To be clear, I have always espoused vaccines in indicated settings.
Back in the day, we were only routinely vaccinating against 7 things in the mid '80's. Now that number has risen to 14.
Administration of multiple vaccines to infants and young children can lead to febrile seizures in some patients.
While there hasn't been a specific study that has been released that says we have a major problem yet, it is always a matter of degrees (the CDC is merely evaluating for an acceptable tolerance level of cases)...the more vaccines at once, the greater the risk....and some vaccine combinations can be a problem as well.
In a large number population, there will definitely be cases of this - it is unavoidable. The number of vaccines will also continue to grow.

The problem nowadays is that politics has invaded medicine completely since COVID - especially when it comes to vaccines.
People do google searches and get "Fact Check"s as their top hit.

This is why I gave my answer below in the last (now locked) thread.
I do not think that 6 separate vaccines is wise - they work and it is safe that way, but the risk of noncompliance goes way up.
I do think that it is a simple thing to alter pediatric visits so that the overall vaccine burden can be distributed more evenly to decrease the febrile seizure risk - particularly since there will be more routine vaccinations yet being added down the road.
The windows foe effective vaccine administration do allow for this, and it would not mean any more visits than otherwise to patients so that compliance would not be affected.
Thus my middle ground perspective.

I suppose that I will now again be accused of killing people and being "a horrible doctor" by the crazies.
I'd appreciate at least a response for this effort, thanks.


Link: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jay-bhattacharya-vaccines-rfk-jr/

tracking Adverse Effects of vaccines on all patients...especially Children. Be more like Dr. Bhatacharya on this subject...i.e. trust the established Science built over many decades of hard work by medical scientists and physicians...leave your Non-Stop Politicking out of it.

For others...here's a quick AI summary of VAERS...
-----------------
AI Overview

Yes, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) actively tracks vaccine effects on children.In fact, the system was originally established under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986specifically to monitor the safety of vaccines, with a heavy emphasis on pediatric populations. [1, 2]

How VAERS Monitors Pediatric Vaccine Safety
• Passive Surveillance: VAERS relies on healthcare providers, vaccine manufacturers, and parents to voluntarily submit reports of health problems—known as adverse events—that occur after a child receives a vaccine. [1, 2]
• Mandatory Reporting: By law, healthcare providers are required to report certain adverse events that occur within specific timeframes after childhood immunizations. [1, 2]
• Early Warning Signal: Agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the FDA use the data as a flagging system to detect unusual or unexpected patterns in children, which then prompt deeper scientific investigations

Important Data Limitations
When reviewing pediatric data in VAERS, public health officials keep several unique factors in mind:
• Causation vs. Coincidence: A report submitted to VAERS does not mean the vaccine caused the health problem. Millions of infants receive vaccines during the first year of life—a period when natural health milestones, sudden illnesses, or developmental conditions frequently emerge purely by coincidence. [1, 2, 3]
• Encouraged Reporting: Parents and doctors are instructed by the CDC Guide to Interpreting VAERS Data to report any significant health event following a vaccination, regardless of whether they think the shot was responsible. [1]
• Safety Context: Decades of data gathered from VAERS, alongside more rigorous active surveillance networks, show that the vast majority of pediatric reports involve mild and temporary reactions like low-grade fevers or soreness at the injection site
-------------------

Amazing Dr and an even better man.

With knowing their political sides.
As you know I live in PS and love the town, Desert and what comes with it.
I am no right wing looney, you wouldn’t survive here if you were.
I could bore you with the friends I have here but you knowing their town you can imagine.
Again, very nice of you.

derailing C19 to save lives (especially the elderly and vulnerable) doesn’t put him in a good light. The better man would have cared for others rather than push a political agenda. I’m not buying your assessment.

And for your education, I'm linking again to Dr. Risch's definitive paper so you can get educated on how well it really worked. I know Ty is a lost cause on this and so are you, but if I can get one other person here to see how HCQ+ did indeed work, then mission accomplished.

Link: Dr. Risch research paper

physician. Other than that, you’re just a tool for trump. A gullible dolt armed with falsehoods and a willingness to tell them.

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

A simple search will show all of my posts and the date that they were made for context as to what we knew.
Each post explains my point. I was never "an advocate" of ivermectin nor HCQ over standard, studied treatment options. I was merely not against them when there were no other options yet available since there was some medical logic as to why they might work. I said several times that back in 2020 before treatment options were available that such meds should have been handled as "off label treatment options" as any other drug with a potential for being helpful should have been since they were well know, relatively safe, and there were no other better options available. This was not done while Fauci and Walensky were reigning over us all. At no time was I recommending them over paxlovid, etc when they became available. But when subsequent studies suggested that there was a niche for HCQ, esp when no other meds were yet available....and at the same time Fauci et al had blocked access to prescribers (again, this was before we had anything else), I criticized that...then and now.

This is well beyond your ability to understand. I say that not as an insult, but because this explanation has repeatedly washed over you without effect.

them here daily. Trump lies and you escalate them.

in point...he asserts that in 2020, when COVID-19 hit and we had no vaccines, Dr. Stephan Hahn...FDA Commissioner...just waited to take orders from Dr. Tony Fauci...Director of NIAID...That is Pure Made Up Nonsense. You'd better believe that a man of Dr. Hahn's stature (fmr Head of M D Anderson Cancer Center) has confidence in his own knowledge and that of his team when comes to authorizing or retracting licenses for drugs.

You Flat Out Cannot Trust Baron when it comes to all things COVID-19...he is Obsessed with Politics over Medical Science, for God Only Knows what reason.


Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hahn

(no message)

It was you who didn't read the article, not me.

And to Mark if you are reading this:
You should either enforce your rules against jim equally, or allow me to respond in kind.
The guy inferred that I killed people below among other insults. Somehow this didn't trigger your filter.
This weak effort attack from jim simply throws out attacks with no effort to substanatiate

He's not the only one.

You have said "You don't know how many others I have deleted". True. You also pointed out that you can't read everything. True.

But, I do know what post you singled out, and what post you allowed to stand without deletion, in a thread that you locked recently with specific parts locked & unlocked.
My comment re conor that got the lock is a long, ongoing teasing that has been reciprocated back & forth in various ways for years. I'm willing to comply with that if you want to discontinue all of that kind of stuff going forward if you do it both ways.

Jim has only gotten worse because he is emboldened by your selectivity

(no message)

I don’t think anybody has ever taken Jim seriously.

I do agree that people should be able to insult his persona without fear of sanction.

But I would allow him to treat my kids.

(no message)

Do more like this.

Hopefully the CDC will just ignore it all and hope it goes away, replaced by his next obsession du jour.

Because this one will end up with kids dying.