Hot Wrestling Chicks Like Man

The safety of vaccines: The pharmacovigilance

L'elenco dei "danni da vaccino" che gli antivaccinisti presentano è lunghissimo, ma in realtà è puro terrore psicologico (volevo almeno per una volta usare una loro espressione che mi viene rivolta spesso) perché si tratta di eventi avversi raccolti in modo passivo con la vaccinovigilanza, come per esempio quello degli USA, il Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System ( VAERS). Questi dati vengono frequentemente citati dagli oppositori alle vaccinazioni con l'intento di spaventare i genitori.

Nella pagina delle domande frequenti del VAERS website reads:

are all adverse events reported to VAERS caused by vaccines ?

No. The VAERS receives reports of many adverse events that occur after vaccination. Some occur randomly following vaccination, while others may be caused by vaccines. Ad hoc studies can help determine if a vaccine really caused a particular adverse event . Just because event against happened after a person has been vaccinated , does not mean that the the vaccine caused . Other factors , as medical history the patient other medicines that were taken near the time of vaccination could be the cause . E ' important to remember that many adverse events reported to VAERS may not be been caused by vaccines .

Being a passive collection and uncontrolled, just a temporal relationship to end on this list, without proof of causation. The aim is to monitor the safety of vaccines. For example, if the experts noted that control the data that an event is reported more often than expected, knowing the frequency of this in the normal population or in vaccinated, this is interpreted as a signal to be explored. However, all cases of serious adverse events are investigated by the staff of the VAERS. You contact your physician, requires medical records and other information and carefully examine each of these events to see if there is a causal relationship to the vaccine or the particular batch used.




then used, as with the vaccinia regularly and shamelessly for many years, these data demonstrate the "dangerousness" of vaccines is extremely unfair.

Even the side effects that you can read the package inserts (i Bugiardini) vaccinovigilance derived from passive, and adverse events may be listed there without proof of causation, but only because they occurred after vaccination. They are placed in the package insert for legal reasons, not for medical reasons.

A similar thing happens with regard to breastfeeding. For legal reasons in almost all the medicines you read that breastfeeding is a contraindication. So if you only read the leaflet, or waiver to take the medicine or you decide to quit - without any real justification - to breastfeed. To find out if you can take a medicine while breastfeeding you should turn to other sources and not just read the leaflet.

It 's interesting to note that sometimes the same people that give this right to counsel breastfeeding mothers, think that the list of adverse events written in the leaflets are all really caused by the vaccine.

So to know the side effects of a vaccine should not use the list written in the leaflet but talk to your doctor or medical clinics in the vaccination of ASL. But I have often heard and read by the skeptics that the medical clinics of ASL vaccine are "poorly informed" because they do not know that vaccines can cause (and there is listed a number of diseases taken from reports of vaccinovigilance).

This is not to say that the damage from the vaccine do not exist. There is nothing that is 100% secure and this naturally also applies to the vaccinations. The risk of a serious side effect is very low and is not very fair pay much attention to these risks completely ignoring the great benefits of vaccines.

would be like one when it comes to the bees, said that if they bite can kill a person allergic and are therefore a public danger, without considering

1) how often this happens and
2) that the bees are vital to our survival for their very important role in pollination


The passive collection of adverse events is designed to monitor the safety of vaccines on large numbers. Even the best studies that are made before the approval of a vaccine are able to identify very rare reactions but only those that occur more often. Only when you vaccinate millions of people you notice any of these risks of the vaccine, just because they are extremely rare. Then you have to weigh these risks with the risks of the disease that the vaccine prevents.

For example, if the X disease against which the vaccine is a direct cause death per 1000 patients and the first case of encephalitis vaccine vaccinated every 1,000,000 (which is the same frequency as in non-vaccinated, so we think now is not caused by the vaccine), the benefit of the vaccine is obvious. 1,000,000 cases of disease X cause - no vaccine - 1000 dead. Now just take the place of the letter "X" the word "measles" .

So, to return to the adverse events that are collected with the vaccinovigilance, you might as well decide to collect and report all adverse events that occur

- a Friday, 17 (venerdìdiciassettevigilanza)

- after visiting his grandmother ; (visitadallanonnavigilanza)

- after a walk in the woods (passeggiatanelboscovigilanza)


- after a trip on the bus (viaggiosullautobusvigilanza)


etc.


The list of adverse events that were obtained with this collection would be very similar to that of vaccinovigilance (apart from those of lesser directly caused by vaccines such as fever, local pain etc,). If you used the same reasoning of vaccinia, suddenly would be very harmful to our health perfectly harmless activities such as visiting grandma, walking in the woods, eating chocolate, traveling on the bus etc. ..

Imagine a child whose symptoms began asthma two weeks after the visit by her grandmother. Of course no one would connect these two facts to say that since the first attack of asthma after paying a visit to her grandmother, this visit has caused, even if the first child was fine. Yet when it comes to vaccines, this reasoning is done. I can understand the parents, because it is the human search for a "guilty" and since the vast majority of children are vaccinated several times, chances are high that you will find this correlation.

But this reasoning is correct? Just something that really happens after another thing to have proof of causation? Of course not, try for a causal relationship we want something else! Yet on this very banal error it is based around the anti-vaccine movement. The vaccinia use the data collected to "prove" that vaccines can cause hundreds of diseases, they say almost all those that exist.

Likewise, you could create such an anti-guided-by-grandmother. It 's simple: just do a collection of all events that happen from now until an unspecified date after visiting his grandmother. You could create an association, for example Co.mo.da.v.no. (Coordination world damaged by a visit from her grandmother), publish an online form that can be compiled by anyone and regularly update the list of events adverse. It should also publish the opinions of the people who wrote that he decided not to bring more children to visit his grandmother, to prevent serious damage. Offer letters kind of justification that can be personalized and sent to her grandmother. It 's absurd, but unfortunately with the vaccines exactly this is happening for many years, in spite of scientific evidence. But

reasons: it is likely that virtually all diseases disappear forever, accidentally starting the day on which it is expected the vaccine? Evidently the vaccinia think, since for them any adverse event that occurs from the time of vaccination on, is necessarily caused by the vaccine, and woe to contradict them!
The vaccines protect
instead "only" from infectious diseases against which they are direct and not cheap. All others continue to make their course as they had always done naturally and can also happen accidentally close to the date of vaccination (even a little earlier, not only soon after ...). Neither the vaccine nor the visits grandmother can least influence.

The anti-vaccine movement is dangerous because it is based on false and absurd statements very cleverly divert attention from the enormous benefits of vaccines in preventing some very dangerous diseases. In this way, unfortunately, more and more parents are convinced to leave their children unprotected. Germs are so continuously enough ground to multiply and to circulate, causing serious damage.

Kramer Aerostar Zx30h

The more bullshit presents Madonna and skeletons (Japanese) in the closet

Who has not seen the movie Mean Girls must die. The bad girls are the most beautiful moment of every high school, the opportunity for distraction from the tedium of rotten teachers and classmates topate. The betcha between betches is stronzissima Regina George (in the real world, it's me).

I'm a bitch, are not a sfranta.

(in English makes it much more, you would like to " AND EVIL TAKES A HUMAN FORM IN REGINA GEORGE "with" evil and to eccellenza è lei". Bah! Sciatta traduzione! Sciatta! SHAT TA!!

Una wannabe di Regina dice "ho sentito che fa la pubblicità alle macchine... IN GIAPPONE!". E riguardando il film ho pensato: DEVO BRASATARE ABOUT IT. Le pubblicità giapponesi sono IL DIAVOLO!
Certo, voi non lo sapete, ma il Giappone è una nazione malefica: seduce i divi dello spettacolo (ovviamente sono al 99% delle volte statunitensi) tramite cachet bilionari per fare le pubblicità più putride. Voi pensate che le star rispondano ai furbi manager giapponesi (bassottini, in giacca e blackberry) " No, figurati se IO, GROSSA popstar texana, mi metto a pubblicizzare dell'acqua minerale! ". SE, MAGARI! Ecco quella poraccia di Beyoncé che promuove una misera acqua (il fotogramma d'anteprima di youtube poi, la dice tutta).

Il bello della questione è che, prima di youtube, questi divi americani potevano sputtanarsi con orribili pubblicità perché tanto le avrebbero trasmesse solo in Giappone... Ma la globalizzazione svela i trabocchetti delle proprie careers, and so the publicity shot in a basement in the mid 80s to promote devilry ELECTRONIC hours jump out and ruin the reputation of a famous pop star friend of ours.

Who, me?!

Ready? A deep breath, VIA.



Madonna dancing and spinning and floating, then scazzatissima from having to promote a MANGIAVIDEOCASSETTE go into a bookstore, he sees a bright M, takes it, puts it (?) and after returning to dance, turn and wave enthusiastically, as he says BEAUTIFUL if he were witnessing the materialization of their worst nightmare.

THE LIGHTNING says " not take this spot outside Japan .

A drink? An incense burners? Of Vietnamese noodles? What publicize this spot is unknown and only knows the elephant (now I have found NO: beauty products ), we only know that Madonna was a fan of Valeria in Reality Circus .

Valeria tamer!

Of course, another withering look here denotes humiliation at having to work with those evil Japanese.

What touches me is 'to field'?

Oh, I always wanted to sponsor a DISTILLED RICE . And how can I enhance it? But of course making GOKU and seeking the Dragon Balls!

Oh, the post-2000 ! Regie superb new elegance, a return to simplicity, flashy farewell! A new style of Japanese advertising, more sober and straight to the point, thoughtful and impromptu ...

Yes, but .... WHAT IS THE PRODUCT ADVERTISED?! a condominium.

AH.

P.s. GRAZIE per il successo avuto dall'ultimo post sul video di Britney, diventato il Brasato più letto di sempre! Non me l'aspettavo! Baci e brasatacci.

Convert Bathtub To Shower

Small Conservatory of Rome Entertainment

Small Conservatory performing arts of Rome
Director: Maestro Ivan Mori

CONTACT:

Telefono: 06 89014610

Mobile: 347 7080852



Segreteria: Via Pescosolido 74 Roma

( Si riceve esclusivamente su appuntamento )



Posta elettronica: ivan.mori@teatro.org





Corsi di recitazione serali,pomeridiani e pre serali. Lezioni private.

Recitazione, dizione,canto discipline dello spettacolo

For newsletter : @ ivan.mori teatro.org

Association of Theatrical Arts and Music MAGNIFICAT Maestro Ivan Mori

Getting Rid Of Old Mala Beads

pertussis vaccine and allergy - part II

This is the second part of my article on vaccines and allergies. The first part is here:

The pertussis vaccine and allergy - First part

Question: Why should the vaccines have anything to do with allergies?
Answer: Because in recent decades the prevalence has increased while the number of vaccines.


This brings to mind a very informative research:

Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2004 Jan; 18 (1) :88-92.
New evidence for the theory of the stork
Höfer T et al.
Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, Berlin, Germany

This study found a significant correlation between the population of storks and the number of births. There were fewer storks, fewer children were born. Here is proof that storks bring children ..... or not?

And also this:




The Simpsons Season 7 Episode 23, Code
3F20 Much Apu About Nothing
Lisa Simpson et al.

Homer: Ah, not even a bear in sight: the patrol is working bears the wonder
Lisa: That's specious reasoning, Dad
Homer: Thank you darling
Lisa: According to your logic, this stone could keep away the tigers
Homer: Oh, how it works?
Lisa: It does not work. It 's just a stupid rock, still do not see any tigers, do you?
Homer: Ah!
Lisa: It 's just a stupid rock ...
Homer: Ah
Lisa: But I do not see any tigers, do you?
Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your stone

not only not Homer Simpson always easy to tell if a correlation is only temporal or causal instead. Especially in the field of alternative medicine so many make their living by exploiting and sometimes unconsciously aware of the inclination of people to see causality where there is only a correlation incece like the rock of Lisa Simpson. There are many people who would buy that stone, and unfortunately there are many other people who know it and then sell it (of course a bit better 'sales techniques Lisa ;-)), just need to place instead of a tiger malattie.Vi long list of advice to follow the blog Medbunker it has already examined the effectiveness of many "stones". Look for the series of video conference in 12.2.11 CICAP of Lugano, where the author of the blog Medbunker said very interesting things about the so-called alternative medicine. The link is currently in the top right of my blog.

If no one believes the stork, even Homer, because we know where babies come from. But with diseases whose causes are unknown, such as allergies, autoimmune diseases, autism, etc.. there is open field for speculation, such as allergies that cause the increase in vaccinations. Or was it the other way around? Okay, correlation is always ...

therefore continues through the book "Children supervaccinati" Eugene Serravalle. Immediately after the example that I discussed in my previous post, we read (on page 38, under "What do they reveal the research on adverse reactions to vaccines?")

Another study conducted on 1,265 children in New Zealand confirms that vaccination may be a risk factor for allergic reactions. Children who were not vaccinated and DTP antipoliemielite had not presented clinical manifestations of allergy before age 10, while among the vaccinated, 23.1% reported episodes of asthma, 22.5% had received medical examinations for asthma, 30% for other allergic diseases.

Epidemiology. November 1997, 8 (6) :678-80.
Is infant immunization a risk factor for childhood asthma or allergy?
Kemp T et al
Department of Medicine, Wellington School of Medicine, New Zealand.


This is a cohort study. The authors examined the relationship between the DTP vaccine (diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis) and OPV (oral polio) and allergies. Information on vaccinations and allergic symptoms were collected for 1,265 children born in 1977 who participated in the New Zealand Health Study and were followed until the age of 16 years. The information was collected through diaries kept by parents and doctors - when the data obtained from parents were unclear - boards doctors. The data obtained were divided into three periods: 0-5, 0-10 and 0-16 years. The 23 (!) Children who had received neither the vaccine nor the DPT polio at the age provided for in the vaccination schedule, ie 3 and 5 months, were classified as "unvaccinated." Any vaccines (DTP and OPV) after one year of age were not considered because the hypothesis of the authors was limited to vaccinations received during early childhood.

Until the age of 10 years for children classified as not vaccinated were not reported asthma episodes or medical consultations for asthma or other allergies. When exams were taken in data collection between 0-16 years, among children classified as not vaccinated, there were 5 episodes / consultations for allergies and asthma. For this age group the difference in the incidence of asthma and other allergies among vaccinated and unvaccinated was not statistically significant.

As a control, the researchers also compared the possible link between measles vaccine and allergic diseases but have not found statistically significant differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated.

The result of this study is to be taken with due caution, especially because the number of unvaccinated children was very small. Even one case of asthma reported between 0 and 10 years have significantly affected the outcome. Another limitation of the study was a potential bias for the use of medical care (you remember the explanation of the study by DeStefano in the previous post?) This is more the result of the difficulty of adjusting for confounding factors, because of the small number of unvaccinated children and the quality of diagnosis.

E 'rather strange that in the abstract the authors report only the results obtained up to 10 years and not until 16 years. If you take into account the results obtained up to 16 years, there have also been cases of asthma among children classified as "unvaccinated." On 17 of which we have data, 2 had at least one episode of asthma, and the marginal relative risk was found in children up to 10 years, is gone. The association was not statistically significant. Also write in the abstract

that 23 children had asthma or other allergies in the first 10 years of life, while in the study you can see that from the beginning are missing data for some of this already small number of children. In fact, in the age group between 0 and 5 only 20 there is an answer about asthma and eczema, and only 16 had replied in the "medical advice for allergies." Between 0 and 10 years and only between 0 and 16 out of 17 there is an answer concerning asthma and allergies for 13 for the consultation. So why say "none of the 23 unvaccinated children had reported cases of asthma" if there are only responses to 17 while the other 6 (26%) do not know anything?

See also the assessment of this study in the Institute of Medicine " Immunization Safety Review - Multiple Immunization and Immune Dysfunction , 2002.

Therefore, this study is cited by Dr. weak. Serravalle confirming that the DTP vaccine may increase the risk for allergic manifestations. Also note that on page 38 mentions only the total number of children, that is 1265, not that they were not vaccinated only 23. However, later in the book (the chapter on pertussis) speaks again of the same "important" research, but this time also informs that only 23 were not vaccinated.

I have often observed that the vaccinia mentioning in a very selective, choosing only studies to support its opinion. In this way, however, could prove anything. A single study is almost never able to give a guarantee that the association found between the subjects under observation is also in the whole population. Even the best studies, controlled for all confounding factors, there is a small chance that the result is due to chance. Imagine then a study like those Joneyama et al. e Kemp et al.

Solo guardando il quadro intero, cioè tutta la letteratura scientifica che ha trattato la questione, è possibile vedere qual'è la probabilità che i vaccini in generale e l'antipertosse in particolare possano aver contribuito all'aumento delle allergie. La probabilità, non la certezza. Non è possibile provare scientificamente che i vaccino non causano mai nemmeno un caso di allergie o asma. Allo stesso modo in cui non si può provare che non c'è nessun servizio da tè in orbita che gira intorno alla terra. Non è possibile provare il "mai", ma gli antivaccinisti lo pretendono, sapendo di chiedere l'impossibile. E bisogna soprattutto pensare agli enormi benefits of vaccines far outweigh any theoretical risk.


Well, with regard to the cell pertussis vaccine is the most studied with regard to the 'association with allergies and especially with asthma, scientific data (there are dozens) that have been made to Today assessed throughout indicate that the vaccine does not increase nor reduce the risk of allergies.

Perhaps the following meta-analysis of 2007 would have more merit to be considered by the author of the book:

Pediatrics 2009; 123:944-950
Vaccination Is Associated with childhood asthma? A meta-analysis of observational studies.
Balicer RD et al
Department of Epidemiology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva,

CONCLUSION. This study Provides no evidence of an association Between Against pertussis vaccination in infancy and later an Increased risk of asthma and wheeze or does not support claims Against pertussis vaccination Might That Significantly Increase the risk of childhood asthma.

Translation:
CONCLUSION . This study provides no evidence for association between pertussis vaccination in infancy and an increased risk of asthma or wheezing (wheeze) and not support a ffermazioni that vaccination against Pertussis can significantly increase the risk of asthma child.

The rise of allergies seems to be related to lifestyle in industrialized countries. Unfortunately still have not discovered the causes, but only some associations more or less strong. Sure is however, that in many cases there is a genetic component because children whose parents suffer from allergies have an increased risk.

Maybe in another environment and another way of life, genetic traits that today are in part responsible for the increase in allergies, gave the subject a survival advantage?

Or, thanks to improved living conditions (including immunizations) with these features and more children survive that in the past would have died for diphtheria, measles, whooping cough etc. before having the opportunity to spend their genetic makeup to next generation?


One lifestyle has so many variables that it is really simplistic to say that vaccines have played a decisive role in the increase of allergies, because this view is not supported by scientific data and studies have been done so much.

Spotting Scope Diagram

GIVE ME SOMETHING GOOD! Britney Spears as the Lady of Ferrero Rocher

È finalmente OUT (in tutti i sensi, oserei dire) il nuovo video di Britney Spears .

La canzone si intitola Hold it against me ed essenzialmente parla del  NULLA più assoluto : il tema principale è SE TI VOLESSI, ME LO DARESTI? con aggiunta di versi speziati come  HO BISOGNO DI UNA VACANZA e  DAMMI QUALCOSA DI BUONO  sponsored by Ferrero Rocher?? Ed è subito TRIP MENTALE con Photoshop !

AHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH

short, the text adds nothing to the world of song as a bit 'all his songs, but to his sexual advances that you can not answer that:

The usual naughty Asian

We all have the horrible secrets. Even I have one, even more than one: I have all his albums. And even some single. And a couple of posters. And a concert t-shirt (bought la large da bambino perché costava 10€ in meno della small per adulti). Lo ammetto. Britney è la mia poraccia chic preferita. È come una Valeria Marini international , e per questo va tutelata.

Senza di lei, un'intera generazione di teenager gay sarebbe cresciuta repressa e incapace di sfogare la propria necessità di sculettare , d'altronde se non avessimo avuto Toxic probabilmente saremmo stati tutti a cantare American life e Nothing fails di Madonna seduti intorno ad un falò come degli scout falliti .

Ma basta, few lines are enough to make people understand the importance of Britney in social work. I will discuss the video.

A impact first I thought it useless! She is motionless.

At a second glance I thought BOH.

third look at (and after reading an enlightening comment on youtube) I discovered the meaning of the video: is the story of Britney , a fine walk through delicate metaphors and famous symbol! Here we go.

1.

The video begins with a meteor falls on the land. How everything is connected to the story of Britney? But of course she is the meteorite, which shocked the world when, at a young age and ... Baby One More Time, shows us what a school uniform could be sensual. I actually have always thought that this was the protagonist of the video-like Asian Criticona spying by Britney and cabinets that appears at the top on this post.

2. Il video continua con Britney che si dedica al product placement, ma anche al trucco e (soprattutto) PARRUCCO, e simboleggia il suo ingresso nel mondo del pop fatto di vanità e apparenza. Non perde occasione per promuovere il suo nuovo profumo... E qua potrei perdermi per ore a parlare dell'inutilità di un profumo che porti il nome di una star famosa, ma non lo farò perché lo trovo noioso.

Si, è product placement.

3. between a perfume and a choreography, the video proceeds showing a Britney dressed in white who stands between the big screens that show videos of past hits, but she is obviously becoming increasingly popular and is floating, floating higher and higher!

Ethereal.

Meanwhile, in a scene seemingly futile search for Britney is the perfect man on an online site. Plenty of fish, namely FISH in spades, never name was more appropriate. And I thought a site was invented, no no! Is there really! However, this is the moment of his life in which you can insert into marriages with men foolish and disappointing failures. BUUH!

That pussy!

4. Tension rises, making Britney the poor victim of the media, until a zero will give the hair and an umbrella at the top of a paparazzo. It would have been nicer that she was actually surrounded by umbrellas rather than microphones.

You are saying WTFLEAVEMEALONE

Thus, the His madness is represented on video by a long deformed mouth (Julia Roberts seems !)...

Julia Roberts

... from a split personality ...

Catfights Valerie Marini

bukkake ... and a rainbow on her, has become SAMARA.

Bukkake & Samara

5. But all's well that ends well, because it picks up, dance and sing. [To say boring tone of one who has been sick and tired of this fucking video] So Britney back to being a pop diva!

Grand Final

the end This post was all an excuse to do the montage of Britney Ferrero Rocher.

Smallest Most Powerful Binoculars

A Heartbreaker reveals the secrets of bank seigniorage OR Ruby Alfonso Luigi Marra: at worst there is never an end in Asia

not come in threes. After Manuela Arcuri (...) and Lele Mora (???), the new sponsor of the book of the year - but I say, the millennium! - Ruby is Heartbreaker.

Things two . Or there was a redefinition the concept of good taste, creativity and marketing -evident to me that I lost, because these spots all have except that these important features-or the Arcuri, clearly angry at the criticism on him for that awful piovutole advertising, Marra forced to make the spots worse and worse to reevaluate his interpretation . I bet on the latter, of course!

1) Visual Arts.

all began with The Phantom of the Opera putting off ... But I say! It all starts with Manuela Arcuri disguised ripping the dress ... Nooooooo! It is an obvious metaphor heartbreakingly beautiful , explains how the script read carefully (even recited, not even that ...)!!! The masked man is not the Phantom of the Opera, but the bank seigniorage ! And she is not Ruby, but the poor performance of Italy is seen stripped of his possessions (well played by a cubist undressed, I would say ). It is a metaphor pop per palati fini , insomma. Tra l'altro l'ambientazione pubblica, ossia il desk di una improbabile banca , rende tutto ancora più voyeuristico e pieno di mistero!

2) Il testo... questo sconosciuto. 

L'ho trascritto per coglierlo meglio e non essere distratti dalla nenia macabra di sottofondo o dal tatuaggio malizioso di Ruby. Eccolo qua!

Ora che il regime ha spogliato la società, cerca, come allora, il capro espiatorio perché, colpevole o no che sia, serva a distogliere dalla necessità for real change. Meanwhile attacks Marra's books because they have everything that we do not know. Reading them, you'll see that the sex love, from unemployment to the economy, from labeling to European institutional reform, the root of evil is in the primary and secondary bank seigniorage. Compete to defeat him by asking fermiamolebanche.it beginning to recalculate the balance of your account. Download free, marra.it, 140 of 360 pages of the labyrinth of women.

So the books have the Truth, and Marra is hampered by the regime ! All this is even more of the conspiracy thesis that sees Lady Gaga as a tool in the hands of the Illuminati , or one that sees Bush as the culprit in the attacks on the World Trade Center . And since these two theories are absolutely true, then even Marra is right !!!!!! But then if these books contain what we know, so prevent it spreading proposing horrible publicity that make the ones who buy it are lovers of trash?

3) And the book??

Watching the commercials and reading the text I can do without thinking (beyond the immediate reflection " that shit") that female The maze is just snubbed if not for the usual, sad, boring cover framed side, and the wretched phrase of invitation free download pages. It thus reveals the nature pretext of the book , born only to talk about the issue of bank seigniorage that Marra has obviously very important! At this point I start to wonder if the correspondence is in fact autobiographical, and if Paul is therefore Alfonso Luigi Marra!

4) The pages of the book free, downloadable here, they realize the obvious, namely that the book sucks . If you want to write letters in a text message to make the problem of seigniorage bank more attractive to the average public, that we do so in a manner likely! But no, 750,000 characters long sms , almost surreal, even for two lawyers, where Paul writes to Louise (p. 30).

Your engagement of all life is over because of me any more than sia finito a causa tua, ma in realtà è finito a causa di qualcosa, più che di qualcuno: cioè del fatto che Alfredo non poteva certo reggere i fasti delle nostre telefonate nemmeno dalle primissime in poi, quando, a settembre scorso, erano pubbliche e sembravano amichevoli, perché chiunque si sarebbe reso conto che i nostri discorsi erano carichi di un flusso di emozioni tali che, quando ci sono, non può farci niente nessuno. Ciò detto, non fare la sapientina, e bada che io divento sì stupido con i buoni, i bravi, gli indifesi ecc., ma non ho mai consentito a nessuno di trattarmici, da stupido. Inoltre è anche un modo di salvaguardare te. Dice infatti Nietzsche: «Potrei perdonarti quello che ha fatto a me, ma come potrei perdonarti quello che hai fatto a te?» Forse solo Alfredo sa meglio di me quanto non ti importi di lui, ma è logico, non sapendo più che pensare, che io finisca per ipotizzare che forse ‘stai ferma’ perché non ti sei ancora liberata del tutto dalle remore a compiere gesti che renderebbero definitiva l’impossibilità di ogni sia pure da te non desiderata eventualità di riappacifica- zione. Vorrei chiamarti, ma per il momento non sono nello stato d’animo adatto. TA

L'unico punto che potrebbe rendere questo testo credibile come sms è il TA alla fine, che presumo sia un Ti Amo e non un gergo segreto between advocates of a certain age. But then, as he wrote a brilliant commentator on the Youtube video of Ruby

I read (skipping a bit 'here and there) the party is a free download from the site. is written with the ass, and above all he is the usual story of her the other (or others, it's not clear). only that he is practically Marra, writing SMS-papyrus of 5000 characters in which psycho-analysis is delusional about their relationship, she is a total whore expressed monosyllables tend to be summed up in "fuck you!" and then there's the spiegone of 'I'm strateggismo ...

Genio.

Comunque, l' epistolario in sms che io vorrei VERAMENTE leggere è un altro, quello di Sara Tommasi:

How Many Days To Spend In Chang Mai

The pertussis vaccine and allergy - First part

Some parents fear that vaccines can cause allergies including asthma.

It 's a very broad topic so the split in different places starting from the cell pertussis vaccine (whole bacterial cell, killed), which is what is most often charged by vaccinia, with regard to allergies. (In most industrialized countries for years using the acellular pertussis containing only parts of the bacterium, highly purified).

For them it all seems very simple. Pubmed go up, do a search on the topic of study required (for example, "DPT immunization asthma"). Read the abstracts and select those in which it is reported a positive association between the vaccine and asthma, without checking the quality of the study.

cite even ignoring case report the fact that the single case report may represent a given unusual compared to the average population and therefore can not be taken as a proof of a causal relationship, the latter is true, moreover, also for some types (drawings) of epidemiological studies that can to establish an association between the EPlace a risk factor and a disease but not to prove a causal link.




Other studies, namely those who have found no association between vaccines and asthma, or even protective association, are simply discarded. They do not even need to obtain the full text studies and read them carefully to assess their quality, the advantages and limitations. Do not have to read books on the subject , to learn how to evaluate scientific work and what must be done carefully.

not need it because they know that the vast majority of their audience will never go in person to check the claims, but just look at the numbers that show the citations of scientific studies that are at the bottom of the page. These quotes are denser, more science seems to him the book. People between their public control and really read the full texts of the studies cited, you can probably count on the fingers of one hand.

may present their views in this way surface only because people let him . Many simply seek confirmation for their opinions and most do not understand how scientific progress. Those who believe that vaccines are bad, buy books or attend sites which are supposed to be written by people who share their views. In reality they do not care what they say truly scientific studies cited. The only thing the press is to feel reassured and strengthened in its belief and placate their consciences. This mental laziness however, may have high costs for the individual and for society. We should learn to be more skeptical and honest with themselves, especially when is the health and lives of their children.

think about it, if vaccinia to be consistent, should not use scientific studies to prove their opinions because their main feature is the rejection of scientific evidence. But obviously know very well make a habit of people not to check the sources cited and the psychological impact that science has a slew of citations to the player.

To explain the way in which the vaccinia unacceptable use - despite everything - the scientific literature, I see no other way to look more closely at the studies cited by them and especially those who do not cite them.

I understand that not everyone is of interest approfondire la lettura degli studi scientifici, ma le vie sono solo due:

1) accettare a occhi chiusi gli argomenti proposti

2) controllare personalmente le fonti citate

Non vedo altre vie. Per fare le cose per bene bisogna vincere la pigrizia mentale.

Quindi ecco l'inizio dell'approfondimento sulle vaccinazioni e le allergie.

Come filo rosso mi servirò, come sempre, del libro "Bambini super-vaccinati" del dott. Eugenio Serravalle. Questo libro è molto prezioso per il mio blog perché è pieno di fili che pendono (come si esprimerebbe Poirot) che mi fanno venire una voglia irresistibile di annodarli.

Sfoglierò il libro e progressivamente commenterò le varie affermazioni che si riferiscono alla questione vaccini e allergie.

A pagina 37 si incontra per la prima volta questo tema:

Uno studio giapponese ha dimostrato che tra bimbi vaccinati contro difterite-tetano-pertosse (DTP) e bimbi non vaccinati erano presenti significative differenze di frequenza per le patologie allergiche.

e poi segue una tabella con le percentuali (vedi abstract dello studio).

Ed ecco il riferimento:

Arerugi. 2000 Jul;49(7):585-92.

[ The effect of DPT and BCG vaccinations on atopic disorders ]

[Article in Japanese]

Yoneyama H et al.

Department of Pediatrics, Tokyo Metropolitan Government Hiroo General Hospital.

The work cited by the author is not only a "study Japanese but it is written in Japanese . I suppose Dr. Serravalle has read only the abstract, unless you know the Japanese language. The same is probably true also for the myriad of other vaccinia mentioning here (just do a search on Google by putting "the effect of DPT and BCG vaccinations on atopic disorders). Practice is only mentioned by vaccinia and proponents of various types of alternative medicine.

You should never use a scientific research by reading only the abstract because This makes it impossible to assess their quality.

However, dall'abstract should already be in doubt about the reliability of the result. The study included all children of a Japanese island. The possible association between the DPT vaccine and asthma, atopic dermatitis and allergic rhinitis was limited to children between 0 and 3 years. A total of 82 children of which 39 vaccinated and 41 unvaccinated. Even these very small numbers make it clear that it is not very appropriate to draw conclusions. These data deserve a table in a book? Not really.

I managed to find some clues that go beyond the abstract. Researchers very meticulous ( as can be seen reading their research ) had included this in their meta-analysis study and requested the translation from Japanese into English. Then they gave, as all studies included in the research, evaluation and a brief description of critical points (see table 2 ). Well, score one of the lowest quality is expected, among other things because they lack reliable information on the diagnosis that was simply based on a questionnaire filled out by parents.

So this is a study of low quality, on a very small population of a remote Japanese island, whose data are based on one of the least reliable source, not a medical diagnosis.

compare, just for curiosity, this study with one of the many others that have been made in recent years. Pediatr Infect Dis


J. 2002 Jun; 21 (6) :498-504.

Childhood vaccinations and risk of asthma.

DeStefano F et al.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.


This is an observational cohort study. It means, in this case, a group of children vaccinated and a group of unvaccinated children, were followed for a certain period of time (a total of 1991 to 1997) and compared their risks (two groups) to develop asthma.

In total, the study by De Stefano et al. were involved 167,240 children who were followed from birth for a minimum of 18 months up to a maximum of 6 years. The data on the vaccination of children was obtained through the Vaccine Safety Datalink Project - a project involving four Health Maintenance Organizations (HMO, an HMO is a network of doctors, pharmacies, hospitals) - which allows you to link together some clinical database allowing to collect the data of patients with their medical history (vaccinations, disease diagnosis, etc.).

for 18,407 children (11% of the total) has been confirmed the diagnosis of "asthma."

Overall, children immunized against DPT, OPV (oral polio) and MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) were not significantly more likely to develop asthma than children not vaccinated. Are significantly more at risk children vaccinated against haemophilus influenzae B (HIB) and hepatitis B.

In reading these results, however, must take into account that observational epidemiological studies such as De Stefano et al., Evaluate only the association between risk factors and disease (not establish a causal relationship between vaccination and asthma), and may present problems of recruitment of subjects. One of the most common is the possibility that some patients have undetectable change in this way the risk of developing the disease in a group (vs children vaccinated. Unvaccinated children).

In this case the authors of the study showed a possible error of the method of selection of children vaccinated and diagnosed as asthma. Some children, after birth, may not have been taken, for various reasons, the Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) members of the project, but escaped observation, may have been vaccinated by other doctors and not be vaccinated solo per gli autori dello studio; oppure potrebbero avere avuto una diagnosi di asma e rientrare invece tra i soggetti sani. Per aggirare questo problema De Stefano et al. hanno condotto una sotto-analisi solo sui bambini portati almeno due volte nel primo anno di vita in uno degli HMO del progetto. Per individuare questo sotto-insieme è stato necessario recuperare le informazioni relative al numero di incontri, informazione che era disponibile solo per due degli HMO per un periodo di tempo limitato. Questi vincoli hanno ridotto la numerosità della coorte a 17.740 bambini. Come cambiano i risultati?

Innanzitutto, nel periodo in cui erano disponibili i dati sul numero di incontri nei due HMO, il numero totale di bambini tracciati risulta pari a 17.949. The risks for these children are perfectly comparable with those obtained on the entire cohort and above. Restricting the analysis to the 17,740 children who had at least two visits in the first year of life, de Stefano et al. observed a significant reduction in the risk of asthma among vaccinated for HIB, hepatitis B and OPV.

After this tedious explanation we come dovrrebbe spontaneous question:

1) Why Dr. Serravalle said that the DPT vaccine increases the risk of allergies and cites a small study of very low quality, based on a total of 81 children and fails to DeStefano in the 2002 points from birth to 6 years up to 167,240 children well? This second clearly merits more study would have to be taken into consideration (especially if you see him in the general context of all studies on the subject made to date)

Maybe he did not find during your research? No, this is not the explanation, because on page 154 cites precisely this work of DeStefano! Perhaps you guess in which section ... in the course of hepatitis B:

children vaccinated until the sixth year of life suffer from bronchial asthma, with an incidence of 10% higher than the other unvaccinated children.

So not only did not inform their readers of the other results of that study, but does not mention even properly the result concerns that the vaccine against hepatitis B. Although this study had found a combination of an increased risk of 10%, it would be more correct to point out that the study demonstrates an association but can not establish a cause and effect. These types of study have some limitations related to (i) the possible presence of confounding factors, that risk factors other than the one studied that may be responsible for the association observed, (ii) problems of misclassification of disease due to different definitions (eg There are different definitions of asthma that differ according to treatment, presence or absence in co-morbidity), (iii) the difficulty of having information complete per tutti i soggetti quando si utilizzano basi dati amministrative. Come si è visto, quando un probabile problema di selezione dei soggetti è stato preso in considerazione, ricorrendo ad una sotto-analisi, l'associazione non è più risultata significativa.

Inoltre, per coerenza il dott. Serravalle doveva presentare anche gli altri dati dello stesso studio e aggiungere che era stata trovata nessun'associazione tra vaccini DPT, OPV, MPR e l'asma. Ha invece preferito non darne informazione ai lettori e utilizzare solo quello che gli serviva per "dimostrare" che il vaccino contro l'epatite B può causare l'asma, spaventando inutilmente i genitori.

Ringrazio Bodegones for collaboration in the presentation of the results of the study by De Stefano et al.;