Kong the 3 vaccines you meantion are old and I would expect them to be safe but it does not mean that it's safe to bundle vaccines together and giving so many sorry you wont convince me they are safe like that until the real questions are asked . Studying one old vaccine and then saying all is ok is bad science

Glenn,

Getting multiple vaccines at the same time has been shown to be safe.

Scientific data show that getting several vaccines at the same time does not cause any chronic health problems. A number of studies have been done to look at the effects of giving various combinations of vaccines, and when every new vaccine is licensed, it has been tested along with the vaccines already recommended for a particular aged child. The recommended vaccines have been shown to be as effective in combination as they are individually. Sometimes, certain combinations of vaccines given together can cause fever, and occasionally febrile seizures; these are temporary and do not cause any lasting damage. Based on this information, both the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and the American Academy of Pediatrics recommend getting all routine childhood vaccines on time.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/multiple-vaccines-immunity.html

By two years of age, healthy infants in the United States can receive up to 20 vaccinations to protect against 11 diseases. Although most people know that vaccines effectively protect against serious infectious diseases, many parents question: Can too many immunizations overwhelm an infant's immune system? Reasonable theories exist for how vaccines could cause these effects.

The Immunization Safety Review committee reviewed the evidence regarding the hypothesis that multiple immunizations increase the risk for immune dysfunction, with a focus on evidence related to risk for infections, the autoimmune disease type I diabetes, and allergic disorders.

The committee found that evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between multiple immunizations and increased risk for infections and for type I diabetes. They also found that epidemiological evidence regarding risk for allergic disease, particularly asthma, was inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship. The committee recommended continued attention in the form of policy analysis, research, and communication strategy development to inform those concerned about these issues and to encourage parents to vaccinate their children.

http://iom.nationalacademies.org/reports/2002/immunization-safety-review-multiple-immunizations-and-immune-dysfunction.aspx

They have had about 14 years to change their minds based on any new research on the subject (and yes, there has been quite a bit of it). They have not...

So, Glenn... It all boils down to exactly what you mean by 'be safe'...

Do you mean 'be totally without any risk whatsoever'? Sorry to disappoint you, but NOTHING in life is totally without risk, Medical Science included.

Or, do you mean 'being vaccinated is safer than not being vaccinated'. That is a true statement.

The science says it. Well respected organizations of Medical Professionals say it.

Sorry, but 'bad science' is from whoever is feeding you this anti-vax bulltripe.

Ok, case in point...

Influenza.

USA death rate for influenza is about 12 per 1,000,000 people every year.

Vaccination rate is about 50% (its a couple of percent higher, but lets assume 50% for ease of calculation).

Of those vaccinated, about half (somewhere between 50% and 60% usually) get total immunity, depending on the strains in the vaccine that year vs. the strains actually circulating. Again let us assume 50%, again, for ease of calculation.

Many of the rest of those vaccinated, again depending on the strains involved, get some form of partial immunity which will lessen the severity of the flu that they might wind up catching...

Not factoring in the loss of the herd immunity effect, that would mean an additional death toll without vaccination of... hmm...

50% of 50% of 12 is... 3. Plus another 1.5 for the 'partials'...

So then that would be a new death rate of about 16.5 out of every 1,000,000 people. Plus it would be much higher because more people would catch it and spread it due to the loss of the herd immunity effect... but let us just concentrate on what we have thus far... Flu vaccination saves *at least* an additional 4.5 people out of every 1,000,000 every year.

Now then, what about the vaccine. The odds of a serious (life threatening) adverse reaction such as anaphylaxis (severe allergic reaction) are about 1 in 1,000,000. But, with prompt medical attention many/most of these people can be saved. So, who the heck knows just how many people actually die of this upon getting a flu vaccine... But, whatever the value is, it MUST be less than 1 in 1,000,000.

So, the flu vaccine saves at least 3.5 people's lives out of 1,000,000. In reality, due to the herd immunity effect, it is likely that the true number is FAR higher...

The same analysis can (AND IS) be performed on each and EVERY vaccine out there.

Unsafe vaccines are either not approved or are taken off the market if the info comes out after approval. Happens rather frequently.

If you still insist on believing anti-VAX propaganda, in the face of a huge number of EXPERT's statements to the contrary, all I can say is that it is too bad that rectal-cranial inversion is not a vaccine-preventable condition.

Be well, and have a nice day.

Jan is it given as a one shot vaccine on it own or is it bundled with other vaccines ?

And thanks for the info as it clearly shows there has not been time for all the effects to show up yet . The study was from 1982-1996 and was measles that Bobby put . Not helpful as it looks like a cover up even if it's not .

Kong please don't be naïve when it comes to health care mate your a smart person so always question the motives of health professionals and organisations . Most are ok but trust me not all are good particulay the drug company's

ergo Johnson and Johnson and talcum powder and now they have to pay 100 mill to the victims . Breast implants blah blah blah .

---

Kong I had a flu shot 3 years ago ( I'm a asthmatic since 12 yrs old ) and haven't had the flu since so I'm not against vaccines or I would not have had it mate .

Someone has to play devils advocate here sometimes heheheheheehe.

---

Glenn,

Trust me, I am NOT naive about the medical profession. I have to fight them frequently.

But, that said, vaccination is NOT one of their sins. I do know something about the subject.

30-some odd years ago, I did some research in a few fields of medicine. The 2nd project (but not the last) involved vaccines. At the time, I was employed at a bacteriological research lab.

A friend of mine there and I put our heads together about vaccines. The main problem with them, we thought, was that some people couldn't get them due to severe allergy to their primary growth media, chicken eggs.

We thought about it for a while, then came up with a possible solution. We pitched our idea to the lab's Powers That Be, and were given permission (and a small grant) to run with it.

Our idea: using insect cell cultures as a growth media. Don't ask for details, the ICK-factor is rather large... But we did come up with a method for producing an effective vaccine against a rather common pathogen that did produce a suitable immune response in rats, before the money ran out.

Fast forward to today... earlier today, while researching vaccines for 'safety' for my previous response, I was intrigued to notice that a major vaccine producer is now using a variation (no doubt a vast improvement) on our old method for producing a vaccine for humans. Gave me a case of the warm fuzzies that that old research we did is now in some small way being used to help people. But, just like with sausage, you are likely better off not knowing how it is made.

And 3 years since your last flu shot? Dayum, Glenn... You are supposed to have those things yearly.

And 3 years since your last flu shot? Dayum, Glenn... You are supposed to have those things yearly

Just one of the lucky ones that don't need to . Every one around me sick ...me nada ...my ex get peed off she's sick for 4 days me 24 hrs , only had it for the ashma and my age .

---

And thanks for the info as it clearly shows there has not been time for all the effects to show up yet . The study was from 1982-1996 and was measles that Bobby put . Not helpful as it looks like a cover up even if it's not .

The 14 year review was of MMR vaccinations, that's measles, mumps and rubella - the three on one type of vaccination that you appear to be concerned about.

Your comment that "it looks like a cover up even if it's not" appears to be you saying, not matter what the evidence says, you'll dismiss it. If that's the case, there's little point carrying on the conversation.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Jan is it given as a one shot vaccine on it own or is it bundled with other vaccines ?

And thanks for the info as it clearly shows there has not been time for all the effects to show up yet . The study was from 1982-1996 and was measles that Bobby put . Not helpful as it looks like a cover up even if it's not .

There are some combo vaccines and sometimes you get several shots of single vaccines at the same visit.
Examples of combination vaccines are: DTap (diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis), trivalent IPV (three strains of inactivated polio vaccine), MMR (measles-mumps-rubella), DTap-Hib, and Hib-Hep B.

Getting multiple vaccines at the same time has been shown to be safe.
Scientific data show that getting several vaccines at the same time does not cause any chronic health problems. A number of studies have been done to look at the effects of giving various combinations of vaccines, and when every new vaccine is licensed, it has been tested along with the vaccines already recommended for a particular aged child. The recommended vaccines have been shown to be as effective in combination as they are individually. Sometimes, certain combinations of vaccines given together can cause fever, and occasionally febrile seizures; these are temporary and do not cause any lasting damage. Based on this information, both the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and the American Academy of Pediatrics recommend getting all routine childhood vaccines on time.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/multiple-vaccines-immunity.html

On the vaccinations theme, Colorado Bill Would Require Reporting Of Non-Vaccinated Children

When 'They' have a VaCCine for Old, Ugly, Poorly EduCated, No Money, Life, Abilities, Accomplishments, Personality, etc etc etc,

I'll offer up my Arm, butt. Maybe. Nah.

Till then, F**k Da Pharmas, Med Establishment.

However, before I was 19, I had Two WHO Yellow 'books' pretty well filled up wif lots O shots.

You know, going Overseas and Shat Like dat.

If school and job said Get Da Fookin' Shot or no Job no school...

Never had a Flu shot.

Once before goin' to MidEast, got a shot in my Ass, dat hurt fO three days. Felt like Honey goin' in.

Sweetness

Red Button Don fO Prez in '16

Yap

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

On the vaccinations theme, Colorado Bill Would Require Reporting Of Non-Vaccinated Children

They sort of do that here now . No vaccine then no part a tax breaks or something or they don't get family tax .

Unless you have a legit reason not to vaccinate then fear enough to many outbreaks .

Bobby I have said I'm not against vaccines . I actually think it's stupid not to .
I've also said that some vaccines are not necesary like hep a or b . How do you get Hepititus ?

kids don't need it sorry they don't , unless the parents work in the health industry . Hell most adults don't freaking need that one

Great cash cow fer the drug company's

as for bundling the vaccines if the mumps , measles , rubellia is safe then ok . but is it ok with Rotavirus .Remember there was a problem with this one .Bobby I don't know if there is a problem . I don't think people would be asking question if someone hadn't noticed a change in there child's behaviour after a shot and the increase of Autism (weather there actually is or not)

It's the policy of giving Kids or Adults vaccines just because they are there I'm against . Giving people unnecessary health treatments is wrong . And risks corruption on beharf of the Drug Company's Insurance corps and health system .

Sorry your system has form in this regard.

---

How do you get Hepititus ?

Hepatitis B is usually transmitted though bodily fluids, usually sex. The advise in UK universities is for all students to get protected.

Hepatitis C is only transmitted through blood to blood contact.

Hepatitis B is usually transmitted though bodily fluids, usually sex

Exactly yet it's the first vaccine given to kids that can't even talk pfh.....

As for students or Adults that's up to them ya stupid enough to do the things to expose your self to it then bad luck and you probably deserved it.

---

If you're vaccinated you should be safe why be so hostile when it comes to other people exercising their rights to abstain. This is one thing I could never get over.

I would love you to tell me I have the right to sue these companies if problems happen after MY children take your product and become damaged.

Yes companies are exempt from prosecution if problems occur.

Go push your socialistic idea else where

If you're vaccinated you should be safe why be so hostile when it comes to other people exercising their rights to abstain.

buddy a god reason to be hostile is that the unvaccinated are vectors of infection, a cost all society pays for. I say don't spread disease.

---

If you're vaccinated you should be safe why be so hostile when it comes to other people exercising their rights to abstain.

buddy a god reason to be hostile is that the unvaccinated are vectors of infection, a cost all society pays for. I say don't spread disease.

They can live in Kalaupapa unmolested.

---

However where your logic fails, where you and your family are protected presumably.

I could take your logic and apply to homelessness and people on welfare.

For according to you someone who refuses to work will incur expenses on the rest of the population.

You see when you remove personal responsibility by socializing decision through the state you create the problems you try to solve.

The problem is if someone is sick you apply medicine to solve it. You are trying to solve the problem that someone chooses to not take the medicine by scolding free choice.

We have laws in place to prevent transgression towards the citizen. If I had permission from the state to have you hand over your savings so I may spread it among the homeless and told you I would pay that back with future earnings of these new helped citizens.

Would you want some guarantee of that repayment? What if I said you can't come after me if it did not work b/c the state created a law that prevents that.

You see the problem here? Everyone has a choice and when you start taking that choice from others it has a tenancy of biting you back.

/dropMike/

Well said Bubby it's choice and Gov are taking the chice away and drug company's are pushing it

Hepatitis not needed

Tetanus is antibiotic haven't we learnt yet about antibiotics

human pamplona virus not needed till puberty and should be informed choice as Hepititis should be . You play with drugs (needles) or have sex with lots of people then ........

Rotavirus more studies

To many kids these days are becoming to sensitive to even things like peanut butter . Anaphylactic shock is deadly if you don't have a EPI Pen close by.

It's the immune system not being able to cope with normal irritants in the body . Are we swapping a perceived policy of safety that's making the next Gen ultra sensitive to everything

Kong you do not need Flu shots every year only if the Flu has mutated and that happens on average every 2-5 years or longer . more misinformation

---

I could take your logic and apply to homelessness and people on welfare.

buddy that is why we have a civil society. The primitive tribes that did not have a social network did not survive. The ones that did survive recognized that they were all in the same boat together.

---

I could take your logic and apply to homelessness and people on welfare.

buddy that is why we have a civil society. The primitive tribes that did not have a social network did not survive. The ones that did survive recognized that they were all in the same boat together.

I think you have that wrong. The tribes that survived, the slave owner(s) [feudal lord] made choices [social network] to preserve their capital generating resources (slaves).

---

However where your logic fails, where you and your family are protected presumably.

I could take your logic and apply to homelessness and people on welfare.

No, you couldn't. There is no basis in biology for herd-immunity to homelessness. The rest of your post is rendered moot because the foundation is false.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...