The Ugly Untold Truth About the Pertussis Vaccine

by Sep 14, 2015Health & Vaccines334 comments

Electron microscope image of the bacteria (bordetella pertussis) responsible for pertussis (whooping cough). (Photo: Alain Grillet/Sanofi Pasteur)

The New York Times reports that the greatest risk to infants of pertussis infection comes from older siblings, but leaves out key parts of the story.

The New York Times reports on a new study finding that the greatest risk to infants of being infected with the bacteria that causes whooping cough, or pertussis, now comes from their older siblings. The Times explains that this is “probably a result of waning immunity among children and adolescents who had received the DTaP vaccine.”

Indeed, waning immunity is a serious problem with the DTaP combination vaccine (which contains diptheria, tetanus, and pertussis antigens). One recent study published in Pediatrics concluded, “Tdap protection wanes within 2 to 4 years. Lack of long-term protection after vaccination is likely contributing to increases in pertussis among adolescents.”

But the Times is misleading its readers by telling only one part of the story, leaving readers with the impression that simply giving more “booster” shots would solve the problem.

It wouldn’t.

Vaccinated Individuals Spread Disease

Waning immunity by itself doesn’t explain the trend described. As another recent study in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases points out, “pertussis is currently the least well-controlled vaccine-preventable disease despite excellent vaccination coverage and 6 vaccines doses recommended between 2 months of age and adolescence” (emphasis added).

Undervaccination is hardly the problem.

One critical piece of information the Times doesn’t indulge its readers with is that the vaccine does not prevent transmission of the disease. Instead, vaccinated individuals may become asymptomatic carriers.

A study conducted by the FDA and published in PNAS found that vaccinated baboons “were protected from severe pertussis-associated symptoms but not from colonization, did not clear the infection faster than naive animals, and readily transmitted B. pertussis to unvaccinated contacts.”

The researchers reasoned that this was due to the differences between the kind of immunity conferred by natural infection and that conferred by the vaccine. Natural infection confers a robust cell-mediated immunity that vaccination actually prevents by favoring humoral immunity, which is to say the vaccine stimulates the production of antibodies but not the “memory” cells required for robust and long-lasting immunity.

As the FDA summarized in a press release, their findings suggested that “although individuals immunized [sic] with an acellular pertussis vaccine may be protected from disease, they may still become infected with the bacteria without always getting sick and are able to spread infection to others, including young infants.”

The director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, where the study was conducted, described it as “critically important to understanding some of the reasons for the rising rates of pertussis”.

The New York Times, incidentally, did at the time report the findings of the FDA study that “people recently vaccinated may be continuing to spread the infection without getting sick.” It quoted the lead author of the study explaining, “When you’re newly vaccinated you are an asymptomatic carrier, which is good for you, but not for the population.”

That is the opposite of what parents are typically told about the need for vaccinations, that the “herd” needs to be vaccinated to protect those too young to receive the vaccine: infants. In fact, the logical conclusion of this finding is that parents who vaccinate a child who has an infant sibling are putting the infant at risk.

And it is infants, not older children, who are most at risk of developing serious complications from the disease.

Needless to say, that risk is not something parents are routinely informed of during visits to their pediatrician’s office (or by the media, as the Times so aptly demonstrates in this example).

But that’s not all. There is another risk of vaccination that parents are not being told.

Vaccine Policy and Genetic Selection

The widespread use of the pertussis vaccine seems to have resulted in natural selection (or unnatural selection, rather) of strains of the bacteria that not only are more resistant to vaccination, but actually favors vaccinated individuals.

Just as the overuse of antibiotics has led to the alarming rise of antibiotic-resistant “superbugs”, so can vaccines put pressure on viruses and bacteria to select for resistant and potentially more virulent strains.

In the case of pertussis, the CDC has internally noted that “the recent resurgence in pertussis cases has been associated with waning immunity over time in persons who received the acellular pertussis vaccine”, but that (bold emphasis added)

a recent study suggests another explanation for decreased vaccine effectiveness: an increase in Bordetella pertussis isolates that lack pertactin (PRN)–a key antigen component of the acellular pertussis vaccine. A study that screened B. pertussis strains isolated between 1935 and 2012 for gene insertions that prevent production of PRN found significant increases in PRN-deficient isolates throughout the United States. The earliest PRN-deficient strain was isolated in 1994; by 2012, the percentage of PRN-deficient isolates was more than 50%.

CDC researchers examined data from epidemics in Washington and Vermont. Here’s what they found:

Findings indicated that 85% of the isolates were PRN-deficient and vaccinated patients had significantly higher odds than unvaccinated patients of being infected with PRN-deficient strains. Moreover, when patients with up-to-date DTaP vaccinations were compared to unvaccinated patients, the odds of being infected with PRN-deficient strains increased, suggesting that PRN- bacteria may have a selective advantage in infecting DTaP-vaccinated persons.

So, to sum up:

A) The pertussis vaccine doesn’t prevent transmission of the disease (and in fact may increase transmission since vaccinated individuals are likely to be asymptomatic and hence no precautions not to expose infants in the family will be taken).

B) Most B. pertussis strains now in circulation in the US are PRN-deficient.

C) Vaccinated individuals are at a higher risk of infection from PRN-deficient strains than unvaccinated individuals.

The corollary sees inescapable that now–ironically thanks to public vaccine policy–vaccinating children for pertussis not only places any infants in the family at risk of getting the disease, but also places at greater risk the vaccinated children themselves.

A subsequent study in Clinical Infectious Diseases looked at data from eight states and found that, overall, 85% of pertussis isolates were PRN-deficient, with a range from 67% in Colorado to 100% in New Mexico.

Moreover, vaccinated individuals were found to have “a significantly higher odds” of having PRN-deficient B. pertussis than unvaccinated individuals.

And by “significantly”, they meant that vaccinated individuals were more than twice as likely to be infected as the unvaccinated. In fact, they found that fully vaccinated case patients had “a 2- to 4-fold greater odds” of having PRN-deficient B. pertussis than the unvaccinated.

Without explicitly pinpointing public vaccine policy as the catalyst, they note the appearance of “a selective advantage to lacking the protein” for the bacteria.

Indeed.

Of course, one would think that such findings might call into question public vaccine policy. But an institutional myopia exists such that questioning public policy is out of the question. The FDA study finding that pertussis vaccines do not prevent transmission of the disease, for example, concluded that the solution was “the development of improved vaccines”.

The simple notion that the human body was designed naturally to have an immune system capable of fending off infectious diseases and that we ought to focus therefore on ways to build up natural immunity, such as through proper nutrition, is practically anathema to the theory underlying public vaccine policy (not to mention the mega-profits for the pharmaceutical companies who have been granted legal immunity by the federal government from damages caused by their vaccine products).

At the very least, parents ought to be properly informed by the media, public health officials, and their pediatricians. But getting even that modicum of sensibility to be widely practiced will no doubt certainly be a long, arduous road for advocates of informed consent.

Did you find value in this content? If so and you have the means, please consider supporting my independent journalism.

About Jeremy R. Hammond

About Jeremy R. Hammond

I am an independent journalist, political analyst, publisher and editor of Foreign Policy Journal, book author, and writing coach.

My writings empower readers with the knowledge they need to see through state propaganda intended to manufacture their consent for criminal government policies.

By recognizing when we are being lied to and why, we can fight effectively for liberty, peace, and justice, in order to create a better world for ourselves, our children, and future generations of humanity.

Please join my growing community of readers!

 

Download my free report 5 Horrifying Facts about the FDA Vaccine Approval Process.

Download my free report 5 Horrifying Facts about the FDA Vaccine Approval Process.

Related Articles

334 Comments

  1. Gen

    Thanks for the enlightening article. Sharing this one for sure!

    Reply
  2. Judith

    Excellent article – sharing…
    Not only is the whooping cough vaccine ineffective but it has some nasty side effects as well:

    The DTap vaccine actually lists SIDS and Autism as adverse reactions due to the frequency of it happening during the trial. This is from the FDA website.

    “Adverse events reported during post-approval use of Tripedia vaccine include idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, SIDS,
    anaphylactic reaction, cellulitis, autism, convulsion/grand mal convulsion, encephalopathy, hypotonia, neuropathy, somnolence
    and apnea. Events were included in this list because of the seriousness or frequency of reporting. ”

    http://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/ucm101580.pdf

    Reply
    • Jeremy R. Hammond

      Yes, I didn’t have time to even begin to get into the risks from the vaccine itself. To clarify, the manufacturer’s product insert lists SIDS and autism as reported adverse events following vaccination, as distinct from an acknowledgement of causation.

      Thanks for sharing!

      Reply
      • Mike Stevens

        They reported car accidents and drowning as “adverse events” too….

        Time for you lot to look up the meaning of the term, methinks.

    • FsmPastapharian

      Really Judith? Still referencing package inserts to try to show causation? I guess you fell in a well once after getting a vaccine, too? You must be right. More irresponsible swill from you.

      Reply
  3. Mal

    What’s the point of knowing the truth? The government is forcing immunization starting January 1st. And getting the waver is only for living children. What abt the ones were pregnant with born after Jan 1st?

    Reply
    • Jeremy R. Hammond

      I don’t know what you’re referring to with regard to January 1. Could you please explain?

      Reply
      • Mal

        Well I’m not sure abt other states but in California, starting Jan 1st, a bill passed saying unless u have a medical exemption all children need immunization.

        http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/7286274

      • Mal

        Oh n I guess there’s a “grandfather clause” u can get for I’m not sure a yr or until next school. Filling out a exemption n writing a letter to congressman asking to be exempt. Except a lot of drs won’t sign the form. I already kinda tried.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Nor should they sign the exemption. The evidence is that vaccinations are a generally safe and effective means of primary illness prevention.

      • Mal

        What happened to living in the country of the free? I no longer have the right to choose what’s best for me and my family.

        Not every thing is a good for everyone. Peanuts are a healthy snack, but Ure not gonna force some one allergic to eat it. It’s the same thing w immunization. Some are allergic and have bad reactions to it. But in this case the government is saying, I don’t care if Ure allergic or not. If u die or not. If u look at a lot of cases, no let’s look at the Disneyland/measles case. 99% of those kids that got sick…we’re up to date on their mmr immunization. If the shots did “their job” shouldn’t only nonvax kids get sick? And I can almost bet those nonvax parents went after the outbreak, to catch the virus. I read so many joked abt going. To get it out of the way. It’s probably the best way to train ur body to fight off the disease compared to shots full of poison. And is it true, once u get it, ull never get measles again? Same as chicken pox. Kids nowadays don’t even get it. They skip to the more severe form, shingles. And they’re still kids! I know more 20yr olds w shingles than senior citizens. These r all children who had their immunization.

        And the great debate…if ur child is fully vax, what are u so worried abt? Shouldn’t ur shots “protect” u from nonvax children? Wouldn’t nonvax children be at greater risk? Even if u can get everyone 100% vax, u still have the risk of world travelers coming to the United States bringing their germs and diseases.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Legitimate medical exemptions ie immunocompromised would be approved. My child shouldn’t be vaccinated because great aunt tilly was allergic to eggs wont. See the difference? Real medical concerns.

        You are living in the libertarian delusion. See my previous posts for an explanation.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        You are advocating tyranny wherein a government bureaucracy determines what constitutes a “legitimate medical exemption”.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Not at all supported by evidence. The vaccination guidelines are quite clear as to what is a contraindication for further vaccination.

      • AutismDad

        No one wants to revisit your posts. It obvious you are talking nonsense and trying to make information fit your ideology.

      • Katia

        Could you repost using standard English.

      • Mal

        Could you not be a smart-ass?
        If you’re going to correct someone, use correct punctuation. ?

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        The libertarian fantasy.

        Rights are not unlimited. I sent my children to school because it was the right thing to do. I wear a seatbelt because a traumatic brain injury can cost literally millions of dollars in health care costs. Children are in car seats for similar reasons. Each of these actions are required by law to protect children and it serves the larger interests of society and the individual.

        These laws were all enacted to protect children from parental decisions that could cause them grave harm. Every single one has been held as constitutional and a valid exercise of regulatory and police powers of the state.

        MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2014 Apr 25;63(16):352-5.

        Benefits from immunization during the vaccines for children program era – United States, 1994-2013

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        The concept of “limited” rights is meaningless. You are simply a totalitarian bully who wishes to enforce his will upon others through the use of government force, regardless of the risk to others of violating their right to informed consent.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Again not supported by evidence. As a practitioner I am quite concerned about informed consent.

        We all have responsibilities to the community at large.

      • AutismDad

        Totalitarian Bully at work

      • Mal

        U don’t send ur kids to school or wear ur seatbelt because u want to. U do it cuz its the law. And I agree. I follow the laws to the best of my ability. N now I’ll have to inject my child w poison, cuz it’s the law. But it is not the law to say I can’t think for myself and do what’s right (in the gray area). It’s my god given right, err, no it’s my constitutional right.

        “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” — Preamble to the Constitution

        If that means I have a libertarian fantasy, well then why the hell do we still follow the Constitution? All I’m saying is, I should have a choice. Not forced.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        The supreme court has ruled on this issue at least three times since 1905. Every time they have upheld mandatory vaccination laws.

        I would encourage you to read on immunity by Eula Bliss.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Your argument is Mal should be forced to undertake a medical procedure against his will because the Supreme Court says so?

      • Shawn_Siegel

        Unlike seatbelts, vaccines are inherently harmful. Vaccination bypasses a river of innate immune reactions designed to prevent toxic vaccine ingredients from entering the bloodstream, and the effects are insidious. The resultant injuries are divorced from the fact of the vaccination, obfuscating causal relation, unless you’ve dedicated time to research beyond the mainstream, which it behooves every parent to do.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Although the overall effect did not reach statistical significance, the results may indicate that a two dose schedule with Edmonston-Zagreb measles vaccine given at 4.5 and 9 months of age has beneficial non-specific effects on children’s survival, particularly for girls and for children who have not received neonatal vitamin A. This should be tested in future studies in different locations.

        BMJ. 2010 Nov 30;341:c6495. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c6495.

        Non-specific effects of standard measles vaccine at 4.5 and 9 months of age on childhood mortality: randomised controlled trial.

        Aaby P1, Martins CL, Garly ML, Balé C, Andersen A, Rodrigues A, Ravn H, Lisse IM, Benn CS, Whittle HC.

        Author information

        Yet more evidence that mmr has benefit for prevention of all cause mortalty.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        See previous comment.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        There was evidence of association between a negative history of measles, exposure in early life, and development of immunoreactive diseases, sebaceous skin diseases, degenerative diseases of bone and cartilage, and certain tumours.

        “Measles virus infection without rash in childhood is related to disease in adult life,” Lancet, January 5 1985, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2856946

        A reduced risk of Parkinson’s disease was associated with most childhood viral infections. The negative association was statistically significant for a history of measles prior to college entrance.

        “Measles infection and Parkinson’s disease,” American Journal of Epidemiolgy, December 1985,http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4061437

        Our results pointed out a protective role of childhood infectious diseases on the risk of CLL [chronic lymphoid leukaemia] in adults.

        “Childhood infectious diseases and risk of leukaemia in an adult population,” International Journal of Cancer, October 15 2013, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23575988

        Measles and mumps, especially in case of both infections, were associated with lower risks of mortality from atherosclerotic CVD [Cardiovascular Disease].

        “Association of measles and mumps with cardiovascular disease: The Japan Collaborative Cohort (JACC) study,” Atherosclerosis, Jun 18 2015, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26122188

        In the 1970s, measles infections were observed to cause regression of pre-existing cancer tumors in children.

        “Harnessing The Measles Virus To Attack Cancer,” Science Daily, October 31, 2006,http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/10/061030143318.htm

      • Don

        Don’t you just hate that seat belt argument?

      • AutismDad

        POLICE POWERS…says it all

      • Shawn_Siegel

        Actually, the evidence is that all the proffered reasons to vaccinate are in reality a web of statistical manipulation, misinformation and social coercion. Research the polio vaccine, outside the mainstream box, and you’ll find that radical changes the CDC made to the diagnostic parameters of the disease as soon as the vaccine was licensed automatically and in essence immediately reduced the annual incidence of polio by 90% – 34,500 cases. Every bit of that reduction was a direct result of the diagnostic changes, but we were and are still told that the vaccine eliminated those cases.

        It’s a con game. Research. Educate. The health of our kids is at stake.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        There have been only 24 cases of polio this year. Polio Eradication will probably be eliminated by 2020.

        Think about that. A disease that was endemic in all regions of the world has been confined to 2 countries in the space of 2 generations.

        My grandmother as a nurse saw the end of smallpox in the us. My mother as a nurse saw the end of polio epidemics in her first 10 years of practice. She saw the eradication of smallpox in 1982.

        As a nurse I will see the end of polio and probably measles by 2025 when I retire.

        All attributable to vaccination programs.

      • Judith

        Polio problems. The World Health Organization (WHO) announced polio had paralyzed a 4-year-old and 10-month-old in Ukraine, marking Europe’s first polio outbreak in five years. And on Monday, WHO said a child in Mali, a nation in West Africa, had contracted polio and been paralyzed.

        In both cases, the polio came not from a virus circulating in the wild but from oral polio vaccines, which use weakened, live versions of the virus that carry a rare but persistent possibility of mutating into a dangerous strain. Once a child with a mutated strain excretes it (polio is primarily spread by fecal matter), the virus may begin circulating among unimmunized people. In Ukraine, only about half of children have been fully vaccinated. Including the Mali case, there have been 13 instances of vaccine-derived polio paralysis around the world so far this year. There were 55 such cases in 2014.

        http://www.worldmag.com/2015/09/vaccines_viruses_vaccine_derived_polio_breaks_out_in_ukraine_and_mali

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Again. The GPEI is aware of this issue opv will be discontinued as soon as there are no wild

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Type 2 viruses in circulation. I don’t know what the threshold is but with record low case numbers it is within 1 to 3 years.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        The laws are different here in Michigan. Also repulsive, but fortunately not quite as totalitarian as California.

    • Jeremy R. Hammond

      I absolutely agree with that. Yes, indeed, it is child abuse, a gross violation of the rights of the child.

      Reply
      • Mike Stevens

        Nice of you to confirm your objectivity.

      • FsmPastapharian

        Yes, preventing them from getting life- and health-threatening diseases is so abusive. Call social services immediately!!

      • John Scudamore

        ‘violation of the rights of the child’. doesn’t quite cover it, it is attempted murder as Shaw said in 1911. We have 230 Gardasil VAERS deaths to prove that now. Vaccination like 99% of Pharma drugs are just a weapon disguised as medicine. Big Pharma kills 2 million every year in the USA alone, for profit. http://whale.to/c/big_brother.html

      • AutismDad

        Its criminal negligence causing harm and death. But as we saw with MERCK’S VIOXX, no amount of harm will shame governments that have sworn to protect Pharma companies..

      • John Scudamore

        pharma & government are one and the same, it’s fascism, been that way for years, and u can’t shame psychopaths

      • Don

        I watched a good friend suffer immensely after her daughter was harmed by the gardasil vaccine. That young woman suffered for so long. She went from being an athlete and dancer to suddenly being almost crippled. A perfectly healthy young woman. As much as my friend suffered along with her daughter; she is now making parents aware of what can happen. She also goes into the schools (when she’s allowed) to speak to students, educators and other patents as well. These parents are smart and strong; they really don’t care what people say or do to attempt to discredit them. I admire them so much and there’s no way in hell any child of mine is going to have that vaccine. It is very dangerous.

  4. Dave

    Amazing article, thank you. I hope you’ll write one on the risks of Vaccination as well. We need more concise, eloquent articles with proper references like this to share.

    Reply
      • Judith

        Please keep writing Jeremy I share all your posts. When you have the science on your side – it is easy to refute the weak evidence of those who challenge you.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Thank you for your encouragement, Judith! Will do.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Here are the current recommendations…

        Abstract for Reference 24

        24
        TI
        Preventing tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis among adolescents: use of tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid and acellular pertussis vaccines recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP).
        AU
        Broder KR, Cortese MM, Iskander JK, Kretsinger K, Slade BA, Brown KH, Mijalski CM, Tiwari T, Weston EJ, Cohn AC, Srivastava PU, Moran JS, Schwartz B, Murphy TV, Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)
        SO
        MMWR Recomm Rep. 2006;55(RR-3):1.

        During spring 2005, two tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid and acellular pertussis vaccine (Tdap) products formulated for use in adolescents (and, for one product, use in adults) were licensed in the United States (BOOSTRIX, GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals, Rixensart, Belgium [licensed May 3, 2005, for use in persons aged 10-18 years], and ADACEL, sanofi pasteur, Toronto, Ontario, Canada [licensed June 10, 2005, for use in persons aged 11-64 years]). Prelicensure studies demonstrated safety and efficacy against tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis when Tdap was administered as a single booster dose to adolescents. To reduce pertussis morbidity in adolescents and maintain the standard of care for tetanus and diphtheria protection, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends that: 1) adolescents aged 11-18 years should receive a single dose of Tdap instead of tetanus and diphtheria toxoids vaccine (Td) for booster immunization against tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis if they have completed the recommended childhood diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and whole cell pertussis vaccine (DTP)/diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and acellular pertussis vaccine (DTaP) vaccination series (five doses of pediatric DTP/DTaP before the seventh birthday; if the fourth dose was administered on or after the fourth birthday, the fifth dose is not needed) and have not received Td or Tdap. The preferred age for Tdap vaccination is 11-12 years; 2) adolescents aged 11-18 years who received Td, but not Tdap, are encouraged to receive a single dose of Tdap to provide protection against pertussis if they have completed the recommended childhood DTP/DTaP vaccination series. An interval of at least 5 years between Td and Tdap is encouraged to reduce the risk for local and systemic reactions after Tdap vaccination. However, an interval less than 5 years between Td and Tdap can be used; and 3) vaccine providers should administer Tdap and tetravalent meningococcal conjugate vaccine (Menactra, sanofi pasteur, Swiftwater, Pennsylvania) to adolescents aged 11-18 years during the same visit if both vaccines are indicated and available. This statement 1) reviews tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis vaccination policy in the United States, with emphasis on adolescents; 2) describes the clinical features and epidemiology of pertussis among adolescents; 3) summarizes the immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety data of the two Tdap vaccines licensed for use among adolescents; and 4) presents recommendations for tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis vaccination among adolescents aged 11-18 years.
        AD
        Epidemiology and Surveillance Division, National Immunization Program, CDC, USA. [email protected]
        PMID
        16557217

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Whether the WHO promotes the “best available evidence” is questionable, but if there’s something specific about the source you’d like to discuss, you’re welcome to present it.

      • ang

        That whole who paper, saying there is no resurgence of whooping cough???? Written in 2013, when FDA admitted the vaccine was causing the problem??? HELLO LOOK OUT THE WINDOW, SEE ALL THOSE PEOPLE COUGHING, ??? WHOOPING COUGH!!!! 90% vaccated, all 6-12 years all all coughing, and the ones not coughing, still with vaccine protection, SPREADING IT AS WELL, WITHOUT SYMPTOMS??? We got more whooping cough in Australia, than before vaccines. I had never seen wc, before the aP vaccines, even working in pathology for 30 years! We had no whooping cough, then they started vaccinating with the part cell, the aP vaccine, 1992???? look at the graph!!!!! and we now have more whooping cough than ever? Not a resurgence at all, we never EVER HAD WHOOPING COUGH AT THIS ABSURD HIGH RATE, EVER….1991/2 near zero! ……. OMG, 100% increase per year in Australia is not an increase? Suddenly occured when they replaced DTP with the useless aP vaccine???? LOOKS SUSPICIOUSLY LIKE THAT HAPPENED IN 1992???? Dont tell me Australia is the only place with this aburd 100% per year increase incidence of pertussis, even with our 90% vaccination rates? Who are these WHO people? they got script writers to write their reports, just like GSK, and Merck, and CDC? Then they write better monitoring, or we now use PCR tests. WE DIDNT NEED PCR TESTS BEFORE !!! THERE WAS NO PERTUSSIS!! The graph continues, yes increase of 100% per year, in years 2012,2013,2014, and so it goes on, so they vaccinate more, and make more aP vaccinated carriers? Babies are dying now, from being infected by aP vaccinated mothers/siblings, carriers without even having symptoms? Hello? The vaccinated herd is a cesspool of pertussis…………. THANKS TO AP VACCINE. BAN THE VACCCINE, END THIS MADNESS!

      • AutismDad

        W.H.O. vaccine central. We already know their stance. We know that no matter what, they are vaccine dealers with no other purpose.

      • eggman2

        Sold out

      • Dorothy Erickson

        Currently my family is insisting on my vaccination with Dtap in order to, supposedly, protect our soon-to-be born grandson. I contend, due to what i have researched, I can be more dangerous to the baby vaccinated. This issue has split us as I will not be allowed to see my grandchilden or help her with her toddler and the baby for two months until he has his first Dtap vaccination.
        I am feeling backed into a corner, after not having any vaccinations for almost 25 years. I have heard its a recommendation only, but its not to them.

      • Diane

        Did we make people get it when we had babies. No one bothered or was not even mentioned when my grandchildren were born even up to 1999 when I had a late one at nearly 42. Nope. No one had to have it when they came to visit in the hospital. But now they want you to get it. I never went in to see my nieces and nephews babies because I didn’t have Whooping cough and wasn’t going to have the vaccine just to see a baby.

  5. Plagued

    Seeing a child fight for their life from Tetnus is … Horrer.
    Seeing a child suffer from vaccine injury is…a life sentence of regret & horror. As a parent solely responsible for this frighteningly innocent and fragile life ..I find both options to the decision whether to vaccinate, no different than choosing which loaded gun to pick up off the table press to your child’s head… A sickening decision I find. One in which the attempt to find a responsible solution to will take you down a rabbit hole that leaves you even more horrified at the decision that you are appearantly solely responsible for …

    Reply
  6. zapp7

    This article is completely irresponsible. It is not possible for the vaccine to make you sick, its design makes this impossible.
    http://justthevax.blogspot.com.au/2012/08/100-certainty.html

    To those in the comments, the “adverse events” section of the vaccine insert lists any and all things that happened to occur during a trial. No causation can inferred.

    While it is quite possible the Tdap vaccine allows for asymptomatic transmission, this has been seen in baboons and not yet confirmed in humans. Given that the evidence shows the vaccine still protects against symptoms, there is STILL a reduction in transmission among those who are vaccinated simply because they are not coughing.

    There are two choices: 1) Get the vaccine and be protected from the symptoms of pertussis IF you catch the disease, which will result in less coughing/symptoms and a lower chance of infecting others. 2) Don’t get the vaccine, suffer far worse symptoms with a higher risk of death the younger you are and have a higher chance of spreading it to others.

    Finally, if the general public was capable of doing a proper risk assessment and weighing the benefits vs. risks, a much more effective whole cell vaccine would be in use. The pertussis vaccine is a great example of the “nirvana fallacy” among anti-vaxxers, where they believe something needs to be 100% effective and 100% safe, which is not achievable. They fear monger about adverse events even if the benefits outweigh the risks and then when a safer but less effective vaccine is made, they complain about lower effectiveness.
    https://skepticscollege.wordpress.com/2015/08/16/whoop-there-it-is-an-overview-of-pertussis-vaccines/

    Reply
    • Jeremy R. Hammond

      This article is completely irresponsible. It is not possible for the vaccine to make you sick…

      I quite reading right there. Quit wasting everybody’s time. I’d like to have a serious discussion here.

      Reply
      • lynneb

        If you wanted to have a serious discussion, then maybe you should stop propagating misinformation and make an effort to actually understand the study you “report” on.

        The vaccine is Acellular pertussis. It does not contain intact pertussis. It is not possible for the vaccine to actually make people sick.

        The only risk is that people may catch wild-strain pertussis despite being vaccinated. But, again, an asymptomatic (that is, NOT COUGHING) carrier is at less risk of transmitting the infection than someone who is actively coughing it out.

        In order to protect infants perfectly, we need to be -aware- of the possibility of people being asymptomatic carriers, and continue to work on a more effective vaccine. However, claiming that what we have now is more dangerous than not vaccinating is completely contrary to the actual conclusions of this and many other studies.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        If you wanted to have a serious discussion, you would address what I’ve actually written, rather than resort to strawman argumentation.

        I never wrote that you can get whooping cough from the vaccine.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Same stuff different day…

      • Katia

        Well, you did quit reading at the point where Lynne said “It is not possible for the vaccine to make you sick”. So what do you think about that?

      • Nita

        I would quit reading if I was misquoted too. No where in his text did he say that the vaccine makes you sick. So, for this person to start their comment with nonsense, makes it a waste of time to acknowledge anything else they have to say.

      • ang

        Sonja, is English your first language?

      • Judith

        A new study published in BMC Medicine by Santa Fe Institute Omidyar Fellows Ben Althouse and Sam Scarpino. Their research points to a different, but related, source of the outbreak – vaccinated people who are infectious but who do not display the symptoms of whooping cough, suggesting that the number of people transmitting without symptoms may be many times greater than those transmitting with symptoms.
        What’s worse, their model shows that if the disease can be spread through vaccinated, asymptomatic individuals essentially undetected, the level of vaccination needed to protect those that are unvaccinated (so-called “herd immunity”) is over 99 percent, impractically high at a time when anti-vaccine campaigns are turning people away from vaccination.
        Their results also suggest that a practice called cocooning, where mothers, fathers, and siblings are vaccinated to protect newborns, isn’t effective. “It just doesn’t work, because even if you get the acellular vaccine you can still become infected and can still transmit. So that baby is not protected,” Althouse says.
        http://www.biomedcentral.com/1

      • ang

        The cocconing was abandoned in Australia by Public Health in 2012. Obviously, revaccination, only increases the aP vaccinated symptomless carriers. All the parents that had aP vaccines, the vaccines had long since failed, ie they could not longer be aP vaccinated carriers, so rejabbing them, just made the problems worse. They still caught pertussis, just didnt have symptoms. The actual statistics for how long the aP vaccine, protects the vaccineee from the pertussis in their own throats, is Upon full vaccination age 5 (6 jabs)? 8 out of 10 are immune to pertusis, by 5 years, this has fallen to only 3 out of 10 protected, at ten years, the vaccine is a failure IN EVERYONE GIVEN IT> So to prevent these people in the very infected herd, from getting symtoms from the pertussis being spread around them, constantly, even a 100% vaccination rate, and re jabs every 2 years, less than half the vaccinees would be prevented from catching pertussis by the aP vaccine. So, if CDC, WHO, actually think that rejabbing everyone every two years for a 50% effectiveness rate, while the other 50% of the herd are still infected carriers, over and over, well think they are looking like complete fools. And the fact newborns cant be vaccinated, and catch pertussis from this infected herd, well how absurd. Stop vaccinating, and pertussis will disappear, no more carriers in around 5 years.

      • Judith

        Also we have the whooping cough mutating and 80% are due to strains that do not have pertactin. This means that 80% of people are not protected by the current vaccine – big news but you still get the propoganda machine in overdrive.

        “So far, it has been bad news as experts have found out the bacteria causing whooping cough have evolved.

        The most likely culprit in the mutation of the Bordertella pertussis, the bacterium causing whooping cough, is the vaccine used to protect humans against it. The vaccine has been effective by zeroing in on pertactin, a protein that plays a major role in the development of the illness.

        “It’s like a game of hide and seek. It is harder for the antibodies made by the body’s immune system in response to vaccination to ‘search and destroy’ the whooping cough bacteria which lack pertactin. This could mean that these pertactin-free strains have gained a selective advantage over bacterial strains with the pertactin protein,” said Ruiting Lan, senior author of the latest study on whooping cough and associate professor at School of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences at the University of New South Wales.”

        The team of experts, led by UNSW PhD candidate Connie Lam, have looked into cases of whooping cough from across Australia and have found out that roughly 80 percent of the cases in 2012 were due to strains of the bacterium that do not have pertactin.

        “The fact that they have arisen independently in different countries suggests this is in response to the vaccine.

      • ang

        I do not listen to the propaganda machine, which often involves the Health Department bureaucrats. I worked in pathology during the 2010 outbreak in Western Australia, Was about 3 months before the first doctors started requesting testing. 45,000 people, ALL GOT EXPOSED. Most kids were coughing it at school, out of school, shopping, everywhere for about 4-6 weeks before they got tested, went on for months. ALL THE KIDS WERE FULLY VACCINATED> Not one victim, I am aware of, in the parents, or anyone who had never been vaccinated, or anyone who had the whole cell vaccine. The parents never caught it. When the Health Department tested other kids, without symptoms, they mostly all had pertussis colonizing their throats anyway, the vaccine just stopped their own bodies from actually getting it, and the symptoms. They can blame the bacteria for mutating, all they want, either way, the vaccine the aP, lasts an average of only 3 years………………… Hardly an effective vaccine. And during this time, the kids, catch, carry and spread it, over and over……….. not just once.

      • ang

        O fcourse its a response to the aP vaccine, Australia never ever had whooping cough outbreaks EVER. No vaccination, or whole cell 30% VACCINATION, no pertussis. They bring in aP vaccine, and the graph says it all! I didnt realise countries who abandoned vaccinations for whooping cough, never have any outbreaks………………….. look at Australia! 90% vaccination rate, pertussis cases now 360 per 100,000 (in those that show symptoms!), and most doctors dont bother to report anymore, because what is the point? The ones not coughing are spreading it too. Madness has to stop. Now vaccinating pregnant mothers, to stop babies catching it from their own family aP vaccinated carriers? Brazil, vaccinations began last May, look what happened in October? USA has 25,000 microcepahlic babies a year, more than the “”zika (sic)”” outbreak in Brazil, but theres no mossies in USA?

      • ang

        As for 80% of the current population not protected from the current vaccine? Everyone over 22 whatever, IS PROTECTED BY THEIR PREVIOUS VACCINE> Its still working, I have never had whooping cough, nor my kids, nor anyone elses kids who had the whole cell, in Albany and the whole population ALL 45,000 WERE EXPOSED. We all got coughed over! 80% of the population wont get pertussis anyway! If people reckon this new useless aP vaccine that only lasts 3 years, protecting themselves (while they still spread pertussis) is a rational thing to get jabbed for, god help the world!
        Pertussis is mild in kids anyway!
        These kids didnt even consider pertussis, for 4-6 weeks, before they got tested, they were all aged 6-12 so said exactly from the stastics how long the aP vaccine lasted (av 3 years)… none in hospital, just a nasty long lasting cough. That is all pertussis is in kids, the Health Department specifically DID NOT RECOMMEND REVACCINATING kids at age 12, why bother? they all catching pertussis anyway, before age 12, despite all the bi yearly jabs, all getting a cough, so what…. then they got real lifelong immunity, and can protect their own babies with maternal antibodies, when they have them. And no longer can they be vaccinated aP carriers, infecting everyone without even having symptoms!
        As for keep the vaccine, as its the best thing we have got? Bullshit, that vaccine is the cause of the damn epidemics, the cause of baby deaths………….. This vaccine god, has got out of control.

        The crap that if you get pertussis, or a vaccine, it only lasts ten years IS A LOAD OF HOGWASH. Whole cell, (if it worked, ie worked in 8 out of 10) or you get pertussis, you get lifelong immunity, LIFELONG MEANS LIFELONG.

        ap VACCINE, if it works (works in 8 out of 10 at full vaccination), is 100% FAILURE IN EVERYONE BY TEN YEARS.

        So who is purposely confusing people here? The only failure is the aP vaccine………………….. And hope they never bring back the whole cell, because that caused brain damage in 1 in 700 who damn had it!

      • ang

        lynneb = viking = zapp7 quote “” In order to protect infants perfectly, we need to be -aware- of the possibility of people being asymptomatic carriers, and continue to work on a more effective vaccine. “” same stupid comments, must be same person. ” Who are the “we”” in your comments?
        lynneb, no one ever said aP vaccine sheds? Where has anyone ever written this? If you dont understand that, why are you commenting? especially with the “”we know the vaccine doesnt work, but we need to use it till we can improve it”” worn out GSK mantra!
        asymptomatic is at less risk of transmitting the disease than someone coughing. No, not if they are the siblings or mother of the baby.
        Are you saying it is OK to be vaccinated, not get sick, but still be asymtomatic carrier? ie the vaccination is making you a carrier, but thats fine, cause you aint sick, and stuff anyone who gets too close and catches it from you? Including babies. nasty selfish person you must be?

        Of course vaccinating with aP is more dangerous than not vaccinating. IT IS DANGEROUS FOR THE HERD, THOSE PEOPLE OUT THERE, the babies, that the vaccinated are spreading pertussis to unknowingly!!! Vaccinated people, no symtoms, are infecting babies, what use IS VACCINATION?

        Then the herd is so infected, after three years, when the vaccine fails, everyone gets pertussis anyway, because the whole herd is full of symptomless carriers?

        Australia since the aP vaccine, and a 90% vaccination rate, has gone from near no pertussis EVER, to 360 per 100,000 and this is DOUBLING EACH YEAR> Please tell me again, that you think it is better to vaccinate with this vaccine? All this in only 20 years of AP VACCINE!!!!!!

    • Zatapa

      Funny you should say that because one of the most recent pertussis outbreaks was in California which has the highest vaccination rates. Sometimes we don’t need science, we just need common sense to survive, not other people’s findings.

      Reply
      • Katia

        What a joke that CA has one of the highest immunization rates. CA has areas with very low vaccination rates. The research shows that people in these areas have a higher incidence of pertussis disease.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Please share that research with us.

        Here’s some I’ll share with you:

        Our unvaccinated and under-vaccinated population did not appear to contribute significantly to the increased rate of clinical pertussis. Surprisingly, the highest incidence of disease was among previously vaccinated children in the eight to twelve year age group.

        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22423127

      • Katia

        15 months later: http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2013/09/25/226147147/vaccine-refusals-fueled-californias-whooping-cough-epidemic.
        “Vaccine Refusals Fueled California’s Whooping Cough Epidemic”

        “Vaccine refusal was indeed a factor, researchers now say. They compared the location and number of whooping cough, or pertussis, cases in that outbreak with the personal belief exemptions filed by parents who chose not to vaccinate for reasons other than a child’s health.”

        I think the public health officials suspected that all along, and when the research verified it, they had to acknowledge it. I say that having worked in public health for many years. PH is unfortunately very political.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Parents not vaccinating their children can’t account for the fact that “the highest incidence of disease was among previously vaccinated children”. As your own source notes:

        Vaccine refusal wasn’t the only factor fueling the California outbreak. Pertussis is a cyclical disease. Protection from the current version of pertussis vaccine appears to fade more quickly than doctors originally thought, so many older children vaccinated as youngsters were no longer immune to the bacterium. And many adults had never gotten a booster.

        Finally, this study couldn’t tell if the parents who filed exemptions had vaccinated their children against some diseases, or which ones.

      • Accountable

        Great article, Jeremy. FYI – Katia (one of the many vaccine trolls) keeps referencing that stale NPR article from 2013.

        They KNEW in 2011 that waning pertussis immunity was an issue. In 2011, after a huge pertussis outbreak in Marin, David Witt, MD (chief of infectious diseases at Kaiser Permanente Medical Center in San Rafael) confirmed that “the bulk of the cases occurred among “fully vaccinated children” aged 8 to 12… “That was a surprise to us,” as it was thought most cases would be among unvaccinated children, Witt says.” (cut & paste link) http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/750210

        Or that the CDC, itself, stated in 2013 that unvaccinated kids are not the driving force behind the pertussis increase. “Yet because their numbers are small, they’re not enough to explain the overall U.S. rise. “We don’t believe the small numbers of parents who are refusing pertussis vaccines for their children are driving the large numbers of cases we’re seeing across the country,” Alison Patti, a health education specialist with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.” http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2013-05/fyi-are-unvaccinated-kids-really-causing-resurgence-whooping-cough

        Or that a more recent article in NPR from 2015 confirms NEW research that pertussis waning is causing the huge outbreaks (which contradicts NPR’s previous report): “The take-home message is that the waning is there,” said Dr. Art Reingold, a University of California, Berkeley professor of public health. “You’re protected initially but it wanes over time…He also said that adding another dose of the vaccine at a later age wouldn’t help much, based on research that was presented to the ACIP group. “[An additional dose] would have very little impact on pertussis,” he said, “in terms of cases prevented.” http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2015/05/05/404407258/whooping-cough-vaccines-protection-fades-quickly

      • ang

        Upon full vaccination, 8 our tof ten are protected, at five years after vaccination (aP), only 3 are still protected. At ten years the vaccine has completedly failed in everyone. Add to this the fact those still with vaccine protection, still catch carry and spread it, not surprising we have such massive outbreaks. You could rejab aP vaccine every 3 years,(certainly not good for your health!!!)…. and still OVER HALF THE POPULATION WOULD NOT BE PROTECTED. And by rejabbing? all you are doing is increasing the number of symptomless carriers……………….. This problem is only been here the last 20 or so years, nearly everyone over 20 is fine………. cant carry, catch or spread. Imagine in another 20 years, if they still keep jabbing with this useless vaccine? Every person age 3months to 40 years old, will be a possible carrier? Stop the absurd vaccine, and IN 5 YEARS, NEAR NO MORE VACCINATED CARRIERS!

      • ang

        Well Zatapa, Australia has a 90% vaccination rate, look what happened when they brought in aP vaccine, around 1992 (?) . Oh been doubling EACH YEAR SINCE 2011. Australia never had whooping cough, prior to the DtaP……………………… the numbers were so low, never registered on a chart like this, I mean, never, ever registered for whooping cough. Look at it now!
        Go on facebook, sick kids, been coughing for weeks, get a PCR test done, yes, it is whooping cough, but in kids, they dont get the whoop…. just a long lasting cough. Average is kids coughing for 6 weeks, before they even get tested! Its all pertusis. Only in the kids, babies, or people who had the aP vaccine, since 1992……. NO ONE ELSE.

    • ang

      omg viking has changed his name and avatar. Hope zapp7 you can at least follow the chart below. Why do you say not yet confirmed in humans? It has well be documented as being passed between humans. Reported several times in Australia. By the Health Department. But seems Australia is the only country without the blinkers on, could it be because we HAD NO PERTUSIS, prior to the aP vaccine, despite a vaccination rate increasing to 90%? Ref: vaccinated health nurse, no symptoms, infects newborn. More recently 4 babies infected in hospital, was a symptomless vaccinated nurse. As for mothers, whos babies die? No doctor will ever test the mother, how do you tell a mother, her vaccination, and her carrying the bacteria, has killed her own baby?

      Reply
  7. lynneb

    No. Just no. This is increasing the amount of misinformation in the public sphere, here.

    Vaccinating
    older siblings and family members against pertussis does NOT — repeat
    this, NOT — _increase_ risk to infants. Because it does NOT — repeat
    this again, NOT — increase the chances of the vaccinated person
    becoming infected!

    IT STILL DECREASES THE CHANCES OF THE VACCINATED PERSON BECOMING INFECTED.

    The
    point of the research was simply to point out that there was still a
    small chance of the vaccinated person becoming infected, and not knowing
    that they were.

    What definitely increases risk of transmission is:
    (a) being infected, which is still much more likely if not vaccinated;
    and
    (b) coughing.

    Please do not misinterpret the research in such a way as to continue to spread anti-vaccine paranaoia and bullshit. Kthxbye.

    Reply
    • Jeremy R. Hammond

      In the event of the older sibling becoming a carrier, it would increase the risk to the infant, for the reason stated.

      Also, you seem to have skipped over the entire section subheaded “Vaccine Policy and Genetic Selection”.

      Reply
      • lynneb

        You’re right, you got that section wrong as well. I should have noted that.

        The proportion of cases of pertussis from the PRN-deficient strain is higher simply because that is the main strain which seems to sneak through. Again, though, it does not increase the number of cases. There are fewer cases overall with vaccination than without — by a considerable number.

        You misread the study and (deliberately?) confuse -proportion- with -absolute number-.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        If you’re going to claim I got something wrong, it is incumbent upon you to state what it is, exactly, I wrote that is incorrect. I would merely note that you haven’t done so. I’ve no time for trolls.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Here is how you have it wrong:

        Depending on the propor- tion of such isolates in a population, aP vaccine immu- nity could potentially be affected. However, significant changes in the field effectiveness of aP vaccines have not been documented despite changes over time in the genetic makeup of circulating B. pertussis strains.16, 17, 20
        There is no evidence to date for diminished effective- ness of vaccines against different allelic variants of
        B. pertussis. In countries with a recent increase in cases, targeted vaccination strategies provided additional evidence that the increases were not related to any reduction in effectiveness against currently circulating strains.12
        Hegerle N, Guiso N. Epidemiology of whooping cough & typing of Bordetella per- tussis.(Report). Future Microbiology 2013;8(11):1391.
        17 Hegerle N, Guiso N. Bordetella pertussis and pertactin-deficient clinical isolates: lessons for pertussis vaccines. Expert review of vaccines 2014;13(9):1135.
        18 Hegerle N, Dore G, Guiso N. Pertactin deficient Bordetella pertussis present a better fitness in mice immunized with an acellular pertussis vaccine. Vaccine 2014;32(49):6597–6600.
        19 Martin SW, Pawloski L, Williams M, Weening K, DeBolt C, Qin X, et al. Pertactin- negative Bordetella pertussis strains: evidence for a possible selective advantage. (Report). Clinical Infectious Diseases 2015;60(2):223.
        20 Mooi FR, He Q, Guiso N. Phylogeny, evolution and epidemiology of Bordetellae. In: Locht C, ed. Bordetella: molecular microbiology. Norfolk, England, Horizon Biosciences, 2007: 17–46.

        12 WHO SAGE pertussis working group. Background paper. SAGEApril 2014. Available at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2014/april/1_Pertussis_back- ground_FINAL4_web.pdf?ua=; accessed July 2015.
        depuis sa conception en 1974. On estimait en 2001 que, sans la vaccination anticoquelucheuse,on aurait enregistré >1,3 millions de décès liés à la coqueluche dans le monde.7 En 2013, d’après les estimations de l’OMS, la coqueluche était encore responsable d’environ 63 000 décès chez les enfants de <5 ans,8 même si une incertitude considérable pèse sur ces estimations compte tenu de la rareté des données de surveillance fiables, notamment en provenance des pays en développement. En 2014, la couverture vaccinale mondiale par 3 doses de vaccin contenant une valence coqueluche était estimée à 86%.9
        Un déplacement de la distribution selon l’âge de la coqueluche vers les tranches d’âge plus avancé (adolescents et jeunes adultes) a été signalé au cours des dernières années dans certains pays à revenu élevé, et en particulier dans des pays ou le vaccin acellulaire a remplacé le vaccin à germes entiers pour la série de doses de primovaccination. Un tel déplacement peut s’expliquer en partie par la reconnaissance plus fréquente de manifestations moins typiques de la maladie chez des sujets plus âgés et par la plus grande sensibilité des analyses de labo- ratoire et de la surveillance étendue, couvrant la totalité de la vie. Il est probable que l’atténuation progressive de la protec- tion apportée par le vaccin et que le moindre renforcement de l’immunité par les bactéries B. pertussis circulantes entraînent un accroissement de la susceptibilité des adoles- cents et des adultes. En conséquence, la coqueluche est fréquemment signalée comme cause des toux persistantes chez l’adulte et l’adolescent.10
        Suite à une augmentation de l’incidence de la coqueluche dans quelque pays utilisant des vaccins acellulaires et à l’expression de préoccupations à propos des possibilités de résurgence de cette maladie,11 l’OMS a dressé un bilan de la situation en 2014.12 Globalement, les données émanant de 19 pays à revenu élevé ou intermédiaire n’ont fourni aucune preuve d’une résurgence de grande ampleur de la coqueluche. Dans la plupart des pays où l’on avait noté une augmentation du nombre de cas de coqueluche depuis plusieurs années, cette augmentation était principalement attribuable aux schémas cycliques intervenant naturellement. Parmi les facteurs ayant probablement contribué à accroître les nombres de cas enregistrés figuraient entre autres la plus grande reconnaissance de la maladie et la sensi- bilité plus poussée de la surveillance et de la technique, main- tenant largement utilisée pour le diagnostic, de l’amplification en chaîne par polymérase (PCR). Néanmoins, on relève des preuves de la survenue d’une vraie résurgence dans 5 des 19 pays examinés, parmi lesquels 4 utilisaient exclusivement des vaccins acellulaires.12 La multiplication des cas observée dans
        7 Brenzel L, Wolfson LJ, Fox-Rushby J, Miller M, Halsey NA. Vaccine preventable diseases. In: Jami- son DT, Breman JG, Measham AR et al. eds. Disease control priorities in developing countries. 2nd ed. New York, Oxford University Press, 2006:389-412.
        8 Global Health Observatory Data Repository. Disponible sur http://apps.who.int/gho/data/node. main.ChildMortREG100?lang=en; consulté en juillet 2015.
        9 World Health Organization. Global and regional immunization profile. [internet]. Genève, Suisse. Disponible sur http://www.who.int/immunization/monitoring_surveillance/data/gs_glo- profile.pdf?ua=1; consulté en juillet 2015.
        10 Wright SW, Edwards KM, Decker M, Zeldin MHl. Pertussis infection in adults with persistent cough. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1995, 273:1044–1046.
        11 Resurgence is defined as a larger number of cases than expected, given the periodic variability of naturally recurring pertussis disease, when compared to previous cycles in the same setting.
        12 WHO SAGE pertussis working group. Background paper. SAGE April 2014. Disponible sur http:// http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2014/april/1_Pertussis_background_FINAL4_web. pdf?ua=; consulté en juillet 2015.
        RELEVE EPIDEMIOLOGIQUE HEBDOMADAIRE, No 35, 28 AOÛ

        http://www.who.int/wer/2015/wer9035/en/

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        There is no evidence to date for diminished effective- ness of vaccines against different allelic variants ofB. pertussis.

        It seems you glossed over the part about how the vaccine is not only less effective against PRN-deficient strains, but vaccinated individuals are more likely than unvaccinated to become infected with them.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        However, significant changes in the field effectiveness of aP vaccines have not been documented despite changes over time in the genetic makeup of circulating B. pertussis strains.16, 17, 20
        There is no evidence to date for diminished effective- ness of vaccines against different allelic variants of
        B. pertussis. In countries with a recent increase in cases, targeted vaccination strategies provided additional evidence that the increases were not related to any reduction in effectiveness against currently circulating strains.
        Source whohttp://www.who.int/wer/2015/wer9035/en/

        Again the evidence is that vaccination tends to work well for controlling outbreaks

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        It does seem that the WHO is misinformed, then, doesn’t it.

      • ang

        UM? Evidence that ap vaccine is causing the highest incidence of pertussis, ever, ever by180 TIMES MORE THAN EVER BEFORE, INCREASING 100% PER YEAR!!!! UM vaccination aint working here, we never, ever had outbreaks before aP vaccination………………. we have 90% vaccination rates, and the only stupid blondie demanding that if we suddenly had 95% vaccination, this absurd increase would stop is the NSW Health Minister…………………

      • ang

        Your quote””” In countries with a recent increase in cases, targeted vaccination strategies provided additional evidence that the increases were not related to any reduction in effectiveness against currently circulating strains.12 “”” Well they were wrong in that article, the coccooning theory got abandoned in 2012 in Australia, when Health Department realised that revaccinating, made the problem worse. As only those vaccinated within last 10 years with aP vaccine, were capable of being a symptomless carrier. Ie revaccinating a mother, or her friends, if they were aP recipients as a child, suddenly again could be vaccinated carriers, if exposed to pertussis in the herd, and would not show symptoms. Isnt it better the devil you see than the devil you dont? How do you keep a newborn away from pertussis carriers, when those who have aP vaccine, are carriers, with no symptoms? I suggest you stop reading experts so called opinions in paid for Pharma rags, and look out the window…………… Yes, those coughing for 4 weeks, yeah, they all got whooping cough!
        Perhaps you could send the authors of that article the graph below? NOTE HERE< NEVER HAD WHOOPING COUGH IN EPIDEMIC NUMBERS IN AUSTRALIA, EVER, ALWAYS BEEN NEAR 0 VICTIMS, AS PER THE CHART BELOW….IE 1,000 BC, UNTIL 1992? What happened around 92–95???? Vaccinations increased to all time high of 90%? They invented and started using the aP pertussis vaccine, AND IT DOESNT WORK. and WHO CAN STATE TILL THEY ARE BLUE IN THE FACE THERE IS NO INCREASE…. LOOK AT THE FRIGGIN CHART!

      • ang

        Can you understand a graph lynneb??? look at the numbers. In 1991, 1992, close to zero cases of pertussis in Australia, AND Western Australia. It had been this way for ever! in Australia, near no pertusis, EVER! Suddenly the new ubeaut aP, vaccine. 92 (?) see a correlation here? No it doesnt shed, and your arm doesnt fall off, and less chances of brain damage from the vaccine. BUT IT DOESNT WORK. Those vaccinated, catch carry and spread pertussis, to all the other vaccinated, whose vaccine has failed (average of 3 years), or spread it to babies, who cant be vaccinated, because the vaccine kills them. Or spread it to others vaccinated, who still have vaccine immunity, and it colonises their throat, and they spread it, round and round, and they dont even look sick? So are you seriously telling me, lynneb that Australia, suddenly got infected and it is increasing 100% per year, from near zero pertussis, EVER, the abhorrent rates we have now,,,,,,,,,,, are you saying it isnt because of the vaccine? then please tell me why? Vaccine rates in the 50s were 40%, in the 70s 70%, now in Australia they are 90%? Cant you see?

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        The WHO evidence does not support antigenic drift as contributing to lessened vaccination effectiveness.
        See http://www.who.int/wer/2015/wer9035/en/

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Well, then, if the WHO doesn’t support it, I guess that settles it.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Mike Stephens made the following comment on a thread in another site regarding comments that you have made.

        “You seem somewhat churlish when it comes to assessing sources of scientific evidence and opinion on vaccination, Jeremy.
        You have asked for sources of evidence, but when given them, you airily dismiss them with sarcastic comments like this:
        “Well, then, if the WHO doesn’t support it, I guess that settles it.”

        Viking has directed you to evidence contradicting your own 
        opinions/conclusions. If you think that the latest position paper on 
        pertussis vaccination from WHO last month is flawed, then it is 
        incumbent upon you to explain why.

        For readers wishing to see how WHO assesses the evidence on pertussis vaccines, here is how they did it for pertussis:
        “In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in
        large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with the current WHO position on the use of vaccines in the global context. The papers are reviewed by external experts and WHO staff, and reviewed and endorsed by the WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on immunization (SAGE) [link provided]. The
        GRADE methodology is used to systematically assess the quality of available evidence. A description of the process followed for the development of vaccine position papers is available at [link provided]”

        It seems clear to any objective observer that WHO has clear, comprehensive and precise means of assessing the quality of all the available evidence. From your own posts and articles, it would appear that you are somewhat inconsistent in this respect, tending to favour articles that are either downright antivaccine or which misrepresent the evidence.”

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        It didn’t seem further comment was necessary to me, given how I’ve already gone over how PRN-deficient strains are now the most common and how vaccinated individuals are actually more susceptible to PRN-deficient strains than the unvaccinated.

      • AutismDad

        They only want to trip you up and harass you.

      • Don

        I recall that, it was very amusing; I’ve never seen such a huge amount of troll “buzz” as with that foreign policy journal article. It caused quite a stir which could only mean you had an impact because you were right on the money! Thanks for continuing to write on this topic.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Well, thanks for following the discussion on over here!

      • eggman2

        These propaganda prostitutes, liked the Viking, are well briefed and assisted by their propaganda Johns ( the propaganda prostitutes handlers ) . They tell them everything that they have to say. It is all well planned by the junk medicine robber barons ( the vaccine makers ) . My son showed me their recruitment ad in the internet.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        You are frankly a half bubble off level.

      • ang

        hahaha! great answer! The who doesnt support that there is an increase in pertussis either?

    • VikingAPRNCNP

      It’s still good practice to wash your hands before handling any baby. I don’t ask to hold other people’s babies because I don’t want to inadvertently Infect them.

      Reply
      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        A little common sense goes a long way, yes.

      • ang

        And if you have had the Dtap vaccine, dont go near a baby. Before a PCR test, to prove you are clear of pertusis in your throat….. Even your own baby!! You could be the person with pertussis in your throat, and you dont even know!

    • Judith

      There are many factors to consider besides preventing infection. One needs to look at what is in the vaccine and adverse events. Have vaccines been studies long term for their ability to cause cancer – the answer is no.

      “BLV infects dairy and beef cattle, causing malignant lymphoma and lymphosarcoma in up to 5% of infected animals. A good indicator of exposure to BLV is presence of the virus antibodies in serum or milk. A baseline for the presence of BLV was established with the first study in the US in 1996, with results revealing that 89% of US dairy operations had BLV.

      The most recent dairy study carried out in 2007 – involving over 82% of the entire US dairy herd from the nation’s 17 major dairy-producing states – showed that nearly 84% of operations were positive for BLV, though only 7.5% of all operations had independently confirmed the presence of BLV.

      “The tests we have now are more sensitive, but it was still hard to overturn the established dogma that BLV was not transmissible to humans, says Prof. Buehring. “As a result, there has been little incentive for the cattle industry to set up procedures to contain the spread of the virus.”

      human cell lines WI-38 and MRC-5 are two of the most common human cell lines used to manufacture viral vaccines, (for example – rubella, chickenpox, smallpox) and these cell lines are of course, commonly nurtured with calf serum.

      Live virus vaccines for human use, 29 monovalent vaccines against measles, mumps, rubella or polio, eight polyvalent vaccines against measles-mumps-rubella and one bacterial polyvalent vaccine against Streptococcus pneumoniae, were tested by reverse transcriptase-nested PCR for the presence of petivirus or pestivirus RNA. Twenty-four samples were selected from European manufacturers, ten were from U.S.A. and four from Japan. Five (13.1%) out of 38 tested samples were positive for pestivirus RNA. Three vaccines (rubella and two measles) were from Europe and two (mumps and rubella) from Japan. The 5′-untranslated genomic region of the contaminant pestivirus RNA were amplified by reverse transcription-PCR and sequenced. Analyses based on primary nucleotide sequence homology and on secondary structures, characteristic to genotypes, revealed that the cDNA sequences belonged to bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV). A cDNA sequence, detected from one measles sample, belonged to BVDV-1b genotype. Pestiviral cDNA detected from the Japanese mumps and rubella vaccine samples, belonged to the BVDV genotypes 1a and 1c, respectively. Analysis on two cDNA sequences detected from measles and rubella vaccine samples from Europe showed their appurtenance to a new genotype, BVDV-1d. These findings indicate that contamination by animal pestivirus may occur in biological products for human use.”

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11503899

      Reply
      • ang

        I agree Judith, but surely for a vaccine to even be considered, it has to actually work? Ap vaccine needs to be rejabbed every 2 years, for only an 80% effectiveness. If you wait 5 years between jabs, only 3 out of ten still have immunity. And those who still have vaccine immunity, those 3 or 4 out of 5 if you jab every two years? While they have vaccine immunity, they catching, carrying spreading, not just once, over and over……… So they remain the sick, sick herd, for life?
        The crap vaccines, are getting so damn bad, now their advertising isnt “”this vaccine works” it is this vaccine “”has less side effects than the one before”” THE “”IT DOESNT WORK BIT””, seems not to be mentioned?

    • AutismDad

      You are completely wrong. The story makes its point and what you spew is merely an emotional rant with no supporting evidence.

      Reply
    • eggman2

      Go to ” Vaccines Are Not Safe ” on You Tube.

      Reply
    • ang

      Yes it does darlin! lynneb, I worked during the pertussis outbreak in Albany 2010. ALL THE VICTIMS, WERE VACCINE FAILURES. Those of the same age, who didnt physically show symptoms of pertussis, WERE CARRYING PERTUSSIS IN THEIR THROATS, AND SPREADING IT. IT HAS GOT SO BAD NOW, THAT THE VACCINATED CARRIERS, SPREAD IT ROUND AND ROUND, NON STOP NOW! It is acknowledged that the number one cause of baby infections is from symptomless infected vaccinated people. Proven already to be fully vaccinated health care workers and siblings of the babies, and others. They are fully vaccinated, and DO NOT have symptoms (Until the vaccine fails, and they catch it themselves, and thank god, no longer catch, carry and spread it without symptoms even!).

      At the present time, everyone vaccinated with the DTap is a potential carrier.

      And sorry to burst your bubble lynneb, THOSE WITH DTAP VACCINE, ARE CARRIERS, NOT JUST ONCE, OVER AND OVER, NO SYMPTOMS.

      THE 2013, FDA REPORT STATES “”””individuals immunized with an acellular pertussis vaccine may be protected from disease, they may still become infected with the bacteria without always getting sick and are able to spread infection to others, including young infants who are susceptible to pertussis disease.””” i AM SORRY LYNNEB, I HAVE NO IDEA HOW YOU CANT UNDERSTAND THAT!!!!

      Reply
    • Rachael

      Lynneb, according to my research, once the tell-tale paroxysmal cough begins, the person is no longer contagious. They are only contagious during the initial stages of the disease, which looks like a common cold. How many people stay home for a common cold?

      My children—ages 9 and 11 and FULLY VACCINATED—contracted and spread pertussis to my 3-month-old baby, who had not been vaccinated. Our pediatrician told me at his 4-month well check that, “Now would be the best time to get your baby up to date on all his vaccinations.” He was still fighting WHOOPING COUGH for Heaven’s sake! Insanity! Even the CDC website, bless their hearts, says not to give a vaccine to a person who is significantly ill at the time. I politely, but decidedly, declined the vaccines, and will continue to do so from here on out. (I also have not returned to that pediatrician.) Thanks to SB277 in CA, this stance might involve significant personal sacrifice, if it means having to homeschool my son when the time comes.

      Maybe you can explain to me why, if this disease is so deadly and feared, I had to INSIST that a doctor (different one than mentioned above) test my daughter for pertussis. Instead of listening to me when I said my baby had a paroxysmal cough that sounded just like the babies with pertussis I watched online (my daughter did not have the paroxysmal cough, which is not uncommon for older kids), the doctor insisted that she felt it was very unlikely to be whooping cough. No one ever tested my baby for it either. The doctor finally admitted that if the test came back positive, it would mean that all the healthcare workers on that floor of the clinic would have to be tested as well. Regardless of this, I insisted they test. The results came back positive. The doctor called our home and profusely apologized to us, saying the doctors at the clinic held a conference, and they now believed that there were far more pertussis cases than they realized. As a result, they decided to begin testing all persons who presented with a cough lasting more than two weeks. Good news, right? Hmm.

      A couple weeks later, my oldest son had mild cold-like symptoms and a minor cough, so we took him in to make sure it wasn’t pertussis. My husband explained that we had three other children who contracted pertussis, one of which was a confirmed case. They still would not test him.

      I put all my kids on high Vitamin C doses in the form of sodium ascorbate, as per Dr. Suzanne Humphries’ protocol, and this did wonders to improve their cough, unlike the antibiotics the doctors crammed down their throats, which only made the cough and symptoms worse. (All the die off from both bad and good bacteria, makes the mucous thicker. I later learned that the antibiotic does NOT cure or treat the disease. It only makes the person not contagious. As stated above, I also learned that they aren’t contagious by the coughing stage anyway.)

      Jeremy, thank you for putting together this article. As evidenced by the Vaccines Revealed docu-series, this information is accurate, and parents need to know the multi-fold risks of vaccination before making the decision that is right for their family.

      Reply
  8. DW Ramzi

    Pertussis has always been the most problematic of the vaccines, the original TDwP was partially effective and interruption of transmission was the key function that reduced the incidence of the disease significantly, but the cri-du-chat side effect was miserably common. The new acellular vaccine was wonderful in being more effective and producing less frequent side effects: the inconsolable crying having entirely disappeared.

    About effectiveness: I am puzzled, as it is quite clear that transmission from asymptomatic carriers is common with or without the vaccine. The fact that the total number of cases has decreased (until the recent anti-vaxx nonsense) overall, it is difficult to understand how the vaccine makes transmission more common. The more reasonable hypothesis would be that when you reduce the community burden of the disease, the less disease goes around and the fewer “carriers” have the opportunity to transmit.

    Critical assessment skills are indeed critical. You should never believe what you read without thinking first: https://skepticscollege.wordpress.com/2015/08/16/whoop-there-it-is-an-overview-of-pertussis-vaccines/

    Reply
    • Jeremy R. Hammond

      Oh, the irony that you condescend to me about critical assessment skills on the basis of the dishonest strawman argument that I wrote that “the vaccine makes transmission more common”.

      I would like to please have a serious discussion here. That requires actually responding to what is said, as opposed to trolling.

      Reply
    • ang

      http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm376937.htm surely even sketpicscollege trust FDA direct quote “”individuals immunized with an acellular pertussis vaccine may be protected from disease, they may still become infected with the bacteria without always getting sick and are able to spread infection to others, including young infants who are susceptible to pertussis disease.” Even I can understand that……….. if you are vaccinated you still catch the disease WITH OR WITHOUT SYMPTOMS, and spread it. Before aP vaccines in Australia NEAR NO PERTUSSIS, Post aP vaccines? 360 cases per 100,000 and DOUBLING EACH YEAR. 90% VACCINATION RATE. What use is a vaccine, that lasts an average of 3 years, and during that time, you can catch, carry and spread the illness, not once, but over and over, without even getting sick? Oh after the 0-10 years (100% failure in everyone before 10 years) yep you get infected from all those vaccinated, whether they showing symptoms or not. Why on earth do trolls, like yourself, quote from skepticscollege, and not from FDA research? Strange.

      Reply
    • ang

      Your quote, is completely absurd “”””i AM PUZZLED, as it is quite clear that transmission from asymptomatic carriers is common with or without the vaccine””””” WHERE DID YOU make this up from? aP vaccinated, catch carry and spread, over and over, until their vaccine fails, and they get it themselves. Non vaccinated, only spread pertussis if they are sick? The only symptomless carriers, are those who are aP vaccine protected, they carry bacteria in their throat, they dont get sick, but they spread it everywhere.

      Reply
  9. Jeremy R. Hammond

    This is precisely why the country needs to have a serious discussion about this topic.

    Reply
    • Don

      The discussion absolutely needs to be had; unfortunately, there is only one side that is able to have a voice. Mainstream media will only discredit anyone who has legitimate concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy. Concerned parents are maligned constantly. It would be nice to actually have a voice, why are they so afraid to allow a normal intelligent discussion without the maligning and constant discrediting? That, in and of itself speaks volumes.

      Reply
  10. thinkliberty64

    That is the opposite of what parents are typically told about
    the need for vaccinations, that the “herd” needs to be vaccinated to
    protect those too young to receive the vaccine: infants. In fact, the
    logical conclusion of this finding is that parents who vaccinate a child
    who has an infant sibling are putting the infant at risk.

    Herd immunity was one of the main reasons why SB277 got passed in CA.

    I wonder if someone would study other vaccines for this same effect.

    Reply
    • VikingAPRNCNP

      No not according to WHO

      Naturally-acquired immunity
      Following natural pertussis infection, antibody to PT – the only B. pertussis-specific antigen – is found in 80%–85% of patients. Neither the type nor the concen- tration of antibodies is well correlated with clinical protection, and so far no protective role has been iden- tified for cell-mediated immunity in humans. Natural infection does not confer long-lasting protection against pertussis.27 Symptomatic reinfections can occur in adolescents and adults and have also been reported in children. The duration of protection conferred by natural and vaccine-induced immunity has been diffi- cult to determine. It is, therefore, difficult to distinguish between the duration of immunity induced by primary infection, and the immunity induced by symptomatic or asymptomatic reinfection.
      Although there is placental passage of pertussis anti- bodies, most infants do not seem to be protected against clinical disease during the first months of life unless the mother has been recently vaccinated, likely due to the low and inadequate levels of antibody transferred. The susceptibility of young infants to life-threatening pertussis has been well documented, with a high inci- dence of pertussis in the first 6 months of life. Recent studies of maternal immunization have demonstrated its effectiveness in protecting newborn infants, suggest- ing antibody-mediated protection.28

      http://www.who.int/wer/2015/wer9035/en/

      Reply
      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        “Although all vaccinated and previously infected animals had robust serum antibody responses, we found key differences in T-cell immunity. Previously
        infected animals and wP-vaccinated animals possess strong
        B. pertussis-specific T helper 17 (Th17) memory and Th1 memory,
        whereas aP vaccination induced a Th1/Th2 response instead. The
        observation that aP, which induces an immune response mismatched
        to that induced by natural infection, fails to prevent colonization
        or transmission provides a plausible explanation for the
        resurgence of pertussis….”

        http://www.pnas.org/content/111/2/787.full.pdf

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        “The recent immunological investigations, stemming from the studies performed in the nineties within the clinical trials of the acellular pertussisvaccines, have highlighted the important role played by T-cell immunity to pertussis in humans. These studies largely confirmed earlier investigations in the murine respiratory infection models that humoral immunity alone is not sufficient to confer protection against Bordetellapertussis infection and that T-cell immunity is required.”

        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26242279

  11. Colby Johnson

    Quote: “”IT STILL DECREASES THE CHANCES OF THE VACCINATED PERSON BECOMING INFECTED””

    Let’s not be too quick to jump to conclusions. At least by my common everyday knowledge of how things work, people who get vaccinated get the problems they were vaccinated for, and people who eat well, exercise often, get plenty of rest, and use momma’s homemade folk remedies don’t seem to catch a thing. (Warning: my opinion hasn’t been peer reviewed!)

    Reply
  12. VikingAPRNCNP

    https://youtu.be/-WAwJGJ1R4k

    Listening to your child cough themselves to death is an experience I wouldn’t wish on anyone. The pertussis vaccine needs improvement. The evidence shows that even with incomplete protection individuals are less sick if they contract the disease.

    Reply
    • Judith

      Unfortunately – it isn’t as simple as that. The vaccine may make the symptoms milder but that person may be a carrier and feel well enough to go to public places, work, go to school, etc. This spreads the disease. Also like antibiotics – vaccines become ineffective as diseases develop resistance. and may very well be causing the epidemic of auto-immune disease we are seeing in our community.

      You may be swapping short term questionable protection for a lifetime of other disease.
      The Lancet admits no large study has been done on auto immune disease.

      “How can one demonstrate or exclude that a vaccine caused
      an autoimmune disease?

      Only epidemiological studies or clinical trials with an extremely
      large sample size can allow for a consistent assessment of
      the relative risk of vaccine-related increased incidence.
      Studies with such large sample sizes are complex, difficult to
      do, and costly, which limit their availability”

      http://image.thelancet.com/extras/02art9340web.pdf

      Reply
      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Since you asked….dm type 1 is probably the most common autoimmune disease. If you read the following evidence you will see that there is no correlation between vaccination and development of DM.

        The issue of autoimmune diseases is just not supported by evidence. The IOM studied adverse effects and no significant linkage could be found.

        Two large, population-based, case-control studies found no association between any of the routinely recommended childhood vaccines and an increased risk of type 1 diabetes mellitus [75,76], nor has an association between type 1 diabetes and childhood vaccination been detected in large population-based cohort studies in Sweden, Finland, and Denmark [77-79].

        Childhood vaccinations, vaccination timing, and risk of type 1 diabetes mellitus.
        AU
        DeStefano F, Mullooly JP, Okoro CA, Chen RT, Marcy SM, Ward JI, Vadheim CM, Black SB, Shinefield HR, Davis RL, Bohlke K, Vaccine Safety Datalink Team
        SO
        Pediatrics. 2001;108(6):E112.

        EURODIAB Substudy 2 Study Group
        AU
        Infections and vaccinations as risk factors for childhood type I (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus: a multicentre case-control investigation
        SO
        Diabetologia. 2000; 43:47.

        Cumulative incidence of childhood-onset IDDM is unaffected by pertussis immunization.
        AU
        Heijbel H, Chen RT, Dahlquist G
        SO
        Diabetes Care. 1997;20(2):173.

        Association between type 1 diabetes and Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccination: birth cohort study.
        AU
        Karvonen M, Cepaitis Z, Tuomilehto J
        SO
        BMJ. 1999;318(7192):1169.

        Childhood vaccination and type 1 diabetes.
        AU
        Hviid A, Stellfeld M, Wohlfahrt J, Melbye M
        SO
        N Engl J Med. 2004;350(14):1398.

        The common thread to these large group studies was the lack of statistical difference in diabetes incidence between the vaccinated unvaccinated groups.

      • Judith

        I will go to the first one you posted as one can only discuss one study at a time. This was not an unvaccinated/vaccinated study. The comparison group had received other vaccines. This is like testing for cancer by comparing one cigarette brand against another. If there is no difference declaring brand x does not cause anymore cancer than brand z – so it is OK to smoke.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Nice reach but the evidence still doesn’t support your belief structure. See the summary statement from up to date.

        “nor has an association between type 1 diabetes and childhood vaccination been detected in large population-based cohort studies in Sweden, Finland, and Denmark.”

      • Judith

        Can you post a link to your best study please.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        From the article.

        ” The results of our study and the preponderance of epidemiologic evidence do not support an association between any of the recommended childhood vaccines and an increased risk of type 1 diabetes. Suggestions that diabetes risk in humans may be altered by changes in the timing of vaccinations also are unfounded.”

        Note the clause “any of the.” It is definitive. There is no relationship.

        The third source says “RESULTS: No difference in cumulative incidence rate of IDDM up to the age of 12 years was found when the birth cohorts for 1978 and 1979 with high DTP vaccination coverage were compared with the cohorts of 1980 and 1981 with low pertussis vaccination coverage.
        CONCLUSIONS: The comparison of the cumulative incidence of IDDM, up to the age of 12 years, in birth cohorts with high and low exposure to pertussis vaccine does not support the hypothesis that pertussis could induce autoimmunity to the beta-cell that may lead to IDDM.”

        The fourth study ” No statistically significant difference was found at any time during the 10 year follow up in the risk of type 1 diabetes between the children born before the vaccination period and those vaccinated at the age of 24 months only (relative risk 1.01). The difference in the risk between the cohort vaccinated first at the age of 3 months and the cohort vaccinated at the age of 24 months only was not statistically significant either (1.06).
        CONCLUSION: It is unlikely that H influenzae type b vaccination or its timing cause type 1 diabetes in children.
        AD
        Diabetes and Genetic Epidemiology Unit, National Public Health Institute, Mannerheimintie 166, FIN-00300 Helsinki, Finland. [email protected]

        Finally “The development of type 1 diabetes in genetically predisposed children (defined as those who had siblings with type 1 diabetes) was not significantly associated with vaccination. Furthermore, there was no evidence of any clustering of cases two to four years after vaccination with any vaccine.
        CONCLUSIONS: These results do not support a causal relation between childhood vaccination and type 1 diabetes.
        AD
        Danish Epidemiology Science Centre, Department of Epidemiology Research, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark. [email protected]
        PMID
        15070789.”

        No statistically significant difference has been found.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        I would appreciate any peer reviewed evidence that vaccines become less effective due to resistance. The flu virus doesnt evolve. It has a particular affinity for incorporating stray dna into its viral dna. It constantly changes form. It’s pretty minimal because viral particles aren’t living in the sense of a bacterium that can adapt.

      • Judith

        There is evidence that leaky vaccines can cause viruses to evolve into more deadly diseases:

        “New vaccines against some of ­humanity’s biggest killers risk spawning even deadlier strains of HIV, malaria, Ebola and bird flu, scientists have warned. The Australian.

        Researchers say they have proven a controversial theory that “leaky” vaccines — those that protect people, but don’t prevent viruses from transmitting — allow pathogens to evolve into superbugs.

        The warning, outlined in the journal PLOS Biology, cites a common agricultural bug for which chickens are routinely vaccinated. Marek’s disease was relatively harmless 60 years ago, but the study found it now killed all unvaccinated birds.

        Australian co-author Stephen Walkden-Brown, an animal health professor at the University of New England, said human ­vaccines could have the same effect. “Most do a good job of preventing infection as well as disease,” Professor Walkden-Brown said.

        “(But) as we get down to diseases that are more difficult to control, which the ­immune system doesn’t do such a good job on naturally, it’s likely that some of those vaccines may be leaky.”

        http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1002198

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        From your article.

        “This does not mean that such technologies should be avoided, particularly when alternative options are limited. Vaccination has massively reduced yield losses due to MD, despite the evolution [49]. However, when protecting all individuals is impossible, or evolution is ongoing, the use of additional transmission-blocking interventions such as improved hygiene might be essential.”

        The issue they are alluding to is husbandry practice changes. Turkeys and chickens are routinely raised in very close quarters in barns and cages. Having grown up near the turkey capital of Minnesota I am quite aware of close quarter husbandry.

        The authors aren’t saying vaccination should never be suppused they are saying that other strategies may be needed to supplement vaccination.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        The authors’ opinion is irrelevant to Judith’s point about the acknowledged fact that vaccine use can cause pathogens to evolve into more virulent forms.

      • Katia

        You’re right about one thing -Judith’s point irrelevant to the author’s research. Her points are generally irrelevant to vaccine science.

      • Katia

        There is no evidence of this happening in humans.

      • Judith

        No but the warning is there that any vaccine that “sheds” can become more pathogenic.

      • Katia

        Maybe, maybe, maybe. And Viking summarized the authors’ points well. The solution is not to quit immunizing.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        The solution to disease is not to continue vaccinating (not to be confused with “immunizing”, mind you) according to existing government policy.

    • Shawn_Siegel

      An hyperbolic description – the little girl isn’t dying, she’s coughing. Perhaps a picture of kids who are literally starving, bellies distended – actually dying – would clarify.

      No one welcomes disease, but it’s an essential, fundamentally recuperative process of cleansing; of elimination of infection and return to wellness. A benign disease is one in which no complications are expected, and complete recovery is usual; whooping cough is a benign disease. Though the symptoms are discomforting, certainly, studies long ago showed they can be markedly ameliorated with administration of vitamin C, especially early in the disease, shortening the critical paroxysmal stage from a matter of weeks to a matter of days. If the CDC actually had an ounce of interest in our well being, they would actively provide that information, for it would undoubtedly save the lives of some if not most of the young infants who do succumb to the disease. Instead, they urge injection of a vaccine containing aluminum, a known neurotoxin, beginning at only two months of age, and repeated twice by the age of six months. it’s unconscionable. Anaphylactic shock, brachial neuritis and encephalopathy are acknowledged by the government as adverse reactions to the pertussis containing vaccines.

      Vaccination’s a travesty, bypassing essential circulatory system safeguards in the innate immune system. Research. Educate. We’re on our own.

      Reply
      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Your information from the Canadian medical journal in 1937 was of a sample size that was not of sufficient size or rigor to be of value.
        Plus there was no followup by any large study groups.

        Interesting idea but the gold standard for primary prevention is still vaccination.

        Secondary tertiary levels of prevention are less effective and more expensive. If you don’t contract the disease you won’t need treatment for the illness.

      • Shawn_Siegel

        Negative. The sample size, and in particular the nature of the findings, is of sufficient size to make any discerning parent pause.

        The gold standard for primary prevention – the only means of true disease prevention – is nutrition and avoidance of toxins, the most intimate and egregious of which are vaccines.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Nobody disputes the value of nutrition. If the ascorbic acid observations were that valuable there would have been hundreds of references in pubmed. As it is I think this is one for irreprocible results folder. 10 patients just isn’t enough to use for treatment planning. The other point is that it is much better to use primary prevention strategies to prevent rather than secondary which treats illness after it occurs.

        The point remains “It was estimated that that without vaccination there would have been >1.3 million pertussis related deaths globally in 2001.7 In 2013, according to WHO estimates, pertus- sis was still causing around 63 000 deaths in children aged <5 years,"
        Weekly epidemiological record
        Relevé épidémiologique hebdomadaire
        28 AUGUST 2015, 90th YEAR / 28 AOÛT 2015, 90e ANNÉE No. 35, 2015, 90, 433–460 http://www.who.int/wer
        Pertussis vaccines: WHO position paper – August 2015
        Introduction
        In accordance with its mandate to pro

        A greater than 99% reduction in mortality from one of the most infectious childhood diseases. All attributable to a cost effective primary prevention strategy.

      • Shawn_Siegel

        In the U.S., mortality associated with all the supposedly vaccine preventable diseases declined by over 95% before the vaccines were in use, and were still on their way down, brought about by the razing of squalid housing, advances in public sanitation and water supply, and the advent of the home refrigerator, in essence improving nutrition.

        Be careful about the WHO bias. Two years ago they announced India was polio free, but what they neglected to mention was the radical changes they made to the diagnostic parameters of the disease with the implementation of the “polio eradication initiative” in the 90s, mirroring the changes made by the USCDC in 1955, with the same results; an illusory eradication. They also failed to mention the tremendous increase in India over the last two decades of acute flaccid paralysis, clinically identical to polio, following on the heels of the oral polio vaccine, which was abandoned in the U.S. fifteen years ago because it causes VAPP – Vaccine Associated Paralytic Polio.

        If you trust the CDC and the WHO, your trust is misplaced.

      • Judith

        There have been no studies on nutrition vs vaccines so of course there are no studies in pubmed. This would require a vaccinated/unvaccinated study which they refuse to do.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        The point is that they work together. Given the proven effectiveness of vaccination programs it would be unethical to not use the best available interventions.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        There is nothing ethical about forcing people to undergo a risky medical treatment, regardless of how effective; and the effectiveness of vaccines has been greatly exaggerated.

      • Illusion

        Thank you.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        The mmr is an effective means of primary prevention against measles.

        Waning of immunity after vaccination, known as secondary vaccine failure, is relatively rare [

        easles, mumps, and rubella–vaccine use and strategies for elimination of measles, rubella, and congenital rubella syndrome and control of mumps: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP).
        AU
        Watson JC, Hadler SC, Dykewicz CA, Reef S, Phillips L
        SO
        MMWR Recomm Rep. 1998;47(RR-8):1.

        Furthermore titers alone may not predict future response to exposure to an infectious agent.

        Epidemiology and Prevention of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases (The Pink Book), 12th ed, Atkinson W, Wolfe C, Hamborsky J. (Eds), The Public Health Foundation, Washington, DC 2011.

        no abstract available

      • Shawn_Siegel

        LOL. You really need to take heed: research outside the mainstream box. You’ll find that the majority of people vaccinated for measles if subsequently exposed to the disease can still develop an infection and symptoms, but without the traditional rash; and that the rash is required for complete elimination of the measles virus; that measles without rash leaves an intracellular viral presence, and is associated with serious chronic disorders later in life.

        Truly, nothing we’ve been told about vaccination, or vaccines, or the threat of infectious disease, is accurate. Your trust is simply misplaced.

        Try a book. Fear of the Invisible, by Janine Roberts, an award winning investigative journalist who’s spent many years of her life researching vaccines, is an excellent place to start.

        Have a nice life.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        1 contagious case in a room of 100 unvaccinated people will result in 93 new cases of measles.

        1 contagious case in a room of 100 vaccinated people might result in 3 cases.

        The vaccines protect both the immunocompromised and the 3 people in a 100 who fail to mount an immune response to the MMR.

        One vaccination costs about 60 dollars for the MMR. A measles related hospitalization can easily cost 10000 dollars per case.

        For that 10000 you can vaccinate 160 people. Potentially preventing 1.5 million
        In medical costs.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Scary.

        Until you consider that virtually everybody used to be exposed to measles and developed a permanent, robust immunity through natural infection.

      • ccdaddy

        Vaccine derived Autism with the bowel disorder from hell from the measles being em-bedded in the child’s guts. 6 million to over 100 million for a single child. Just weeks ago, a single child was awarded 61 million dollars for life long care cost, for his vaccine injury. And are you really serious, you think that all measles cases require a hospital stay? The Merck manual states, that measles is a benign disease.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Measles isn’t benign. Obviously you didn’t read carefully. 25% of measles cases result in hospitalization.

        The dtap settlement is 4 years old. The story is 4 years old and just found now. Literally a 1 in a billion case…..

        There is no credible evidence linking mmr to autism. 95000 children studied and no linkage between mmr and autism.

        See http://jama.jamanetwork.com/Mobile/article.aspx?articleid=2275444

      • Katia

        Funny you AVs talk about fear so much when you’re the fear-mongerers! AUTISM! !!!! TOXINS!!!!!! FORMALDEHYDE! !!!!!!! MERCURY! !!!!!!!!

      • Shawn_Siegel

        LOL. Fear was one word in the title of a book, quoted in my comment – a book you’ve not read, so you don’t know how that title befits the author’s findings. Janine Roberts won awards for her expose of the diamond cartel – she’s an experienced, well reputed author, who since she began investigating vaccines over ten years ago hasn’t been able to stop. It would behoove any parent to read her book.

        The substance of my comment was to the evidence that once vaccinated for measles and then exposed to the disease, there’s a more than likely chance you’ll still develop the infection and some of the symptoms, but not the rash; and that measles without the rash leads to disease later in life – to be more specific, to immunoreactive diseases, sebaceous skin disease, degenerative disease of bone and cartilage, and certain tumors. There’s no talk of fear there, but certainly an expectation that any discerning parent would want more information.

        Your reply is irrelevant.

      • Katia

        LOL! You guys are big time fear-mongerers.

      • Shawn_Siegel

        And still no substance, or actual response. So be it.

        Take care.

      • AutismDad

        Typical Katia. If she has nothing she has a tantrum.

      • Judith

        Yes you are correct – and of course these diseases which are so common and getting more and more prevalent are not studied for their association with vaccines.

      • Judith

        The vaccine questioning population has a right to ask for answers. Yes there are toxins in vaccines, there are serious adverse events. We know that there is a serious conflict of interest in our government bodies who receive funding from pharmaceutical companies through their CDC foundation. The research that is supposed to prove vaccines are safe is dodgy and the vaccinated/unvaccinated study has not been done except in some tiny badly designed studies.

        Dr. Richard Horton, the current editor-in-chief of the Lancet published a statement saying that a lot of published research is in fact unreliable at best, if not completely false.

        “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.” (source)

        This is quite disturbing, given the fact that all of these studies (which are industry sponsored) are used to develop drugs/vaccines to supposedly help people, train medical staff, educate medical students and more.

        Dr. Marcia Angell, a physician and longtime Editor in Chief of the New England Medical Journal (NEMJ), has this to say:

        “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine” (source).

        Pharmaceutical companies spend over $3.5 billion a year on TV, newspapers, and other advertising, targeting news departments, which have become receptacles for pharmaceutical profit and propaganda platforms for the industry. Media outlets feature spokespeople like Dr. Offit—without identifying their industry ties.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Questioning the wisdom of injecting children with mercury is “fearmongering”?

        Do you know how utterly stupid that is?

      • sabelmouse

        because they’re in there. but measles is NOT the black death.

      • Don

        Oh but of course, they will find something wrong with her. If there isn’t; they’ll make something up! As with Sharyl Akitsson. Every single person ,whether it’s a journalist, scientist, microbiologist, doctor, pediatrician, they malign and discredit.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        On the contrary, waning immunity is a known problem with the measles vaccine.

        This has led to the situation in which mothers are no longer able to confer immunity as well to their infants via breastmilk. Had they been infected naturally as children themselves, they would have developed a robust, permanent immunity, but since they were themselves vaccinated and antibody titers wane over time, they cannot transfer antibodies to their infants.

        Thus, public vaccine policy has shifted the risk in the event of a measles outbreak away from those in whom it is generally well-tolerated onto the most vulnerable members of society: infants.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Wrong as usual. There is about a 2 month difference in titer loss between natural immune and vaccinated children. At 6 months both groups of infants have essentially zero antibody titers. The point ultimately is that if the people who come into contact with the baby are vaccinated during that 3 to 6 month before the child can be vaccinated are very very unlikely to transmit measles to the infant.

        Secondary vaccine failure isn’t the issue that you believe it to be. From up. To date.

        Waning of immunity after vaccination, known as secondary vaccine failure, is relatively rare [14]. Most individuals with low antibody titers demonstrate an anamnestic immune response upon revaccination, indicating that they are probably still immune despite low titers [17].

        TI
        Measles, mumps, and rubella–vaccine use and strategies for elimination of measles, rubella, and congenital rubella syndrome and control of mumps: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP).
        AU
        Watson JC, Hadler SC, Dykewicz CA, Reef S, Phillips L
        SO
        MMWR Recomm Rep. 1998;47(RR-8):1.

        Epidemiology and Prevention of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases (The Pink Book), 12th ed, Atkinson W, Wolfe C, Hamborsky J. (Eds), The Public Health Foundation, Washington, DC 2011.

        Furthermore 9 month vaccination with mmr produces an 85% immune response.

        See up to date

        n many countries outside the United States, measles vaccination is administered at age nine months in order to provide earlier immunity among children more likely to be exposed to measles at young ages. The effectiveness of vaccination at this age is approximately 85 percent [18-23].

        If needed the us could adopt a 6 and month vaccination program and achieve nearly the same effectiveness as current recommendations.
        See

        RESULTS: Highest measles incidence rates were observed among children<1 year of age. Vaccine effectiveness estimates increased with age at vaccination from 78% with a single dose administered at 6 months of age to 95% at 9 months. Vaccine effectiveness with the early two dose strategy was 93%.
        CONCLUSIONS: Immunization with a singledose of standard titer Schwarz vaccine before 9 months of age provided higher clinical protection than expected from seropositivity studies. The early two dose strategy is justified in contexts where measles incidence is high before 9 months of age. Our results raise the issue of lowering the recommended age for measles vaccination in developing countries.

        Measles vaccine effectiveness in standard and early immunization strategies, Niger, 1995.
        AU
        Kaninda AV, Legros D, Jataou IM, Malfait P, Maisonneuve M, Paquet C, Moren A
        SO
        Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1998;17(11):1034.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        You tell me I’m wrong only then to confirm that I’m right by acknowledging that vaccinated women have an inhibited ability to pass antibody protection onto their infants through breastmilk.

        Which of course is highly relevant and illustrates the problem of waning immunity that you describe as “relatively rare”.

        Actually, it’s universal. Antibody titers will always decrease over time.

        So perhaps you mean to say that it’s rare for that to result in a person dropping below the level considered protective. But how can this be said to be “rare” when it hasn’t been very well studied?

        Receiving less attention, however, is the issue of
        vaccine failure. While the current vaccine is acknowledged as a good vaccine, we and others have demonstrated that the immune response to measles vaccine varies substantially in actual field use. Multiple studies demonstrate that 2-10% of those immunized with two doses of measles vaccine fail to develop protective antibody levels, and that immunity can wane over time and result in infection (so-called secondary vaccine failure) when the individual is exposed to measles. For example, during the 1989-1991 U.S. measles outbreaks 20-40% of the individuals affected had been previously immunized with one to two doses of vaccine. In an October 2011 outbreak in Canada, over 50% of the 98 individuals had received two doses of measles vaccine…. [T]his phenomenon continues to play a role in measles outbreaks. Thus, measles outbreaks also occur even among highly vaccinated populations because of primary and secondary vaccine failure, which results in gradually larger pools of susceptible persons and outbreaks once measles is introduced. This leads to a paradoxical situation whereby measles in highly immunized societies occurs primarily among those previously immunized.

        — Gregory A. Poland and Robert M. Jacobson, “The Re-Emergence of Measles in Developed Countries: Time
        to Develop the Next-Generation Measles Vaccines?” Vaccine, January 5, 2012 [Vaccine. 2012 Jan 5; 30(2): 103–104], http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3905323/.

        More than half doesn’t exactly sound like a “rare” occurrence to me.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        You are deliberately misinterpreting the evidence.
        1. At 6 months there is NO statistically significant difference in antibody levels between the children of naturally immune and vaccinated women. Both groups of women pass on antibodies to their children
        2. Vaccination programs are the single most effective primary prevention strategy. Dr Poland article does not say don’t vaccinate. If anything he specifies characteristics of an improved vaccine program. In no way does he call for a return to the early 1960s of 4miion cases of measles per year with 400 us deaths.

        Dr Poland clearly identifies in his discussion ”
         Primary among these are that surprising numbers of otherwise well-educated people reject the vaccine due to safety fears—effectively diminishing its worth as a public health tool. Thus, current measles vaccines can only be used to protect individuals without contraindications, and those willing to accept the vaccine, conditions that leave a large enough segment of the population susceptible and unprotected from measles such that cases will ”

        In other words failure to vaccinate is the single greatest threat to public health and the greatest contributor to disease resurgence…

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        I’m not “misinterpreting the evidence”, you just have your facts wrong.

        Antibody titers from the measles vaccine are typically lower than from natural infection, and passive antibodies from breastmilk wane earlier in infants born to vaccinated mothers as compared to mothers who were naturally infected in their own childhood.

        This is well understood.

      • Illusion

        For some reason I trust the innate intelligence of our natural physiology and it’s evolution with diseases and enviroment over time MORE THAN, the intelligence of man made delusions of vaccinations. Wonder what percentage who contracted natural measles did not develop immunity?

      • ione murphy

        Do you have any studies more recent than 1998? I do, it’s from 2013 and here is what it says..
        “…even in highly vaccinated populations, substantial proportions of those infected in an outbreak will have been previously vaccinated [9,12–14,16]… need for research on determinants of measles vaccine response, and the development of improved measles vaccines.
        However, measles eradication is unlikely as population immunity of 96–98% is required to prevent persisting measles endemicity [7,8,27,201]. In a recent study of measles-vaccine efficacy from 1960 to 2010, median efficacy was only 94% [28].
        While the current measles vaccine used in the USA and many other countries is safe and effective, paradoxically in the unique case of measles, it appears to insufficiently induce herd immunity in the population. This relates to a combination of factors including: higher than observed rates of primary and secondary vaccine failure in clinical practice versus that seen in clinical trials”…www. dot ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3570049/

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        My statement was based on a study that Judith linked….

        If you read Dr Poland article carefully he is not calling for a do not vaccinate strategy. He is calling for the development of BETTER vaccines. Since according to your link the next generation of vaccines is 5 or more years away the acip recommendations are still appropriate. 2 doses of mmr vaccine. The pragmatic side is that if a severe outbreak occurs then public health would probably pursue an aggressive community based revaccination strategy.

        The Poland article still comes out with a greater than 90% effectiveness for most vaccinees. Which is congruent with the information I posted from up to date.

        Ring vaccination worked to contain and eve tally eliminate smallpox.

        A non vaccination strategy leads to a résurgence of disease. The majority of the cases that Dr Poland reviewed were single dose vaccinees…. the second dose is what moved the immunity levels up in the 90+% range.

        The missed point that Dr Poland consistently makes is

        “The last 10 years have shown that the increasing immunization coverage with the current live-attenuated measles vaccine, the two-dose schedule and the implementation of appropriate measles control measures decreased global measles mortality by 74% from the 535,000 deaths that occurred in 2000” and “Measles elimination has failed primarily due to failure to vaccinate, but also in part due to vaccine failure, allowing the accumulation of susceptible individuals and the occurrence of outbreaks when exposure occurs ”

        The best strategy for outbreak prevention remains the mmr with a vaccination proportion of at least 95 to 98%.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Dr. Poland’s opinion is not the relevant point here. Others looking at the same facts about how public policy has created a situation in which infants are put at greater risk in the event of a measles outbreak and draw a much different, arguably much more reasonable, conclusion.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        What places children at risk isn’t vaccination. It is failure to vaccinate. The root cause is failure to vaccinate. This increases the likelihood that those 2 to 5% who fail to mount an adequate immune repose to 2 doses of mmr are more likely to contract measles if exposed to an active carrier.

        The recommendations for a.2.dose.strategy.are based on best available evidence.

        Measles can be eliminated. Smallpox was eliminated through a combination of isolation and vaccination revaccination of those exposed to a contagious smallpox patient.

        Up to date has some interesting data about post exosure prophylaxis.
        Postexposure prophylaxis — Postexposure prophylaxis for susceptible individuals exposed to measles consists of vaccination within 72 hours of exposure in the absence of a contraindication. If more than 72 hours but fewer than 6 days have elapsed since exposure, immune globulin may prevent or modify measles infection in susceptible individuals.

        And

        In one of the largest outbreaks in Australia, postexposure MMR vaccination was 100 percent effective ….

        The effectiveness of prophylaxis for measles contacts in NSW.
        AU
        Sheppeard V, Forssman B, Ferson MJ, Moreira C, Campbell-Lloyd S, Dwyer DE, McAnulty JM
        SO
        N S W Public Health Bull. 2009 May;20(5-6):81-5.

        And
        Infants aged 6 to 11 months are at greater risk for severe disease. Infants with measles virus exposure may receive vaccination, although they must undergo repeat immunization at age 12 to 15 months and again prior to school entry. When infants receiving an early measles vaccine dose between 6 and 11 months followed by a dose after 12 months were studied during and after a measles epidemic, the early two-dose strategy was 99.5 percent effective against measles disease and antibody titers measured at 4 to 6 years of age were comparable to titers measured in children who had received one measles dose at 12 to 18 months [50]

        Evaluation of an early two-dose measles vaccination schedule.
        AU
        Hutchins SS, Dezayas A, Le Blond K, Heath J, Bellini W, Audet S, Beeler J, Wattigney W, Markowitz L
        SO
        Am J Epidemiol. 2001 Dec;154(11):1064-71.

        These are recommendations that can contain and help prevent outbreaks.

        Failure to vaccinate places children and the immunocompromised at risk of contracting measles.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        It is stupid to deny that there are risks associated with vaccines.

        As for whether the benefits outweigh the risks, I disagree with your opinion.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        I have very clearly stated that the relative risk ratios clearly favor vaccination over the wild disease.

        As I said earlier “The root cause is failure to vaccinate. This increases the likelihood that those 2 to 5% who fail to mount an adequate immune repose to 2 doses of mmr are more likely to contract measles if exposed to an active carrier.”.

      • Illusion

        “I have very clearly stated that the relative risk ratios clearly favor vaccination over the wild disease.”
        Based on the FACT, that 1st world unvaccinated populations have never been studied? So the TRUE risks ARE NOT known. And you nor I either have proof. But you think you do, because you only can look at partially vaccinated populations, so you can ONLY make conclusions about rates of vaccination failures. It’s YOUR only thing to comment on.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        What you “very clearly stated” was that “What places children at risk isn’t vaccination.”

        So, as everyone can see, you stated that vaccination carries no risk.

        Hence my remark that it is stupid to deny that there are risks with vaccination.

        About measles, there may be risks with NOT being naturally exposed to it (which generally confers a robust permanent immunity, unlike the vaccine):

        “There was evidence of association between a negative history of measles, exposure in early life, and development of immunoreactive diseases, sebaceous skin diseases, degenerative diseases of bone and cartilage, and certain tumours.”

        — “Measles virus infection without rash in childhood is related to disease in adult life,” Lancet, January 5 1985, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2856946

        “A reduced risk of Parkinson’s disease was associated with most childhood viral infections. The negative association was statistically significant for a history of measles prior to college entrance.”

        — “Measles infection and Parkinson’s disease,” American Journal of Epidemiolgy, December 1985,http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4061437

        “Our results pointed out a protective role of childhood infectious diseases on the risk of CLL [chronic lymphoid leukaemia] in adults.”

        — “Childhood infectious diseases and risk of leukaemia in an adult population,” International Journal of Cancer, October 15 2013, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23575988

        “Measles and mumps, especially in case of both infections, were associated with lower risks of mortality from atherosclerotic CVD [Cardiovascular Disease].”

        — “Association of measles and mumps with cardiovascular disease: The Japan Collaborative Cohort (JACC) study,” Atherosclerosis, Jun 18 2015, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26122188

        “In the 1970s, measles infections were observed to cause regression of pre-existing cancer tumors in children.”

        — “Harnessing The Measles Virus To Attack Cancer,” Science Daily, October 31, 2006,http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/10/061030143318.htm

      • Illusion

        And the ASSUMPTION is made that having an a titer showing adequate antibodies also PROVES immunity to disease. Which it does not. Vaccination and Immunity ARE NOT the same thing. Immune systems are much more COMPLEX than the simple assertion of “We See” circulating antibodies.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Indeed, an antibody response to antigen is neither always sufficient nor even always necessary for immunity.

    • sherri

      my child had this cough. he did not “cough himself to death.” what is far, far more tragic than this, is that medical care is, according to the peer reviewed medical journal, the Lancet, medical care is itself the 3rd leading cause of death in the U.S. so IF 10 people, 100 people, or even 1,000 people die of whooping cough is tragic, why is it not even a conversation that between 220,000 and 480,000 people a year die needlessly of medical care? where is the concern there? where is the tragic video of that suffering?

      Reply
      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Please make apples to apples comparisons.

        The point of primary prevention is just that. Prevent illness before it occurs.

        I can assure you that there are numerous people working constantly across all health care settings to minimize and prevent medical nursing errors. Nurse cross check insulin and heparin to prevent errors. Surgical teams take timeouts to verify correct patient, correct procedure and correct locations.

        The important piece is that 2 to 5 % of pertussis patients have serious sequellae. That is a tragedy because those illnesses are probably 99% preventable through vaccination.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        300000 children die worldwide each year from pertussis. This is twice the number that die from measles. Consistent vaccination programs could prevent about 500000 deaths annually.

        Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Pertussis (Whooping Cough). Pertussis in Other Countries. http://www.cdc.gov/pertussis/countries.html.

    • sherri

      4 minutes, and all talking, not one example of the cough. at the end it says in the U.K. on average 4 babies die of the whooping cough. 4? each one is tragic. but far, far, far more than that die of Tylenol. where is your outrage there?

      Reply
      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Strawman…….

        As a professional nurse I spend a great deal of time in risk management. I don’t know of a single medical or nursing professional that doesn’t agonize about medication errors and prevention.

    • ang

      Yep, never crossed her mind she had whooping cough, why? because she was vaccinated. Doctors are conned into thinking that the vaccine works, when it doesnt. All the kids I tested for whooping cough, all aP vaccinated, all had the disease.. so they are out about, coughing everywhere, or are just aP vaccinated carriers, spreading it without any symptoms. So Viking what is the point of your video? It is known that aP vaccine IS THE CAUSE OF THESE EPIDEMICES> the fact the doctor didnt send this child for a PCR test, is astonishing! Vaccinations are what is causing your babies to get whooping cough. Mothers/siblings vaccinated with aP, are infecting their own babies! The whole herd is vaccinated to remain sick, and symptomless? and they still catch it when the aP even fails in their own bodies, after an average of 3 years? Every person who keeps rejabbing, remaining a symptomless carrier, infecting everyone, over and over, HOW SELFISH CAN THEY BE?

      Reply
      • VikingAPRNCNP

        An acellular vaccine cannot cause disease. It is not whole cell and thus cannot revert to wild type….

      • ang

        I never said it did. Stop making up rubbish, I never said. But it does make those vaccinated into Typhoid Mary types, they catch it, carry it and spread it. No symptoms, just carry the bacteria in their throats, without getting sick themselves. ONLY THE AP VACCINATED, WHOS VACCINE IS STILL WORKING (AVERAGE LIFE OF VACCINE 3 YEARS), has the ability to catch, carry and spread it. Not once, but every time they catch it, over and over, they spread it for 8 weeks EVERY TIME. Then around age 6-12 (av) the aP vaccinated, all get pertussis anyway.

    • ang

      The danger now, is not the kids older than 12, they have all had whooping cough, if they were going to get it, despite their vaccine. The serious problem, is the fact they still vaccinating little kids, so from age 2 months to age 6-12, these kids are just little Pertussis Marys ie (like Typhoid Mary), they catch it, carry it, spread it to the newborn in the family, and the little tikes dont even have symptoms.

      Reply
  13. VikingAPRNCNP

    https://www.soundsofpertussis.com/common/video6.html

    The WHO position:

    All children worldwide, including HIV-positive individuals, should be immunized against pertussis. Every country should aim to achieve early and timely vaccination and maintain high vaccination coverage of over 90% at all levels, national and subnational. Vaccination of pregnant women is likely to be the most cost-effective additional strategy for preventing pertussis disease in infants too young to be vaccinated and appears to be more effective and favourable than cocooning.

    http://www.who.int/immunization/diseases/pertussis/pertussis-vaccine-position-paper/en/

    Reply
    • Jeremy R. Hammond

      Yes, we all know what the governmental recommendations are.

      Reply
  14. VikingAPRNCNP

    It’s pretty simple. The risk for a true vaccine injury are 1 in a million or less.

    Wild disease complication rates are 2 to 5%

    Pertussis death rates have been dramatically reduced on the global level.

    It was estimated that that without vaccination there would have been >1.3 million pertussis related deaths globally in 2001.7 In 2013, according to WHO estimates, pertus- sis was still causing around 63 000 deaths in children aged <5 years,8 although there is considerable uncer- tainty over these estimates in view of the paucity of reliable surveillance data, particularly from developing countries. In 2014 global vaccination coverage with 3 doses of a pertussis-containing vaccine was esti- mated at 86%.

    http://www.who.int/wer/2015/wer9035/en/

    Over 99% decrease in mortality with pertussis vaccination.

    Reply
    • Jeremy R. Hammond

      The risk for a true vaccine injury are 1 in a million or less.

      What’s a “true” vaccine injury? As opposed to…? According to what study?

      The simple fact of the matter is that the risks of vaccine injury aren’t known because it isn’t well studied. Scientists are only just beginning, for example, to examine questions like how vaccines cause autoimmune disease.

      Reply
      • Mal

        N also not every parent reports it either. I didn’t. ?

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        A true vaccine injury can defined as death or anaphylaxis. The IOM has studied these issues at length.

        http://iom.nationalacademies.org/Reports.aspx?Activity={43C096A7-F094-43D0-985A-B6BF561A7C5D}

        As to autoimmunity there just doesn’t appear to a there there

        From up to date

        VACCINES — Concerns have been raised, particularly in the lay press, regarding the risk of inducing autoimmune disease by vaccination in patients with autoimmune disorders; the scientific evidence clearly favors the value of vaccination. Patients suffering from an autoimmune disease might have a generally heightened susceptibility to autoimmunity, but there are no well-designed epidemiologic studies showing a significant increase in any autoimmune disease following vaccination of these patients. Other studies indicate there is no difference in the occurrence following vaccination of severe systemic adverse effects, including autoimmune disorders, with vaccines using adjuvant compared with non-adjuvanted vaccines. Indeed, many patients with autoimmune disease are relatively poor immune responders to vaccine antigens and may require additional boosters. The protective value of vaccines in patients with autoimmune disease is well-established based by sound epidemiologic data, while the possibility that vaccines may induce or exacerbate autoimmune disease remains speculative [65,66].

        Abstracts for References 65 and 66

        65
        TI
        A(H1N1)v2009: a controlled observational prospective cohort study on vaccine safety in pregnancy.
        AU
        Oppermann M, Fritzsche J, Weber-Schoendorfer C, Keller-Stanislawski B, Allignol A, Meister R, Schaefer C
        SO
        Vaccine. 2012 Jun;30(30):4445-52. Epub 2012 May 5.

        BACKGROUND: A(H1N1)v2009 influenza vaccination of pregnant women was a challenge for health care providers, as little safety data were available.
        METHODS: We prospectively followed the pregnancies of women who were vaccinated at any time during pregnancy or≤4 weeks prior to conception and compared these outcomes to a control cohort matched by the estimated date of birth. Primary endpoints: rate of spontaneous abortion and major malformations. Secondary endpoints: preeclampsia, gestational age at birth, and birth weight.
        RESULTS: Pregnancy outcome of 323 women immunized with adjuvanted or non-adjuvanted A(H1N1)v2009 influenza vaccines from 2009-09-28 to 2010-03-31 were compared to 1329 control subjects. The risk for spontaneous abortions (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.36-2.19) and the rate of major malformations (all trimesters: OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.38-1.77; preconception and first trimester exposure: OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.13-2.64) did not vary between the two cohorts. Furthermore, there was no increase in preeclampsia, prematurity, and intrauterine growth retardation in the vaccinated cohort.
        CONCLUSION: The results of our study do not indicate a risk for the pregnant woman and the developing embryo/fetus after H1N1 vaccination. We provide and apply methods novel in observational studies on pregnancy outcome, especially if a single dose exposure is investigated.
        AD
        Institute for Clinical Teratology and Drug Risk Assessment in Pregnancy, Charité- Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany.
        PMID
        22564554
        66
        TI
        Influenza and pneumococcal vaccination of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: current views upon safety and immunogenicity
        AU
        Murdaca G, Orsi A, Spano F, et al
        SO
        Autoimmun Rev. 2013;

        AD
        PMID
        0

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        How about an autoimmune disease? Why does that not meet your criteria for being a “true” vaccine injury? That vaccines can cause autoimmunity is not in the least bit controversial.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        . The issue of autoimmune diseases is just not supported by evidence. The IOM studied adverse effects and no significant linkage could be found.

        Two large, population-based, case-control studies found no association between any of the routinely recommended childhood vaccines and an increased risk of type 1 diabetes mellitus [75,76], nor has an association between type 1 diabetes and childhood vaccination been detected in large population-based cohort studies in Sweden, Finland, and Denmark [77-79].

        Childhood vaccinations, vaccination timing, and risk of type 1 diabetes mellitus.
        AU
        DeStefano F, Mullooly JP, Okoro CA, Chen RT, Marcy SM, Ward JI, Vadheim CM, Black SB, Shinefield HR, Davis RL, Bohlke K, Vaccine Safety Datalink Team
        SO
        Pediatrics. 2001;108(6):E112.

        EURODIAB Substudy 2 Study Group
        AU
        Infections and vaccinations as risk factors for childhood type I (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus: a multicentre case-control investigation
        SO
        Diabetologia. 2000; 43:47.

        Cumulative incidence of childhood-onset IDDM is unaffected by pertussis immunization.
        AU
        Heijbel H, Chen RT, Dahlquist G
        SO
        Diabetes Care. 1997;20(2):173.

        Association between type 1 diabetes and Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccination: birth cohort study.
        AU
        Karvonen M, Cepaitis Z, Tuomilehto J
        SO
        BMJ. 1999;318(7192):1169.

        Childhood vaccination and type 1 diabetes.
        AU
        Hviid A, Stellfeld M, Wohlfahrt J, Melbye M
        SO
        N Engl J Med. 2004;350(14):1398.

        The common thread to these large group studies was the lack of statistical difference in diabetes incidence between the vaccinated unvaccinated groups.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Recent studies implicate a web of mechanisms in the development of vaccine adjuvant-induced autoimmune diseases, in particular, in those associated with aluminum-based compounds (Alum), which comprise a major bulk of contemporary adjuvants….

        It is accepted that several autoimmune diseases have a significant genetic background and genetic variations may affect the risk of adverse reaction following vaccination….

        In predisposed individuals, adjuvants may determine autoimmunity or aggravate autoimmune diseases.

        Molecular mimicry has been proposed as one of the main immunopathogenic mechanisms in post-vaccination CNS demyelination….

        Alongside molecular mimicry, other mechanisms have been proposed to explain the occurrence of autoimmune diseases after infection and some of these mechanisms may be important to explain correlations between autoimmunity and vaccines….

        Adjuvants present in the vaccines can induce a non-specific activation of the immune system with a subsequent expansion of autoreactive lymphocytes that may be accelerated further by defective regulatory cells/circuits, in geneticallly susceptible individuals….

        Recent evidence from Northern Europe suggests that the influenza H1N1 vaccine contributed to the onset of narcolepsy among those 4 to 19 years old during the pandemic influenza in 2009-2010….

        The idea that the adjuvant component of vaccines could enhance or trigger autoimmunity or autoimmune diseases represents an intriguing observation that may explain a number of adverse reactions observed after vaccination.

        Autoimmun Rev. 2015 Oct;14(10):880-8. doi: 10.1016/j.autrev.2015.05.014. Epub 2015 May 29.

        On vaccine’s adjuvants and autoimmunity: Current evidence and future perspectives.

        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26031899

      • Andrew Kinsella

        Mre recently we have been hearing of an association between Hep B vaccine and (I think) MS.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        So if a child is brain damaged from encephalitis due to vaccination or develops an autoimmune disease as a result, that doesn’t count as a “true vaccine injury”, by definition.

        That’s very instructive. Got it, thanks.

      • Illusion

        BS, then you haven’t seen or met any kids. I sat a birthday party at a table of 4 mom, ALL 4 MOMS had kids with digestive problems, ALL of special diets? I know, it’s coincidence disease. And yes we are aware of ALL environmental hazards, of which vaccines are INJECTED, NOR “ORGANIC”.

      • Illusion

        “but there are no well-designed epidemiologic studies showing a significant increase in any autoimmune disease following vaccination of these patients.” So your PROOF is that nobody has every REALLY studied it. WELL THEN I GUESS YOU ARE RIGHT, nobody know shit! And your proof is NOTHING, proof of nothing if no one studied it. WE WERE TOLD THAT DIET was not related to our child’s GI DISEASE of the intestines. A pediatric GI specialist told us this, BRILLIANT, food DOES NOT AFFECT the intestine, FUNNY that is contrary to being told to eat fiber for example. There JUST ISN’T enough “RESEARCH” to PROVE food affects INTESTINES? Wow do we every have a sense of trust and confidence IN MEDICAL SCIENCE. Then her recommended a flu shot for her on immunosupprents. Why NOT dampen immunity AND challenge it at the same time. I’m sure there is “NO RESEARCH” on the intelligence of doing this!

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Since you asked….dm type 1 is probably the most common autoimmune disease. If you read the following evidence you will see that there is no correlation between vaccination and development of DM.

        The issue of autoimmune diseases is just not supported by evidence. The IOM studied adverse effects and no significant linkage could be found.

        Two large, population-based, case-control studies found no association between any of the routinely recommended childhood vaccines and an increased risk of type 1 diabetes mellitus [75,76], nor has an association between type 1 diabetes and childhood vaccination been detected in large population-based cohort studies in Sweden, Finland, and Denmark [77-79].

        Childhood vaccinations, vaccination timing, and risk of type 1 diabetes mellitus.
        AU
        DeStefano F, Mullooly JP, Okoro CA, Chen RT, Marcy SM, Ward JI, Vadheim CM, Black SB, Shinefield HR, Davis RL, Bohlke K, Vaccine Safety Datalink Team
        SO
        Pediatrics. 2001;108(6):E112.

        EURODIAB Substudy 2 Study Group
        AU
        Infections and vaccinations as risk factors for childhood type I (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus: a multicentre case-control investigation
        SO
        Diabetologia. 2000; 43:47.

        Cumulative incidence of childhood-onset IDDM is unaffected by pertussis immunization.
        AU
        Heijbel H, Chen RT, Dahlquist G
        SO
        Diabetes Care. 1997;20(2):173.

        Association between type 1 diabetes and Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccination: birth cohort study.
        AU
        Karvonen M, Cepaitis Z, Tuomilehto J
        SO
        BMJ. 1999;318(7192):1169.

        Childhood vaccination and type 1 diabetes.
        AU
        Hviid A, Stellfeld M, Wohlfahrt J, Melbye M
        SO
        N Engl J Med. 2004;350(14):1398.

        The common thread to these large group studies was the lack of statistical difference in diabetes incidence between the vaccinated unvaccinated groups.

      • Illusion

        “dm type 1 is probably the most common autoimmune disease.” — Probably looking at one disease that probably isn’t the most common or maybe might sorta be probably be PROOF of nothing. I had NOT heard that the cause of DM Type I HAD BEEN FOUND. So we don’t know the cause of TYPE I DM but for sure KNOW without certainty what isn’t causing it… I though science was supposed to investigate the unexplained NOT explain the uninvestigated??? Do you think receiving 69 vaccines in early childhood COULD affect someone 5, 10, 20 years later? I do. How long can your patient’s take prednisone? My kid has already taken a LIFETIME + dose of prednisone that could affect her bone density ANYTIME in her life. WELL how can THAT be? She hasn’t taken any prednisone in over 5 years, she just too 40-60mg a day MANY TIMES OVER prior to age 11. How can that be? But finding or NOT finding coorelations probably is PROOF according to your ONE disease that probably ISN’T proof of anything, EXCEPT we do not know what causes DM TYPE I. HOW OLD IS the OLDEST age cohort that now has taken 69 doses of vaccines by age 6? Have this been studied for LIFETIMES???? NO. So THERE’s MORE Proof OF we know NAUGHT what we are doing…. WE are all gov’t mandated experiments. It’s called the Nuremburg Code. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199711133372006

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Dm pretty clearly has an immune component as the islets of Langer hand are destroyed by the body.

        The vaccines in use today have lower antigen counts than those in the 60s.
        From up to date

        With manufacturing advances and discontinuation of smallpox immunization, children are exposed to fewer antigens today than they were in 1980

        cine refusal: issues for the primary care physician.
        AU
        Lyren A, Leonard E
        SO
        Clin Pediatr (Phila). 2006;45(5):399.

        AD
        Department of Pediatrics, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA.
        PMID
        16891271

        The reality is that the autoimmune claims for chronic disease caused by vaccinations have not stood up or been verified by any peer reviewed study.

      • ione murphy

        Chronic autoimmune disorder caused from a vaccine..

        From the CDC- Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) is a rare disorder in which a person’s own immune system damages their nerve cells, causing muscle weakness and sometimes paralysis. On very rare occasions, they may develop GBS in the days or weeks after getting a vaccination.”

        “The chronic version of GBS is known as Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy or CIDP. Researchers who studied vaccine reaction rates found that “GBS is more strongly associated with vaccination for influenza” than for any other vaccine. The Journal of the American Medical Association cites Guillain Barré as the most frequent neurological condition reported after getting the flu shot.”

        “Statistics released in March, 2014 by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services revealed that the flu vaccine remains the top vaccine causing injuries which are being compensated through vaccine court, and that Guillain-Barré Syndrome, a crippling disease, remains the top injury being awarded compensation due to the seasonal flu vaccine.

        The report shows that from 11/16/2013 through 2/15/2014, there were 128 total cases filed in vaccine court and 52 cases were compensated. 40 judgements adopted settlements” source Hrsa Gov and Health Impact News

        “The risk of a former GBS patient developing GBS again from a vaccination is not known as the complication rate from vaccinations in recovered GBS patients has not been properly studied. Members of the GBS|CIDP Foundation Medical Advisory Board have deliberated on the safety of immunizations for former GBS patients and offer the following guidelines: For the rare person who developed GBS within four to six weeks of receiving an immunization, it seems prudent to avoid that vaccination in the future. For those whose GBS did not follow soon after a vaccination, there is no reliable data to indicate the risk of developing GBS after a vaccination”… Source GBS/CIPD Foundation

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Guillaume Barre remains extremely rare. In 30 years of health care I have met two patients who developed gbs following flu shots.

        Extremely rare and the point remains that the wild illnesses are more dangerous.

      • ione murphy

        So you will admit that vaccines can cause autoimmune disorders after all, even if as you say it’s “extremely rare”

        I know two people who have contracted GBS from vaccines, but I don’t personally know anyone who has ever been hospitalized or died from the flu.

        So what do you make of flu deaths INCREASING 3 fold for children under 5 years old after the CDC recommended flu vaccines for children??

        In 2003-2004 the CDC recommended for the first time that children younger than 5 years and older than 6 months receive an annual flu vaccination.

        The number of children dying from the flu has risen *drastically* since the CDC recommended children under 5 receive the flu vaccine. There has been an average of 67% increase of flu-associated death in children since the CDC recommended children under 5 receive the flu vaccine.

        They found that children who had received the flu vaccine had three times the risk of hospitalization, as compared to children who had not received the vaccine. In asthmatic children, there was a significantly higher risk of hospitalization in subjects who received the TIV (Stands for Trivalent Influenza Vaccine – a.k.a. the flu shot), as compared to those who did not…source Sciencedaily

        The following is a list of different years and the number of flu associated deaths in children reported to the CDC:

        1999-2000 -36 deaths

        2000-2001 -30 deaths 17% decrease

        2001-2002 – 25 deaths 17% decrease

        2002-2003 – 29 deaths 16% increase

        Year that they started giving flu vaccine to children..

        2003-2004 – 153 427% increase

        2004-2005 — 47 deaths 69% decrease

        2005-2006 – 46 deaths 3% decrease

        2006-2007 – 68 deaths 48% increase

        2007-2008 – 88 deaths 29% increase

        2008-2009 – 133 deaths 51% increase

        2009-2010 – 282 deaths 112% increase

        2010-2011 – 115 deaths 59% decrease

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        No I was saying that the risk for autoimmune illness following vaccination is extremely rare.
        The evidence is quite clear.

        From up to date

        Vaccination — Guillain-Barré syndrome has followed vaccinations, but this danger may be overstated. In a retrospective study that analyzed a northern California healthcare database over an ascertainment period from 1994 through 2006, there was no increased risk of incident GBS following any vaccination and all vaccinations combined, whether using a 6 week or 10 week risk interval [46].

        Lack of association of Guillain-Barrésyndrome with vaccinations.
        AU
        Baxter R, Bakshi N, Fireman B, Lewis E, Ray P, Vellozzi C, Klein NP
        SO
        Clin Infect Dis. 2013;57(2):197.

        In 1992/93 and 199394flu season one case of gb per million vaccinations.
        The Guillain-Barrésyndrome and the 1992-1993 and 1993-1994 influenza vaccines.
        AU
        Lasky T, Terracciano GJ, Magder L, Koski CL, Ballesteros M, Nash D, Clark S, Haber P, Stolley PD, Schonberger LB, Chen RT
        SO
        N Engl J Med. 1998;339(25):1797.

        2009 H1N1 flu season 1 to 2 cases per million vaccinations.

        Association between Guillain-Barrésyndrome and influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent inactivated vaccines in the USA: a meta-analysis.
        AU
        Salmon DA, Proschan M, Forshee R, Gargiullo P, Bleser W, Burwen DR, Cunningham F, Garman P, Greene SK, Lee GM, Vellozzi C, Yih WK, Gellin B, Lurie N, H1N1 GBS Meta-Analysis Working Group
        SO
        Lancet. 2013;381(9876):1461.

        Guillain-Barrésyndrome and preceding infection with campylobacter, influenza and Epstein-Barr virus in the general practice research database.
        AU
        Tam CC, O’Brien SJ, Petersen I, Islam A, Hayward A, Rodrigues LC
        SO
        PLoS One. 2007;2(4):e344. Epub 2007 Apr 4.

        Investigation of the temporal association of Guillain-Barre syndrome with influenza vaccine and influenzalike illness using the United Kingdom General Practice Research Database.
        AU
        Stowe J, Andrews N, Wise L, Miller E
        SO
        Am J Epidemiol. 2009 Feb;169(3):382-8. Epub 2009 Jan 20.

        ( In contrast, the relative incidence of Guillain-Barrésyndrome within 90 days of an influenzalike illness was 7.35 (95% confidence interval: 4.36, 12.38), with the greatest relative incidence (16.64, 95% confidence interval: 9.37, 29.54) within 30 days. ) the above found no relationship between vaccination but did find increased risk after a case of the flu.

        Also

        One of the complications of influenza infection is an increased risk of GBS that is several times greater than the risk following influenza vaccination.

        Guillain-Barre syndrome, influenza, and influenza vaccination: the epidemiologic evidence.
        AU
        Vellozzi C, Iqbal S, Broder K
        SO
        Clin Infect Dis. 2014;58(8):1149.

        1.4 million adolescents who received Menactra, the attributable risk for GBS ranged from 0 to 1.5 additional cases of GBS per million vaccines within the six-week period following vaccination

        Risk of Guillain-Barrésyndrome after meningococcal conjugate vaccination.
        AU
        Velentgas P, Amato AA, Bohn RL, Chan KA, Cochrane T, Funch DP, Dashevsky I, Duddy AL, Gladowski P, Greenberg SA, Kramer JM, McMahill-Walraven C, Nakasato C, Spettell CM, Syat BL, Wahl PM, Walker AM, Zhang F, Brown JS, Platt R
        SO
        Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2012;21(12):1350.

        Gb is extremely rare. The risk is far greater after a case of the flu as compared to post vaccination. You can flog gb all you want but as the saying goes “that dog won’t hunt.” If anything the flu vaccination is protective against developing gb syndrome.

      • ione murphy

        So these are not your comments then ??

        “As to autoimmunity there just doesn’t appear to a there there”

        “The issue of autoimmune diseases is just not supported by evidence.”

        “The reality is that the autoimmune claims for chronic disease caused by vaccinations have not stood up or been verified by any peer reviewed study”

        Vaccine. 2012 Nov 19;30(49):7123-9. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.09.032. Epub 2012 Sep 26.

        Autoimmune disorders after immunisation with Influenza A/H1N1 vaccines with and without adjuvant: EudraVigilance data and literature review.

        Isai A1, Durand J, Le Meur S, Hidalgo-Simon A, Kurz X.

        Author information

        1European Medicines Agency, Pharmacovigilance and Risk Management Sector, Patient Health Protection Unit, London, United Kingdom.

        Abstract

        All suspected autoimmune disorders (AID) reported as adverse reactions to EudraVigilance from 1 October 2009 to 31 December 2010 for adjuvanted (Celtura™, Fluval P™, Focetria™ and Pandemrix™) and non-adjuvanted (Cantgrip™, Celvapan™ and Panenza™) pandemic Influenza A/H1N1 vaccines were analysed to determine whether adjuvanted vaccines were associated with higher reporting of AID than non-adjuvanted ones. AID were identified based on the corresponding MedDRA High Level Group Term. Reports of type 1 diabetes mellitus and multiple sclerosis were also included in the analysis. Causality was assessed based on WHO causality assessment for adverse events following immunisation and Brighton Collaboration criteria for Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura and acute disseminated encephalomyelitis. Of the 50,221 adverse reactions received in EudraVigilance for A/H1N1 vaccines (adjuvanted: O46,173, non-adjuvanted: 4048), 314 were AID (adjuvanted: 276, non-adjuvanted: 38). GBS was the AID with the highest number of reports (125, adjuvanted: 109, non-adjuvanted: 16).

        Reporting rates for all reports of AID using the estimated number of vaccinees as denominator were 6.87 per million adjuvanted 3.94 for non adjuvanted…

        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23022149

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        And returning to the point I was making when “Viking” first denied that vaccines can cause autoimmune diseases, note that if vaccination causes a child to develop GBS, it isn’t a “true” vaccine injury, according to the definition “Viking” provided.

        Instructive.

      • ione murphy

        I cant understand people who keep denying that vaccines cause autoimmune disorders!
        I mean, it’s part of the Vaccine Injury Table laid out by the Gov. Claims have been awarded to those with autoimmune disorders caused from vaccines.

        I wish we could put this to rest once and for all, maybe this proof will convince our Viking nurse she needs to face the truth…

        HRSA-U.S. Department of Health and Human Services-

        National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program

        The Vaccine Injury Table (Table) makes it easier for some people to get compensation. The Table lists and explains injuries/conditions that are presumed to be caused by vaccines. It also lists time periods in which the first symptom of these injuries/conditions must occur after receiving the vaccine

        If your injury/condition is not on the Table or if your injury/condition did not occur within the time period on the Table, you must prove that the vaccine caused the injury/condition. Such proof must be based on medical records or opinion, which may include expert witness testimony….source http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/vaccinetable.html

        Vaccine Injury Table- V. Vaccines containing measles virus (e.g., MMR, MR, M) A. Thrombocytopenic purpura

        Date–Vaccine–Name–Illness
        or Symptoms–Link to Court Decision–Amount Compensated

        5/28/2014 Influenza Vaccine, Varicella Vaccine

        Immune Thrombocytopenia Purpura Case No. 10-517V $75,000

        What Is ITP or Idiopathic Thrombocytopenia Purpura?. In most cases, an autoimmune response is thought to cause ITP. Normally, your immune system helps your body fight off infections and diseases. But if you have ITP, your immune system attacks and destroys its own platelets.” source~National Institutes of Health

        Vaccination and autoimmune disease: what is the evidence?

        “Another example of confirmed autoimmune adverse effects after vaccination is idiopathic thrombocytopenia, which might arise after administration of the measles-mumps-rubella vaccination.51–55 The reported frequency of clinically apparent idiopathic thrombocytopenia after this vaccine is around one in 30,000 vaccination.” Source ~The Lancet

        Vaccine Injury Table- HRSA
        IV. Vaccines containing rubella virus (e.g., MMR, MR, R) A. Chronic arthritis

        What is Chronic Arthritis? “The immune system produces antibodies that attach to the linings of joints. Immune system cells then attack the joints, causing inflammation, swelling, and pain”

        JAMA. 1997 Aug 20;278(7):551-6.
        Risk of chronic arthropathy among women after rubella vaccination. Vaccine Safety Datalink Team.

        Arch Intern Med. 1993 Oct 11;153(19):2268-74.
        Chronic rubella vaccine-associated arthropathy.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        I cant understand people who keep denying that vaccines cause autoimmune disorders!

        It’s a bit like the folks who continued to insist that Iraq really did have WMDs in 2003, even after the CIA itself acknowledged in the Duelfer Report that the unaccounted stocks were unilaterally destroyed in 1991.

      • ione murphy

        Since you brought up the subject…there is something I have been wondering about for awhile. Maybe you have some answers. I’m no expert on blowing up nerve gas or WMD’s, but don’t you think it was a bad idea to do so, instead of actually going in and capturing any evidence and disposing of it in a way that’s not going to release it into the environment and kill thousands of innocent civilians?

        The Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory in Sudan

        “On August 20, 1998, the factory was destroyed in cruise missile strikes launched by the United States military allegedly in retaliation for the August 7 truck bomb attacks on its embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya (see 1998 U.S. embassy bombings). The administration of President Bill Clinton justified the attacks, dubbed Operation Infinite Reach, on the grounds that the al-Shifa plant was involved with processing the deadly nerve agent VX

        Germany’s ambassador to Sudan from 1996 to 2000, Werner Daum, wrote an article in 2001 in which he called “several tens of thousands of deaths” of Sudanese civilians caused by a medicine shortage a “reasonable guess”.[17] The regional director of the U.S. based Near East Foundation, who had field experience in the Sudan, wrote an article in The Boston Globe with the same estimate and said “without the lifesaving medicine [the destroyed facilities] produced … tens of thousands of people—many of them children—have suffered and died from malaria, tuberculosis and other treatable diseases. Al-Shifa produced 90 percent of Sudan’s major pharmaceutical products”

        Source Wikipedia

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Not only did they go and bomb facilities thought to manufacture CBW during the first war on Iraq, thus just spreading the agents to the wind (one hypothesized contributor to Gulf-War Syndrome, in addition to the anthrax vaccine), but then in the second war on Iraq, they created the only condition under which the intelligence community assessed Saddam Hussein would actually use CBW (a desperate move for regime survival) and then created the conditions by which extremist groups might actually get their hands on CBW.

        Indeed, while the claim Iraq had ongoing CBW programs and manufacturing was a lie, armed groups did get their hands on pre-1991 munitions still containing chemical agents.

      • Illusion

        Makes one wonder this discussion with a supposed practioner who makes no sense.

      • ione murphy

        Vaccine Related Disorders that are on the Vaccine Injury Table or have been awarded compensation in court.

        Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) -Autoimmune
        GBS is an autoimmune disorder that causes the body to attack and destroy the myelin sheath.

        Transverse Myelitis -Autoimmune
        Transverse myelitis is a neurological disorder involving inflammation across the spinal cord. Attacks of inflammation can damage or destroy myelin, the fatty insulating substance that covers nerve cell fibers.

        CIDP – Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy-Autoimmune
        CIDP is a form of autoimmune disease. What happens is the body’s defenses attack and strip away the covering that protects the nerves, which is called the myelin sheath.

        Neuromyelitis Optica or Optic Neuritis Autoimmune
        Neuromyelitis Optica (NMO), also known as Devic’s disease or Devic’s syndrome, is an autoimmune disorder that affects the optic nerves and the spinal cord. Immune system cells and antibodies mistakenly attack and destroy myelin cells in the optic nerves and the spinal cord

        Dermatomyositis or JDM and Vaccine Reactions -Autoimmune
        Dermatomyositis is a rare autoimmune disease that causes an inflammatory response in which the body’s immune system attacks blood vessels in the muscle and skin.

        Thrombocytopenia Purpura -Autoimmune
        ITP is a disease where the immune system destroys its own platelets.

        Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis ADEM
        Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) is characterized by a brief but intense attack of inflammation in the brain and spinal cord that damages myelin. Myelin is the protective covering of nerve fibers.

        Brachial Neuritis & Vaccination
        Brachial Neuritis is the swelling and inflammation of the nerve bundles that send signals from the spine to the shoulder, arms, and fingers

        SIRVA

        Intussusception & Rotavirus Vaccine

        Narcolepsy

        http://www.mctlawyers.com/vaccine-injury

      • Illusion

        Well it isn’t a death nor anaphylaxis, so by definition, GB is not a “TRUE” injury that likely lands you in ICU, intubated, breathing on a vent. That means it breaths FOR you.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        It’s not vaccination. It is the circulating strain of influenza that determines mortality.

        See

        During seasonal influenza epidemics, fatal infections are less common among children than among adults (average of 0.2 deaths per 100,000 persons <19 years compared with 1.5 and 66 deaths among 100,000 persons ages 19 through 64 years and ≥65 years, respectively, between 1976 and 2007) [48]. Between 2004 and 2012, annual influenza mortality among children or=65 years.
        Influenza-associated pediatric deaths in the United States, 2004-2012.
        AU
        Wong KK, Jain S, Blanton L, Dhara R, Brammer L, Fry AM, Finelli L
        SO
        Pediatrics. 2013;132(5):796.

        BACKGROUND: Influenza-associated deaths in children occur annually. We describe the epidemiology of influenza-associated pediatric deaths from the 2004-2005 through the 2011-2012 influenza seasons.

        Prevention and control of seasonal influenza with vaccines. Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices–United States, 2013-2014.
        AU
        Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
        SO
        MMWR Recomm Rep. 2013;62(RR-07):1.

        By the way I can just about guarantee that you have known someone who died from influenza mediated pneumonia.

      • ione murphy

        Cochrane Review -Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy children

        Published:
        15 August 2012

        “In children under the age of two, the efficacy of inactivated vaccine was similar to placebo. It was not possible to analyse the safety of vaccines from the studies due to the lack of standardisation in the information given, but very little information was found on the safety of inactivated vaccines, the most commonly used vaccine in young children.

        Influenza vaccines are efficacious in preventing cases of influenza in children older than two years of age, but little evidence is available for children younger than two years of age. There was a difference between vaccine efficacy and effectiveness, partly due to differing datasets, settings and viral circulation patterns. No safety comparisons could be carried out, emphasising the need for standardisation of methods and presentation of vaccine safety data in future studies. In specific cases, influenza vaccines were associated with serious harms such as narcolepsy and febrile convulsions. It was surprising to find only one study of inactivated vaccine in children under two years, given current recommendations to vaccinate healthy children from six months of age in the USA, Canada, parts of Europe and Australia. If immunisation in children is to be recommended as a public health policy, large-scale studies assessing important outcomes, and directly comparing vaccine types are urgently required. The degree of scrutiny needed to identify all global cases of potential harms is beyond the resources of this review.

        This review includes trials funded by industry. An earlier systematic review of 274 influenza vaccine studies published up to 2007 found industry-funded studies were published in more prestigious journals and cited more than other studies independently from methodological quality and size. Studies funded from public sources were significantly less likely to report conclusions favourable to the vaccines.

        The review showed that reliable evidence on influenza vaccines is thin but there is evidence of widespread manipulation of conclusions and spurious notoriety of the studies. The content and conclusions of this review should be interpreted in the light of this finding.”

        http://www.cochrane.org/CD004879/ARI_vaccines-for-preventing-influenza-in-healthy-children

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        At least 2 of the following sources were published following the Cochrane review.

        Mortality is increased approximately threefold during seasons when influenza A H3N2 strains account for at least 20 percent of isolates [48]. Pediatric mortality was increased during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic [4].

        stimates of deaths associated with seasonal influenza — United States, 1976-2007.
        AU
        Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
        SO
        MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2010;59(33):1057.

        Influenza infections are associated with thousands of deaths every year in the United States, with the majority of deaths from seasonal influenza occurring among adults aged>or=65 years. 
        Influenza-associated pediatric deaths in the United States, 2004-2012.
        AU
        Wong KK, Jain S, Blanton L, Dhara R, Brammer L, Fry AM, Finelli L
        SO
        Pediatrics. 2013;132(5):796.

        BACKGROUND: Influenza-associated deaths in children occur annually. We describe the epidemiology of influenza-associated pediatric deaths from the 2004-2005 through the 2011-2012 influenza seasons.

        Prevention and control of seasonal influenza with vaccines. Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices–United States, 2013-2014.
        AU
        Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
        SO
        MMWR Recomm Rep. 2013;62(RR-07):1.

      • Illusion

        So vaccination is causing more virulent strains of flu that kill people? Thus the increase in death of children since the CDC recommendation that children receive flu vaccine?

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        No. The vaccination programs don’t cause tell circulating strains to become more virulent. Mortalty was linked to a specific antigenic profile.

      • ione murphy

        So how exactly would you define ‘extremely rare’?
        I found claims from just one lawyers group for 45 GBS injuries since Jan 2014 I believe its 200-300 a year total correct? Here’s a sample..
        Vaccine Injury claims that have been settled in court:
        Date–Vaccine Name–Illness
        or Symptoms—Link to Court Decision–Amount Compensated
        2/10/2015 Influenza Vaccine, TDaP Guillain Barre Syndrome (GBS)Case No. 11-760V $500,000
        1/29/2015 Influenza Vaccine Guillain Barre Syndrome (GBS)Case No. 13-228V $140,000
        1/14/2015 Influenza (Flu) VaccineGuillain Barre Syndrome (GBS)Case No. 13-828V $75,000
        1/13/2015 TDaP Vaccine Guillain Barre Syndrome (GBS)Case No. 14-209V $100,000
        1/12/2015 Influenza (Flu) Vaccine Guillain Barre Syndrome (GBS)Case No. 13-802V $165,000
        1/8/2015 Influenza (Flu) Vaccine Guillain Barre Syndrome (GBS)Case No. 14-158V $120,000
        11/12/2014 Influenza (Flu) Vaccine Guillain Barre Syndrome (GBS)Case No. 13-425V$80,000
        10/31/2014 Influenza Vaccine Guillain Barre Syndrome (GBS )Case No. 13-39V $140,000
        10/10/2014 Flu Vaccine GBS Case No. 13-142V$60,000
        10/1/2014 Influenza Vaccine Guillain Barre Syndrome (GBS) Case No. 13-110V $120,000

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Out of how many influenza vaccinations given? By no means are al gb cases related to vaccinationevebts.

      • Illusion

        That’s NOT what package insert state.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Of course all GBS are not associated with vaccination.

        That doesn’t change the fact that vaccination increases the risk of GBS.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Except the data shows that influenza and other viral diseases are significantly more likely to be implicated in gbs.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        I already have in another post….

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        I don’t recall seeing any information about any studies comparing rates of GBS in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated individuals.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        If anything influenza vaccination reduces the risk of developing gbs.

        “The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of GBS within 42 days after a diagnosis of pandemic influenza was 4.89 (95 % CI 1.17-20.36). After pandemic vaccination the adjusted HR was 1.11 (95 % CI 0.51-2.43). Our results indicated that there was a significantly increased risk of GBS during the pandemic season and after pandemic influenza infection. However, vaccination did not increase the risk of GBS. ”
        Eur J Epidemiol. 2015 May 26. [Epub ahead of print]

        Risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome after exposure to pandemic influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccination or infection: a Norwegian population-based cohort study.

        Ghaderi S1, Gunnes N, Bakken IJ, Magnus P, Trogstad L, Håberg SE.

        The vaccine coverage was about 39% of the population.

        This study illustrates the potential of conducting European collaborative vaccine safety studies. The main, fully adjusted analysis, showed that the RI of GBS was not significantly elevated after influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccination (RI = 1.4 (95% CI: 0.7-2.
        PLoS One. 2014 Jan 3;9(1):e82222. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0082222. eCollection 2014.

        Guillain-Barré syndrome and adjuvanted pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009 vaccines: a multinational self-controlled case series in Europe.

        Romio S1, Weibel D2, Dieleman JP1, Olberg HK3, de Vries CS4, Sammon C4, Andrews N5, Svanström H6, Mølgaard-Nielsen D6, Hviid A6, Lapeyre-Mestre M7, Sommet A7, Saussier C8, Castot A9, Heijbel H10, Arnheim-Dahlström L11, Sparen P11, Mosseveld M1,Schuemie M1, van der Maas N12, Jacobs BC13, Leino T14, Kilpi T14, Storsaeter J15, Johansen K16, Kramarz P16, Bonhoeffer J17,Sturkenboom MC1.

        Most UK GBS and FS cases had infections in the preceding 3 months. When considering the children living in England, there was no significantly increased risk of GBS after pandemic A/H1N1 2009 influenza vaccination or 2010/2011 seasonal influenza vaccination.

        Arch Dis Child. 2014 Jun;99(6):532-8. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2013-304475. Epub 2014 Feb 28.

        Pandemic A/H1N1 2009 influenza vaccination, preceding infections and clinical findings in UK children with Guillain-Barré syndrome.

        Verity C1, Stellitano L1, Winstone AM1, Stowe J2, Andrews N3, Miller E4.

        It’s pretty clear that influenza and campylobacter infections dramatically increase the risk for gbs.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        The appropriate comparison point is to compare the incidence of gbs between people who have had influenza or campylobacter or other infections. The evidence is very clear that having had either campylobacter or influenza puts individuals at a much higher risk than the influenza vaccination.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        That isn’t evident. Nor could it be, lacking the knowledge of how much vaccination increases the risk of GBS. Again, the study you are relying on (and others like it) use a flawed methodology, as it may be that vaccination increases the risk that a subsequent infection could trigger GBS. Again, this is discussed here:

        Association between vaccination and Guillain-Barré syndrome.
        Lancet Infect Dis. 2013 Sep;13(9):730-1. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(13)70142-7. Epub 2013 Jun 28.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Our study demonstrates that there is also a risk of GBS after influenza virus infection in adults, with an expected frequency much higher than that after influenza vaccination using either inactivated vaccines (1 GBS case per 1,000,000 vaccinated persons [34–36]) or live attenuated vaccines (2 GBS cases per 2,500,000 vaccinated persons

        …..

        it can be estimated that the incidence of influenza-related GBS relative to the number of cases of influenza is 4–7 cases of GBS per 100,000 cases of influenza. In comparison, the risk of developing GBS after C. jejuni infection has been estimated to be 1 case of GBS per 1000 cases of C. jejuni infection

        Guillain-Barré Syndrome and Influenza Virus Infection

         Authors

        Valérie Sivadon-Tardy1,2David Orlikowski2,3Raphaël Porcher5,6Tarek Sharshar2,3Marie-Christine Durand2,4Vincent Enouf7,8Flore Rozenberg9,10Christiane Caudie11Djillali Annane2,3Sylvie van der Werf7,8Pierre Lebon8,9Jean-Claude Raphaël2,3Jean-Louis Gaillard1,2, andElyanne Gault1,2,7,8

        http://m.cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/48/1/48.full

        Tam CC, O’Brien SJ, Petersen I, Islam A,Hayward A, Rodrigues LC . Guillain-Barré syndrome and preceding infection withCampylobacter, influenza and Epstein-Barr virus in the general practice research database. PLoS ONE 2007;2:e344.

        Has evidence that influenza vaccination is protective against influenza related gbs.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        That is not a study comparing rates of GBS in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated individuals, and once again you are citing a study using the flawed methodology discussed here:

        Association between vaccination and Guillain-Barré syndrome.
        Lancet Infect Dis. 2013 Sep;13(9):730-1. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(13)70142-7. Epub 2013 Jun 28.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        You are not asking the appropriate question.

        Question 1: what is the baseline rate of gbs in the population at large. Answer 3 to 4 cases per 100000 people.

        Question 2: What are the common threads of events leading to infection.
        Answer 2/3 of cases are preceded by campylobacter J or influenza. This yields a base rate of cases attributable to known disease. (The literature points to enteric viruses as the primary cause.).

        Question 3: what is the base rate of suspected cases of gbs attributable to influenza vaccination. Answer 1 to 2 per million vaccination events. The Norwegian study estimated influenza vaccination coverage at 39% of the population. To make the math simple we can assume a 50% vaccination rate per million people. That leaves us 1 possible vaccination related case per million people.

        From here the comparisons are simple. Out of a million people we can expect 30 to 40 cases of gbs. Of that number 20 t0 25 are related to campylobacter or influenza infection.

        That means that out f any given million people it is about 25 times more likely that gbs is caused by infection vs the influenza vaccination. The other piece to this is that gbs cases tend to peak during winter spring. This correlates with influenza season. If anything there is evidence that the vaccination reduces the incidence of gbs attributable to influenza.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        You are not asking the appropriate question.

        Question 1: what is the baseline rate of gbs in the population at large.

        Rather, you are not asking the appropriate question, as the population at large will have predominantly been vaccinated, which invalidates this methodology for testing the hypothesis, as I’ve already pointed out.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        You are just plainly wrong. GBS just doesn’t appear out of the blue. It is precipitated by a bacterial or viral infection for the majority of cases. If you are trying to determine the risk after exposure to vaccination it has to be within context.
        The us influenza vaccination rate for adults was 41.2% in 2012/13.
        http://www.cdc.gov/flu/fluvaxview/coverage-1213estimates.htm#age-group-adults

        When examining causes of disease it’s important to drill down to root causes of the condition. You have been given sourced information that discusses the role of ecological exposure to gbs.

        The root cause is usually c jejuni or influenza.

        The known gbs rate is 30 to 40 cases per million people. The estimated rate following vaccination is 1 to 2 cases per million vaccinations.

        With a 43% vaccination rate that yields on the high side .8 cases per million people. Any given individual is at least 50 times more likely to develop gbs from illness than vaccination.

        In short there is no meaningful relationship.

        Lack of association of Guillain-Barrésyndrome with vaccinations.
        AU
        Baxter R, Bakshi N, Fireman B, Lewis E, Ray P, Vellozzi C, Klein NP
        SO
        Clin Infect Dis. 2013;57(2):197. The vaccinated unvaccinated comparison is essentially meaningless.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        You are just plainly wrong. GBS just doesn’t appear out of the blue.

        I didn’t argue that GBS appears out of the blue (hence by your own criteria therefore not “plainly wrong”).

        You are employing a strawman fallacy and begging the question, essentially arguing that we don’t need to study whether vaccination contributes to rates of GBS because we already know it doesn’t.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        No. Epidemiology is epidemiology. There is no reason to study gbs and vaccination because enough evidence has been accumulated to show that further study is a waste of time and research dollars.

        The vaccinated vaccinated data for gbs incidence was already available in the articles that have been posted.

        You have certainly attempted to make a vaccination and gbs incidence connection throughout the pattern of your replies to evidence based rebuttals.

        The pathophysiology and epidemiology of gbs is quite clear. There is no statistically significant risk linking gbs with vaccination.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        You keep repeating the same fallacies. See my previous comments.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Lack of association of Guillain-Barrésyndrome with vaccinations.
        AU
        Baxter R, Bakshi N, Fireman B, Lewis E, Ray P, Vellozzi C, Klein NP
        SO
        Clin Infect Dis. 2013;57(2):197.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        That paper notes that there was a high risk of GBS associated with the 1979 swine flu vaccine, and that two different studies have found an increased risk of developing GBS after vaccination of 1 excess case per 1 million vaccinations.

        The authors note that GBS occurred up to 10 weeks following 1979 H1N1 vaccination and that when they used that interval, they found a statistically significant increased risk of GBS after typhoid vaccination. They get away with their title by limiting the duration to only 6 weeks and, appropriately, state explicitly that they were “unable to exclude any possible association between vaccine and GBS.”

        We can also find in the literature, e.g.:

        Association between vaccination and Guillain-Barré syndrome.
        Lancet Infect Dis. 2013 Sep;13(9):730-1. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(13)70142-7. Epub 2013 Jun 28.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Thus, the small risk of GBS associated with influenza vaccination, on the order of one to two excess cases of GBS per million people vaccinated, is substantially less than the overall health risk posed by naturally occurring influenza. One of the complications of influenza infection is an increased risk of GBS that is several times greater than the risk following influenza vaccination [32].

        Guillain-Barre syndrome, influenza, and influenza vaccination: the epidemiologic evidence.
        AU
        Vellozzi C, Iqbal S, Broder K
        SO
        Clin Infect Dis. 2014;58(8):1149.

        It’s a very rare disorder to begin with. It’s most commonly associated with campylobacter infection and influenza. A fairly strong argument can be made from an epidemiological standpoint that the flu vaccine is actually protective against gbs. (Given that naturally occurring influenza and campylobacter infection cause the majority of cases.)

        39 years later I think that we can say the swine flu issue has been put to rest. The lesson is that active surveillance worked to identify the problem in 1976.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Again, the flaws in the methodology of the study you are relying on are outlined here:

        Association between vaccination and Guillain-Barré syndrome.
        Lancet Infect Dis. 2013 Sep;13(9):730-1. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(13)70142-7. Epub 2013 Jun 28.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        1 to 2 per million following vaccination.

        1 per 150000 following a case of the flu. As usual vaccination is safer than the disease.

      • ione murphy

        If as you say ” As usual vaccination is safer than the disease” why do so many health care workers opt out of getting the flu vaccine yearly? If they are not threatened with losing their jobs over it , only 43.4% will voluntarily summit to the vaccine. Many health care organizations are fighting against mandatory flu vaccines.

        How Many Health Care Workers Got Vaccinated Last Season?

        Early season(http://www.cdc.gov/flu/fluvaxview/hcp-ips-nov2014.htm)

        2014–15 flu vaccination coverage among health care personnel was 64.3%, similar to early season coverage during the 2013–14 season (62.9%).

        Early season flu vaccination coverage was higher among health care personnel whose employers required (85.8%) or recommended (68.4%) that they be vaccinated, compared to those whose employer did not have a policy or recommendation regarding flu vaccination (43.4%).

        Among unvaccinated health care personnel who did not intend to get the flu vaccination during this flu season, the most common reason reported for not getting vaccinated was that they don’t think that flu vaccines work. The second most common reason was that they don’t need the vaccine.”

        National Nurses United-

        “NNU is also calling on the pharmaceutical representatives from Pfizer and Novartis, who are members of the NVAC, (National Vaccine Advisory Committee) to recuse themselves from any votes that take place on the issue of the mandatory flu vaccine. The companies stand to make millions of dollars from flu vaccine sales. There are no nurses currently on the NVAC board.

        “It is unfortunate that for-profit pharmaceutical companies were consulted in this matter yet the voices of the nation’s direct-care hospital RNs have gone unheard,” said NNU co-president Karen Higgins, RN. “Nurses are calling for an open process to explore the best way to protect patients and healthcare workers, not one that is driven by corporate profits.”

        AAPS, a national organization of physicians in all specialties, objects to the mandatory immunization of health care workers (HCWs).

        Fewer than half of American HCWs choose to be immunized annually against influenza. We believe that the professional judgment of these workers should be respected.”

        The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) had this to say:

        “In the age of “evidence-based medicine,” it is shocking that there is so little evidence that the influenza vaccination program is effective. Indeed, there is evidence that it may be ineffective Safety data are reported in very few studies: only five randomized studies with 2,963 observations extending only one week after the injection. In fact, the coordinator of the vaccines section of the Cochrane Collaboration called for an urgent reevaluation of the UK’s influenza vaccination program (Jefferson T, Influenza vaccination: policy versus evidence. BMJ 2006;333:912-915). In particular, the safety of many repeated similar vaccinations is not addressed. Allergic, anaphylactic, hyperimmune, and dysimmune reactions are possible.”

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        That has absolutely nothing to do with the central point which was that the rate of gbs was not increased following vaccination.

        In fact influenza and other viral infections are more likely to trigger the disorder.

      • Illusion

        Influenza vaccine package inserts state Guillian Barre and Bells Palsy as “AN ASSOCIATION”. If you don’t understand what that means, that means THE TWO GO TOGETHER IN THE SAME TIME. I had Bells Palsy after a “work” flu shot, so opt to not take them anymore. Because I used to suffer from “safe and effective” delusions until my own physiology proved otherwise. Critical thinking includes “belief” in your own life experience.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        The population data shows that a wild case of the flu or other viral infection is far more likely to cause gbs than the vaccination.

      • Evan Eberhardt

        The denial of kids regressing into autism is a similar set of blinders pro-vaxers display. By their logic, they think had a toddler skipped that round of vaccines they would have had the exact same outcome. 6 month olds starting to walk and talk and then suddenly those functions are lost. Nope, would have happened anyway! To which I ask: How? A day at home playing with toys, hopefully breastfeeding, getting plenty of sleep, then BAM! Autism all of a sudden! And we have no clue why! It’s beyond ridiculous to even entertain such a notion, yet that is what the entire medical cartel is doing by saying vaccines play no part in autism when literally thousands of parents have gone on record saying their kid changed after a round of shots (as a parent I know when my child has a slight sniffle, so suddenly losing walking and talking…yeah, I trust the parents here over brainwashed misinformed doctors playing CYA games).

      • AutismDadd

        Dead on Evan

      • Illusion

        Guillian Barre is “SAFER” than the flu. I have had the flu at least 5 times, I was NEVER intubated on a vent, but my cousin was in ICU for weeks??? Huh? I guess she’s 5 years older than me, that must be why. I’ve never needed to even go to a doctor for the flu…

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        That it is “extremely rare” is no doubt of little comfort to parents whose children are damaged by vaccines.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Do you realize just how rare 1 to 2 occurrences per million is?

        Pertussis 2 to 5 cases of complications per hundred illnesses.

        Measles complications for the wild illness are about 1 per 250 cases of infection. (Death and permanent disability are about 3 to 4 per thousand.)

        You are entitled to have fixed unchanging beliefs but the best available evidence is that vaccination is the single best primary prevention strategy for vaccine preventable diseases.

      • Illusion

        Our local neurologist had Guillian Barre and so did my cousin.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        A disorder can be rare and still be visible in your social circle.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        The vaccines in use today have lower antigen counts than those in the 60s.

        How much of that is because of adjuvants like aluminum that they put in vaccines today?

      • Illusion

        “autoimmune claims for chronic disease caused by vaccinations have not stood up or been verified by any peer reviewed study.” That’s right, coorelations PROVE nothing. Did they study the kids who didn’t get vaccines? 50% of my vaccinated kids have autoimmune disease. So you thing Type I DM is “probably” more prevalent than allergies,asthma, IBD, juevenile arthritis, cancer in children, thus your guessing studies that don’t prove a cause for disease have for sure found WHAT ISN’T causing a disease. Is that how it works? So Colonel Mustard, in the library with the revolver WAS in the same room as the murder, there just isn’t enough proof FOR SURE to associate the Colonel, so we know for a fact it wasn’t him? Very telling. Not. And food has nothing to do with intestines I have been told by “science”.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        That dog doesn’t hunt. The evidence is pretty clear from the large group studies that autoimmunity isn’t triggered by vaccination.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        The evidence is pretty clear to the contrary.

        Recent studies implicate a web of mechanisms in the development of vaccine adjuvant-induced autoimmune diseases, in particular, in those associated with aluminum-based compounds (Alum), which comprise a major bulk of contemporary adjuvants….

        It is accepted that several autoimmune diseases have a significant genetic background and genetic variations may affect the risk of adverse reaction following vaccination….

        In predisposed individuals, adjuvants may determine autoimmunity or aggravate autoimmune diseases.

        Molecular mimicry has been proposed as one of the main immunopathogenic mechanisms in post-vaccination CNS demyelination….

        Alongside molecular mimicry, other mechanisms have been proposed to explain the occurrence of autoimmune diseases after infection and some of these mechanisms may be important to explain correlations between autoimmunity and vaccines….

        Adjuvants present in the vaccines can induce a non-specific activation of the immune system with a subsequent expansion of autoreactive lymphocytes that may be accelerated further by defective regulatory cells/circuits, in geneticallly susceptible individuals….

        Recent evidence from Northern Europe suggests that the influenza H1N1 vaccine contributed to the onset of narcolepsy among those 4 to 19 years old during the pandemic influenza in 2009-2010….

        The idea that the adjuvant component of vaccines could enhance or trigger autoimmunity or autoimmune diseases represents an intriguing observation that may explain a number of adverse reactions observed after vaccination.

        Autoimmun Rev. 2015 Oct;14(10):880-8. doi: 10.1016/j.autrev.2015.05.014. Epub 2015 May 29.

        On vaccine’s adjuvants and autoimmunity: Current evidence and future perspectives.

        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26031899

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Asia is not an accepted syndrome. It’s a made up term for a disorder that doesn’t exist….

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Or it does exist.

        Which would better explain why there are so many papers acknowledging it in the medical literature.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Until now, vaccination effects in autoimmune diseases have only been studied in over 5000 patients. Vaccinations generally did not induce worsening of disease activity in patients with multiple sclerosis, systemic lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis, insulin-dependent-diabetes-mellitus, chronic arthritis in children, vasculitides, and myasthenia gravis, whereas immunogenicity, although protective, was generally lower than in normal controls, depending on disease severity and immunosuppressive therapy. Data are very poor on the efficacy.

        Are anti-infectious vaccinations safe and effective in patients with autoimmunity?Review article

        Salemi S, et al. Int Rev Immunol. 2010.

        Authors

        Salemi S1, D’Amelio R.

        Author information1Azienda Ospedaliera S. Andrea, Rome, Italy.

        Citation

        Int Rev Immunol. 2010 Jun;29(3):270-314. doi: 10.3109/08830185.2010.483028.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Not sure what your point is, so I’ll just reiterate the fact that it is well recognized in the medical literature that vaccination carries the risk of triggering autoimmune diseases in genetically predisposed individuals.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Vaccinations generally did not induce worsening of disease activity in patients with multiple sclerosis, systemic lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis, insulin-dependent-diabetes-mellitus, chronic arthritis in children, vasculitides, and myasthenia gravis, 

        The claims for ASIA just are not very credible…….

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        I didn’t say anything about making autoimmune diseases worse.

        Again, ASIA is fairly well-established in the literature, and dismissing it as “not very credible” is simply ignorant.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Another critique of ASIA.

        They invoke an entity called ASIA (Autoimmune/Inflammatory Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants). From what I’ve been able to tell, ASIA is basically a made-up syndrome that isn’t generally accepted. The authors of this article describe it as group of diseases that include “post-vaccination phenomena,” silicone implant–induced autoimmunity, Gulf War syndrome, macrophagic myofasciitis with chronic fatigue syndrome, and the sick-building syndrome. Note that all of these, with the exception of chronic fatigue syndrome, are highly dubious entities whose existence as distinct clinical syndromes is questionable at best. Even more dubious are the clinical criteria, four major and four minor, that are used to “diagnose” ASIA. The idea is that either two major criteria or one major and two minor criteria are required for a diagnosis of ASIA.

        http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/08/09/antivaccinationists-against-the-hpv-vaccine-round-5000/

        Basically the syndrome is bull puckey….

        The evidence for sutoimmunity as being induced by vaccination is nonexistent.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Saying ASIA “isn’t generally accepted” is meaningless.

        Leaky gut “isn’t generally accepted”, either, and you probably wouldn’t have too much trouble finding a blog post saying so, as well. I’ve encountered numerous doctors who literally mocked me for bringing it up with them. This doesn’t change the fact that it’s a completely uncontroversial medical condition in the literature, a recognized prerequisite condition, according to the BMI’s journal Gut, for 50 different autoimmune diseases.

      • Illusion

        Experiments done to LOOK AT THE TIMING of vaccines and THE TIMING of autoimmune destruction of islets of langerhans is “suppose to” somehow prove the safety of vaccines in THE VAST UMBRELLA of POSSIBLE autoimmune conditions? ARE YOU HAVING DELUSIONS OF GRANDEUR? 4th GRADE science taught us to have a control group, THAT would be the group WHO WAS NOT, I repeat, the group WHO WAS NOT exposed to vaccines? If you are stating vaccines have NOTHING to do with destruction of the islets of langerhans, THEN DO THAT EXPERIMENT!!!! If you are trying to state that timing of vaccines does not clearly show it’s effect on the timing of autoimmune destruction of islets of langerhans, then THAT IS ALL you have shown. Can this experiment reproduce THE SAME EFFECT in UNVACCINATED PEOPLE? No, BECAUSE UNVACCINATED GROUPS WERE NOT EVEN STUDIED!!!!! BESIDES THE FACT THAT Your posts do NOT EVEN COME CLOSE to a drop in the bucket in the study of the VAST ARRAY of autoimmune conditions, which GO SO FAR BEYOND ONE cell group in ONE ORGAN, in ONE population, with one disease!!!! AND IF YOU BELIEVE IT proves anything more than “TIMING”, then believe that it also proves WHO are making crop circles. People who suffer from Grandiose Delusions usually have mental illness or suffer from substance (money/power) abuse. And to think you are supposedly a practioner, then I remind myself that 50% of practioners graduate in the bottom half of their class…

      • Judith

        None of these have completely unvaccinated as cohorts.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        There is no need for unvaccinated cohorts.

        The etiologies fraction can give us this information.[
        Etiologic fraction is the proportion of cases in which the exposure has played a causal role in disease development.It is defined as:[6]where:EF = Etiologic fractionNe = Number of exposed individuals in a population who develop the diseaseNn = Number of unexposed individuals in the same population who develop the disease.
        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attributable_risk

        In the case of Guillain-Barré syndrome

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        They calculated that essentially no one developed the disease following influenza vaccination while a substantially greater number who had the flu or other viral infection developed the disease.

        Nonsignificant statistical differences between the dm non dm patients in the presence of vaccination gave us the the answers.

      • Judith

        The flu vaccine is a lottery – they do not have time to comprehensively study this vaccine before releasing it as there is always the pressure to develop and release before the flu season.

        The phenomenon in which the flu vaccine can actually make the flu worse was originally observed as widespread in Canada during the 2008-2009 flu season. Researchers studied the issue for the next couple of years and concluded that the flu vaccine did in fact increase the severity of flu symptoms among those who were vaccinated http://healthimpactnews.com/2015/could-the-ineffective-flu-shot-be-causing-more-severe-flu-outbreaks-including-deaths/

        The same issue was studied in Hong Kong in 2012 by comparing a group of people vaccinated with the flu vaccine against a group that used a placebo. The researchers found that those who received the flu vaccine suffered 5.5 times more incidents of similar diseases (see: Study: Flu Vaccine Causes 5.5 Times More Respiratory Infections – A True Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated Study.)

        In 2013, a study conducted by microbiologist Dr. Hana Golding of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research at Bethesda in Maryland showed that pigs vaccinated against one strain of influenza were worse off if subsequently infected by a related strain of the virus (see: Vaccination may make flu worse if exposed to a second strain.)

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        The golding study was a comparison of live attenuated vaccine effectiveness against inactivated vaccine. It also compared Intramuscular vs intranasal administration. NP great surprises but the live attenuated vaccine given intranasal was more effective.

        “In contrast, infection-enhancing antibodies were not detected in the serum of LAIV vaccinates and VAERD was not observed”

        NCBISkip to main contentSkip to navigationResourcesHow ToAbout NCBI Accesskeys

        Sign in to NCBI

        PubMed

        US National Library of MedicineNational Institutes of Health

        Search databaseAll DatabasesAssemblyBioProjectBioSampleBioSystemsBooksClinVarCloneConserved DomainsdbGaPdbVarEpigenomicsESTGeneGenomeGEO DataSetsGEO ProfilesGSSGTRHomoloGeneMedGenMeSHNCBI Web SiteNLM CatalogNucleotideOMIMPMCPopSetProbeProteinProtein ClustersPubChem BioAssayPubChem CompoundPubChem SubstancePubMedPubMed HealthSNPSRAStructureTaxonomyToolKitToolKitAllToolKitBookUniGene

        Search term

        Search

        AdvancedHelp

        Result Filters

        AbstractSend to:

        Virology. 2014 Dec;471-473:93-104. doi: 10.1016/j.virol.2014.10.003. Epub 2014 Oct 28.

        Live attenuated influenza A virus vaccine protects against A(H1N1)pdm09 heterologous challenge without vaccine associated enhanced respiratory disease.

        Gauger PC1, Loving 

        Dr Goldings work is focused on finding ways to enhance vaccine effectiveness. The introduction sections of her articles reference ACIP Recommended influenza vaccination guidelines.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Please don’t paste irrelevant material. Make your argument. Paraphrase, quote specific relevant portions, provide sources, etc.; but don’t just paste big long sections containing extraneous content like:

        Search databaseAll DatabasesAssemblyBioProjectBioSampleBioSystemsBooksClinVarCloneConserved DomainsdbGaPdbVarEpigenomicsESTGeneGenomeGEO DataSetsGEO ProfilesGSSGTRHomoloGeneMedGenMeSHNCBI Web SiteNLM CatalogNucleotideOMIMPMCPopSetProbeProteinProtein ClustersPubChem BioAssayPubChem CompoundPubChem SubstancePubMedPubMed HealthSNPSRAStructureTaxonomyToolKitToolKitAllToolKitBookUniGen

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Judith made a claim about the article that was not supported by what the author actually argued. (Nor did she put the actual citation in place……if I am going to go to the effort to find the citation I owe it to others to put enough information in place to allow others to evaluate her claim.)

        That said the copy of the citation could have been cleaner.

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of confirmed seasonal 
        A c c e p t e d M a n u s c r i p t
        influenza infection between recipients of TIV or placebo although the point 
        estimate was consistent with protection in TIV recipients (relative risk, RR: 0.66, 
        95% confidence interval, CI: 0.13, 3.27). TIV recipients had significantly lower 
        risk of seasonal influenza infectio

        Increased risk of non-influenza respiratory virus infections associated with receipt of inactivated influenza vaccine

        Again the authors didn’t say don’t vacinate. The question was the potential Impact on nonspecific immunity against respiratory infections other than the flu. It’s a far reach to claim that the vaccine caused respiratory infections when that wasn’t the question. Again the question is how to improve influenza vacinations.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Again the authors didn’t say don’t vaccinate.

        Irrelevant.

        The point is that the flu vaccine induces a humoral response at the expense of a cell-mediated response that would otherwise protect against not only the vaccine-strain of influenza, but other strains as well.

        Annual Vaccination against Influenza Virus Hampers Development of Virus-Specific CD8+ T Cell Immunity in Children

        This is why the vaccine is less effective for each subsequent year you get it, and why it can actually increase one’s chances of catching influenza.

        Impact of Repeated Vaccination on Vaccine Effectiveness Against Influenza A(H3N2) and
        B During 8 Seasons

      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Not actually supported by your source. ” conclusion, we found that vaccination provided protection against medically attended influenza infection, regardless of prior vaccination history. This is consistent with randomized clinical trials of influenza vaccine efficacy [38″

        Impact of Repeated Vaccination on Vaccine Effectiveness Against Influenza A(H3N2) and B During 8 Seasons

        The authors identifies numerous confounding variables including small n when disaggregated as well as unrecognized confounding variables. One of the more interesting ideas was that of a relatively stable flu strain across a number of seasons possibly explaining the 5 year difference…..flu strains are almost never stable from year to year so this could be an anomalous finding
        The key point of all was that the authors still recommended annual vaccinations.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        What part of what I wrote in my previous comment are you challenging when you say it is not supported by my source?

      • AutismDad

        Funny, its the LAY press when its critical, but the press is used as social control just the same when its convenient.

      • Andrew Kinsella

        How about Guillain Barre Syndrome?
        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19730016– 1000 cases in the US over 15 years according to that study.

        Also- many cases of febrile convulsions probably represent a low grade encephalitis, and there is no systematic follow up for these children.

      • AutismDad

        Vaccine injuries are defined by those who are also proponents. Definitions and Official Word are both used to control sensitive issues like this. They say vaccines are safe and effective and adverse events rare and mild, so they define autism out and keep the rare and mild in their list.

    • Illusion

      So MAYBE there are some good vaccines, NOT convinced that the increase is “required” vaccines since the 1970’s to the late 1980’s-present is so-called helping people be healthy. I see WAY TO MANY chronically ill children, so THE COST BESIDES your supposed 1 in a million “true vaccine injury” IS MILLIONS, an ENTIRE POPULATION of chronically ill children. But YOU ARE FINE WITH KIDS HAVING A LIFETIME OF DISEASE TO PREVENT YOUR FEARFUL DISEASE??? No one shouldn’t be looking to add more vaccines, vaccines should be the BAREST minimum to none. Industry LOOKING TO expand should NOT be making this choice for a bunch of sick kids!!!! OUR SICK KIDS. I have 2 kids fully vaccinated until one became seriously chronically ill. Guess what, her system IS SO REACTIVE to all sorts of things. WHY IS HER SYSTEM SO SENSITVE to reacting to things? AM I SUPPOSED TO BELIEVE challenging her immune system 69 times by age 6, starting at 12 hours of age, only a few breaths into her life, probably could have nothing to do with this? YOU people are sick for “believing” in the herd! A healthy herd is proven by a numerous group of sick individuals? Just run herd off the cliff…

      Reply
      • Judith

        Thank you Illusion – the type of chronic illness we are seeing in our children is frightening. The sad thing is that it is not being studied for it’s association with vaccines. There is only one way that this could be put to rest would be a very large retrospective vaccinated/unvaccinated study.

    • Illusion

      So a lifetime of disease and/or disability for MANY is PERFECTLY acceptable. Or at least not worth studying or caring about. People walking around looking normal, but who can’t function without help because they are non-verbal, mentally impaired. Oh well. We can’t really care about these people, their plight or being responsible for causing more people to have these problems.

      Reply
      • VikingAPRNCNP

        Les than 1 in a million adverse effects per vaccination event.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        The vaccine-injured just have to “take one for the team”, you know. The “greater good”, and all that.

  15. EllyW

    Great article! The FDA and CDC findings have been swept under the rug so well that extremely few people know about them, even people who really study up on vaccine issues. Thank you for bringing this information to many more people.

    Reply
  16. ione murphy

    Measles outbreak in Slovenia 2010. They have compulsory vaccines for measles for over 40 years and more than 95% of children are fully vaccinated. So they tested their health care workers and found “49 HCW with written record of 2-dose vaccination against measles in childhood were tested. Interestingly, only 31 (63%) had adequate IgG levels. 5 (10%) were completely negative”

    Vaccines

    Saturday, March 31, 2012, 15:30 – 16:30

    Mandatory measles vaccination – are healthcare workers really safe?

    T. Mrvic*, M. Petrovec, M. Breskvar, T. Lejko Zupanc, M. Logar (Ljubljana, SI)

    Objectives: Mandatory vaccination against measles in Slovenia was introduced in 1968 and since 1978, all children should receive 2 doses of vaccine. Compliance rate is more than 95%. This resulted in eradication of the disease from our country for more than 10 years. In 2010 1 case was introduced to Slovenia from Ireland and this year 22 cases were reported; 4 imported from abroad and 18 secondary transmissions; 5 of them were healthcare workers (HCW). All patients were treated in University medical centre Ljubljana (3 hospitalized, 19 ambulatory). Because measles pose a risk of epidemic, we tried to establish if our HCW are really protected against the disease.
    Methods: From June to October 2011 we conducted a survey among HCW employed in University medical centre Ljubljana regarding protection against measles. HCW born before 1960 were excluded. We demanded from HCW written proof of vaccination or having the measles. If they did not provide that, we performed serologic testing.
    Results: data from 3424 HCW were collected. Only 1609 (47%) employees provided a written record about vaccination; 608 (38%) received 2 doses, and 68 (2%) had the disease. For 1747 (51%) no data were available. In this group serologic testing determining IgG measles antibodies was performed using ELISA. 1407 (80%) had positive IgG and 340 (19%) had IgG under the positive reference value; 131 (7%) were completely negative. Also 49 HCW with written record of 2-dose vaccination against measles in childhood were tested. Interestingly, only 31 (63%) had adequate IgG levels. 5 (10%) were completely negative. Analysis of 172 serological negative HCW according to their birth year showed, that 10 (5%) were born before measles vaccination was introduced to Slovenia, 110 (64%) were born between 1968 and 1977 when some children received only one dose and 52 (30%) were born after 1978 when all children should have received 2 doses of measles vaccine.
    Conclusions: Our serologic data represent one of the largest epidemiologic studies about protection of HCW against measles. It shows that in spite of mandatory vaccination in Slovenia for the last 40 years, HCW are not protected enough. There is clearly evidence that too many of them did not receive 2 mandatory doses of vaccine. Among fully vaccinated we found 10% with negative measles IgG antibodies and further 26% with IgG under the positive reference value. It is questionable, whether they are really protected when in contact with measles.

    Reply
    • ang

      Areas in China have 100% vacciantion rates, they still getting outbreaks of pertussis, mumps, measles and rubella. All vaccination does, is allow the people to catch the illness at the worst possible age, for their health to cope with it. IE aP vaccinated, now spread pertussis, with or without symtpoms, infecting their own new babies, without even realising they are the ones who infected their own babies. With vaccination? the symptoms of the illness are not always there in the vaccinated, and with pertussis, those still with vaccine protection, catch, carry and spread it, over and over, not just once. As for mealses, those vaccinated still get mealses, and spread it, they just dont get the spots. So the cesspool of illness in the infected herd is there, just we cant see it, we can no longer attempt to keep our newborn babies away from those will illness, how can we, when our own vaccinated children, are carrying pertussis, without even having a cough? GSK, and Merck murder.

      Reply
  17. eggman2

    Excellent article

    Reply
  18. eggman2

    Go to : ” Silent Epidemic; The Untold Story of Vaccines Movie dire ” on YouTube. It is a good two hours movie that explains almost all of the problems with VACCINES.

    Reply
  19. Mrs Chattles

    All I know is thank goodness I had whooping cough naturally as a child, because it protected my 4 week old breast fed baby when my two little grand daughters caught it from a “fully vaccinated” child at a party and they had been all over him, cuddling,coughing and kissing him and he did not get it, absolutely nothing, my opinion is that vaccines have upset the balance of nature, so mothers today have no “natural immunity” and cannot protect their young babies.

    Reply
  20. ang

    copy of my email to UWA: Thankyou, so much for listening. I am Angela Eisenhauer email address [email protected] My initial studies are in relation to DTap in pregnancy, following on from the now documented facts that aP vaccine is causing massive increases in whooping cough in infants, due to the fact babies are now being infected by fully vaccinated siblings, who are symtomless carriers of the disease…………….. I worked during the pertussis outbreak in Albany, Western Australia in 2010.

    Thus my further interest in vaccines in pregnancy: Please, please reply, as I am getting nowhere in trying to clarify, that this research was ever conducted by the Univerisity of Western Australia.

    I have the abstract of the research she published in a very recent publications as listed below in the WA Health press release, and would very much like to have access to the full article. If you have access to the fulll article, I would very much like to see the statistics backing up her statements.

    Thanks again,

    Angela Eisenhauer ………………… Albany 0406668237

    Firstly, here are the links:

    https://theconversation.com/vaccines-to-expect-when-youre-expecting-and-why-50587 7 January 2016

    which later has been republished as this:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3516999/Flu-vaccine-cuts-risk-stillbirth-HALF.html 7 April 2016

    Finally released by Health Department as this:

    31 March 2016

    Influenza vaccination during pregnancy may reduce stillbirth risk

    WA Health researchers, in collaboration with the Telethon Kids Institute, have discovered that pregnant women who receive the seasonal influenza vaccination are less likely to experience a stillbirth than unvaccinated mothers.

    The retrospective study used records to examine nearly 60,000 Western Australian births that occurred during the 2012 and 2013 seasonal influenza epidemics. The cohort included 52,932 mothers who had not received the vaccine and 5076 mothers who had been vaccinated.

    The risk of stillbirth among vaccinated mothers was 51 per cent lower than the risk among women who had not been vaccinated.

    WA Health Communicable Disease Control Directorate Project Officer and study author Annette Regan said that the results were particularly exciting as it showed vaccination could help reduce the stillbirth rates for mothers-to-be.

    “It is widely accepted that pregnancy puts women at an increased risk of developing serious complications related to influenza, including acute respiratory distress syndrome and pneumonia. This study also suggests that foetal mortality is linked to influenza infection during pregnancy,” she said.

    “In the past 12 months there has been a significant uptake in the number of pregnant women receiving the antenatal pertussis vaccination, yet the number of women receiving the antenatal influenza vaccination is still low.

    “Approximately 40 per cent of pregnant women in Western Australia do not receive the influenza vaccine, which means both they and their unborn baby are missing out on protection. This lower uptake rate may be due to concerns about the safety of influenza vaccination during pregnancy.

    “As a direct result of this research WA Health will be broadening its 2016 seasonal influenza vaccination promotions to better educate consumers and health professionals on the health benefits of the influenza vaccination during pregnancy.”

    The research published today in the Clinical Infectious Diseases Journal (external site) by theInfectious Disease Society of America (IDSA) (external site), also showed that stillbirth rates increased after influenza virus circulation periods and decreased prior to the influenza season.

    Although these seasonal differences were not statistically significant, they were consistent with results from a study in Switzerland in 2000 which showed the incidence of stillbirth increased in relation to the northern hemisphere’s influenza season, as well as with similar research conducted during the influenza A/H1N1 pandemic.

    “The findings support the safety of influenza vaccination during pregnancy, and also suggest that vaccination protects against stillbirth,” Ms Regan said.

    “With more than three million stillbirths occurring worldwide each year, establishing a connection between influenza season, vaccination and stillbirth could have global implications for infant mortality.

    “While further research is needed to confirm these links, the findings of this study should encourage expectant mothers and health care providers to discuss the safety and benefits of receiving the influenza vaccine during pregnancy.”

    Media contact: 9222 4333

    Follow us on Twitter: @WAHealth

    I have emailed [email protected] and [email protected] I rang the Media line at WA Health just prior to telephoning you, with no result of any substance, asking for clarification ……… especially this quote “”

    The risk of stillbirth among vaccinated mothers was 51 per cent lower than the risk among women who had not been vaccinated. “”””” and clarification as to the role Annette Regan took in the University of Western Australia as she is quoted in the Daily Mail……………………….

    This is all I can find about here, and seems she is a phD student, who works for the Health Department, and has little to do with the Influenza studies at University of Western Australia:

    The Conversation

    Search analysis, research, academics…

    Annette Regan

    I call a FRAUD a FRAUD, and when it is twisted into the Daily Mail, saying this lady is lead researcher in flu vaccine studies of 60,000 WA women who gve birth during the winter months of 2012/ 13? when that is more than the total number of births for those two years combined, yes I question……………………………. and for Kim Hames, Health minister to release a press release saying if you get flu vaccine in pregnancy it protects you 51% from miscarriage? Yes this is absurd, then to find out Ms Regan is promoting herself as anything more than the UWA STUDENT, THAT SHE IS, Is absurd.

    Reply
  21. ang

    Oh, for you author of this great article, are more facts: great stuff, removed the day after it was published, re that big mossie with GSK written on the barrel, in Brazil. https://idsent.wordpress.com/2016/01/24/tdap-vaccinations-for-all-pregnant-women-in-brazil-mandated-in-late-2014/January 24, 2016

    In October 2014, the Brazilian Ministry of Health’s Epidemiological Surveillance Center “Prof. Alexandre Vranjac” (CVE) in São Paulo, Brazil published a “technical report” on the diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis vaccine (Tdap).1 In that report, the CVE stated that the Tdap vaccine would be included in Brazil’s National Vaccination Schedule for pregnant women.

    Considering the epidemiological situation of the [pertussis] disease and the need to protect the mother-child pair, the Tdap vaccine will be incorporated into the National Vaccination Schedule for pregnant women and health professionals (anesthesiologist, gynecologist, obstetrician, neonatologist, pediatrician, nurse, and nursing technician) who care for newborns in maternity wards and nurseries/neonatal ICUs.1

    A retrospective study published in the journal BMC Infectious Diseases in 2015 highlights the growing incidence of pertussis (whooping cough) in Brazil from 2007 to 2014. Using data obtained from case notification forms, the study identified a total of 80,068 “suspected cases” of pertussis in Brazil during that seven-year period.2 Another study published in Autopsy Case Reports last year cited the increasing number of deaths from pertussis in Brazil in recent years, particularly in 2013.3

    In 2013, 109 pertussis-related deaths were reported—a number 7-fold higher than the average number of deaths reported annually in the period from 2001 to 2010. More than 80% of the deaths occurred in infants younger than 3 months of age.3

    It is understandable that the Brazilian government was concerned about the upward trend in pertussis infections. By the end of 2014, following the October report from the CVE, the Brazilian Ministry of Health announced the introduction of the Tdap vaccine for all pregnant women in the country,3 and the Brazilian National Immunization Program (NIP) had begun the vaccinations.2 The policy change had been expected for many months. Earlier in 2014, at a meeting of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE), the group had written in a background paper…

    [Brazil] will recommend Tdap in the routine immunization programme for pregnant women from 2014 onward.4 .

    The CVE report recommended the Tdap vaccine be given to women between the 27th week and 36th week of their pregnancy, and that it could also be administered up to 20 days prior to the expected date of birth.1 The report specified the Tdap produced by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) of the United Kingdom as the one to be used. GSK has a technology transfer agreement with Brazil’s Butantan Institute for the production of the Tdap vaccine5 in Brazil.

    The CVE report listed the following ingredients in the GSK/Butantan Institute Tdap vaccine:

     Diphtheria toxoid—not less than 2 International Units (IU)

     Tetanus toxoid—not less than 20 International Units (IU)

     Bordetella pertussis antigen

     Pertussis toxoid—8 mcg

     Filamentous haemagglutinin—8 mcg

     Pertactin—2.5 mcg

     Adsorbed hydrated aluminum hydroxide (Al (OH ) 3) and aluminum phosphate (AlPO4)

     Excipients: aluminum hydroxide , aluminum phosphate , sodium chloride and water for injection. Contains formaldehyde residues, polysorbate 80 and glycine1

    GSK’s Tdap product is internationally known under the brand name Refortrix® or, more commonly, Boostrix®), and it has been licensed in Brazil for more than a decade.6 In addition to the ingredients listed above for Boostrix, the following growth medium and process ingredients are used in manufacturing the vaccine:

     modified Latham medium derived from bovine casein

     Fenton medium containing bovine extract

     formaldehyde

     Stainer-Scholte liquid medium

     glutaraldehyde

     aluminum hydroxide7

    According to GSK, neither the safety nor effectiveness of Boostrix have been established in pregnant women.8 The package insert for Boostrix reads:

    A developmental toxicity study has been performed in female rats at a dose approximately 40 times the human dose (on a mL/kg basis) and revealed no evidence of harm to the fetus due to BOOSTRIX. Animal fertility studies have not been conducted with BOOSTRIX. There are no adequate and well-controlled studies in pregnant women. Because animal reproduction studies are not always predictive of human response, BOOSTRIX should be given to a pregnant woman only if clearly needed.8

    Despite this cautionary information, the Brazilian government has been vaccinating tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of pregnant women in its country during the past year. A large portion of these pregnancies are occurring in Brazil’s northeastern region, notably in the state of Pernambuco—the country’s fastest growing population center.9 10

    ________________________________________

    References:

    1 Centro de Vigilância Epidemiológica “Prof. Alexandre Vranjac” (CVE). INFORME TÉCNICO–VACINA DIFTERIA, TÉTANO E COQUELUCHE (dTpa). cve.saude.sp.gov.br October 2014.

    2 Guimarães LM, Neves da Costa Carneiro EL, Carvalho-Costa FA. Increasing incidence of pertussis in Brazil: a retrospective study using surveillance data. BMC Infect Dis2015; 15: 442.

    3 Palazzi Sáfadi MA. Pertussis in young infants: a severe vaccine-preventable disease. Autops Case Rep April-June 2015; 5(2): 1-4.

    4 World Health Organization (WHO). WHO SAGE pertussis working group: Background paper, SAGE April 2014. WHO.int April 2014.

    5 Instituto Butantan. vaccines. Butantan.gov.br.

    6 de Carvalho AP, Pereira EMC. Acellular pertussis vaccines for adolescents. J PediatrJuly 2000; 82(3).

    7 Vaccine Ingredients and Manufacturer Information. CarProCon.org

    8 GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). Package Insert for Boosterix. us.GSK.com

    9 Bevins V. Brazil’s historically poor northeast finally gets its boom. Los Angeles Times May 24, 2012.

    10 Sells H. Brazil’s Northeast Emerging as Economic Powerhouse.CBN News July 23, 2012.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22423127 2010, pertussis Dtap failures.

    https://au.news.yahoo.com/video/watch/29458625/epidemic-of-whooping-cough-sweeps-across-sydney/#page1

    “Anonimous says:

    January 14, 2016 at 5:31 pm

    I’m from Brazil and I know some people in the medical community. And what they are really pointing out as the main suspected reason for the increase of cases of Microcephaly in the country was a new batch of a tetanus vaccine. This vaccine was given to the pregnant women in Brazil and most of those vaccines were distributed to Pernambuco the state with more cases. When the Microcephaly cases started, the lab responsible for the production of this vaccine removed all the vaccines from the market. And the government apparently is covering up by pointing the Zika virus as probable cause. Then I ask:

    Where is the relation between Zika Virus and Microcephaly? (When there are cases of people who didn’t have Zika yet had children with Microcephaly)

    Zika Virus occur in Africa and Asia since the 50’s and there is no relation between these disease and Microcephaly

    Reply
    • ang

      Note the anonymous states tetanus vaccine, this in fact is distributed as Dtap vaccine ie the aP vaccine, instead of banning this vaccine, and not having siblings infect babies anymore, they vaccinate more, and now trying to pre vaccinate babies before birth, so they will not be exposed, GSK and Merck for fraud, because their Dtap, is causing babies to be infected by own family members………….. If they stopped vaccinating, in 2010, THERE WOULD NO LONGER BE VACCINATED SIBLINGS INFECTING NEWBORNS, THE DAY THEY ARE BORN…………………….>> GSK and Merck Murder. GSK clearly says in paperwork NOT TO BE USED IN PREGNANCY………………>>> Lab rats, how disgusting!

      Reply
    • ang

      Oh, the DTap produced in penumbucco, by a company licenced to produce GSK vaccines? Yeah the vaccines were ready last May, vaccinations began last May. I wondered what they would do, trying to cover the fact the aP is causing vaccinated carriers? I never, ever thought they would be so blatantly corrupt, and so sickeningly able to destroy women/babies, by attempting to pre vaccinate babies, with a vaccine THAT KILLS BABIES IF GIVEN AT BIRTH. Evilness, beyond belief, and GSK? will get yet another 3 billion fraud fine, no murder charges? just like in study329.org apparently murder is called fraud, if you are a vaccine manufacturer………… with friends at the CDC? As with the paxil fraud? 3 billion fine for a damn 14 billion profit! Sickening!

      Reply
    • Jeremy R. Hammond

      Not just Brazil. The CDC recommends Tdap for pregnant women in the US, and the UK has the same policy, as do a number of other countries.

      Reply
      • ang

        I know, they have been jabbing in an ad hoc way (women have a choice), for about 2 years, is that possibly why USA has 25,000 microcephalic babies per year? Despite all the scans, and terminations of microcephalic babies? USA has less than double the birthrate of Brazil, but more microcehalic babies than this “outbreak”‘ in Brazil. That indicates to me that the flu jab in pregnancy, as used in the USA, is also causing problems. Strange how they dont blame a mossie in the USA? That big mossie with GSK, or Merck, written on the barrel?

      • ang

        I work in pathology. In Albany, Western Australia, the very first outbreak of pertussis ever. ALL THE VICTIMS WERE DTAP FAILURES, 90% vaccination, rate, all were fully up to date with the aP vaccines, in 2010, they were all aged 6-12, not one parent (who had the DTP, or unvaccinated) caught this illness. They were all vaccinated. Luckily no babies got infected. Our city is of 45,000 people. This pertussis outbreak had been going on for months, before doctors considered testing for pertussis (that oh, cant be pertussis, they vaccinated crap)…………. most kids had been coughing and out and about for 6 weeks, before getting tested. Yeah, just a cough, just long lasting, and annoying, not deadly. Is deadly for babies (unless their mothers have real pertussis immunity (not the aP type), if the mother has real immunity, the baby is protected by natural mothers maternal antiboides and breastmilk. The problem at the present time, is not the fact the vaccine is useless, and only lasts an average of 3 years, but the fact those vaccinated, still catch, carry and spread it.
        During the outbreak in Albany, where 100% of the inhabitants got exposed, only the kids who had the aP vaccine, got sick, the Health Department then tested kids who WERENT SICK, BUT HAD HAD THE VACCINE> Yes, they still had the bacteria in their throats, still spreading it. That vaccine should have been BANNED IN 2010… THEN THERE WOULD NO LONGER BE VACCINATED CARRRIERS OUT THERE. These people, who are aP vaccinated, while the vaccine still works for them for those few years, catch, carry and spreaq pertussis, NOT JUST ONCE> THEY DO THIS OVER AND OVER, until their vaccine fails, and they all get pertussis, because the whole vaccinated herd is now so full of vaccinated carriers, respreading it, around and around…………………. So what does CDC, GSK, Merck do about this? are they honest and stop using the vaccine, which would end the pertussis outbreaks? NO, they attempt to prevaccinate babies before birth, so they dont catch pertussis from their fully vaccinated siblings, immoral, greed.
        Look what happens when you jab women with a vaccine, THAT THE MANUFACTURER SAYS, NOT TO BE USED IN PREGNANCY? Lab rats to the slaughter, yet again.

      • ang

        The latest push is to get women to vaccinate for flu in Australia. In fact only 8.8% of pregnant women get the flu vaccine here. We dont have flu outbreaks, and the flu vaccine is dangerous anyway, let alone in pregnancy!. It is not popular in Australia, because we know it doesnt work. Anyhow the WA Health Department just published some absurd statistics. Seems an Annette Regan is making out she is head of a research team at the prestigious University of Western Australia. Her statements are absurd, research was not done at UWA, was actually the Health Department, and she isnt a research expert at all. I contacted the media department at UWA, who are investigating the garbage. [email protected] Annette Regan is just a person who studied infectious diseases or some rubbish in USA< worked for CDC, then comes to Western Australia, writes an absurd article in the conversation (USA) , in January, and then has some absurd stuff published in the Daily Mail, last week, pretending she is a research scientist with UWA. She works for health department, and apparently is studying at UWA???? Here statistics are all absurd. But our stupid health department republished them without checking the classic "if you get a vaccine for the flu during pregnancy, you are 51% protected from having a miscarriage" yeah pretty bold statement, with absolutely no UWA studies to back it up.

  22. ang

    Hi Jeremy. My daughter in Bunbury, WA, just reported that two of her kids were in classes, all coughing with whooping cough (my grandkids now immune!), only 4 bothered to get tested, yep whooping cough. So in reality, out of what 40 – 60 kids, 4 get on the register as having had whooping cough. Oh in Bunbury, WA, 90% of the kids are fully vaccinated. Besides the ones not coughing, are carrying it anyway (until their own aP vaccine fails, as it does in everyone anyway).

    So makes the chart below pretty irrelevant, if only 4% of whooping cough kids now, bother to get tested.

    The horror? They dont catch it themselves, until age 6-12. While they continuously get rejabbed (ie 6 times by age 5), they continue to catch, carry, and spread it, with no symptoms. Over and over again. THE NUMBER ONE CAUSE OF BABY INFECTIONS IS AP VACCINATED, SYMPTOMLESS CARRIERS, AGED UNDER 6. Yes, horrible isnt it, you aP vaccinate your kids, they are the ones who will infect the new baby, and they wont even have symptoms.

    A simple PCR test, will show if they have the bacteria in their throats, without symptoms. Pre vaccinating a baby before birth? They tried that in Brazil (got called zika), and in USA? vaccinating pregnant mothers, is now causing more late term miscarriages, than even neonatal deaths. Oh, and USA top in neonatal deaths……………….

    Reply
  23. Millie Whaley

    I just found this article,my son has been sick with the same thing every year and I’m not surprised by the information. As of this year I will make sure he dosent get the vaccine

    Reply
    • Jeremy R. Hammond

      What has he been sick with, if you don’t mind my asking?

      Reply
  24. Harry Trent

    Hi Jeremy, I am researching this for my little infant. I read the study of prn- linked from the CDC website. I assume it is the one you are writing about.

    I can see that it says that a vaccinated person is more likely to get the prn- strain as compared to the prn+ strain.
    But it doesn’t say that the unvaccinated is less likely to contract prn-. From the results, I can see that both the vaccinated and unvaccinated catches the prn- more than the prn+.

    That doesn’t say much as the prn- is much more prevelant now.

    how would i say my unvaccinated infant is less likely to contract the prn-?

    Reply
  25. Jeremy R. Hammond

    Harry, I don’t understand your question or point of confusion. You’ll have to clarify. I think, but am not sure, that the key point you’re missing is that, according to the CDC, as well as that Martin, et al, study, vaccinated individuals are at higher risk of infection with PRN- strains than unvaccinated individuals. Logically, that means unvaccinated individuals are less likely to contract the PRN- strain than vaccinated individuals.

    “vaccinated patients had significantly higher odds than unvaccinated patients of being infected with PRN-deficient strains” … “PRN- bacteria may have a selective advantage in infecting DTaP-vaccinated persons” — CDC

    “Vaccinated case-patients receiving at least 1 dose had a significantly higher odds of having PRN–B. pertussis compared with unvaccinated case-patients” — Martin, et al

    Reply
    • Harry Trent

      Thanks Jeremy, it’s really refreshing to find a sensible discussion for a parent who is truly wanting to understand this. Most discussions turn out to be more emotional than anything else.

      But yes, back to this study: yes I can see it says that for the vaccinated individuals 462 out of the total 527 get the prn – strain which makes it around 87% of the time. And for unvaccinated it is 65 out of 94 which makes 70%.

      But that just means that the unvaccinated cases of pertussis has more prn- than prn+.

      It does not really point out that unvaccinated gets less cases of pertussis prn- as this study is not aimed of looking at comparing the vaccinated and unvaccinated. Instead it is just comparing the ratio of prn- and prn+

      Unless I am missing something in the methods results and cals, I don’t see how I can convince myself that my little one has a lower chance of getting pertussis without the vaccine.

      Sorry for the long post or if I am missing something very obvious. I am looking through a lot of info at the moment while deciding of wether to go for the jab.

      Reply
  26. Jeremy R. Hammond

    Harry, I’m still having trouble understanding your point of confusion. For example, you say, “But that just means that the unvaccinated cases of pertussis has more prn- than prn+.” I don’t know what you mean. PRN- strains were also more prevalent among vaccinated cases. And it doesn’t just mean that the vaccinated were at higher risk of PRN- than PRN+. Again, it also means the vaccinated were at higher risk of PRN- than the unvaccinated:

    “Vaccinated case-patients receiving at least 1 dose had a significantly higher odds of having PRN–B. pertussis compared with unvaccinated case-patients”.

    I think that states it pretty plainly. This doesn’t necessarily mean that vaccinated individuals are at higher risk of getting pertussis. But you have to consider also the fact that, thanks to mass vaccination, PRN- strains now appear to be predominant in the US and also potentially more virulent.

    In an outbreak in a preschool in Florida in 2013, for example, zero of the unvaccinated students were infected and 85% had received 3 or more doses of the vaccine.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4734526/

    Reply
  27. AutismDadd

    This is the debate and the dilemma. Unfortunately medical consensus controls the every move of mainstream medicine, and if they say more boosters it will be so. Their preference is to never admit defeat or give critics ammunition so instead they play semantics and shell games with the facts, and use exaggeration and misinformation instead of telling the truth. They also use the old divide and conquer strategy to keep the public unsure who to believe. Then of course we have mandatory vaccinations, or vaccine experimentation on free test subjects. When adverse events and side effects occur we see further use of all the above, plus the bribing of victims with a Vaccine injury compensation plan. But that too is a train wreck of narrow definitions, arbitrary cut off dates and cherry picking of the science to create lower ( artificial ) numbers they can quote when they claim there are few victims and the adverse effects are mild.

    Reply
  28. Mrs Chattles

    I will say it over & over again because it’s on record and was notified.
    My 2 little granddaughters (2 & 4) DID catch whooping cough from a “fully Vaxxed kid” at a party that kid was coughing over everyone and everything, the mother was in denial because her kid WAS vaccinated.

    At the time I was 45 and had a 4 week old breast fed baby that the girls had been all over kissing, cuddling and coughing on before we found out when swabs were done confirming pertussis.
    My 4 week old breast fed baby did NOT get it in spite of the heavy direct contact because I’d had it as a child and my NATURAL immunity protected him. The girls got over it fine.

    Reply
  29. Jeremy R. Hammond

    That’s unfortunate, but my thought is that you need to go with what your heart and mind tell you, and hopefully in the meantime you might be able to get through to your grandon’s parents to help them better understand and respect your decision (and realize the follies of their choice to temporarily essentially exile you from their home).

    Reply
    • sabelmouse

      ust like jh hospital hiding their page on vaccine shedding dangers to the immunocompromised.

      sure, there’s nothing to see here!

      Reply
    • Judith

      Thank you..

      Reply
  30. Evan Eberhardt

    Breastfeed. Eat real food. Get fresh air, sunlight, and lots of play. Keep elderberry handy during school months (I give it daily the entire school year). Kids get sick. Keep a clam collected head and realize illnesses are a normal part of growing up. Fevers are not bad either (they make for some rough nights, but there is no lasting harm). Western medicine is so upside down, it’s hard to even fathom.

    The only way out of this nightmare is to show the world how our unvaxxed kids are faring.

    Also, the risk of tetanus is quite remote. Proper wound care virtually eliminates any risk. It wasn’t even very common during the Civil War that had wounded men everywhere near horse dung. More scare tactics that have no basis in reality (which is vaccinology, for the most part).

    Reply
  31. Tiffany Adele Scott

    That is terrible. I truly hope they realize the truth about the spread of pertussis!

    Reply
  32. concerned user

    Jeremy your conclusions are incorrect and dangerous. People carry MANY potentially disease carrying bacteria as normal flora. The fact that they do not exhibit the potentially life threatening complication of infections they are vaccinated against is evidence of their efficacy. Failure to vaccinate endangers children. I recently had a child in my clinic who died of measels. The parents chose not to vaccinate against this readily preventible disease because they misunderstood the vaccine. I know these words will fall on deaf ears but I would be remiss if I said nothing.

    Reply
    • Jeremy R. Hammond

      Please identify with a quote which conclusion(s) of mine you are challenging as “incorrect and dangerous”.

      People carry MANY potentially disease carrying bacteria as normal flora. The fact that they do not exhibit the potentially life threatening complication of infections they are vaccinated against is evidence of their efficacy.

      Your meaning is unclear. Are you claiming that the pertussis vaccine protects against, e.g., e. coli?

      Failure to vaccinate endangers children. I recently had a child in my clinic who died of measels. The parents chose not to vaccinate against this readily preventible disease because they misunderstood the vaccine.

      Assuming your clinic is in the US, the odds of that happening in your clinic are astronomically low. Forgive me not believing you. The last confirmed measles related death in the US was in 2015. And that was a vaccinated adult, not an unvaccinated child. Prior to that the last death was 2003.

      It happens, but the risk of a child dying from measles in the United States today is virtually nonexistent. In the prevaccine era it was considered a generally mild disease, and virtually every child had it, the vast majority surviving and emerging from the discomfort of it with a stronger immune system. Measles mortality had declined dramatically in the first half of the 20th century, prior to the introduction of vaccines, due to increases in standard of living including better nutrition, e.g., vitamin A sufficiency. Today, thanks to mass vaccination and the inferior, waning immunity of the vaccine, in the event of a measles outbreak, infants are at greater risk of infection because vaccinated mothers aren’t as well able to confer immunity to their babies in the form of antibodies passed through breastmilk as they were in the prevaccine era, when they were themselves exposed as children and developed a robust, lifelong immunity. Parents today must weigh the very low risk of measles with both the known and the potential risks of the vaccine.

      Are my words falling on deaf ears?

      Reply

Share your thoughts.

Pin It on Pinterest

Shares
Share This