Somebody's got to play the Devil's advocate, or you guys wouldn't post all this good shit.:)

It's hard to do it without getting personal though, huh? I went through my shit carefully before posting and took out anything bitter or related to our lives etc.

Actually that's a damn good point bruce.

(soz about the patronising jibe toad :P)

You're absolutely right B, it's a good thing. But if you're gonna bring it, bring it for real - none of that sugarpop shit.

:eek: :p

As the most informed Cellar poster on this topic, Jinx, you should take a more active role in the discussion.

I'm sorry I hurt your feelings again, Tony.

I'm sorry for sucking enough to allow it! Moving on...

Postlicensure Safety Surveillance for Quadrivalent Human Papillomavirus Recombinant Vaccine

The Risks and Benefits of HPV Vaccination

Information Pertaining to Labeling Revision for Gardasil

Gardasil package insert

Information Pertaining to Labeling Revision for Gardasil

Thanks for that. I am getting ready to give my son's GF her second shot.

Glad to help.

shit i'm due for my 3rd in november

We have gone ahead with it. One of my girls got it, one declined. I personally encourage it. But this is purely a personal decision for each person.

Agreed.
I think it's important to note though, that as well as adverse health events associated with the vaccine, it also has limitations which aren't mentioned in the advertisements. There are 15+ strains of hpv that are considered oncogentic - Gardasil contains recombinant examples of 2 of them (the ones that may cause 50% or more cervical cancers).

Regular pap smears, hpv testing, and especially condoms are still imperative - vaccinated or not.

edit
Marketing HPV Vaccine

No doubt. But from my readings it was with HPV types 16, 18, 6, 11 and HPV types 16 and 18 currently cause about 70% of cervical cancer cases. HPV types 6 and 11 cause about 90% of genital warts cases. To me that is a pretty big deal and leaves only a chance that you will get one of the remaining 30% that are not covered by the vaccine and only 10% of HPV that causes genital warts, which I see on people all the time. And they are quite disruptive, yet highly contagious. I guess if they ever get a vaccine for Genital Herpes I would encourage them to get that since that is an even more common type of infection.

From the Risk and Benefits JAMA article

Which is what Barbara Loe Fisher was talking about...

This may be true. But current guidelines are that women who develop evidence of abnormal cervical cells, which are then graded in severity, should be treated. This consists of Laser ablation of the cervical cells, or CKC (cold knife cone) bx, or in some cases both. That is why you should get PAP smears yearly. Both of those procedures require anesthesia and should be performed in an OR, unless you are really brave. So we are willing to put you under the knife, or laser, and subject you to an anesthestic for these abnormal cells but we still don't know if you will be one of those who develop cervical cancer. We do 3 or 4 CKC's or Laser Vap of the cervix a week and this is a small but busy practice. 4 or 5 a year come in with near cancerous cells and everyone of these girls is in their 20's or early 30's. The incidence of HPV is common in women in the US, whether or not is causes problems for you is why you get the PAP's (although there are other potential causes of cervical Ca). It is a simple screening tool. Anyone here want to take a chance and just bag it hope that your immune system just catches the bad stuff? I don't think so. This vaccine has the potential to do a lot of good for women's health. It comes down to a personal decision. I think women should be encouraged to get it.

New Research Study Shows Developmental Delays in Monkeys Given Hepatitis B Vaccines

I have just learned something that makes my heart sing.

The above study is only a very small part of a very large study involving many, many monkeys, which will be testing the entirety of the current vaccine schedule both with and without thimerosal (because as the study notes, while thimerosal has been removed from most childhood vaccines in the US, it is still in wide use in developing countries.) Hep B is the shot given on the day of birth, so it's the first part of the study with conclusive results. The rest is coming. Boy, is it ever coming.

Yes, it is.

I respect your views but you are not going to win converts by linking Huffington Post to any valid review of any medical issue. Just my 2 cents.

The full manuscript has not been published yet. The abstract is available in the Annals Of Epidemiology, Sept 2009. It costs $36 or so to view it online... I didn't think anyone would bother, but the information is worth noting regardless of your personal politics.

Understood. I may be able to get it for free. Give me a few days and if I get it I may need to send it to you via EM.

Sweet. Thanks.

Damm. Which one is it that you want?

I see a number of linked articles.

Can you send me the links of the ones you want?

Just post them here.

It's just the abstract...

Annals of Epidemiology Sept 2009: 19(9); 659
Hepatitis B Vaccination of Male Neonates and Autism

Got it. Give me till early next week. I have a busy next few days. I promise you a response most likely via pm.

Great, thanks again.

I found it but couldn't open it. I will see if we can order it.

I found these and can get these:


Journals / MEDLINE®
Title Citation
1 The clinical content of preconception care: immunizations as part of preconception care. PreviewAbstract Full Text PDF Find Similar Articles MEDLINE® is the source for the citation and abstract of this record Coonrod DV - Am J Obstet Gynecol - 01-DEC-2008; 199(6 Suppl 2): S290-5
2 Mercury exposure and public health. Review PreviewAbstract Full Text PDF Find Similar Articles MEDLINE® is the source for the citation and abstract of this record Clifton JC 2nd - Pediatr Clin North Am - 01-APR-2007; 54(2): 237-69, viii
3 Special immunization considerations of the preterm infant. Review PreviewAbstract CrossRef Find Similar Articles MEDLINE® is the source for the citation and abstract of this record Gad A - J Pediatr Health Care - 01-NOV-2007; 21(6): 385-91
Show All 3 Results

The Clinics
Title Citation
1 Mercury exposure and public health. Review PreviewAbstract Full Text PDF Find Similar Articles MEDLINE® is the source for the citation and abstract of this record Clifton JC 2nd - Pediatr Clin North Am - 01-APR-2007; 54(2): 237-69, viii

the last one is interesting and is about 45 pages long from the Pediatric Clinics of North America. I saved the PDF and can email it to you if you want. Just pm me where I can em a big assed file.

Here are some others from Medscape:

Autism Resource Center
Autism, an early childhood condition characterized by symptoms of abnormal social interaction, communication, or behavior, is one in a group of disorders comprising autism spectrum disease. The causes of autism are unknown. Early signs of autism include unusual responses to environmental stimuli, unusual social interaction, and language delays. Behavioral, educational, and psychological therapies are the most effective autism treatments. Autism awareness and early diagnosis are crucial for effective treatment. Autism Overview
Autism Diagnosis
Autism Treatment
Autism Follow-up
Autism Pictures
Autism CME/CE


Featured Autism Articles
Do Children With Autism Experience High Rates of Gastrointestinal Problems?
A study published in the August 2009 issue of Pediatrics compares the long-term data on children with autism and those without.

Medscape Pediatrics, September 2009
Citalopram Ineffective in Children With Autism
A National Institutes of Health trial has found that citalopram is ineffective in treating repetitive behavior in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorders.

Medscape Psychiatry & Mental Health, July 2009
Autism Medication Found to be Ineffectual in Treatment of Autistic Children
In his latest video blog, Dr. Robert Findling reports on a NIH study that finds that citalopram is no better than placebo in treating autistic children with repetitive behavior.

Medscape Psychiatry & Mental Health, June 2009
Autism, ADHD, and Medicated Births
Could the extensive use of medication during birth be contributing to the recent increase in developmental disorders?

Medscape Ob/Gyn & Women's Health, May 2009
Can Mirtazapine be Used to Treat OCD Symptoms Associated With Asperger's Syndrome?
Dr. Bethany DiPaula addresses whether Mirtazapine can be effectively used to Asperger's Syndrome patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder.

Medscape Psychiatry & Mental Health, April 2009
Body Expressions of Emotion Do Not Trigger Fear Contagion in Autism Spectrum Disorder
Emotion perception deficits in ASD may be due to compromised processing of the emotional component of observed actions.

Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, March 2009
Mirror Neurons and Their Clinical Relevance
One of the most exciting events in neurosciences over the past few years has been the discovery of a mechanism that unifies action perception and action execution.

Nature Clinical Practice Neurology, January 2009
Advanced Parental Age and the Risk of Autism Spectrum Disorder
What are the effects of maternal and paternal age on risk of autism spectrum disorder?

American Journal of Epidemiology, December 2008
Impact of Innate Immunity in a Subset of Children With Autism Spectrum Disorders: A Case Control Study
This study assessed whether clinical features of ASD subset are associated with atopy, asthma, food allergy, primary immunodeficiency, or innate immune responses important in viral infections.

Journal of Neuroinflammation, November 2008
Pharmacology and Genetics of Autism: Implications for Diagnosis and Treatment
What is the current state of the molecular genetic causes of autism? How can we extend the pharmacological principles pioneered in fragile X and Rett syndromes to the broader group of autism patients?

Personalized Medicine, November 2008
Autism Spectrum Disorder-associated Biomarkers for Case Evaluation and Management by Clinical Geneticists
The authors provide a brief cataloging of the rapidly emerging, clinically available biomarkers that the clinician can use to evaluate autism spectrum disorders.

Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics, November 2008
Autism Spectrum and Psychiatric Comorbidities
What psychiatric conditions occur most often in patients with autism spectrum disorders? In his latest video blog, Dr. Robert Findling discusses the most common presentations.

Medscape Psychiatry & Mental Health, September 2008
California Data Do Not Support a Link Between Thimerosal in Vaccines and Autism
A study published in the January 2008 issue of the Archives of General Psychiatry looks at California Department of Developmental Services data.

Medscape Pediatrics, August 2008
New Developments in Autism Spectrum Disorders
Eric Hollander, MD, Professor and Chairman of Psychiatry; Director, Seaver and New York Autism Center of Excellence, NY, describes the newest information on autism.

The Medscape Journal of Medicine, June 2008
Abnormal Cerebral Effective Connectivity During Explicit Emotional Processing in Adults With Autism Spectrum Disorder
These study provides evidence that abnormal long-range connectivity between structures of the 'social brain' could explain the socio-emotional troubles that characterize the autistic pathology.

Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, June 2008
Chronic Bacterial and Viral Infections in Neurodegenerative and Neurobehavioral Diseases
Can chronic bacterial or viral infections be a common feature of progressive neurodegenerative and neurobehavioral diseases?

Laboratory Medicine, May 2008
Rett Syndrome: From Recognition to Diagnosis to Intervention
This review details the clinical picture of Rett syndrome and the diagnostic strategies required, explores the critical medical issues and recent advances in molecular neurobiology, and provides an overview of intervention strategies.

Expert Review of Endocrinology and Metabolism, May 2008
Thimerosal in Vaccines: Some Reassuring Data
Whether thimerosal increases prevalence of autism remains controversial even though most vaccines no longer contain this preservative. Has there been a decrease in reported autism since its removal?

Journal Watch, January 2008
Thimerosal in Vaccines and Neuropsychological Outcomes?
A study published in the September 27, 2007 issue of NEJM fails to find a link between prenatal or postnatal thimerosal exposure and neuropsychological functioning in childhood.

Medscape Pediatrics, January 2008
Highlights of the 115th Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association
Why is it more difficult to treat anxiety than depression in children? How can you prevent adolescent suicide? What psychosocial interventions are best in later life?

Medscape Psychiatry & Mental Health, January 2008
More

Guidelines and Summary Guidelines
Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network - Assessment, diagnosis and clinical interventions for children and young people with Autism Spectrum Disorders
American Academy of Neurology - Screening and Diagnosing Children With Autism
American Academy of Pediatrics Guidelines - American Academy of Pediatrics Guidelines 2007
Ohio Developmental Disabilities Council - Service Guidelines for Individuals With Autism Spectrum Disorder/Pervasive Developmental Disorder (ASD/PDD)
Practice parameter: screening and diagnosis of autism. Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the Child Neurology Society
Practice parameter: evaluation of the child with global developmental delay: report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and The Practice Committee of the Child Neurology Society

A retrovirus (similar to HIV) has been tentatively connected to autism:

So is it a matter of timing, introducing the vaccine before the virus has been defeated?
If the virus is never defeated, and it's a never ending battle, then wouldn't any infection, anything the immune system is called on to battle, cause the virus to spread?

In theory, yes, just like a normal disease can set off Type 1 diabetes in a child predisposed to it. But the vaccine's adjuvants throw the whole system into a far larger response than it normally would give to any real infection. So the chances of a vaccine causing the virus to spread are much higher than an appropriately-modulated immune response to a normal pathogen. Not to mention that in the real world, you don't usually get Diptheria, Tetanus, Pertussis, Hepatitis B, and influenza all in the same day.

Ahhh, OK. Thank you. :D

Have you heard about Desiree Jennings yet?

A routine flu vaccination triggered a severe, permanent neurological reaction in this otherwise healthy woman. But the doctors would like to reiterate that the chances of a neurological reaction to a vaccine are only one in a million, y'all. They're totally positive about that.

I think that is a bit of a stretch. Much of that thinking is theoretical.

And how many people are going to get vaccinated just this year alone?

Oh hey, I forgot to mention, you know what two of the most common comorbid symtoms of autism are? Dystonia and seizures.

Apparently the neurology department at the U of Maryland is using this video to demonstrate psychogenic dystonia. She isn't making it up, but it's in her head. link

eta: which do you trust more, Inside Edition or local Fox affiliates?

The brain is a delicate and complicated thing. A lot of people believe social anxiety is all in one's head, too.

can't even get the flu shots ifn you want em.

BD#1 (8 mos pregnant) was told yesterday by her doctor to get the shots, only to find out they ran out of h1n1 yesterday.

Are you ƒucking kidding me?

This is what I learned from watching the video you posted: The doctors who have actually examined her believe she has dystonia. Then "some guy" on the news who hasn't examined her, but has seen some videos of her, thinks she might have this other condition.

Yes, stupid people. Psychiatric doctors believe differently, and as a result, they routinely cure people of it.

Yes, where "some guy" is Dr. Stephen Grill, who spent three years in a neurology residency; four years in a fellowship on movement disorders with the National Institutes of Health; is a Medical Advisor for the Dystonia Medical Research Foundation; is lead physician at the Parkinson's & Movement Disorders Center of Maryland; and is a tenured professor at Johns Hopkins, where Desiree was diagnosed.

Here's what the Dystonia Foundation has to say:

http://www.dystonia-foundation.org/p...ystonia/85.php

There is still no way that someone can make a diagnosis of psychogenic dystonia by simply watching the video. There is A lot more work involved, AND EVEN THEN, getting a conclusive diagnosis is not easy. This guy is only on the show to say that psychogenic dystonia is a possibility (did he mention that it is usually only the case 3 % of the time, however?).

Gardasil Researcher Drops A Bombshell

http://thebulletin.us/articles/2009/...6766677720.txt

It just makes me cry.


Here's another one about how researchers are finally being heard about the fact that the flu vaccine (both seasonal and pandemic) has zero efficacy.

It's scary. I had a friend who died from cervical cancer some years ago, and when gardisil first came out I thought "wish that had been around when I was younger."

I just trusted that, if they put it on the market, it's OK.

I've learned a lot from this thread.

And I don't get flu shots, either.

The Dystonia Foundation follows up on Desiree Jennings:

We have here a case of media failure. Who said the shot was causal? No doctors, no experts... Desiree made that connection, and the media cascaded along. 1000 stories in Google News said "Woman has shot, gets ill." Reporters don't take science classes, they don't take logic classes, and they and their editors are biased to cover stories that sound scary and alarming.

And then they make them scarier and more alarming. Inside Edition didn't interview any experts in their story. Did they ask a neurologist and not get a scary enough narrative out of it? Or did they simply not try?

The HPV vaccine article doesn't give us the total number of people who have received the injection, so when they say that x large number have experienced side effects, you can't compare it to the total number to see if it's a lot of people or not. Then they go on to say that the side effects include all these nasty things. What they don't say is how many of the side effects reported were redness at the injection site, and how many were sudden death. To absorb this information we need a chart. Boing Boing ran a link to a chart a few weeks ago. The chart shows that the vaccine is very safe for the overwhelming majority of girls.
99.9% of girls injected with the vaccine experience no side effects at all
99.993% of girls injected with the vaccine experience no serious side effects
99.9999% of girls injected with the vaccine don't die from it

the lifetime risk for a woman dying of cervical cancer is one in 500.
the lifetime risk for a woman dying from the HPV vaccine is one in 145,000.

It sucks if you are that one person in 145,000, but look at the overall numbers and compare risk.

I'm no expert in the HPV vaccine, but we will need to make the choice soon about whether our daughter should get it. It helps to have charts that show the risks, not scare articles that throw numbers around without any context. Sure, if you focus on the one girl who dropped dead an hour later, it's scary as hell, but what about 20 million who are just fine after getting the vaccine?

I still lean towards supporting it. We got it for our girls and my sons girl friend.

Cite please? The article linked above indicated that it was far, far lower than that, even moreso when you consider that 4 out of 5 cases are in developing countries. 1 in 500 women in America does not die of cervical cancer, even measured over a lifetime.

The question is not just how dangerous is it, the question is how effective is it. If it does not actually do anything to lower the rate of cervical cancer, it doesn't matter how safe it is or isn't.

Her neurologist says she has dystonia, as that is what he diagnosed her as having. She did not just head over to WebMD and diagnose her own symptoms. Frankly it's irrelevant whether it is specifically dystonia or not; she sure as fuck has something neurological going on. You are correct that no one can prove the flu shot caused it, either directly or indirectly. But so far no one can prove another cause for it either--and severe neurological diseases do not suddenly show up one day in normal healthy people. Historically it's already been proven that severe neurological impairments can sometimes occur as a result of rushed, poorly tested flu vaccines.

As glatt pointed out, it's a question of risk versus benefit, as is everything in life. But what if there is no benefit at all? There's a lot of evidence that the flu shot does not protect you from the flu, and the lead research developer of Gardasil says that it isn't going to measurably reduce the rate of cervical cancer in this country. 44 girls should not have to die for that, even if they're only 44 out of 20 million.

The cite was the chart I linked to. The other numbers in that chart pretty closely matched the numbers in the article.

Well the blog author doesn't say how he calculated the 1 in 500 number (he acknowledges that at least some of the risk numbers were calculated himself, and he has already adjusted those numbers 3 times at the bottom of the post after commenters pointed out his faulty math.) He does generically cite the CDC as a source.

The CDC says that:

That's deaths actually in the US (compared to 250,000 worldwide, according to the National Cancer Institute.) I have a hard time believing that 4,000 out of roughly 150 million total population of women equals a 1:500 chance of cervical cancer death over one's lifetime, but I'd be happy to see the math.

Keep in mind though, that you have to compare equal populations--according to your link, there were roughly 750 cases of severe side effects (like blood clots and transverse myelitis) after 20.4 million doses. Multiply by a factor of 7.35 to see the number of side effects that would be seen if the entire population of women were vaccinated, and you've now got just over 5,500 women severely damaged by this vaccine, compared to under 4,000 who are dying from it. Some might say you should also multiply by three at this point, because one must get at least 2 more booster shots of the vaccine to retain immunity over the years, but on the other hand someone who's already been vaccinated once with no side effects is probably less likely to suffer side effects later on. Not impossible, but less likely. So now we're at somewhere more than 5,500, but less than 16,500. In the meantime, the number of deaths from the vaccine has also gone up to somewhere between 150 and 450 (using your site's numbers of 20 deaths) or somewhere between 320 and 970 (using my site's numbers of 44 deaths.)

Now also, don't forget that fully 30% of those 4,000 cervical cancer deaths are caused by other types of HPV that are not included in the HPV vaccine. So really, only 2800 people are dying each year from the type of HPV that could be prevented by the vaccine. And the National Cancer Institute still notes that the majority of those could also be prevented by getting regular pap smears and sticking to a few monogamous relationships over one's lifetime.

Let's use your numbers. The vaccine has killed 44 people since its inception a few years ago. It's been out for a few years now, so it's like 10 deaths or so a year. (a guesstimate) On the other hand you have 2,800 cancer deaths in a year. That's the fair comparison. 10 vs 2,800. Death vs. death. Cancer is 280 times deadlier than the vaccine.

The chart said that the odds of dying of cervical cancer are 1 in 500 and dying of the vaccine are 1 in 145,000. According to that chart, cancer is 290 times deadlier than the vaccine.

The chart talks about lifetime risks, and your numbers are annual risks, but the comparison winds up in the same ballpark. Cancer is 280 times deadlier according to your numbers and 290 times deadlier according to the chart's numbers.

When you compare injuries to death, the results can be wildly different but then you aren't comparing apples to apples. If you want to talk about the number of serious side effects, then on the other arm of the scale, you should be talking about women who have survived cancer.

Compare deaths to deaths, and injuries to injuries. Compare annual risks to annual risks, and lifetime risks to lifetime risks.

You have to add some anal cancers, such as what Farrah Fawcett died from.

Something neurological OR something psychosomatic. Sure as fuckity-fuck!

This sentence seems like an argument from logic but isn't. I parse it as, "Something had to have caused it, because something caused it."

And yet you are so personally offended (and rightly so, in my opinion) when someone suggests your symptoms are psychosomatic, and yours don't even have overt physical symptoms. You are dismissing this woman's problem as psychosomatic only because she has made the connection that the vaccine happened just before onset, which is exactly the reason the dystonia foundation has "reviewed the videos" and come to that conclusion as well. Except for you, the reason is only cognitive dissonance--you know vaccines are safe because you believe pharmaceutical researchers have been honest with themselves and with you, so it must not be possible that this vaccine damaged her in the way she says it has. (Which is funny, since the CDC will readily admit such things are possible, they just point out the numbers are very small and the benefits outweigh the risks.) In the case of the dystonia foundation, it is both cognitive dissonance and political pressure. Maybe some had doubts, maybe some didn't, but it would certainly be a career-ender for any member of that team to come to any conclusion other than the one they did.

This is a woman who received a flu vaccine every single year up to this point; she was not an anti-vaccine proponent looking for a scandal. You want to tell me that 'them's the breaks, one woman with a severe muscular disorder is worth it for thousands of people to be saved from the flu,' then fine, I'll accept that you feel that way. But it is hypocritical for you to broadly declare that all she needs is a little talk therapy, and just as offensive to me as when someone says it to you.

That's a fair numbers-to-numbers comparison. It would be interesting to know what the rate of lifelong complications are among cervical cancer survivors. But I would still point out that getting cervical cancer is not a purely statistical chance. The rate of cervical cancer deaths has not gone down yet despite the use of the vaccine, because the people responsible enough to go to the doctor to get vaccinated are by and large not the people who are getting the disease in the first place. If you believe your daughter will attend her annual gynecological exams, and have a responsible sex life as an adult, then her personal risk of cervical cancer is far, far lower than the national average. No one can yet pinpoint the risk factors for vaccine reaction though, so her risk for that is going to stay just as high as it is now until someone can.

Everyone's got to make their own call about their own risk level. But it's not a game of Russian Roulette, individual behavior does play a role.

Look at you getting way personal two moves ahead! So that we don't oversimplify social phobia for the sake of winning an Internet argument: like all mental illnesses, there are certainly biological and psychological components which overlap to a great degree. The mind even has the ability to change its own chemistry, which makes the matter very complicated.

No

You are accepting this woman's problem as evidence of harm via vaccine... why? There's no actual evidence. You say things like, nobody else proved any other cause! But that explanation doesn't make any sense, you know?

I am offering an alternate explanation for why she is experiencing her symptoms. I am skeptical of the explanation that you and Inside Edition offered, because I find it to be weak, and I seek facts to understand it more completely.

Skepticism is healthy, and you should welcome challenges to your beliefs. When your point of view is challenged, either you will find that you are correct and thus your view is strengthened, or you find that you are incorrect and thus you change your view. In either case you are improved by it.