Nazareth toddler third Israeli to die after receiving swine flu vaccination

[john[_5_]]

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1131081.html

Nazareth toddler third Israeli to die after receiving swine flu vaccination

By Dan Even, Haaretz Correspondent

A toddler from Nazareth died Thursday at home, three days after receiving a
swine flu vaccination at Rambam Medical Center in Haifa.

The two-year-old, who had a pacemaker and had been undergoing weekly
dialysis at Rambam, had been inoculated in the pediatric nephrology
department where she was being treated.

However the vaccine was allegedly given against Health Ministry regulations,
which permit only children over the age of 3 to receive the shots currently
available in Israel.

The vaccines now being given in Israel contain adjuvant, which helps improve
the immune system. However, this component has not been proven safe for
children under 3 and pregnant women, therefore Israel and some other
countries, Canada, for example, are not inoculating these groups with
vaccines containing adjuvant. Vaccines without this component are to arrive
in Israel starting next week.

An autopsy performed Thursday at the Abu Kabir Institute of Forensic
Medicine in Tel Aviv revealed that the toddler died of complications from
her kidney condition, not from the vaccine. The institute said the results
of additional tests would be ready in about a week.

The Health Ministry said that more than 65 million people have been
inoculated worldwide without incident, including many children, and that the
vaccine meets all standards of safety and efficiency and is recommended by
the World Health Organization.

Rambam Medical Center released the following statement: "Although there is
apparently no connection between the toddler's death and the inoculation,
the hospital director instructed that immediate clarification be undertaken
of the events in the days preceding her death. We all hope that the autopsy
will help clarify the reasons for her death."

This is the third death following inoculation against swine flu in Israel.
The first, soon after the inoculations started, was a 75-year-old Bat Yam
dialysis patient who died three days after receiving the shot in the
hospital. At the beginning of this week, a 57-year-old dialysis patient died
at Soroka Medical Center in Beer Sheva, two weeks after receiving the
vaccine.

Out of some 10,000 Israelis who have so far been vaccinated, the Health
Ministry said this week that there have been 43 reported cases of side
effects from the inoculation, including several cases involving swelling and
redness around the site of the shot, respiratory distress, allergies and
headaches; one patient complained of limited hand movement.

[dr_jeff]

john wrote:

> An autopsy performed Thursday at the Abu Kabir Institute of Forensic
> Medicine in Tel Aviv revealed that the toddler died of complications from
> her kidney condition, not from the vaccine.

[john[_5_]]

"dr_jeff" > wrote in message
...
> john wrote:
>
>> An autopsy performed Thursday at the Abu Kabir Institute of Forensic
>> Medicine in Tel Aviv revealed that the toddler died of complications from
>> her kidney condition, not from the vaccine.

They would say that, wouldn't they. Kind of like allowing the perpetrators
to be the expert witness.

[dr_jeff]

john wrote:
> "dr_jeff" > wrote in message
> ...
>> john wrote:
>>
>>> An autopsy performed Thursday at the Abu Kabir Institute of Forensic
>>> Medicine in Tel Aviv revealed that the toddler died of complications from
>>> her kidney condition, not from the vaccine.
>
> They would say that, wouldn't they. Kind of like allowing the perpetrators
> to be the expert witness.

They would say it because it's true.

[Beverly Erlebacher]

In article >,
dr_jeff > wrote:
>john wrote:
>> "dr_jeff" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> john wrote:
>>>
>>>> An autopsy performed Thursday at the Abu Kabir Institute of Forensic
>>>> Medicine in Tel Aviv revealed that the toddler died of complications from
>>>> her kidney condition, not from the vaccine.
>>
>> They would say that, wouldn't they. Kind of like allowing the perpetrators
>> to be the expert witness.
>
>They would say it because it's true.

I'm waiting for John et al to trumpet some case where a recently
vaccinated person dies in a car crash as a vaccine related death.

[john[_5_]]

"dr_jeff" > wrote in message
...
> john wrote:
>> "dr_jeff" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> john wrote:
>>>
>>>> An autopsy performed Thursday at the Abu Kabir Institute of Forensic
>>>> Medicine in Tel Aviv revealed that the toddler died of complications
>>>> from her kidney condition, not from the vaccine.
>>
>> They would say that, wouldn't they. Kind of like allowing the
>> perpetrators to be the expert witness.
>
> They would say it because it's true.

Yeah yeah, of course it's underlying conditions
http://www.whale.to/vaccine/underlying_conditions.html

[john[_5_]]

"Beverly Erlebacher" > wrote in message
. ..
> In article >,
> dr_jeff > wrote:
>>john wrote:
>>> "dr_jeff" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> john wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> An autopsy performed Thursday at the Abu Kabir Institute of Forensic
>>>>> Medicine in Tel Aviv revealed that the toddler died of complications
>>>>> from
>>>>> her kidney condition, not from the vaccine.
>>>
>>> They would say that, wouldn't they. Kind of like allowing the
>>> perpetrators
>>> to be the expert witness.
>>
>>They would say it because it's true.
>
> I'm waiting for John et al to trumpet some case where a recently
> vaccinated person dies in a car crash as a vaccine related death.

reminds me of you vax quacks seat belt analogy, haven't heard that for
awhile

[Peter B]

"dr_jeff" > wrote in message
...
> john wrote:
>
>> An autopsy performed Thursday at the Abu Kabir Institute of Forensic
>> Medicine in Tel Aviv revealed that the toddler died of complications
>> from her kidney condition, not from the vaccine.

In every post that John has used he has been shown to have deceived or
misled everyone regarding H1N1.

I'm personally through reading any of his posts since he is an abject
liar.

[dr_jeff]

Peter B wrote:
> "dr_jeff" > wrote in message
> ...
>> john wrote:
>>
>>> An autopsy performed Thursday at the Abu Kabir Institute of Forensic
>>> Medicine in Tel Aviv revealed that the toddler died of complications
>>> from her kidney condition, not from the vaccine.
>
> In every post that John has used he has been shown to have deceived or
> misled everyone regarding H1N1.
>
> I'm personally through reading any of his posts since he is an abject
> liar.

Personally, I just respond to his and Jan's posts once or twice. IMHO,
their resposnse do more to help show what kind of poor advice they offer
than anything I can point out. And, anyone reading Jan's personal
attacks is able to determine what kind of person she is, as well.

Jeff

[Peter B]

"dr_jeff" > wrote in message
...
> Peter B wrote:
>> "dr_jeff" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> john wrote:
>>>
>>>> An autopsy performed Thursday at the Abu Kabir Institute of
>>>> Forensic Medicine in Tel Aviv revealed that the toddler died of
>>>> complications from her kidney condition, not from the vaccine.
>>
>> In every post that John has used he has been shown to have deceived
>> or misled everyone regarding H1N1.
>>
>> I'm personally through reading any of his posts since he is an abject
>> liar.
>
> Personally, I just respond to his and Jan's posts once or twice. IMHO,
> their resposnse do more to help show what kind of poor advice they
> offer than anything I can point out. And, anyone reading Jan's
> personal attacks is able to determine what kind of person she is, as
> well.
>
> Jeff

Good idea!

[Peter Bowditch]

(Beverly Erlebacher) wrote:

>In article >,
>dr_jeff > wrote:
>>john wrote:
>>> "dr_jeff" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> john wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> An autopsy performed Thursday at the Abu Kabir Institute of Forensic
>>>>> Medicine in Tel Aviv revealed that the toddler died of complications from
>>>>> her kidney condition, not from the vaccine.
>>>
>>> They would say that, wouldn't they. Kind of like allowing the perpetrators
>>> to be the expert witness.
>>
>>They would say it because it's true.
>
>I'm waiting for John et al to trumpet some case where a recently
>vaccinated person dies in a car crash as a vaccine related death.

One of the claimed "deaths from HPV vaccine" was a passenger who died
in a car crash some months after the vaccination.

You couldn't make this stuff up..

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

[john[_5_]]

"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message
>
> One of the claimed "deaths from HPV vaccine" was a passenger who died
> in a car crash some months after the vaccination.
>
> You couldn't make this stuff up..
>

You do all the time, lets see the evidence for that one

And you make up vaccine lies all the time
http://www.whale.to/vaccine/real.html

[Peter Bowditch]

"john" > wrote:

>
>"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message
>>
>> One of the claimed "deaths from HPV vaccine" was a passenger who died
>> in a car crash some months after the vaccination.
>>
>> You couldn't make this stuff up..
>>
>
>You do all the time, lets see the evidence for that one
>
>And you make up vaccine lies all the time
>http://www.whale.to/vaccine/real.html
>

Thanks for that, John.

I notice that you have removed the photographs of me and put them on
the other wonderful page you have about me. You know, the one that I
am so ashamed of that I have it featured at
http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/tributes/tributes.htm

One of my friends was really pleased to have his picture on a kook
site, specially one as kooky as yours. I must tell him about the
change. In fact I will announce it on Twitter and Facebook so that
everyone can see it and have a good laugh at you.

Oh, and by the way, as you cited whale.to Scopie's Law has been
invoked and you lose the game.

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

[john[_5_]]

"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message
>
> Oh, and by the way, as you cited whale.to Scopie's Law has been
> invoked and you lose the game.
>

only Noddy uses logical fallacies, and wins

[Peter Bowditch]

"john" > wrote:

>
>"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message
>>
>> Oh, and by the way, as you cited whale.to Scopie's Law has been
>> invoked and you lose the game.
>>
>
>only Noddy uses logical fallacies, and wins
>

As I used no logical fallacies I'm not sure what you are talking
about.

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

[john[_5_]]

"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message
...
> "john" > wrote:
>
>>
>>"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message
>>>
>>> Oh, and by the way, as you cited whale.to Scopie's Law has been
>>> invoked and you lose the game.
>>>
>>
>>only Noddy uses logical fallacies, and wins
>>
>
> As I used no logical fallacies I'm not sure what you are talking
> about.
>


You only use 2 logicall fallacies, Scopies law and ad hominem, usually you
are mad.

But if you could get simple logical fallacies you would explode, after all,
no pseudo-skeptic can think as he would be after the truth, not propaganda
central

Scopies law, even a 12 year old could see the absurdity of that one.
http://www.whale.to/b/appeal_to_incredulity.html

[Peter Bowditch]

"john" > wrote:

>
>"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message
...
>> "john" > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> Oh, and by the way, as you cited whale.to Scopie's Law has been
>>>> invoked and you lose the game.
>>>>
>>>
>>>only Noddy uses logical fallacies, and wins
>>>
>>
>> As I used no logical fallacies I'm not sure what you are talking
>> about.
>>
>
>
>You only use 2 logicall fallacies, Scopies law and ad hominem, usually you
>are mad.

Scopie's Law is not a logical fallacy, and nowhere did I use ad
hominem.

>
>But if you could get simple logical fallacies you would explode, after all,
>no pseudo-skeptic can think as he would be after the truth, not propaganda
>central
>
>Scopies law, even a 12 year old could see the absurdity of that one.
>http://www.whale.to/b/appeal_to_incredulity.html

Yes, the old appeal to incredulity is a favourite of loons. It comes
to the fore with creationists, but quackonauts use it because they
can't understand medicine or science.

>
>
>
>

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

[john[_5_]]

"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message
>
> Scopie's Law is not a logical fallacy, and nowhere did I use ad
> hominem.


care to explain that one


This is ad hominem:

"I mentioned to Marcia that these people are mad. I saw Dr Kalokerinos on
stage once and he is the most insane person I have ever seen outside a
mental hospital."

"Ah, yes, the lying sleazebag McCandless."


The ad hominem argument is a fallacy, though often an ad hominem attack is
not even an argument but merely an insult.

whether he is insane or not bears no relevance to his argument, obviously.

[Peter Bowditch]

"john" > wrote:

>
>"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message
>>
>> Scopie's Law is not a logical fallacy, and nowhere did I use ad
>> hominem.
>
>
>care to explain that one
>
>
>This is ad hominem:
>
>"I mentioned to Marcia that these people are mad. I saw Dr Kalokerinos on
>stage once and he is the most insane person I have ever seen outside a
>mental hospital."

A comment on the evidence before me. Kalokerinos was behaving as an
insane person would behave, and mentioning this is not ad hominem.

>
>"Ah, yes, the lying sleazebag McCandless."

Again a comment on the evidence before me. McCandless says that she
can actually see metallic mercury in the urine of children. Thus she
is a liar. She charges money to provide a useless medical treatment.
Thus she is a sleazebag.

QED. No ad hominem present.

>
>
>The ad hominem argument is a fallacy, though often an ad hominem attack is
>not even an argument but merely an insult.
>
>whether he is insane or not bears no relevance to his argument, obviously.

What? Of course it does.

>
>

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

[john[_5_]]

"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message
>
> A comment on the evidence before me. Kalokerinos was behaving as an
> insane person would behave, and mentioning this is not ad hominem.

Yes it is, end of story. You are not qualified to diagnose insanity, and a
practicing medical doctor would hardly be allowed to practice if insane.


>>
>>"Ah, yes, the lying sleazebag McCandless."
>
> Again a comment on the evidence before me. McCandless says that she
> can actually see metallic mercury in the urine of children. Thus she
> is a liar. She charges money to provide a useless medical treatment.
> Thus she is a sleazebag.
>

You are not qualified to offer a comment, obvious ad hominem, and we know
why you abuse these 2, as they both say vaccines cause autism or death.

[Peter Bowditch]

"john" > wrote:

>
>"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message
>>
>> A comment on the evidence before me. Kalokerinos was behaving as an
>> insane person would behave, and mentioning this is not ad hominem.
>
>Yes it is, end of story. You are not qualified to diagnose insanity, and a
>practicing medical doctor would hardly be allowed to practice if insane.

That is why Rebecca Carley had her licence yanked. Remember her? She
is probably one of your heroes.

John, do you believe that the WHO and Save The Children are
DELIBERATELY committing genocide in Africa?

>
>
>>>
>>>"Ah, yes, the lying sleazebag McCandless."
>>
>> Again a comment on the evidence before me. McCandless says that she
>> can actually see metallic mercury in the urine of children. Thus she
>> is a liar. She charges money to provide a useless medical treatment.
>> Thus she is a sleazebag.
>>
>
>You are not qualified to offer a comment, obvious ad hominem, and we know
>why you abuse these 2, as they both say vaccines cause autism or death.
>

Are you suggesting that someone who says that she can see metallic
mercury in urine is telling the truth?

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

[john[_5_]]

"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message
>>
>>You are not qualified to offer a comment, obvious ad hominem, and we know
>>why you abuse these 2, as they both say vaccines cause autism or death.
>>
>
> Are you suggesting that someone who says that she can see metallic
> mercury in urine is telling the truth?
>

Avoiding the fact scopies law is a logical fallacy, no surprise there

and lets deal with your 20 lies first shall we
http://www.whale.to/vaccine/real.html

[Peter Bowditch]

"john" > wrote:

>
>"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>You are not qualified to offer a comment, obvious ad hominem, and we know
>>>why you abuse these 2, as they both say vaccines cause autism or death.
>>>
>>
>> Are you suggesting that someone who says that she can see metallic
>> mercury in urine is telling the truth?
>>
>
>Avoiding the fact scopies law is a logical fallacy, no surprise there

As it simply is not a logical fallacy but a statement of fact, there
is nothing to talk about.

>
>and lets deal with your 20 lies first shall we
>http://www.whale.to/vaccine/real.html
>

My friends were disappointed that you had taken their picture off that
page, but I reassured them that it was still up there on the page
about me. They were quite excited to be featured on a major kook site.

Oh, and trying to discredit me by citing whale.to immediately triggers
Scopie's Law.

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

[john[_5_]]

"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message >
> Oh, and trying to discredit me by citing whale.to immediately triggers
> Scopie's Law.
>

LOL. Oh well, good to know you haven't any argument
http://www.whale.to/b/appeal_to_incredulity.html

you don't have any credit in the real world, abusive, liar, and using a
logical fallacy

[Peter Bowditch]

"john" > wrote:

>
>"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message >
>> Oh, and trying to discredit me by citing whale.to immediately triggers
>> Scopie's Law.
>>
>
>LOL. Oh well, good to know you haven't any argument
>http://www.whale.to/b/appeal_to_incredulity.html

What has an appeal to incredulity got to do with anything?

>
>you don't have any credit in the real world, abusive, liar, and using a
>logical fallacy
>

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

[john[_5_]]

"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message
...
> "john" > wrote:
>
>>
>>"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message >
>>> Oh, and trying to discredit me by citing whale.to immediately triggers
>>> Scopie's Law.
>>>
>>
>>LOL. Oh well, good to know you haven't any argument
>>http://www.whale.to/b/appeal_to_incredulity.html
>
> What has an appeal to incredulity got to do with anything?
>

It is your main argument. Scopie's Law is based on that. Logical fallacy

[Peter Bowditch]

"john" > wrote:

>
>"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message
...
>> "john" > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message >
>>>> Oh, and trying to discredit me by citing whale.to immediately triggers
>>>> Scopie's Law.
>>>>
>>>
>>>LOL. Oh well, good to know you haven't any argument
>>>http://www.whale.to/b/appeal_to_incredulity.html
>>
>> What has an appeal to incredulity got to do with anything?
>>
>
>It is your main argument. Scopie's Law is based on that. Logical fallacy
>

No, Scopie's Law is not based on an appeal to incredulity, unless you
count the incredulity that anyone could believe the rubbish on the
relevant web site. Appeal to Incredibility, perhaps.

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

[john[_5_]]

"Peter Bowditch" > wrote in message
> No, Scopie's Law is not based on an appeal to incredulity, unless you
> count the incredulity that anyone could believe the rubbish on the
> relevant web site. Appeal to Incredibility, perhaps.
>

Whatever, it's a logical fallacy. Perhaps you could explain Scopie's Law in
detail so we can actually get the so called logic it's based on.