• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Vaccine Underreporting

Bodi

Just waiting for my set...
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
122,701
Reaction score
27,443
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
One aspect that people refuse to acknowledge about the potential harm of vaccines is the massive under-reporting of serious adverse reactions.

In total, 37 studies using a wide variety of surveillance methods were identified from 12 countries. These generated 43 numerical estimates of under-reporting. The median under-reporting rate across the 37 studies was 94%. (L.Hazell & S.A Shakir.)

The under reporting of Vaccine side effects - Vaccine Side Effects

The issue is that doctors do not report adverse reactions or conclude that adverse reactions that they are legally supposed to report have nothing to do with the vaccine. That is not their job. Their job is to administer the vaccine and to report any adverse reactions so that the CDC is aware and so that the CDC can come to a conclusion if the adverse reaction is related to the vaccine or not.

Even VAERS admits that this is a problem

"Underreporting" is one of the main limitations of passive surveillance systems, including VAERS

https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/index
 
Vaccines are safe and effective.

7005_5.jpg
 
One aspect that people refuse to acknowledge about the potential harm of vaccines is the massive under-reporting of serious adverse reactions.



Even your ridiculous junk anti-vacc article is forced to admit that it's still at worst 1 in 4000 that were effected. That's nothing, and it's much more likely that the issues are completely unrelated. ****, if you let 4000 people drink a glass of orange juice in a day the odds are good that at least one of them will get in a car accident that day. Should we start claiming there is a link between those two events?

**** I'd wager that for ever 4,000 people that go to a hospital for any reason whatsoever there's at least 1 that gets some kind of virus transmitted to them while they're sitting in the waiting room.

These types of issues are fairly easily explained by things that really have little or nothing to do with the actual vaccine. The doctors don't report them because they don't think the symptoms have anything to do with the vaccine, and they're probably right the vast majority of the time. If the doctors are right 80% of the time your 1 in 4000 jumps to like 1 in 16,000.
 

No, it's not tragic, and your own article admits it's probably not true. 9 out of the 17 deaths were proven to be completely unrelated to the vaccine, and among the other 8 there isn't a shred of evidence to include the vaccine played any roll. Furthermore of those 8 deaths they're trying to blame two different vaccines. Unless I missed it I don't see anywhere in this article where they tell you how many children received the vaccine. I'm willing to bet that in a country the size of china the numbers are close to a million.

If close to a million children under the age of 5 took part in virtually any activity you can name, odds are good that at least 17 of them would die while they were doing it.
 
Even your ridiculous junk anti-vacc article is forced to admit that it's still at worst 1 in 4000 that were effected. That's nothing, and it's much more likely that the issues are completely unrelated. ****, if you let 4000 people drink a glass of orange juice in a day the odds are good that at least one of them will get in a car accident that day. Should we start claiming there is a link between those two events?

**** I'd wager that for ever 4,000 people that go to a hospital for any reason whatsoever there's at least 1 that gets some kind of virus transmitted to them while they're sitting in the waiting room.

These types of issues are fairly easily explained by things that really have little or nothing to do with the actual vaccine. The doctors don't report them because they don't think the symptoms have anything to do with the vaccine, and they're probably right the vast majority of the time. If the doctors are right 80% of the time your 1 in 4000 jumps to like 1 in 16,000.

If adverse reactions are not being reported, as much as 90%, then the data being reported about the effects of vaccines is flawed. Just a fact.

When your kid faces a severe adverse reaction then you can say it is not tragic. Until then you can stay quite. Cool? Cool.
 
If adverse reactions are not being reported, as much as 90%, then the data being reported about the effects of vaccines is flawed. Just a fact.

When your kid faces a severe adverse reaction then you can say it is not tragic. Until then you can stay quite. Cool? Cool.

Injecting a 6 to 10 pound newborn with known neurotoxins is 100% safe! What's wrong with you? Do you hate science bro?!

theylive17.jpg
 
What quantity of which neurotoxins?

Are you admitting there are in fact neurotoxins in vaccines? Or are you still holding fast to the idea that they are completely safe?

If someone told me there are neurotoxins in a shot they wanted to give me, but only trace amounts, I'd still say no to receiving it. If I'd say no for myself, then I'd say no for a 6 to 10 pound infant.
 
Are you admitting there are in fact neurotoxins in vaccines? Or are you still holding fast to the idea that they are completely safe?

If someone told me there are neurotoxins in a shot they wanted to give me, but only trace amounts, I'd still say no to receiving it. If I'd say no for myself, then I'd say no for a 6 to 10 pound infant.

I find it interesting that you didn't answer the question.

I didn't "admit" anything. I asked a question. One you seem unable to answer. I wonder why that is.
 
Are you admitting there are in fact neurotoxins in vaccines? Or are you still holding fast to the idea that they are completely safe?

If someone told me there are neurotoxins in a shot they wanted to give me, but only trace amounts, I'd still say no to receiving it. If I'd say no for myself, then I'd say no for a 6 to 10 pound infant.

That's because you obviously have little understanding of the science.

Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO) is a neurotoxin that is added to many foods in processing. Are you dedicated to avoiding any ingestion at all?

The key concept here is that the dose makes the poison.

No one says vaccines are 'completely' safe, but they generally have very low incidences of adverse events.
 
Are you admitting there are in fact neurotoxins in vaccines? Or are you still holding fast to the idea that they are completely safe?

I don't know if anything is "completely safe". But aggregate safe, and beneficial to society and the health of our population at whole? Yes, of course.

Even with "underreporting", what effects are being underreported? Autism? Or sore arms? Or mild fevers?

There are certainly reactions to vaccines, there are people who cannot be vaccinated for one reason or another. More the reason that those who can be vaccinated should. There are millions of vaccines per year, and even if there is underreporting, there are enough numbers to see trend lines emerge. We should do a better job collecting the data for sure, but it doesn't mean that there is zero data or we have no idea. With the vast number of people in the yearly vaccination pool, even underreporting cannot suppress trends.
 
That's because you obviously have little understanding of the science.

Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO) is a neurotoxin that is added to many foods in processing. Are you dedicated to avoiding any ingestion at all?

The key concept here is that the dose makes the poison.

No one says vaccines are 'completely' safe, but they generally have very low incidences of adverse events.

LOL!

The simply fact that you're equating injections to ingestion is laughable. If injected, 100% of the chemical hits your bloodstream. If ingested, your liver does the work of addressing the toxin.
 
Unfortunately you're wasting your time. Unless someone has had a child suffer vaccine injury that wasn't taken seriously by their doctor, they aren't going to believe you. People are brainwashed.
 
I don't know if anything is "completely safe". But aggregate safe, and beneficial to society and the health of our population at whole? Yes, of course.

Even with "underreporting", what effects are being underreported? Autism? Or sore arms? Or mild fevers?

There are certainly reactions to vaccines, there are people who cannot be vaccinated for one reason or another. More the reason that those who can be vaccinated should. There are millions of vaccines per year, and even if there is underreporting, there are enough numbers to see trend lines emerge. We should do a better job collecting the data for sure, but it doesn't mean that there is zero data or we have no idea. With the vast number of people in the yearly vaccination pool, even underreporting cannot suppress trends.

Good, we agree. Vaccines are not 100% safe and should be taking with some measure of caution.
 
Good, we agree. Vaccines are not 100% safe and should be taking with some measure of caution.

So should ibuprofen. If one can be immunized, one should be. I think it's rather stupid not to be, barring severe allergic reactions.
 
LOL!

The simply fact that you're equating injections to ingestion is laughable. If injected, 100% of the chemical hits your bloodstream. If ingested, your liver does the work of addressing the toxin.

Yes- injected dihydrogen monoxide is very dangerous.

Yet it's found in every single vaccine!!!!
 
LOL!

The simply fact that you're equating injections to ingestion is laughable. If injected, 100% of the chemical hits your bloodstream. If ingested, your liver does the work of addressing the toxin.

Good, we agree. Vaccines are not 100% safe and should be taking with some measure of caution.

Eating food is not 100% safe. Walking down the street is not 100% safe. Taking a shower is not 100% safe. "Some measure of caution" is a meaningless phrase because it applies to literally anything that any human being does ever.

You've yet to identify the type and quantity of the neurotoxin. There's a good reason you're avoiding this question. Funny that people talk about brainwashing...
 
Last edited:
Yes- injected dihydrogen monoxide is very dangerous.

Yet it's found in every single vaccine!!!!

Did you know in hospitals, patients are routinely injected with a combination of dihydrogen monoxide - a known dangerous substance to inject, combined with two other chemicals. One is known to react explosively with dihydrogen monoxide, and they combine it anyway! The other is a chemical used to sterilize surfaces.

And they just inject this stuff into people! Every day!

Saline is water combined with table salt, which is sodium chloride. Sodium reacts explosively with water. Chlorine is used to sterilize pools or other surfaces.
 
Hmm tell that to the parents of my cousin. Severely damaged, and ended up in court with a win for my uncle and aunt. Things do go very wrong with vaccines...

Sent from my SM-G920R4 using Tapatalk

Tell that to the literally billions of people who didn't die of smallpox.
 
Back
Top Bottom