Do Vaccines Really Prevent 2.5 Million Children from Dying Each Year?

Do Vaccines Really Prevent 2.5 Million Children from Dying Each Year?

The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that vaccination prevents between 2-3 million deaths worldwide each year and that an additional 1.5 million deaths could be avoided if vaccination coverage improved. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) qualifies this estimate by specifying that vaccines “prevent an estimated 2.5 million deaths among children younger than age 5 every year.”1 2 3 4 5

This 2.5 million estimate has been cited by public health organizations for at least 10 years now and can be traced back to the 2009 WHO report State of the world’s vaccines and immunization.4 6 That report, written primarily by freelance public health and science writer John Maurice, whose clients included vaccine supplier Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance and vaccine manufacturer Novartis,7 claimed: “Every year immunization averts an estimated 2.5 million deaths among children under five years old.”4

According to the WHO report, the estimate was based on “assumptions of no immunization and current incidence and mortality rates in children not immunized.”4

My understanding of that rather vague methodology explanation is that the WHO came up with the 2.5 million estimate based on the assumption that most of the children under five years of age who died around the world were unvaccinated. As the number of deaths of children in this age range declined, the assumption was that the declines were largely due to increased vaccination rates. UNICEF, which partnered with the WHO on the 2009 report confirms these assumptions when its states:

The number of children under five years old dying every year has fallen from 12.7 million in 1990 to 6.3 million today. Immunization in large part drove this historic achievement.8

Of course, the problem with the WHO’s methodology is that most children under five years of age do not die solely because they were unvaccinated. According to data collected by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) at the University of Washington in Seattle, more than two-thirds of children under five years of age who die each year die of causes other than diseases for which vaccines are available.9 10

By the same token, most children under five years of age do not survive solely because they were vaccinated.

Obviously, there are other things that account for the death of young children around the world or for their ability to stay healthy and live well into adulthood. There are many factors, including sanitation, housing, nutrition and clean drinking water. Simply being raised in a caring and financially stable family environment can make a huge difference in a child’s health, as would living in a country not plagued by endemic crime, terrorism or war.

Apart from the questionable thinking behind the WHO’s methodology, there is an even more fundamental problem with the 2.5 million estimate, and it is a mathematical problem.

A report published by UNICEF in 2010 estimated that the number of deaths of children under five years of age had fallen to 8.1 million in 2009.11 That number was down from 8.8 million in 200812—which means that during the 18 years preceding the WHO’s 2009 report, the number of children under five years of age dying prematurely had dropped by an average of 216,666.7 annually. (Subtract 8.8 million from 12.7 million and you get 3.9 million. Now divide 3.9 million by 18.)

So even if you were to disregard ALL other factors and assume that the declines in the number of the deaths of children under five years of age during 1990-2008 were solely attributable to vaccination, the best the WHO should have been able to say in 2009 was that vaccines prevented just under 217,000 deaths of children in this age range. Worldwide. That is a far cry from the outdated 2.5 million estimate that the organization continues to provide as justification for expanding childhood vaccination programs and the development of more and more vaccines.


References:

1 World Health Organization. Ten threats to global health in 2019. WHO.int 2019.
2 WHO. 10 facts on immunization. WHO.int March 2018.
3 WHO. Global Immunization Impact Constrained by Outdated Vaccine Delivery Systems, Researchers Say. WHO.int Mar. 30, 2017.
4 WHO, UNICEF, The World Bank. State of the world’s vaccines and immunization, 3rd edition. WHO.int 2009.
5 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Global Health Security: Immunization. CDC.gov Feb. 13, 2014.
6 Harmon K. Global Child Immunizations at All-Time High, Despite Rising Costs. Scientific American Oct. 21, 2009.
7 John Maurice. LinkedIn.
8 UNICEF. Immunization: Keeping Children Alive and Healthy. UNICEF.org.
9 Vanderslott S. How is the world doing in its fight against vaccine preventable diseases? Our World Data Apr. 24, 2018.
10 Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. HealthData.org.
11 UNICEF, WHO, The World Bank, United Nations DESA/Population Division. Levels & Trends in Child Mortality, Report 2010. UNICEF.org.
12 Black RE, Cousens S, Johnson HL, Lawn JE, Rudan I, Bassani DG, et al. Global, regional, and national causes of child mortality in 2008: a systematic analysis. The Lancet May 12, 2010.

Note: This commentary provides referenced information and perspective on a topic related to vaccine science, policy, law or ethics being discussed in public forums and by U.S. lawmakers.  The websites of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) provide information and perspective of federal agencies responsible for vaccine research, development, regulation and policymaking.

...

13 Responses to "Do Vaccines Really Prevent 2.5 Million Children from Dying Each Year?"

  1. Andreas Kroschke   February 7, 2019 at 1:33 pm

    Sadly the CDC will continue to push more and more vaccines until “each child can be saved from illness”. Supposedly there are over 200 vaccines in development so pretty soon each child will receive 500 doses of vaccines until they die from vaccine poisoning or are brain damaged beyond repair from all the toxins that pass through the blood brain barrier. I don’t know if this is a globalist eugenics program and these people are pure evil or if they honestly think they are helping humanity with their endless vaccines. I lean towards the former because the REFUSE to do proper safety studies and the synergistic toxicity that our children are exposed to.

    Reply
  2. INGRID C DURDEN   February 7, 2019 at 1:53 pm

    I read somewhere that Bill Gates finances vaccinations, that children die from the vaccines, that vaccines with live matter shed and kill unvaccinated children, and when the children survive all that, probably die from dirty water or from starvation. What is better – that a child gets the sickness, either recovers and gets life long immunity and grows stronger (yes some will die from the sickness), or that doctors poison them with the vaccine and then do not provide food so they will live ?

    Reply
  3. Beth   February 7, 2019 at 3:06 pm

    Remember to take into account decreased deaths due to automobile accidents (infant & toddler car-seat laws and recommendations):

    Of note, the recommendation that all children be restrained in a rear-facing-only or convertible CSS used rear facing as long as possible represents a significant change from previous AAP policy and is based on data from the United States9 as well as extensive experience in Sweden.10 (footnote referenced 10 = “Isaksson-Hellman I, Jakobsson L, Gustafsson C, Norin HA. Trends and effects of child restraint systems based on Volvo’s Swedish accident database. In: Proceedings of Child Occupant Protection 2nd Symposium; November 12, 1997; Warrendale, PA”

    the year 1997 is AFTER other countries were already implementing increased infant and toddler car safety.

    http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/142/5/e20182460

    Reply
  4. Bruce Boyes   February 7, 2019 at 6:05 pm

    217,000 preventable deaths sounds like a lot to me!

    Reply
    • Dr Jim Louro   February 8, 2019 at 11:04 pm

      Thats just the math from their own nuumbers. If they were real numbers from what they stated. That’s not what vaccines have protected us from. The study shows the numbers are an outright lie. But even if they were factual its 2.5 million to 217,000. Just giving the enormity of the false data!

      Reply
  5. jo   February 7, 2019 at 6:27 pm

    Prevent?? Hell no, they NEVER did and Never will.
    That’s not anti-vax or B.S., THAT’S SCIENCE.
    MODERN VACCINES IGNORE SCIENCE, AND ARE ENTIRELY FOR HIGH-PROFIT, A GOV GOLDMINE—THEIR PERSONAL ATM.

    I’VE WORKED IN INDUSTRY, WHERE WE HAD MASKS AND GLOVES and filled out paperwork, wow, TO WORK WITH DANGEROUS CRAP LIKE ALUMINUM, MERCURY, and it would be similar for Thaliodomide & fetal body parts, etc.
    AND WE NEVER INJECTED ANY OF THAT, BECAUSE WE’D LIKELY DIE.
    But look at me, unlike some recently-vaccinated folk, I’m STILL alive. I followed safe scientific methods.

    WHAT EVIL: WHEN “YOUR” GOV FORCES YOU TO BUY INSURANCE FROM THEM, AND TAKE HARDLY-TESTED, paid-off fast-tracked, Un- or Hardly- Regulated Industrial Chemicals AND OTHER DRUGS.

    Reply
  6. Paul Leaner   February 9, 2019 at 8:24 pm

    Have the Doctor AND the facility give a written guarantee of personal responsibility for Their medical recommendation of vaccination. Doctor, put up or shut up!!!

    Reply
  7. Vincent Cali   February 12, 2019 at 5:43 pm

    The number of cases and number of deaths from specific diseases have been documented in the U.S. even before the CDC was founded in 1946. For instance, there were 27,000 cases and 6,000 deaths attributed to a polio epidemic in America in 1916. There were about 101,961,000 people living America in 1916 versus 324,459,463 living in America 100 years later in 2016. You can extrapolate the rate of death from that specific polio epidemic in 1916, when there was no vaccine, to the 2016 population to estimate how bad a polio epidemic would be in modern times. This also would assume that 0 people got the polio vaccine in 2016 and that the population would still be the same number. That number of deaths would be around 1.9 million in a single year if an epidemic occurred. Is this faulty logic that I’m applying? I am asking honestly.

    Reply
  8. Elizabeth   February 18, 2019 at 9:44 am

    I don’t think it’s possible to estimate how many children’s lives “vaccines” are saving.

    If we take into account the testimony of Dr. Andrew Zimmerman and Dr. Richard Kelley acknowledging that vaccines do cause autism in children with decreased mitochondrial function- then any accurate accounting of life saving would have to account for all the children caused to have autism by vaccination. Children with severe autism have severe morbidity and often shortened lives. How many of these children die each year as the result of wandering for example? (A discussion of the testimony of these 2 neurologists working at the Kennedy Krieger Institute is available in J.B. Handley’s book, “How to End the Autism Epidemic”.)

    If we studied the mechanisms by which vaccines caused death and did more accurate autopsies that had the capacity to identify deaths caused by vaccination, then we might be able to begin to quantify how many deaths caused directly by vaccination each year the population is sustaining. We can’t know now because the entire data collection system does not identify deaths caused by vaccination. I don’t think all SIDS and SUDS deaths are caused by vaccines, but I suspect many of them are.

    It’s also hard to know how many children are made more vulnerable to death by the unstudied “non-specific” effects of vaccination. A retrospective study of children in Guinea Bissau, Africa by Peter Aaby found that children given the DTP vaccine did not die from diphtheria, tetanus, or pertussis but had double the rate of death from other infections than children who had not been vaccinated at all.

    If the scope of hyperimmune (allergy) diseases and autoimmune diseases fomented by vaccines are taken into consideration, then we must subtract deaths due to these illnesses from the total estimate of “lives saved”, such as deaths due to status asthmaticus, food anaphylaxis, intractable seizures, and cancer. It’s nearly impossible to estimate how many of these conditions are idiopathic and how many are iatrogenic.

    Reply
  9. Lisa   February 23, 2019 at 3:51 am

    @Vincent Cali why did you choose 1916? Polio deaths were down much lower by the time of the vaccine. And we don’t know how many of those were actually polio – they weren’t able or didn’t make a practice of testing for it. Before 1955, any paralysis lasting longer than a few days in at least one limb was classed as polio. After 1955 (and the introduction of the vaccine, coincidentally) it required a much longer period of paralysis to be classed as polio. in 1954 there was about 1000 deaths, which was already a large decline, which likely would have continued even without a vaccine, as many other diseases without vaccines declined.. You’re also assuming that we wouldn’t have better ability to treat it now than in the 1950s.

    Reply
  10. Adele Sanoy   February 26, 2019 at 1:22 am

    In the interest of informed consent, I wish parents were provided with the Vaccine Injury statistics, along with the disclaimer that they are extremely under-reported, as well as the total damages paid to date.

    Reply
  11. James Schaaf   March 7, 2019 at 3:40 pm

    I’m not sure what to make of this analysis other than it seems seriously flawed.

    The writer understanding of the WHO method is “based on the assumption that most of the children under five years of age who died around the world were unvaccinated. As the number of deaths of children in this age range declined, the assumption was that the declines were largely due to increased vaccination rates.”

    But this seems inconsistent with the statement that the “assumptions of no immunization and current incidence and mortality rates in children not immunized.”

    It’s hard to tell from a reported summary of the methodology, but it seems like the WHO simply took the death rate due to the diseases with vaccines among unvaccinated people and applied that rate to the vaccinated people.

    The part where Mr. Caceres finds a maximum number of lives saved to be 217,000 per year seems to be incorrect as well. Two points are that vaccines have been around before 1990, and that the population is growing so even if the total deaths held steady, there may be lives saved.

    More importantly, why would you divide by the number of years? if there’s 12.7 million deaths in 1990 and 8.8 million deaths in 2008, the maximum number of lives saved would be 3.9 million a year.

    This would be the case if vaccinations were the cause of 100% of the reduction in deaths (which it is not). Imagine a case where it is true that vaccinations WERE the cause of all the reduction. The author states the maximum that could account for is 217,000. What then accounts for the other ~3.7 millions less deaths per year?

    Reply
  12. Trish   March 8, 2019 at 5:01 pm

    I don’t believe this, there are too many variables. Worldwide many nations have poor nutrition and bad water. This WHO estimate assumes those who died were unvaccinated.

    On 3/6/19 a NY Times article claimed a large Danish study proved that MMR did NOT cause Autism. No, these are biased studies:

    1) researched by and paid for by the vaccine companies (this one is funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation and research completed by Danish vaccine maker Statens Serum Institut.) 2) medical journal editors own stock in these companies 3) only the MMR was studied (even though children received many other vaccinations previously) 4) children with preexisting conditions didn’t get the MMR and were kept out of the study and they were used as a control as being “unvaccinated” (but they received many other vaccines) Aluminum adjuvents in various vaccinations are cumulative 5) the national register in Denmark is unreliable, according to published science.
    Less than two years ago, a study was published showing the inconsistencies of the Danish National Register, which is the dataset used in this study. 6) Healthy User Bias (Healthy people are more likely to choose to be vaccinated; those with chronic diseases or health issues tend to avoid the risk of vaccination; those who choose vax tend to have other healthy behaviors, i.e. diet, exercise, regular screening). 

    NOTE: Here in the U.S. we’re at 1 in 36! Shouldn’t CDC researchers rush to Denmark to figure out why their autism rate is so much lower than ours? For every 1,000 Danish kids, only 10 have autism. But here in the U.S., we have 28 per 1,000–that’s 177% more autism! ****J.B. Handley, a blogger and parent of an autistic child’s own personal theory as to why the Danes have a lower autism rate (1) They do NOT give the Hepatitis B vaccine. No kids in this study received that vaccine, and the Chinese recently showed Hep B vaccine causes brain damage in mice. (2) The Danes also do NOT give the Rotavirus vaccine or flu vaccine. (The much lower vaccination requirement of Danish children versus American children is NOT mentioned anywhere in the study.)

    In 21 of 24 autism studies including this researcher, A Hviid, one of his co-author on many of these studies, worked as a visiting scientist at CDC, Division of Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, before the grant was awarded.

    Poal Thorsen, is now a most wanted by the FBI for stealing over $1 Million grant money and not doing the research. From approximately February 2004 until February 2010, Poul Thorsen executed a scheme to steal grant money awarded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). CDC had awarded grant money to Denmark for research involving infant disabilities, autism, genetic disorders, and fetal alcohol syndrome. CDC awarded the grant to fund studies of the relationship between autism and the exposure to vaccines. n April 2011, Thorsen was indicted on 22 counts of Wire Fraud and Money Laundering. According to bank account records, Thorsen purchased a home in Atlanta, a Harley Davidson motorcycle, an Audi automobile, and a Honda SUV with funds that he received from the CDC grants.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.