Most places that add confusion to the coincidence of your dying less than 24 hours after being vaccinated are from sketchy (at best) sources, but they do make Daddy ask more and more questions. A report from the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies (a fairly respectable group) implies that they just do not know and uses language that sounds like they are hedging their bets.
Based on this review, the committee concluded that the evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between some vaccines and SIDS; and that the evidence is inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship between other vaccines and SIDS, SUDI, or neonatal death.If it is just a coincidence that you died, in part, due to getting your immunizations then just come out and say that. If there might be a link, say that too, but do not straddle the fence with "the evidence is inadequate to accept or reject a casual relationship." What does that mean? And if the evidence is inadequate, how in the world can they say that current policies do not need to be reviewed?
The committee found no basis for a review of current immunization policies, but saw a clear need for continued research on adverse event following vaccination and on the biological basis for sudden unexpected infant deaths.What a steaming pile that is! If there is inadequate evidence and babies are still dying, policies do need to be reviewed. If one baby dies from misinformation about vaccines, then the information needs to be reviewed, revised, and communicated in a way that very clearly states that they either cause or do not cause infant deaths of any kind. It is only fair to the infants and the parents that we know definitively (or at least as close to definitive as possible) what in the world is going on with our children's health.
Daddy knows that medicine is as much an art as a science, but giving misleading or contradictory information is worse than giving no information at all.
I love you and miss you!