminated
needles,
prostitutes, prisoners, sexually promiscuous persons and babies born to
infected mothers.


Canada offers prenatal blood screening (which includes testing for hepatitis
B
infection) to all pregnant women, and in rare cases of maternal infection,
newborn infants are immeditely treated with hepatitis B immune globulin
(HBIG),
which offers immediate short term passive immunity. Immune globulin is
prepared
from pooled human plasma from selected donors wth high level of anti-HBs who
are seronegative for bloodborne infections. This screening and treatment
insures that vulnerable, at risk infants are protected from acquiring
hepatitis
B and effectively reduces their risk of becoming lifelong carriers of the
disease. The majority of adults, and older children who might rarely
contract
the disease usually recover, and develop lifelong immunity. Only a small
percentage of people who contract hepatitis B go on to become carriers of
the
disease and/or develop degenerative liver disease.


Health Canada reports "an encouraging picture of declining incidence of HBV
infection in Canada in recent years. The reasons for this apparent decline
remain speculative. A high-risk group approach to the use of hepatitis B
vaccine has been in place in Canada since 1982 (3) and prenatal screening,
at
first targeted at high-risk pregnant women and later at all pregnant women,
has
also been in place since 1982..........A downward trend for the incidence of
HBV in the early 1990s has also been reported in the United States and has
been
partly ascribed to declining transmission among injection drug users,
possibly
as a result of safer needle-using"


http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hpb/lcdc/publ.../dr2307eb.html

Jan Drew wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Jan Drew wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Jan Drew wrote:
Hep B #1 in the hospital (first day of life)
2 Months - Hep B, Hib, DTaP, IPV, PCV
4 months - Hib, DTaP, IPV, PCV
6 months - Hep B, Hib, DTaP, IPV, PCV
That's 5 types of shots, 15 actual shots, and 21 immunizations if you
count the D, T, and acellular P separately.
Wonderful. All that protection so early in life.
Anti-vac websites deleted.

Jan added nothing worth quoting.

Sad.. that Mark believes these children lives are worthless.

Wrong. You posted from anti-vac liar websites, which are, ipso facto,
not worth quoting.

Wonder why he hates children so much?

INCORRECT!

Unlike the anti-vac liars, I love LIVE & HEALTHY children.

Jan Drew wrote:
"Mark Probert"

snip
Jan Drew wrote:
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...
Max C. wrote:
I've always been curious to know... could you explain to me why it is
felt necessary to give the HepB vaccine on the day of birth?
Because there is an extremely high risk of mother-to-child
transmission, child-to-child transmission, and children represent the
primary reservoir for HepB. Not to mention that HepB is far more
deadlier in infants then in older persons.

And if you look at the schedule you'll see that if a mothers HepB
status is known to be negative then vaccination can be delayed,
although this delay is strongly recommended against:

http://www.keepkidshealthy.com/welco..._schedule.html


Why the
rush? Shouldn't parents be given a chance to get to know their
babies'
personalities before giving such a questionable shot? Sure you've
provided evidence that there are no causes for concern, but then
others
like Jan have given evidence that there *IS* cause for concern. To
me,
a study showing no cause for concern does not negate one showing
cause
for concern unless it specifically and fully addresses the reasons
that
are of concern.
It's a matter of risk management. Nothing we do, including being
born, is without risk. And like everything else in life, vaccination
does carry risks. But the risks far outweigh the risk of not being
vaccination. In the case of HepB it is particularly damaging to
children - whereas 1-2% of adults infected with HepB develop chronic
and deadly disease, 30-50% of infected infants will develop chronic
and deadly disease.

We put our kids into child seats in the car, put sunscreen onto them
to protect them from UV, make them wear helmets when they ride a bike,
all in the name of risk management. Vaccination is the same thing, a
way to protect our children. And like everything else we do to
protect our kids, it is not perfect, but it is better then doing
nothing at all.

Bryan

Ohh, looky what the AAPS has taken down from Canada, since 2003!

[Mark does not want it to be shown, too bad]

Ohh, looky what the AAPS has taken down from Canada, since 2003!

I still have it..because *I* posted it!

Yes, you are incurable.


The anti-vac AAPS which is fully explained he

http://tinyurl.com/pxsq9

Surely not a reputable organization.