I know if you don’t have a child with autism, it’s going to be hard for you to understand where we’re coming from. Trust me, if you had a child with autism, you would be asking for answers too. But you calling us the #1 health hazzard is just as ‘loony’ as us questioning vaccines. And please, don’t call us anti-vaxxers…..Seriously, that is not what we are about. Vaccines are very important, but there are some questions that need to be answered. Until they find the gene that causes autism, we are still going to ask why?

How can a person such as myself have any need for Gardasil when I am not sexually active, and never will be until the date of my wedding? For me to be sexually promiscuous before marriage would be for me to act in such a way as to violate my character, as well as to violate any and all Biblical standards of right and wrong.

Contrary to what some politicians may think, NOT ALL teenagers are at the mercy of their hormones; furthermore, I have not been a teenager in years.

The fact that the stereotypical teenager chooses to be in a relationship does NOT give the government the right to shove that stereotype down the throats of all teenagers. If people other than myself choose to date around/sleep around, then THOSE PEOPLE should be the ones who get vaccinated (if they get some kind of disease because they were not vaccinated, then they really have no one to blame but themselves). Those of us who remain single, on the other hand, should be LEFT ALONE.

“It has been shown, conclusively, that no such link exists.”
I am not an expert, but my understanding is that science has difficulty proving conclusivley that links between one variable and another do not exist. Often the best that can be said is that no link has been found despite extensive investigation. This might seem like a small point; however, it is important that science experts in the media help the public fully understand both the strengths and weaknesses of science.

In its ad, the company that makes Menactra states that if someone has had GBS, they cannot take the vaccine. This is because it is strong enough to cause GBS, which usually goes into remission, to return.

My daughter had GBS when she was 4. Up until then, I diligently vaccinated all my children. However, after she got GBS her doctors – experienced specialists, not just general practitioners – warned me of all the real dangers of vaccines, and told me to never vaccinate her again, and to reconsider vaccinating any of my other children. When one is no longer able to take a vaccine, doctors are surprising candid about their safety.

GBS is rare, but it is a horrible thing to live through. Many of the diseases “prevented” by vaccines are less damaging to the body than GBS.

To be clear, I am not against immunizations. I am against the way that they are currently manufactured, marketed and mandated. Vaccines unnecessarily contain ingredients like aluminum, formaldehyde and thimerosal. There are ways to manufacture these vaccines without these ingredients but these changes are simply are not cost effective to the pharmaceutical companies.

Many of the vaccines are also developed from animal ingredients including cell cultures of chick embryos, monkey kidney cells, fetal bovine serum, and embryonic guinea pig cell cultures. Xenotransplantation is so controversial and moratoriums for it exist because it is a public health risk due to possible viral transmissions. Yet very few in the medical community seem concerned with the development of vaccines using animal cell cultures.

Further, according to the manufacturers own product inserts, they have not been “evaluated or tested for their carcinogenic potential, mutagenic potential, or for impairment of fertility” or “reproductive capacity.” There have been no long term studies on the cumulative effect on the child’s developing immune system of combining all these vaccines together. All studies are in the short term, week and months, not years.

As far as the mandated schedule, one serious issue I have is Hepatitis B, it is primarily transmitted through injection drug abuse and unprotected sex. Why we inject one day old infants with this vaccine is beyond me. Why we inject infants with known carcinogens, neurotoxins and cell cultures from various animals is also beyond me. The science and techniques are there for the companies to manufacture these vaccines differently. But, profit margins matter more than people apparently. And the medical community isn’t exactly taking a stand against their current practices.

If you haven’t read it, here is Robert F. Kennedy’s Jr.’s investigation in to the government cover-up of the mercury/autism scandal. Let me guess, Robert F. Kennedy’s Jr. is anti-science too.

Here are some anti-mammogram links:
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2002/03/06/mammography-dangers.aspx
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2002/03/06/mammograms-part-three.aspx

I’ll add a couple notes to what Wounded King said. As far as the unvaccinated transmitting diseases to the vaccinated, what we don’t hear is whether the “vaccinated” had received the full series of shots for that disease. If they had not yet received their followup shots, they are very likely to have been susceptible, still.

Also, you said that the anti-vaxers have succeeded in making vaccines safer. I would question that assertion because I have yet to see any data suggesting a change in the safety profile of any of the vaccines from before the anti-vaxers started up to now. I’m willing to be shown, but until I see the data, I’m hedging my bets. A couple questions along those lines: What were the injuries from vaccines that occurred before? What changes resulted in the reduction of the rate or severity, or even elimination, of those injuries?

Finally, another note on thimerosal. This chemical has a pretty long history and well-developed profile. In small quantities, it does not pose a risk to the majority of people. Yes, it is still used for some U.S. vaccines (flu) and in vaccines in other countries, particularly less developed ones, where drug storage facilities are less than adequate. In these situations, the thimerosal helps to keep the vaccines free from contaminants, like bacteria or fungi. The removal of the substance from the majority of U.S. vaccines was more of a public relations move, rather than being based on sound science. Did it make vaccines safer? For some people whose bodies cannot clear it efficiently, perhaps, but I suspect that it has had little impact on the overall safety of our vaccines.

No vaccine is 100% effective. There is always going to be a risk that any given individual, despite their vaccination status, may contract an infection when they come into contact with it. You say ..

But you know what there is another story going around (and supposed to make me take angry at the anti-vaxers) the story is unvaccinated kids spreading disease to vaccinated kids? WTF is going on there? Are these vaccines effective or not? Do they work or not? What has happened to medicine if our vaccines are not working?

Medicine advocates widespread immunisation precisely because it is recognised that vaccines are not 100% effective. The point is not to just protect immunised individuals but to protect whole populations and effectively eradicate the disease. What has happened to medicine is that people have ignored it and decided that they know better.

The principle benefit of herd immunity is that it reduces the rate at which an infection can spread, up to the point of effectively halting that spread. It therefore affords a significant degree of protection to individuals who have not yet been, or for some reason cannot be, vaccinated or those in whom the response to vaccination was weaker and who have a lower degree of resistance. It also drastically reduces the scope for mutation in the disease vector by not allowing it a large pool of unvaccinated individuals to circulate in.

Cheers,

WK

I’m sorry, I was wrong, all that.

My point still stands that the authorities who say ethyl is safe creep me out. They are making an assertion and don’t have toxicology to back it up. If they were honest they would say “We think ethyl mercury is safe” and if we were diligent we would reply, prove it.

There are a number of factors, as has already been pointed out, that can affect what is behind the numbers. Try not to jump to conclusions based solely on the statistics HCN posted.

If ever posted through moderation, we have much larger population sets, as well as clinical analysis that speaks well to my points.

I would agree that having a vaccination program in place for MMR (or even just measles) results in greater potential harm for an unvaccinated adult (or one where the vaccine was not effective). Against that, though, I would weigh the risk of actually getting the disease. If vaccination rates are kept high, then that risk is actually quite small.

I’d add adults whose immunization wanes to your list, but OK. The kicker is your last sentence.

Safety studies on the vaccines indicate that the risk of adverse effects is significantly lower than the risk for complications from the disease being prevented.

In the short term, I would definitely agree with you. If we want to understand the risks over time horizons beyond several weeks, this gets increasingly complicated; especially if we never look.

We will continue to advance, just as we will continue to miss something in the big picture. But our medical progress has been much more “two steps forward, one step back” than “one step forward, two steps back”.

We are in agreement!

- pD

Though, I am sure with pD’s logic vaccination has made us stronger against tetanus, since the survival rate went from less than 50% to 75%, and the odds were even better for pertussis.

It is precisely this type of gross over simplification that causes people to believe that studying children who got the MMR versus those that did not can give us valuable information as to the impact on an entire battery of immune insults. It is also why I am becoming increasingly skeptical.

Presumbaly you are aware of the differences in transmission between tetanus and measles? Likewise, are there any differences in health outcome of getting pertussis for an adult versus an infant?

There is no doubt that measles vaccination has resulted in large scale reductions in hospitilizations; but I’ve never argued against that point. My only point, in regards to measles vaccination and the values you posted is that mass vaccination has created an adult population with a dangerously different immune profile than the adult populations of the last forty thousand years. We have clinical analysis to prove this point, as well as much larger populations that seem to confirm this.

What is so funny is that I’m being painted as ‘anti vax’ for this thread, but the conclusion I am coming to is that a continued vaccination for measles is absolutely essential; not because it will cause us to return to the bad old days of the 1950′s, but instead, to a much, much worse place, where measles strikes young and old alike, as a result of our actions.

Until we perform quality studies comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated populations; how can we hope to understand if our tinkering, regardless of the observable short term benifits, is having other, unintended effects?

- pD

Second point, perhaps they aren’t reasoning properly, but ya know what? Their generation (mine) lost an average of 5 IQ points to the chemical they were worried about – Ethel Mercury. I don’t get where this “Trust us ethel is safe” comes from. That is an unproved assertion that sounds more and more like a lie or like incompetence or like misplaced trust. It is something that came out of a twisted self poisoned chemist’s mouth in previous generations.

Ethel mercury has a history here in America. We used to have it as gasoline additive. It went from there to all of our environment to eventually into a generation’s bloodstream. It’s sad that we went through so much work to clean it up and outlaw its use only to find it directly injected into another generation. There is a reason the FDA had guidelines for it. If it’s not safe for gasoline – is it safe for a kid’s bloodstream? There is a corporation in my city named Ethyl, they are not allowed to sell their product here in the USA but like true amoral scum they sell it and consult to all these third world countries, showing them that a lack of engine knock and some milage efficiency for backward motors is totally worth sacrificing an environment and a generation of healthy brains. Trust us – ethel is safe.

Third point, do you know the whole schedule of recommended vaccines for your state? There are classic effective vaccines like the MMR series and then there are newer questionable ones. Chicken pox? What else? How about instead of recommended lets have, required, essential and non-essential schedules?

Last point, what is heard immunity? Is that what we were going for? The point of vaccines is for individual immunity isn’t it? I have vaccinated my child (full schedule). I believe in vaccines as much as you, especially the older well tested generation. I’m outraged when there are outbreaks. When an unvaccinated child spreads a nearly extinct disease to babies and young day care kids before they were supposed to get their shots. It’s totally tragic when that happens, it is disgusting. But you know what there is another story going around (and supposed to make me take angry at the anti-vaxers) the story is unvaccinated kids spreading disease to vaccinated kids? WTF is going on there? Are these vaccines effective or not? Do they work or not? What has happened to medicine if our vaccines are not working?

Which is why I attempted to post a link to a study on the impact of medical interventions on levels of mental disabilities, which is held up in moderation (forgetting that all of those JREF folks are cruising and partying off the South American coast). It is:
Impact of Specific Medical Interventions on Reducing the Prevalence of Mental Retardation
Jeffrey P. Brosco, MD, PhD; Michael Mattingly, BS; Lee M. Sanders, MD, MPH
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2006;160:302-309.

It states “Approximately 1 in 1000 children with clinical measles develops encephalitis. Although most children with encephalitis recover without sequelae, approximately 15% die and 25% of survivors develop complications such as MR. We assumed that approximately 1 in 5000 cases of measles leads to MR.”

Another article looks at the costs of hospitalization and dealing with disabilities from selected vaccine preventable diseases:
Economic Evaluation of the 7-Vaccine Routine Childhood Immunization Schedule in the United States, 2001
Fangjun Zhou, PhD; Jeanne Santoli, MD, MPH; Mark L. Messonnier, PhD; Hussain R. Yusuf, MBBS, MPH; Abigail Shefer, MD; Susan Y. Chu, PhD, MSPH; Lance Rodewald, MD; Rafael Harpaz, MD, MPH
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2005;159:1136-1144.

In the 1950s specialized schools and institutes for the deaf, blind and other disabilities were very common. They have almost all closed. There is a bit in the book “Train Go Sorry” by Leah Hager Cohen that discusses this. One thing that filled up those schools was the rubella epidemic in the early 1960s, an event that precipitated the reason for the book “Deaf Like Me” by the Spradley brothers. Some of the institutions that housed disabled children were used to test vaccines, which is discussed in both “Polio, An American Story” by David M. Oshinsky and the biography of Maurice Hilleman, “Vaccinated” by Paul Offit. Since I am avoiding URLs, just look for “Willowbrook State School for the Retarded” and “Fernald School for the Mentally Retarded”.

Though, I am sure with pD’s logic vaccination has made us stronger against tetanus, since the survival rate went from less than 50% to 75%, and the odds were even better for pertussis.

Quick note on comments: if you have a hyperlink in your post, it will get held up for moderation. I’m not sure, but I think that Phil is the one who checks them and approves them, to make sure that there isn’t any NSFW content and such before letting them through. And, with him in the Galapagos right now, it might be a couple days before the posts appear. Then again, someone from Discover might moderate them.

“Incidence decreased; virulence increased.”

Minor note, but just looking at the numbers of cases and deaths, you cannot conclude this. You would actually need to do a lab assay of the particular virus involved in the outbreak/cases to determine if it was indeed more virulent. There are a number of factors, as has already been pointed out, that can affect what is behind the numbers. Try not to jump to conclusions based solely on the statistics HCN posted.

I would agree that having a vaccination program in place for MMR (or even just measles) results in greater potential harm for an unvaccinated adult (or one where the vaccine was not effective). Against that, though, I would weigh the risk of actually getting the disease. If vaccination rates are kept high, then that risk is actually quite small.

Also, we shouldn’t just be looking at death as a determining factor for vaccinating or not. What are the complications involved with the diseases? What impact do they have, not only for the individual patient, but also for the greater society around them? The reality is that a lot of these disease, while carrying a pretty decent risk of death, more often have complications that are debilitating, rather than fatal. And yes, the number of people that get through unscathed is going to be higher than those who get complications. However, what is the relative risk of complications from the disease vs. complications from the vaccine? Safety studies on the vaccines indicate that the risk of adverse effects is significantly lower than the risk for complications from the disease being prevented.

No one who has a brain to think will say that vaccines are 100% safe. Nor will they conclude that we know everything there is to know about vaccines and the diseases they prevent. We know a lot, though, and we continue to increase that knowledge. We will continue to advance, just as we will continue to miss something in the big picture. But our medical progress has been much more “two steps forward, one step back” than “one step forward, two steps back”.

Another point directed to those who think that multiple vaccines overload the immune system. In actual fact, even though we are vaccinating against more diseases than in the past, we are actually using fewer antigens (the part of the vaccine which stimulates the immune response) in these vaccines than was previously the case.

The most tired, over used, and gross over simplification of an argument in the defense of the current schedule is that of ‘reduced antigens’. Take a look at the information provided by the oft quoted Paul Offit in regards to antigen levels in, “Addressing Parents’ Concerns: Do Multiple Vaccines Overwhelm or Weaken the Infant’s Immune System?”

What you will see is that the ‘reduction’ in antigens is comprised in reductions in a single vaccine, the move to the DTaP vaccine. Then take a look at the abstract I posted above, “Modulation of the infant immune responses by the first pertussis vaccine administrations”, wherein researchers found that children getting DTaP showed a distinct shift in their immune system cytokine production when getting DTaP vs DTP.

What are the potential complications of such a shift? No one knows! But we do know that we have exposed chidren to fewer antigens. Whew!

But hey, maybe I’m off base. Can you provide some insight into how we can adequately judge the risks of increasing pro inflammatory cytokine production in infants versus a reduction in antigen exposure?

- pD