We don’t know how many people are injured by vaccines

“The potential of a vaccine injury is a legitimate concern that people have when faced with vaccination. Databases of vaccine adverse effects (such as VAERS in the U.S. and similar databases in other countries) are replete with reports of complications that come in close temporal proximity to vaccine administration. These adverse effects range from numerous but seemingly small effects, such as inflammation at the side of injection or fever, to more rare but also more adverse or irreversible conditions, such as allergic reactions or Guillain-Barré syndrome to mention a few, to perhaps even more rare fatal cases.

How do public health officials approach the concerns of citizens about vaccine safety in general? They point to scientific publications that claim to have found no statistical associations between a certain vaccine and a suspected injury, despite case reports that have initially instigated such studies.

A typical statistical study that aims to look for an association between a certain vaccine and a certain adverse effect might answer the following question: can we find the association by looking at a limited and randomly selected pool of people from the general population? The answer quite predictably comes out as: no statistically significant association has been found that way. However, this is the right answer to the wrong question.

The question that should be sought instead: is the association likely to be found in a group of people who are similar (genetically, nutritionally, metabolically, immunologically, etc.) to the person who had suffered from an adverse effect?

Such studies are very expensive to execute, they are unlikely to be funded by governments / funding sources with biased vaccination agendas, despite the fortunes accumulated by vaccine sales. Therefore, such studies are simply not being performed.

The consequences are that important moderators (i.e. predisposing factors) to vaccine injuries are not being uncovered in time, a vulnerable segment of the population continues to be unnecessarily injured by vaccines, while references to the “lack of evidence” studies are being misused to silence the dissenters.

With our current state of research on vaccine injures, I will repeat this over and over again: lack of evidence does not constitute the evidence of lack.

So the Establishment claims that the chance to develop a certain syndrome after a certain vaccine is one in a million, based on the frequency of previously reported cases.

If you understand the statistics, they say, then you understand that you have higher chances to get injured in a car accident, or get struck by lightning, or win a lottery, etc.

What they don’t tell you is that, if you understand the biology as opposed to mere statistics, then you understand that depending on particular predisposing factors which you might or might not have (and which you are not even made aware of due to the lack of research that would uncover such factors), your chances of getting a certain vaccine injury would be either close to nil or close to 100 percent.

As of now, we are totally in the dark regarding who will and who won’t suffer a severe vaccine injury and from which vaccine. No guarantees can be made. Basically, vaccinate yourself at your own risk.”

— Dr. Tetyana Obukhanych, immunologist

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s