Cynthia A. Janak
March 30, 2008
VAERS reporting -- is it accurate?
By Cynthia A. Janak

I have had people tell me that the numbers that I have been updating in regards to the Gardasil vaccine are not that bad considering the lives that will be saved from cervical cancer. So what I did was to go to the "National Vaccine Information Center" to get their take on what the numbers are or should be. I was astounded at what I found.

https://www.nvic.org/Issues/VAERS.htm

In 1986, Congress passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (PL-99-660) that among other things required healthcare providers to report vaccine reactions to a centralized reporting system. As a result the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) to which parents, physicians and vaccine manufacturers could report adverse events was created. NVIC has assisted many parents in reporting adverse events following vaccination as many doctors refuse to make a report. It is estimated that only 110% of all doctors report a severe health problem which occurs after a drug or vaccine is given to a patient.

In May 1990 we started to track DPT vaccine lot number when parents reported their child's hospitalization, injury or death following vaccination to NVIC. Evaluating adverse event reports from more than 90 families, we found multiple serious reports were from the same vaccine lot numbers. NVIC made three separate presentation to government advisory committees between 1990 and 1993, but no substantive action was ever taken by the FDA or CDC.

Upon further investigation when the VAERS computer data became available through the Freedom of Information Act, we found (1) a lack of reporting by health care providers; (2) a lag time between when the adverse event occurred and when the report is filed; (3) data entry error; (4) duplicate reports; (5) inadequate follow-up by the government of reported serious injuries and deaths; (6) many lots with very high numbers of reports; and (7) no recall of any lot of vaccine. We do not know how many doses of vaccine are in each lot because the FDA and the drug companies do not release this information to the public. Therefore, it is impossible to precisely compare one lot to another for reactivity.


I am going to use this statement in regards to the articles that I have written about Gardasil and vaccines. I think you will find this interesting.

In my article on Gardasil dated March 28th, 2008 I gave the newest stats on Gardasil. They are as follows.

5238 reported incidents +2141 = 7379 (I will update the multiple incident number at a future date.)
89 were considered life threatening
204 were hospitalized
913 had not recovered at the time of the report
124 are disabled at the time of the report
13 have died

Because of this vaccine three more young women died and we have an increase of 932 incidents reported. That is approximately 310+ girls that had an adverse reaction to this travesty every month.


I am going to start with this sentence in the first paragraph. It is estimated that only 110% of all doctors report a severe health problem which occurs after a drug or vaccine is given to a patient.

With this in mind I am going to take the higher percentage which is 10% and figure what the new numbers should be that include the potentially unreported incidents by the doctors.

73790 reported incidents
890 were considered life threatening
2040 were hospitalized
9130 had not recovered at the time of the report
1240 are disabled at the time of the report
130 have died

Why would our doctors not report an adverse effect like fainting or seizures? The reason could be that they are following the company opinion that "it is a case of auto-suggestion." Does that sound logical to you? It sure doesn't to me.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/why-are-we-experimenting-with-drugs-on-girls/2007/05/24/1179601570922.html

Of course, the vaccine couldn't be at fault. CSL, the company that makes Gardasil, said the reactions were due to stress and anxiety. The girls were all worked up. They'd got themselves into a state and panicked. The vaccine's inventor, Ian Frazer, said it was a case of auto-suggestion.

These two paragraphs preceded what I put above. If you follow the logic of Ian Frazer then all these other adverse effects are also auto-suggestion.

THE much trumpeted inject-every-girl-free-with-Gardasil campaign has run into a bit of a snag. Four Melbourne schoolgirls were rushed to hospital this month after receiving the vaccine promoted as preventing cervical cancer.

Sixteen other girls were reported sick. One student was left paralyzed for six hours. "I couldn't move at all," she said.


I would like to ask Ian Frazer how paralysis could be auto-suggestion.

Maybe most doctors believe this and that is why they do not report the reactions that babies and small children have to vaccines. It is all because of auto-suggestion even though babies cannot talk or truly understand language. Interesting concept I think.

With all this in mind let us take another look at the new figures.

73790 reported incidents
890 were considered life threatening
2040 were hospitalized
9130 had not recovered at the time of the report
1240 are disabled at the time of the report
130 have died

With the new figures we have over 3000 girls and women that have had an adverse reaction to this vaccine in a month. That means that 36000 will be affected in a year. If we put the same logic to use with deaths that means there will be approximately 10 deaths a month and 120 deaths a year. This also means that we have approximately 600 girls a month that have not recovered at the time of the report. That equates to 7200 girls and women a year. What this is telling me is that we are willing to sacrifice over twice as many women to potentially be disabled for the long term to save 3,700. How does that balance out? That makes no sense to me.

The average age of a woman with cervical cancer is 48. The effectiveness or dangers of this vaccine will not be known for at least a decade. Let's put things into perspective. Cervical cancer results in just 3,700 deaths nationally every year compared to heart disease, which kills over 300,000 women annually.

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54219


Just one more perspective on this. Let us say that the average woman that gets the vaccine is 16 years old and the average age of a woman with cancer is 48 years old we have a span of 32 years between vaccination and cancer. Let us say that we now have 100 women that are disabled a month from the vaccine. We will then have 1200 a year newly disabled women and you multiply that by 32 years between vaccination and cancer you will have 38400 disabled women cancer free in this country. What kind of a strain will that put on our health care system?

On to the next paragraph.

"we found multiple serious reports were from the same vaccine lot numbers. NVIC made three separate presentations to government advisory committees between 1990 and 1993, but no substantive action was ever taken by the FDA or CDC."

I would like to know why no substantive action was ever taken by the FDA or CDC. If something is hurting my child or grandchild I would expect that they would investigate and take that vaccine lot off the market just as a precaution. Could it be that they did not do anything because of the fire storm that would hit the press if they did that? Could it be because of big pharma and politics? I do not know but these questions should be asked.

I will finish with the last paragraph that states, We do not know how many doses of vaccine are in each lot because the FDA and the drug companies do not release this information to the public.

Why isn't this information released under the Freedom of Information Act? This should be required by the FDA and big pharma. To me this is just another censoring of critical information that would be of a benefit for the citizen but detrimental to big pharma if a hot lot is found. Could this be collusion? It sure looks that way but who knows for sure.

What I do know is that the FDA put this vaccine on the fast track to approval and now we are paying the price for this auto-suggestion.

This is just another example of what happens when We The People let our government run some area of our lives. They are not being accountable to the citizens. Whatever happened to transparency in government? My opinion is that they are only being transparent when it suits their agenda? Or maybe they have too much to do and need to give some of the responsibility back to the States, what a concept.

I have one comment that is off topic for Hillary, Obama and McCain. We The People need less government intrusion in our lives. Stop preaching the rhetoric of more government policies and agencies. Give the power back to the people if you dare. We are not under educated like during the "New Deal Era." We do not need any more 'New Deals.' We want our country back.

Please call or write your elected officials and tell them to take this vaccine off the market immediately before any more young women become disabled.

TO FIND YOUR SENATORS AND CONGRESSMEN

Find your Senators=> www.Senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Find your Congressmen=> www.House.gov/writerep
Find your Congressmen & Senators=> www.MoralLaw.org/delegation.htm
Find your Newspapers=> www.TownHall.com/action/write_media.html/
Find Local Talk-Radio=> www.Radio-Locator.com

© Cynthia A. Janak

 

The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)

Click to enlarge

Cynthia A. Janak

Cynthia Janak is a freelance journalist, mother of three, foster mother of one, grandmother of five, business owner, Chamber of Commerce member... (more)

Subscribe

Receive future articles by Cynthia A. Janak: Click here

Latest articles

July 7, 2014
Stop the HPV vaccine madness!


November 17, 2013
Why VAERS is a passive reporting system that the FDA loves to quote


May 20, 2012
Does the mainstream media slant the truth about the HPV vaccines? Part 3


May 19, 2012
Does the mainstream media slant the truth about the HPV vaccines? Part 2


May 17, 2012
Does the mainstream media slant the truth about the HPV vaccines? Part 1


April 27, 2012
HPV vaccines -- Do the risks outweigh the benefit?


April 6, 2012
Anaphylaxis and HPV vaccines, what do they have in common?


October 7, 2011
HPV vaccine cocktail targets not only HPV


September 27, 2011
Truth about Gardasil demands that the Department of Justice investigate HPV vaccines


September 21, 2011
Talking about the HPV vaccine is now called fear mongering and morally indefensible


More articles