What is in those Vaccinations?????

Jan Drew wrote:
"Rich" wrote in message
...
"Jan Drew" wrote in message
. com...
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...
Mark Probert wrote:
Why did you snip?

Following your lead?

LOL. Pot meet kettle, and all that. Does anyone else see the irony in
these accusations - Jan questioning my credentials, presumably because
she can't argue the science...

Bryan
Say what...

Graduate Trainee
Say what, non-graduate?

I see a question mark..by yours

You didn't see one by mine.

Next?

IOW, your comment to Bryan was meant to belittle? To demean the fact
that he has published research papers?

What is YOUR training?

Jan Drew wrote:
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...
Mark Probert wrote:
Bryan Heit wrote:

Because to develop anaphyaxis you first need to be exposed to the
antigen which induces the response (i.e. animal gelatin). Since infants
cannot be exposed to this until after birth, and are vaccinated soon
after birth, they do not have an opportunity to develop an Anaphylaxis
response. given the time it takes for the immune system to set up for
such a response, the childhood vaccines can be safely given early on
without this being a concern. That is one of the underlying reasons why
so many vaccines are given in the first few weeks of life.

Let me see if I have this correct...

Parents who delay vaccines to "protect" their child are actually placing
them at greater risk for a more serious reaction.

Correct?

Yes, no and maybe. Now it that's not a clear answer, then I don't know
what is...

The timing of vaccination schedules are designed to give the child the
vaccination at the earliest time point in which their immune system is
capable of developing a proper immune response. Obviously, giving
vaccinations before this point would be meaningless as you wouldn't get a
proper immune response. The side advantage of this schedual is that you
are also giving the child the vaccinations just as their immune system
develops the potential to create anaphylaxis responses (the response which
leads to anaphylaxis is very similar to that leading to immunity).

As such, giving you child their first shots at the correct time
essentially eliminates the risk of anaphylaxis, as prior to that point
their immune system was not able to create that type of response. And
because anaphylaxis requires prior exposure AND immune response, the young
child risk of anaphylaxis is essentially zero. That said, giving the
vaccines later does not necessarily mean that the child has an increased
risk of anaphylaxis.

The reason for this is that in order to undergo an anaphylactic response
your immune system has to have seen the anaphylactic compound before,
learned to identify it, and also gone onto creating an inappropriate
immune response to that compound. So unless your child has been exposed
to the anaphylactic compound before the first shots (but after their
immune system develops anaphylactic capabilities), there is still little
risk of anaphylaxis.

Long story short, from a purely theoretical point of view there is an
increased risk of anaphylaxis by giving shots later, but in the real world
the events required for this to happen are extremely rare.

Probably the last thing I should point out is that anaphylactic responses
can occur after vaccination. Generally speaking, this occurs in people of
teenage age and older. But most importantly, these are extremely rare
events, are usually easily treated, and the morbidity/mortality associated
with these are only a tiny percentage of the morbidity/mortality
associated with not being vaccinated.

Bryan

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


Database of Vaccine Injury: The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System
(VAERS)


The U.S. government has paid more than $1 billion to compensate victims of
vaccination injuries and continues to compile a database of all reported
"adverse events'' from vaccine administration. This database, available on
the
Internet , was instrumental in helping health officials detect bowel
obstruction problems that led to the recent withdrawal of the rotavirus
vaccine.
While the overwhelming majority of vaccinations are safe and without
incident,
about 1700 of the 11,000 "vaccine adverse events" reported annually are
serious, and result in problems that include hospitalizations, death or
disability.


For the more seriously harmed or fatally injured victims - many of them
children - the government has established a Vaccine Injury Compensation
Program
(VICP). The VICP has awarded more than $1 billion in compensation since it
began in 1988.


Called the VAERS Searchable Database, for Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting
System, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System website is a cooperative
program for vaccine safety of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). VAERS is a post-marketing
safety surveillance program, collecting information about adverse events
(possible side effects) that occur after the administration of US licensed
vaccines.


The Web site provides a nationwide mechanism by which adverse events
following
immunization (AEFI) may be reported, analyzed and made available to the
public.
The VAERS Web site also provides a vehicle for disseminating vaccine
safety-related information to parents/guardians, healthcare providers,
vaccine
manufacturers, state vaccine programs, and other constituencies.


Parents and others interested in the kind of reactions occurring after
vaccinations can search all cases for the past several years.


"We're very glad that people have the opportunity to look at the database
for
themselves,'' said Susan S. Ellenberg, Ph.D., who helps monitor VAERS.
"Because
the truth is, the more people are looking at VAERS, the more likely they are
to
find some kind of a signal that should be pursued."


The stated purpose of VAERS is to detect possible signals of adverse events
associated with vaccines. Additional scientific investigations are almost
always required to properly validate signals from VAERS and establish a
cause
and effect relationship between a vaccine and an adverse event.


Potential concerns raised by VAERS are investigated through a CDC project
called the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). VSD is a large-linked database and
includes information on more than six million people, allowing for planned
vaccine safety studies as well as timely investigations of hypotheses.


The site for securely submitting vaccine adverse event data via the Internet
is: https://secure.vaers.org/VaersDataEntryintro.htm. Information
identifying
the person who received the vaccine will not be made available to the public
and information supplied in this on-line form will be securely transmitted
to
VAERS. For additional information, please call VAERS toll-free at
1-800-822-7967 or e-mail .

As pointed out by Dr. James Laidler, the VAERS database will take just
about any outrageous report.

"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Jan Drew wrote:
"Rich" wrote in message
...
"Jan Drew" wrote in message
. com...
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...
Mark Probert wrote:
Why did you snip?

Following your lead?

LOL. Pot meet kettle, and all that. Does anyone else see the irony
in these accusations - Jan questioning my credentials, presumably
because she can't argue the science...

Bryan
Say what...

Graduate Trainee
Say what, non-graduate?

I see a question mark..by yours

You didn't see one by mine.

Next?

IOW,

I don't need IOW.

I am very well capable of using my own words.

your comment to Bryan was meant to belittle?

Not at all.

To demean the fact
that he has published research papers?

Not at all..and has already been address.

Try to follow.

What is YOUR training?

NOYB.

Give it up, Mark.

I made NO claim.

"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Jan Drew wrote:
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...
Mark Probert wrote:
Why did you snip?

Following your lead?

LOL. Pot meet kettle, and all that. Does anyone else see the irony in
these accusations - Jan questioning my credentials, presumably because
she can't argue the science...

Bryan

Say what...

Graduate Trainee

Yes, a graduate trainee in a science based program where he has already
published peer reviewed scientific papers and presented to notable
organizations.

Your training in science consisted of what? Please list:

1.

"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Jan Drew wrote:
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...
Mark Probert wrote:
Bryan Heit wrote:

Because to develop anaphyaxis you first need to be exposed to the
antigen which induces the response (i.e. animal gelatin). Since
infants cannot be exposed to this until after birth, and are
vaccinated soon after birth, they do not have an opportunity to
develop an Anaphylaxis response. given the time it takes for the
immune system to set up for such a response, the childhood vaccines
can be safely given early on without this being a concern. That is
one of the underlying reasons why so many vaccines are given in the
first few weeks of life.

Let me see if I have this correct...

Parents who delay vaccines to "protect" their child are actually
placing them at greater risk for a more serious reaction.

Correct?

Yes, no and maybe. Now it that's not a clear answer, then I don't know
what is...

The timing of vaccination schedules are designed to give the child the
vaccination at the earliest time point in which their immune system is
capable of developing a proper immune response. Obviously, giving
vaccinations before this point would be meaningless as you wouldn't get
a proper immune response. The side advantage of this schedual is that
you are also giving the child the vaccinations just as their immune
system develops the potential to create anaphylaxis responses (the
response which leads to anaphylaxis is very similar to that leading to
immunity).

As such, giving you child their first shots at the correct time
essentially eliminates the risk of anaphylaxis, as prior to that point
their immune system was not able to create that type of response. And
because anaphylaxis requires prior exposure AND immune response, the
young child risk of anaphylaxis is essentially zero. That said, giving
the vaccines later does not necessarily mean that the child has an
increased risk of anaphylaxis.

The reason for this is that in order to undergo an anaphylactic response
your immune system has to have seen the anaphylactic compound before,
learned to identify it, and also gone onto creating an inappropriate
immune response to that compound. So unless your child has been exposed
to the anaphylactic compound before the first shots (but after their
immune system develops anaphylactic capabilities), there is still little
risk of anaphylaxis.

Long story short, from a purely theoretical point of view there is an
increased risk of anaphylaxis by giving shots later, but in the real
world the events required for this to happen are extremely rare.

Probably the last thing I should point out is that anaphylactic
responses can occur after vaccination. Generally speaking, this occurs
in people of teenage age and older. But most importantly, these are
extremely rare events, are usually easily treated, and the
morbidity/mortality associated with these are only a tiny percentage of
the morbidity/mortality associated with not being vaccinated.

Bryan

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


Database of Vaccine Injury: The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System
(VAERS)


The U.S. government has paid more than $1 billion to compensate victims
of
vaccination injuries and continues to compile a database of all reported
"adverse events'' from vaccine administration. This database, available
on the
Internet , was instrumental in helping health officials detect bowel
obstruction problems that led to the recent withdrawal of the rotavirus
vaccine.
While the overwhelming majority of vaccinations are safe and without
incident,
about 1700 of the 11,000 "vaccine adverse events" reported annually are
serious, and result in problems that include hospitalizations, death or
disability.


For the more seriously harmed or fatally injured victims - many of them
children - the government has established a Vaccine Injury Compensation
Program
(VICP). The VICP has awarded more than $1 billion in compensation since
it
began in 1988.


Called the VAERS Searchable Database, for Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting
System, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System website is a
cooperative
program for vaccine safety of the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention
(CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). VAERS is a
post-marketing
safety surveillance program, collecting information about adverse events
(possible side effects) that occur after the administration of US
licensed
vaccines.


The Web site provides a nationwide mechanism by which adverse events
following
immunization (AEFI) may be reported, analyzed and made available to the
public.
The VAERS Web site also provides a vehicle for disseminating vaccine
safety-related information to parents/guardians, healthcare providers,
vaccine
manufacturers, state vaccine programs, and other constituencies.


Parents and others interested in the kind of reactions occurring after
vaccinations can search all cases for the past several years.


"We're very glad that people have the opportunity to look at the database
for
themselves,'' said Susan S. Ellenberg, Ph.D., who helps monitor VAERS.
"Because
the truth is, the more people are looking at VAERS, the more likely they
are to
find some kind of a signal that should be pursued."


The stated purpose of VAERS is to detect possible signals of adverse
events
associated with vaccines. Additional scientific investigations are almost
always required to properly validate signals from VAERS and establish a
cause
and effect relationship between a vaccine and an adverse event.


Potential concerns raised by VAERS are investigated through a CDC project
called the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). VSD is a large-linked database
and
includes information on more than six million people, allowing for
planned
vaccine safety studies as well as timely investigations of hypotheses.


The site for securely submitting vaccine adverse event data via the
Internet
is: https://secure.vaers.org/VaersDataEntryintro.htm. Information
identifying
the person who received the vaccine will not be made available to the
public
and information supplied in this on-line form will be securely
transmitted to
VAERS. For additional information, please call VAERS toll-free at
1-800-822-7967 or e-mail .

As pointed out by Dr. James Laidler, the VAERS database will take just
about any outrageous report.

Don't let these FACTS..get in your way, Mark.

The U.S. government has paid more than $1 billion to compensate victims of
vaccination injuries and continues to compile a database of all reported
"adverse events'' from vaccine administration. This database, available on
the
Internet , was instrumental in helping health officials detect bowel
obstruction problems that led to the recent withdrawal of the rotavirus
vaccine.
While the overwhelming majority of vaccinations are safe and without
incident,
about 1700 of the 11,000 "vaccine adverse events" reported annually are
serious, and result in problems that include hospitalizations, death or
disability.

"cathyb" wrote in message
oups.com...

Jan Drew wrote:
"JohnDoe" wrote in message
. ..
vernon wrote:
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...

Jan Drew wrote:

Do prove you are a scientist.. please.

This may appear 2x - my news reader is acting up...

My scientistness is a matter of public record. My written
publications
can be found through any academic search engine, such as the
pubmed.gov
search engine I keep providing you links to. Other engines which
would
have this info include google scholar, biological abstracts, cisti,
medline, and many more. From pubmed:




As a former member of NIH,

Member of NIH? Was that where you had the job of 'dominant scientist'?

Oh...JohhDopey...wants to know all about vernon...but NOT Bryan...

Of course. We know Brian is a scientist.

lol....



All we know of Vernon is that
his posts indicate a dearth of education in either English or the
sciences, and that Walter Mitty is well grounded individual in
comparison.




I still like to know if that involved wearing leather outfits or not.

lol...

It was funny.


Do tell us your last name.

Looking for someone else to harrass offline, Jan?

Been listening to lies, aka/ cathyb?

snip more crap

Oh but it was *funny*

And I would have thought

Really?

Since when?

"JohnDoe" wrote in message
. ..
Jan Drew wrote:

"JohnDoe" wrote in message
. ..

vernon wrote:

"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...


Jan Drew wrote:


Do prove you are a scientist.. please.

This may appear 2x - my news reader is acting up...

My scientistness is a matter of public record. My written publications
can be found through any academic search engine, such as the pubmed.gov
search engine I keep providing you links to. Other engines which would
have this info include google scholar, biological abstracts, cisti,
medline, and many more. From pubmed:




As a former member of NIH,

Member of NIH? Was that where you had the job of 'dominant scientist'?


Oh...JohhDopey...wants to know all about vernon...but NOT Bryan...

But I know all about a Bryan. Bryan May that is. I've been a fan since the
beginning.

Ohhhh, JohnDopey..you are even a bigger dope than I thought.



I still like to know if that involved wearing leather outfits or not.

lol...

Do tell us your last name.


And I would have thought


Really?

Since when?



I can state that there are a wide variety of opinions. Some of them
almost accurate.
It is primarily an organization for the promotion of ideas, all with
money behind them. In ten years I never saw any inclination of
"research".

Maybe that was because you were to focused on the floors you were
mopping.


Also any site with .gov is VERY subject to error.

On the other hand I am not weighing in on the vaccination discussion
other than reiterating that it (vaccinations) is almost void of
realistic research.

A recent flat out farce is the authorization of shingles vaccine. The
research would make a high school science major blush.

"Jan Drew" wrote:


"JohnDoe" wrote in message
...
Jan Drew wrote:

"JohnDoe" wrote in message
. ..

vernon wrote:

"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...


Jan Drew wrote:


Do prove you are a scientist.. please.

This may appear 2x - my news reader is acting up...

My scientistness is a matter of public record. My written publications
can be found through any academic search engine, such as the pubmed.gov
search engine I keep providing you links to. Other engines which would
have this info include google scholar, biological abstracts, cisti,
medline, and many more. From pubmed:




As a former member of NIH,

Member of NIH? Was that where you had the job of 'dominant scientist'?


Oh...JohhDopey...wants to know all about vernon...but NOT Bryan...

But I know all about a Bryan. Bryan May that is. I've been a fan since the
beginning.

Ohhhh, JohnDopey..you are even a bigger dope than I thought.

If JD was talking about the legendary Brian May I am not surprised
that Jan thinks that he is a dope. We all know that Jan disapproves of
homosexuality, and Brian used to hang around with homosexuals who were
so out of the closet that they called themselves Queen with a capital
"Q". Beelzebub has a devil put aside for him.

Of course, there is always the possibility that Jan missed yet another
reference to popular culture.
--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

Jan Drew wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Jan Drew wrote:
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...
Mark Probert wrote:
Bryan Heit wrote:

Because to develop anaphyaxis you first need to be exposed to the
antigen which induces the response (i.e. animal gelatin). Since
infants cannot be exposed to this until after birth, and are
vaccinated soon after birth, they do not have an opportunity to
develop an Anaphylaxis response. given the time it takes for the
immune system to set up for such a response, the childhood vaccines
can be safely given early on without this being a concern. That is
one of the underlying reasons why so many vaccines are given in the
first few weeks of life.
Let me see if I have this correct...

Parents who delay vaccines to "protect" their child are actually
placing them at greater risk for a more serious reaction.

Correct?
Yes, no and maybe. Now it that's not a clear answer, then I don't know
what is...

The timing of vaccination schedules are designed to give the child the
vaccination at the earliest time point in which their immune system is
capable of developing a proper immune response. Obviously, giving
vaccinations before this point would be meaningless as you wouldn't get
a proper immune response. The side advantage of this schedual is that
you are also giving the child the vaccinations just as their immune
system develops the potential to create anaphylaxis responses (the
response which leads to anaphylaxis is very similar to that leading to
immunity).

As such, giving you child their first shots at the correct time
essentially eliminates the risk of anaphylaxis, as prior to that point
their immune system was not able to create that type of response. And
because anaphylaxis requires prior exposure AND immune response, the
young child risk of anaphylaxis is essentially zero. That said, giving
the vaccines later does not necessarily mean that the child has an
increased risk of anaphylaxis.

The reason for this is that in order to undergo an anaphylactic response
your immune system has to have seen the anaphylactic compound before,
learned to identify it, and also gone onto creating an inappropriate
immune response to that compound. So unless your child has been exposed
to the anaphylactic compound before the first shots (but after their
immune system develops anaphylactic capabilities), there is still little
risk of anaphylaxis.

Long story short, from a purely theoretical point of view there is an
increased risk of anaphylaxis by giving shots later, but in the real
world the events required for this to happen are extremely rare.

Probably the last thing I should point out is that anaphylactic
responses can occur after vaccination. Generally speaking, this occurs
in people of teenage age and older. But most importantly, these are
extremely rare events, are usually easily treated, and the
morbidity/mortality associated with these are only a tiny percentage of
the morbidity/mortality associated with not being vaccinated.

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


Database of Vaccine Injury: The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System
(VAERS)


The U.S. government has paid more than $1 billion to compensate victims
of
vaccination injuries and continues to compile a database of all reported
"adverse events'' from vaccine administration. This database, available
on the
Internet , was instrumental in helping health officials detect bowel
obstruction problems that led to the recent withdrawal of the rotavirus
vaccine.
While the overwhelming majority of vaccinations are safe and without
incident,
about 1700 of the 11,000 "vaccine adverse events" reported annually are
serious, and result in problems that include hospitalizations, death or
disability.


For the more seriously harmed or fatally injured victims - many of them
children - the government has established a Vaccine Injury Compensation
Program
(VICP). The VICP has awarded more than $1 billion in compensation since
it
began in 1988.


Called the VAERS Searchable Database, for Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting
System, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System website is a
cooperative
program for vaccine safety of the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention
(CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). VAERS is a
post-marketing
safety surveillance program, collecting information about adverse events
(possible side effects) that occur after the administration of US
licensed
vaccines.


The Web site provides a nationwide mechanism by which adverse events
following
immunization (AEFI) may be reported, analyzed and made available to the
public.
The VAERS Web site also provides a vehicle for disseminating vaccine
safety-related information to parents/guardians, healthcare providers,
vaccine
manufacturers, state vaccine programs, and other constituencies.


Parents and others interested in the kind of reactions occurring after
vaccinations can search all cases for the past several years.


"We're very glad that people have the opportunity to look at the database
for
themselves,'' said Susan S. Ellenberg, Ph.D., who helps monitor VAERS.
"Because
the truth is, the more people are looking at VAERS, the more likely they
are to
find some kind of a signal that should be pursued."


The stated purpose of VAERS is to detect possible signals of adverse
events
associated with vaccines. Additional scientific investigations are almost
always required to properly validate signals from VAERS and establish a
cause
and effect relationship between a vaccine and an adverse event.


Potential concerns raised by VAERS are investigated through a CDC project
called the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). VSD is a large-linked database
and
includes information on more than six million people, allowing for
planned
vaccine safety studies as well as timely investigations of hypotheses.


The site for securely submitting vaccine adverse event data via the
Internet
is: https://secure.vaers.org/VaersDataEntryintro.htm. Information
identifying
the person who received the vaccine will not be made available to the
public
and information supplied in this on-line form will be securely
transmitted to
VAERS. For additional information, please call VAERS toll-free at
1-800-822-7967 or e-mail .
As pointed out by Dr. James Laidler, the VAERS database will take just
about any outrageous report.

Don't let these FACTS..get in your way, Mark.

The U.S. government has paid more than $1 billion to compensate victims of
vaccination injuries and continues to compile a database of all reported
"adverse events'' from vaccine administration. This database, available on
the
Internet , was instrumental in helping health officials detect bowel
obstruction problems that led to the recent withdrawal of the rotavirus
vaccine.
While the overwhelming majority of vaccinations are safe and without
incident,
about 1700 of the 11,000 "vaccine adverse events" reported annually are
serious, and result in problems that include hospitalizations, death or
disability.

Jan, you snipped my comment because you cannot handle the truth.


As pointed out by Dr. James Laidler, the VAERS database will take just
about any outrageous report.

VAERS database has been stacked by reports filed by people seeking money
in litigation. Hardly not self serving.

Jan Drew wrote:
"cathyb" wrote in message
oups.com...
Jan Drew wrote:
"JohnDoe" wrote in message
. ..
vernon wrote:
"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...

Jan Drew wrote:

Do prove you are a scientist.. please.
This may appear 2x - my news reader is acting up...

My scientistness is a matter of public record. My written
publications
can be found through any academic search engine, such as the
pubmed.gov
search engine I keep providing you links to. Other engines which
would
have this info include google scholar, biological abstracts, cisti,
medline, and many more. From pubmed:



As a former member of NIH,
Member of NIH? Was that where you had the job of 'dominant scientist'?
Oh...JohhDopey...wants to know all about vernon...but NOT Bryan...
Of course. We know Brian is a scientist.

lol....



All we know of Vernon is that
his posts indicate a dearth of education in either English or the
sciences, and that Walter Mitty is well grounded individual in
comparison.



I still like to know if that involved wearing leather outfits or not.

lol...
It was funny.

Do tell us your last name.
Looking for someone else to harrass offline, Jan?

Been listening to lies, aka/ cathyb?

Jan, do tell everyone about your contacting someone not on Usenet about
Mark Lowry...

Do not forget to answer....

Yes, Jan "H*A*M*A*S" Drew, you do

*H*arass
*A*buse
*M*align
*A*nnoy
*S*talk

people off line.


snip more crap

Oh but it was *funny*

And I would have thought

Really?

Since when?