72 babies died within 20 days of receiving GSK Infanrix hexa Vaccine

[andersonsophie89]

72 babies died within 20 days of receiving GSK Infanrix hexa Vaccine.
They reported that the deaths of these children were due to Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) and Sudden Unexpected Death Syndrome (SUDS) unrelated vaccination. WHAT??? What cant

Infanrix hexa combines vaccines against 6 diseases [namely Diptheria, Tetanus and Acelluar Pertusis (whooping cough), Hepatitis B, inactivated Poliomyelitis and Haemophilus influenza type B] in a single vaccine.

Why arent we informed of problems

england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/homelessness/emergency_accommodation_if_homeless/womens_refuges

It may make no sense to you...but the fact remains there is a schedule, a red book telling you to go, every time you go to see a HCP and are "out of synch" you are flagged...

I don't think there are big bold letters at the bottom of any of these communications saying......"before you commit to this undertaking we strongly recommend we undertake your own research"...and they sure as hell don't put the pitfalls on the same page as the "benefits"......

they expect a herd following of the vaccination schedule....probably why they call it herd immunity!

I vaccinated "blindly"! I accept that it's recommended by the government and the medical profession, and it makes sense to me - why risk my child getting those diseases?

I just vaccinated. And I'm still happy with my choice.

OP,

Have you given your children antibiotics or even paracetamol or ibuprofen before? Did you deeply research the side effects first? These are statistically far more dangerous than childhood immunisations.

Immunisations are some of the safest medicines on the planet. They are so safe that some GPs are not aware of the dangers, in the same way as they are probably not deeply frightened of driving to work in the morning (far more dangerous).

The reason I suspect that GPs are not rushing to talk about vanishingly rare side effects is that is the only thing people like you will listen to. You do not actually believe that your child could get a horrible disease and be very sick or even die. But, if you don't vaccinate, they could. There are pockets of the country where there are sufficient selfish anti vaxers that measles is making a return. And then you will be begging for every medicine (far more dangerous than the vaccine) that modern science can offer you.

I still think that MN should remove 'vaccinations' as a topic. The rubbish written about this is far more dangerous than other things that they seem to have policies on. Or at least, they should post a link to the real science and evidence in every one of these threads.

I vaccinated "blindly" too. But this was years after the MMR controversy so I had already read loads of stuff about the supposed link with autism. Is this another issue/vaccine altogether or just a continuation of the previous scare?

I have just signed something for my DD being vaccinated. It came with a chunky leaflet and lots of information about possible side effects. I had to SIGN that I agreed. It is too long since my children had baby vaccines but is there not a signature involved there too?

Vaccine debates get very nasty very quickly because as soon as you question someone's good faith on the subject - on either side - you're implicitly making some very nasty insinuations.

My own advice would be to go for a position that doesn't require assuming that those disagreeing with you are acting in bad faith.

Would you say the same about a 'seatbelt' or 'smoking' thread? After all there are some dangers of wearing a seatbelt and smoking is protective against some things.

The study does not follow all 24m babies who were vaccinated during the period in question. It does not mean that of those 24M babies, all but 13 / 69 / 72 of them are still alive. It just means that any adverse event was not linked to the vaccine. These are deaths where for the most part (not all) a physician believed there to be a link, these links are all rejected by the report.

A study concluding the I in 1,000,000 figure discussed in this thread, would have had to analyse all events in those patients lives and compared those to a non vaccinated population. In fact what comparisons that are made in this document are to populations that were vaccinated using a different vaccine.

The stories of deaths in the report are heartbreaking, especially the 2 month old girl who whose brother had died following a DTaP vaccine either 2 years earlier or at the age of 2, I can't quite remember.

The study is by a Dr Puliyel who seems to have form for this type of study and does not appear to be that reliable.He is basically daying that because there is no other cause it therefore must be the vaccine., but sids is by definition an unexplained death in a seemingly healthy baby under 1. He sounds like he is addind 1+1 and making 3, just as Viera Schreibner did.

The sad fact is that babies die for all sorts of reasons, some of which become apparent at autopsy, some don't and not all babies who die unexpectedly are autopsied anyway. The rate of sudden infant death without an apparent cause (aka SIDS) has continuously declined since the very early 1990ies and the introduction of the hexavalent vaccine (which isn't even used in the UK) has not broken that trend. Fewer babies die now than ever and fewer babies die for reasons than we know (so both infant mortality overall AND the rate of SIDS are going down).

Recording the number of deaths in temporal relation to vaccinations is part of post-marketing surveillance and just because GSK reports on two events that are in a certain temporal order doesn't mean event 1 caused event 2. But conspiracy theorists will theorise conspiracies based on anything. That is it.

I'm trying to figure out why puliyel has randomly taken the base SIDS rate as the number of deaths reported 10-20 days after vaccination with infanrix and compared it to the number who died 0-10 days after being vaccinated. I can't see any rationale for doing that, it's akin to plucking it out of thin air. He might as well have argued that given the sudden decrease in SIDS after day 10 was attributable to the vaccine and infanrix prevents SIDS.

I suspect his his oversight was slightly simpler than that though, but unfortunately big enough to make his entire paper total bollocks.

fluffling - I am so happy to hear that you have prior warning of risks in your doctors ward for you to read and the medical staff there have the time to ensure your fully aware of the potential adverse reactions which could happen. Unfortunately, at my doctors surgery we just have posters of "have you got your flu shot" Please can you let me know which doctor you are at, so that I can make a complaint and use the surgery you go to as an example of good practice.

To reply to your comment "you and the tin foil hat brigade sites seem to think there's some massive secret and a big percentage of babies die from the vaccines". I never said that. That is what you think all people who questions vaccine must think. I only said there are plenty of reports everyday of cases and reports of vaccines aren't as safe as we are told. My doctor hasn't told me about vaccine safety, and when I asked him he hasn't even read the vaccine insert but assures me they are safe and effective.

I dont want this to be a big discussion between different vaccine injuries like autism to vaccines. That info was just for one person. If you really must know, after my nephew got the vaccine, he was admitted to hospital, after that he was a changed baby and he stopped developing properly. He now lives in a care home which specialise for those with autism and learning difficulties. He sometime can have seizures. Would you like pictures/ medical records / address so that you can visit and tell us that my nephews problems was because of the tin foil hat we are due to wear in the future?

Now if someone says to me, I have a pill which will cure the boy of his condition. He will be like a normal boy of his age. The only thing is that you cannot vaccinate the boy and he might be able to catch measles, mumps, flu or whatever we have vaccine for. I would bet not only my family, but every other parent who has had a child who has been vaccine damaged would bit your hand off. Not only that you will be hailed as a hero.

I wish we are told of these dangers before taking the vaccine. The community nurse, doctor, midwife did not give us a copy of the vaccine manufactures insert to read before taking it. Nor did the nurse who administer the vaccine told us of the dangers, side effects, what to look out for before she jabbed the boy. Now if something as horrific as death was one of the side effects of vaccine, is made clear to you by posters, and the medical staff, please can you post their details on this forum. I would love to join that practice myself, or let my local NHS know to use yours as an example of good practice.

To everyone, I am very sorry I cannot reply to everyone comments or questions. If anyone is asking about the report. I am sorry, I cannot answer you. I dont work for the company or have the training to be able to comment on it. I can only do the same as you and read what is written and have a lot of questions myself. Please do your own indept research to decide for yourself.

Answer to those who questioned why we blindly vaccinated. The simple reason being, we believed them to be safe and effective without any problems, just like taking a vitamin. I know my doctor and the nurse are good people, and believed that

• the people at the top making the policies look out for the interest of the public and public funds.
• There manufactures would never put up a drug on the market, if they had problems with them. Because we live in a country where we can sue the manufactures for big faults. We didnt know you can't sue the vaccine manufacturers, because the government has passed a bill to protect them from this. You will have to put a claim in with HMRC for vaccine injury and have to prove your health has been hindered by 60%. We didnt know if there was a problem with the batch, it is simply used up, or shipped to a different country, rather than discarded. We didnt even know there was a vaccine injury reporting system.
• We aren't so naive to believe that there could never been any dodgy dealings between the NHS and manufactures. But they wont do anything because they are both under careful watch of the regulatory bodies, had no links with the manufactures. Who act like the police, to sniff out anything which can pose a threat to the public.

With all these checks, we never think thought there could be any possible real side effects. This is why you don't get a vaccine information sheet before you vaccinate. The only research if you can call it that, we done is by going on websites like this and look at what it says about vaccine, the NHS website. Now I know this is really just light reading. I know it is stupid, to do light reading on a dryg which will be injected into a babies blood stream. Especially when we know that the baby body is still developing and immuture. We knew that there are certain things you cant give to the baby because its gut/ immune system/ skin/ brain etc... hasnt fully formed yet, so you cant give the baby this and that. But looking into vaccines, was the last thing on our mind to check up on. I know it is stupid, in hind sight. From speaking to a lot of parents, we are not the only ones. My doctor didnt neither. So what does this say about our system? We get told of the pro, but how about the cons of vaccinating? This is what I am asking.

larrygrylls, there is antibiotics in vaccines. But when I give my babies any sort of drugs it comes with the manufactuers insert so that I know what side effects to look out for. But this is not routinely given to parents before or after the baby get vaccinated. Why isnt it?

jazzandh - I agree with you. I went to the doctors today and again I cant see any posters or info on the bottom of any get your vaccine type posters of the possible dangers. I am looking at my red book and cant see I either.

there aren't "antibiotics in vaccines" - there is a minute residue from the production process, which is about 0.5% (one twohundredth) of one therapeutic dose in some vaccines.

When my children went for their vacs I was always told of common mild adverse effects and much rarer severe effects. Plus I always got the leaflet that comes with the vaccines. They are still in my red book.

Sounds like some have rubbish nurses that don't follow the rules.

What vaccines have antibiotics in? Any examples?

Thanks Catherine!

larrygrylls - to be completely honest, if you dont like any threads which quesitons vaccines, it is not for you. And my suggestion (in the nicest way) is simple, dont read them.

'I can only do the same as you and read what is written' - true, but you have not read the actual report though, have you? Just the scary stories on anti-vaccination websites.

This link I gave above has info on which vaccines have antibiotics and which antibiotics used

Again its not the scary stuff as sophie wants to imply