Full story: TwinCities.com
#23 Mar 20, 2010
Hepatitis B vaccinations given to infants 12 hrs after birth. 5-day study documented "adverse effects"
Symptoms: Studies involved observation for 5 days only
Pain, tenderness, pruritus, erythema, ecchymosis, swelling, warmth, nodule formation, irritability, fever (= 101°F oral equivalent), diarrhea, fatigue/weakness, diminished appetite, rhinitis, nausea; pharyngitis, upper respiratory infection, sweating; achiness, sensation of warmth, lightheadedness; chills, flushing, vomiting; abdominal pains/cramps; dyspepsia; influenza, cough, vertigo/dizziness, paresthesia, pruritus, rash (non-specified); angioedema; urticaria, arthralgia including monoarticular, myalgia; back pain; neck pain, shoulder pain, neck stiffness, lymphadenopathy, insomnia/disturbed sleep, earache, dysuria, hypotension, elevation of liver enzymes, constipation, Guillain-Barré Syndrome, multiple sclerosis; exacerbation of multiple sclerosis; myelitis including transverse myelitis, seizure; febrile seizure; peripheral neuropathy including Bell's Palsy; radiculopathy; herpes zoster; migraine; muscle weakness; hypesthesia; encephalitis, Stevens-Johnson Syndrome; alopecia; petechiae, eczema, arthritis, increased erythrocyte sedimentation rate; thrombocytopenia, pain in extremity, systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE); lupus-like syndrome; vasculitis, polyarteritis nodosa, irritability; agitation; somnolence, optic neuritis, tinnitus, conjunctivitis, visual disturbances, syncope and tachycardia.
Anaphylaxis and symptoms of immediate hypersensitivity reactions including rash, pruritus, urticaria, edema, angioedema, dyspnea, chest discomfort, bronchial spasm, palpitation, or symptoms consistent with a hypotensive episode have been reported within the first few hours after vaccination. An apparent hypersensitivity syndrome (serum-sickness-like) of delayed onset has been reported days to weeks after vaccination, including: arthralgia/arthritis (usually transient), fever, and dermatologic reactions such as urticaria, erythema multiforme, ecchymoses and erythema nodosum
Thrombocytopenia alone can cause the triad of symptoms. It's a hemorrhagic condition. Brain swelling from infection and/or hemorrhaging probably also affects the brainstem located deep in the neck.
You will note there was no mention of structural damage to the neck and spine. No structural damage, no violent shaking. Those injuries are seen in whiplash-shaken vehicle accident injuries but almost never in so-called SBS cases.
#24 Mar 21, 2010
I will be brief and to the point-- it costs $$$ to pay an "expert" defense prostitute.
#25 Mar 21, 2010
I am just sating facts . Anyone else is a mindless sheep allowing the justice perversions to continue. What do you call the largest cheild predaor inn each county? your honor Think about it. What other occupation destroys people for pesroinal gain besides members of the brotherhood. you are either part of the problem or you see it plan as day.
#26 Mar 21, 2010
I could not have stated better. Very true statement
#28 Mar 21, 2010
It costs $$$ to pay "expert" prosecution prostitutes. And it comes out of the same place--taxes. But of course that's far more import than the lives of innocent children. If doctors were paid to do the proper tests, as required but ignored, the cost would be far less than the consequences of not doing it.
Medical "science" (an oxymoron) and the criminal justice system are broken. The "largest" child predators-- Doctors in bed with Big Pharma, and prosecutors carrying on with their career ambitions while cheating on their pledges to pursue justice.
You ranters are too lazy to do any research and appear to live by the motto, "Don't confuse me with facts."
#29 Mar 21, 2010
I have taken vitamin C my whole life. So have my kids. Shockingly, it has never caused brain bleeding or neck muscle injuries! Same with vaccinations! And again, your are just spouting nonsupported rhetoric (...the person is accused and it translates directly into a conviction...). So not only do the doctors have it wrong, so do all the jurors who have heard all the evidence in these cases? Not one person in THIS case says there was vomitting, high fever, that the baby was taking vitamin C, or had been vaccinated. I'll continue to take my vitamin C and let you know if it causes my brain to bleed or injuries to my neck muscles! I suppose if it causes me to stop breathing it might be a bit tougher to let me know. And I sure hope if anyone spends money on a defense expert that spouts such nonsense, it is their own and not the taxpayers.
#30 Mar 21, 2010
The jurors are not experts. The last person we should be listening to in order to support SCIENCE is a juror, prosecutor, or even defense attorney. SCIENTISTS are those we should be listening to, and yet instead just like this woman who is spouting obviously long-researched science is being ridiculed because it doesn't fit in with our perfect vision of the way life should be.
I don't know what state others are from but where I live praise God above we get the right to defend ourselves even if we're poor. We have so much corruption in our so-called justice system but at least we're afforded that much. And not a single taxpayer has ever complained. I'm stunned that the Constitution is being played the way it is as well in this conversation.
All that aside, a battle of experts in the courtroom is not the way to prove SCIENCE. The scientific method once upon a time was what was taught in the classrooms. I've had a neurologist tell me that what passes for it these days is shocking.
There is a lot out there that even the most educated people in this WORLD do not understand about the health of an infant, such as lucid intervals after a head trauma, scurvy is returning (and the vitamin c would PREVENT that, not cause it - someone got a little confused I think), metabolic disorders are on the rise, vaccines are PROVEN to cause related symptoms in human babies on "rare" occasions, but that means it happens and we need to be aware of it, etc.(MMR and DTaP and Hep B notably) Without differential testing any diagnosis and opinion of a doctor would need a second opinion.
If you went into the hospital emergency department complaining of a headache and fever and they diagnosed your loved one with maliciously hurting you, this would be the same as this diagnosis for infants. There is no way a fever could possibly be diagnosed simply by being present. Neither can the allegedly shaken baby syndrome injuries. There are vastly too many reasons for their occurance.
Retinal hemorrhages can happen at birth, simply labor and birth. Fetuses invitro have been seen with subdural hematomas. These are not shaking mechanism injuries. Think about it clearly and logically and you see it start to not make sense at all as a shaking-based injury.
If you have a child you are not safe from this diagnosis. Something falls on your child's head while he's climbing a bookcase, child falls over in a seizure, you find your precious baby not breathing one night, a short fall, any of those with a trip to the hospital...and you can be accused.
#31 Mar 23, 2010
Clueless, as the previous person pointed out, we were talking about Vitamin C DEFICIENCY. Of course you and your family didn't suffer from the problems we were discussing. You didn't have a deficiency. There is no point in arguing with a person who can't or won't accurately read the article or posts.
Nor was there anything said about neck muscle injuries in the article or by me. Violent shaking would cause damage to the neck bones and spine, and probably to the muscles and tendons too, but there was nothing about that, only something deep within the neck. So how do you injure something deep inside the neck but nothing around it? I don't think so. More likely infection and brain swelling that affected the stem of the brain deep inside the neck.
As for vaccines, count yourself very lucky that your family has never suffered from vaccine side effects like runny nose, respiratory infections, ear infections, skin sores, eczema, asthma, bronchitis, allergies, digestive problems, vomiting, inconsolable crying, fever, learning disabilities, behavior problems--those are just some of the minor side effects of common vaccines.
My daughter's first and only vaccination (given against our will) caused a life-threatening flesh eating disease that could have killed her if a naturopath hadn't found a way to reverse it. That was in 1986 and I've been doing research on the subject ever since. I'll stick with the science, not the fairy tale. A few quotes below tell the real story.
"Getting a vaccination does not guarantee immunity.(~CDC, January 28, 1994.)
"Neutralizing antibodies are reported to reflect levels of protection, although this has not been validated in the field." (~Journal of the American Medical Association, June 9, 1999, Vol. 281. No. 22)
Vaccines made from animal substrate contain animal viruses that are impossible to filter out. By 1961, scientists discovered that animal viruses in vaccines, including smallpox, could act as a carcinogen when given to mice in combination with cancer-causing chemicals, even in amounts too small to induce tumors alone. They concluded that vaccine viruses function as a catalyst for tumor production.(~Science, December 15, 1961.)
THE WASHINGTON POST, Feb.2, 1986 "Vaccines can be a risk for infected persons--virus in vaccines, like natural virus infection...MAY ACTIVATE LATENT VIRAL INFECTIONS."--Dr. Robert Gallo, National Institute of Health
By the 1920s, several British medical researchers documented that smallpox was not only more common among the VACCINATED, but that the DEATH RATE from smallpox was actually higher among those who had been vaccinated. This indicates that the vaccine was ineffective and predisposed vaccinated persons to more lethal disease.(~Vaccination, Dr. Viera Schreibner, 1993 pp. 205-220.)"
I researched the history of vaccinations going back to the 1790's. The whole thing is a fraud. Everything we think we know about vaccination is the product of "revisionist history". It has caused death and devastation from year one, without offering any protection from disease.
#32 Mar 23, 2010
Even the most hideous alleged crime absolutely requires an unbiased zealous lawyer.
All the cost should be provided by the State, Just as the State has vast resources.
What if you were falsely accused and had the full apparatus of the state on you. You might want help from the constitution which it affords.
#33 Mar 23, 2010
Have state or federal funding would certainly level the playing field and at least provide some small means for due process, rather than having "justice" depend on the financial state of individual counties.
In many of these cases, public defenders and even privately hired ones don't want to go to trial and push their clients into taking plea bargains by telling them that cases based on symptoms alone are virtually unbeatable, but the international publicity involving the few rare trials that take place is beginning to turn that around. Prosecution witnesses are usually the same doctors involved with the case, while expert witnesses for the defense are those who are actual expert witnesses for that area of medicine or science (that have to be approved by the court to be allowed), so it certainly would be better to also have the funds come from independent sources higher up. In fact, prosecutors and public defenders actually get paid from too close to the same sources, and there are way too many personal agendas and area politics involved. Most of the cases I know about had horrible public defenders who sold them out. Getting their clients to sign plea bargains looks better than going to trial and losing. But outside funding might change that a little. There really aren't many of these cases that go to trial, which again makes this important. Again, outside funding for the Office of Public Defenders makes perfect sense, but it would take changing the legal structure much higher up, I imagine.
By the way, NJO, would you refer to this as a "hideous alleged crime" if it turned out to be caused by vaccine-induced encephalitis, or something related? I don't know don't know who or what caused the clinical signs, but know enough not to make any assumptions just because someone was charged. In the case I'm investigating, two doctors, three law enforcement officers and possibly a prosecutor committed criminal offenses, so I've come to understand that "probable cause" for charges may not be as "probable" as they appear. There was no evidence at all. Probably cause was based entirely on assumptions, and I doubt that's the first time it's happened.
If you find an unbiased, zealous public defender in this country on a case like this, I'd like to hear about it.
Add your comments below
|MN Who do you support for Governor in Minnesota in... (Oct '10)||Aug 2||Go Blue Forever||848|
|North St. Paul pins hopes on building fiber opt... (Jan '09)||Jul '14||Turk||1,754|
|Cops break up check forgery ring; 13 charged (Dec '10)||Apr '14||Missmedezi||87|
|Legislation would rename Hwy. 36 in North St. P...||Mar '14||Joe Blow||3|
|Tarah Louise Schmahl booked on multiple charges (Dec '13)||Dec '13||Local Jail Blotter||1|
|District 622 Want MORE TAXES (Jul '11)||Nov '13||RPeterson||33|
|Newly installed wind turbines idled by Minnesot... (Jan '10)||Nov '13||The loser is gone||2,893|
Find what you want!
Search North St. Paul Forum Now