Hi Matt, as you can see in the document I have just compiled, there are thousands of pieces of research that do not support the idea of vaccination. These are just the tip of the iceberg but people do not know about them because unfortunately, I have never once seen a fair representation of facts in the general media that supports a decision not to vaccinate. I have read incredibly well referenced books (e.g. “Vaccine Safety Manual” by Neil Z. Miller, which summarises hundreds of pieces of research) that report on the anti-vaccination side of the story. When googling the authors you often find that people try to discredit them by saying e.g. “They have an anti-vaccination agenda and why didn’t they state this?” or “They only present studies that support their agenda” or they take issue with perceived problems of one particular study. Well that may be true, but this still does not address the many research findings. If the general public knew about this information then, at the very least, they might realise the vaccine debate is not as cut and dried as it is presented in the media and they might understand why some people choose not to vaccinate their children.
SOME FINDINGS REFERENCES
The Institute of Medicine (IOM), which is part of the National Academy of Sciences, analyzes health policies and issues advice to the US government. They're funded not just by the government but also by pharmaceutical companies and independent philanthropic organizations and individuals. They are considered a very prestigious scientific body in the world. In the last three decades, the IOM has reviewed vaccine safety several times. Their first reports came out in 1991 and 1994.
However, the latest report on this issue, released in August 2011 is very significant, and many still do not understand its true importance.
Over a period of three years, they reviewed over 1,000 studies on vaccines. Interestingly, they excluded studies funded by the pharmaceutical industry, although some of the studies were funded by government agencies independently.
The review focused on eight vaccines: Measles, mumps and rubella vaccine Meningococcal vaccine
Pneumococcal vaccine Hepatitis A-hepatitis B Varicella zoster (chickenpox) HPV vaccine
Influenza vaccine
Diphtheria, tetanus and acellular pertussis, also known as DTaP or Tdap
Perhaps the most important thing IOM did in this review is that they looked at two categories of science: 1. Epidemiological research (large studies comparing different groups of people against each other) 2. Bench science (research into the biological mechanisms at work within cells and molecules)
"This is very important because a lot of the studies that the CDC relies on as evidence that vaccines don't cause any problems are epidemiological studies. This report is important because they looked at both kinds of science. The most shocking
conclusion of this report is that for more than a hundred bad health outcomes that have been reported after these eight vaccines have been given to people, they could not come to a conclusion as to whether or not those vaccines did or did not cause those adverse events!"
Institute Of Medicine
http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2011/Adverse-
Some of those serious health problems included: Multiple sclerosis
Lupus
Encephalitis (brain inflammation) Rheumatoid arthritis
Autism
Encephalopathy, involving permanent brain damage
Why Couldn't IOM Conclude Whether Vaccines are Causative Factors?
Why is it that the IOM was unable to determine whether there was a direct causative link between vaccines and the many serious health outcomes indicated in these studies? Barbara suggests four potential explanations:
1. The studies were not available in the published literature 2. There were too few studies showing the same link 3. The available studies were methodologically unsound
4. The available studies were conflicting (i.e. there was evidence both for and against)
"What I call this category is the 'We Don't Know' category. When you think about it, these vaccines are mandated for children, and yet in most instances the scientific evidence [of safety] is so poor, they don't know! When the report came out there were a lot of organizations like the American Academy of Pediatrics that came forth and said, "They didn't find
causation… So vaccines are safe." That's NOT what that report said at all. I think people need to understand the significance of it… The category of 'We Don't Know' is a very important category…"
The Institute Of Medicine concludes that the evidence convincingly supports a causal relationship between some vaccines and some adverse events.
Evidence Convincingly Supports a Causal Relationship
The committee concludes that the evidence convincingly supports a causal relationship between some vaccines and some adverse events.
As a live vaccine, the varicella zoster vaccine is linked to four specific adverse events, all due to infection from the vaccine virus strain:
Disseminated varicella infection (widespread chickenpox rash shortly after vaccination)
Disseminated varicella infection with subsequent infection resulting in pneumonia, meningitis, or hepatitis in individuals with demonstrated immunodeficiencies
Vaccine strain viral reactivation (appearance of chickenpox rash months to years after vaccination)
brain)
The MMR vaccine is linked to a disease called measles inclusion body encephalitis, which in very rare cases can affect people whose immune systems are compromised and usually occurs within a year of acute measles infection or vaccination. The MMR vaccine also is linked to febrile seizures, which are a type of seizure that occurs in infants and young children in association with fever. Febrile seizures are generally benign and hold no long-term consequences.
Six types of vaccines—MMR, varicella zoster, influenza, hepatitis B, meningococcal, and tetanus containing vaccines—are linked to anaphylaxis.
The committee also found convincing evidence of a causal relationship between injection of vaccine, independent of the antigen involved, and two types of adverse events, including syncope, or fainting, and deltoid bursitis, or frozen shoulder, characterized by shoulder pain and loss of motion.
Evidence Favors Acceptance of a Causal Relationship
The evidence favors acceptance of four vaccine–adverse event relationships. In these cases, the evidence is strong and generally suggestive, but not firm enough to be described as convincing. These relationships include:
HPV vaccine and anaphylaxis;
MMR vaccine and transient arthralgia (temporary joint pain) in female adults; MMR vaccine and transient arthralgia in children; and
certain trivalent inactivated influenza vaccines used in Canada in some recent years and a mild and temporary oculorespiratory syndrome, which is characterized by conjunctivitis, facial swelling, and upper respiratory symptoms, including coughing and wheezing
Whooping cough
Eighty one percent of 2010 California whooping cough cases in people under the age of 18 occurred in those who were fully up to date on the whooping cough vaccine. Eleven percent had received at least one shot, but not the entire recommended series, and only eight percent of those stricken were unvaccinated. The vaccine's effectiveness was only 41 percent among 2- to 7-year-olds and 24 percent among those aged 8-12.
Clinical Infectious Diseases
http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2 012/03/13/cid.cis287
Percentage of B pertussis and B parapertussis cases was higher in vaccinated population compared to unvaccinated population.
Archives of Disease in Childhood
http://adc.bmj.com/content/88/8/684.abstrac t
Outbreak of pertussis in young children who had been vaccinated according to the national vaccination programme. The occurrence of smaller outbreaks of whooping cough is not unexpected; what is unexpected is an outbreak in children who had all been vaccinated against the disease with acelullar vaccine less than one year previously.
http://www.eurosurveillance.org/ViewArticle. aspx?ArticleId=2779
Some hypotheses for this apparent vaccine failure are:
antigenic shift so that the circulating strains and vaccination strains of Bordetella pertussis diverge and vaccine efficacy is reduced
other factors, alone or in combination
In Australia, dangerous new strains of whooping cough bacteria were reported in March 2012. The vaccine, researchers said, was responsible. The reason for this is because, while whooping cough is primarily attributed to Bordetella pertussis
infection, it is also caused by another closely related pathogen called B. parapertussis, which the vaccine does NOT protect against. Two years earlier, scientists at Penn State had already reported that the pertussis vaccine significantly enhanced the colonization of B. parapertussis, thereby promoting vaccine-resistant whooping cough outbreaks15.
According to the authors:
"... [V]accination led to a 40-fold enhancement of B. parapertussis colonization in the lungs of mice. Though the mechanism behind this increased colonization was not specifically elucidated, it is speculated to involve specific immune responses skewed or dampened by the acellular vaccine, including cytokine and antibody production during infection. Despite this vaccine being hugely effective against B. pertussis, which was once the primary childhood killer, these data suggest that the vaccine may be contributing to the observed rise in whooping cough incidence over the last decade by promoting B. parapertussis infection."
Centre For Infectious Disease Dynamics http://www.cidd.psu.edu/research/synopses/
acellular-vaccine-enhancement-b.-parapertussis
In 2007, US health officials admitted that the pneumococcal vaccine had created superbugs that caused severe ear infections in children. Similarly bad news emerged about the hepatitis vaccine that same year, when immunologists discovered mutated vaccine-resistant viruses were causing disease. And in developing countries, even to this day, health officials are concerned that polio viruses in the vaccine may not only be mutating, but may be causing the very disease they are supposed to prevent.
Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes http://journals.lww.com/jaids/Fulltext/2007/1 1010/Selection_of_Hepatitis_B_Virus__HBV__ Vaccine.4.aspx News Medical http://www.news- medical.net/news/20111108/Live-virus-used- in-polio-vaccine-can-evolve-and-infect-warns-TAU-researcher.aspx Mumps
Merck has recently been slapped with two separate class action lawsuits contending they lied about the effectiveness of the mumps vaccine in their combination MMR shot, and fabricated efficacy studies to maintain the illusion for the past two decades that the vaccine is highly protective.
http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/06/2 7/47851.htm
DTP and Measles interaction
Fatality was increased for children ages 6 months to 17 months old, if they received the DTP with or after measles
Vaccine
vaccination. The increase was significant enough for Aaby to suggest that the DTP reduces the benefits of the measles vaccine.
/pii/S0264410X0601111X Chicken Pox
A review of the US varicella (chickenpox) vaccination program published in May in the journal Vaccine8 concluded the vaccine has:
Not proven to be cost-effective Increased the incidence of shingles
Failed to provide long-term protection from the disease it targets―chicken pox―and
Is less effective than the natural immunity that existed in the general population before the vaccine
Vaccine
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article /pii/S0264410X12007761
Autism
A number of studies have suggested a link between autoimmune disorders and autism risk. Support comes from studies showing an increased risk of ASD in children of mothers with autoimmune disorders.1-3 Yet, not all studies agree, since at least one carefully done study found no strong link.4
Other more carefully done studies provided evidence suggesting some link. For example, in one study serum from a mother with an autistic child was found to bind immunologically with specific brain cells (Purkinje cells).5 When this serum was injected into pregnant mice, their babies demonstrated neurological changes suggestive of autistic behavior, indicating a transfer of the autoantibodies into the developing baby mouse.
A number of studies have found autoantibodies in a significantly higher number of autistic children to various brain structures, such as serotonin receptors, myelin basic protein, neuron axon filament protein, nerve growth factor and cerebellar neurofilaments.6-10
It should be understood that these autoantibodies are not found in all cases and that they may develop as a result of the damage caused by the disease itself, rather than causing the disease. For example, we know that after a stroke or head injury a substantial number of people will develop autoantibodies to brain proteins. Nevertheless, the autoantibodies can worsen the damage and prolong the damaging pathology.
One study found that strains of mice highly susceptible to developing autoimmune diseases were sensitive to the ASD-like behavioral effects upon mercury exposure, whereas mouse strains genetically not susceptible to autoimmunity do not develop ASD behaviors.12
6. Singh VK, Rivas WH. Prevalence of serum antibodies to caudate nucleus in autistic children. Neuroscience Lett 2004; 355: 53-56. 7. Singh VK et al. Antibodies to myelin basic protein in children with autistic behavior. Brain Behavior Immunol 1993; 7: 97-103. 8. Singer HS et al. Antibrain antibodies in children with autism and their unaffected siblings. J Neuroimmunol 2006; 178: 149-155. 9. Singh VK et al. Circulating autoantibodies to neural and glial filament proteins in autism. Pediatr Neurol 1997; 17: 88-90.
10. el-Fawal HA e al. Exposure to methylmercury results in serum
autoantibodies to neurotypic and gliaotypic proteins. Neurotoxicology 1996; 17: 531-539. 11. Havarinasab S et al. Immunosuppressive and autoimmune effects of thimerosal in mice. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2005; 204; 109-121.
12. Hornig M, Chian D, Lipkin WJ. Neurotoxic effect of postnatal thimerosal are mouse strain dependent. Mol Psychiatry 2004; 9: 833-845.
An interesting article: 'The Case for a Link to Autism Spectrum Disorders.' Notice there are 172 references to scientific research from various Journals etc.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/pag es/the-danger-of-excessive-vaccination-during-brain-development.aspx
Hep B
Hepatitis B shots are part of the standard government-recommended childhood vaccination schedule, with the first dose given at 12 hours of age in the newborn nursery of most hospitals.
But hepatitis B is a primarily blood-transmitted disease associated with risky lifestyle choices such as unprotected sex with multiple partners and intravenous drug use involving sharing needles—it is NOT primarily a "children's disease."
For most children, the risk of a serious vaccine reaction may be 100 times greater than the risk of hepatitis B. There are more reports of serious adverse reactions in children than there are cases of childhood hepatitis B reported in America.
The policy was, in part, based on the fact that adults, who are at high-risk for being infected with hepatitis B (namely, mostly those who are IV drug users or are engaging in unprotected sex with multiple partners, or prostitutes) are difficult to reach and do not get vaccinated. Infants and children are a much easier population to control, and easier to access.
The thinking was that hepatitis B could be prevented in the U.S. with mass use of hep B vaccine by all infants and children so they would be protected from birth and early childhood. However, a policy that attempts to prevent an infectious disease in adolescents and adults by vaccinating infants and young children assumes the vaccine provides long lasting protection. Science has proven this is simply not the case for hepatitis B vaccine.
Hepatitis B Immunity Fades After Just a Few Years
Hepatitis B vaccine requires three doses for "seroprotection" (vaccine induced antibodies measured in the blood). However, all vaccines only confer temporary, partial immunity and the length of time you are protected from hepatitis B after receiving the vaccine series has gotten shorter and shorter as studies have revealed antibody levels decline much more rapidly than vaccine developers and policymakers expected.
Consider these findings:
In a study involving dental healthcare workers published in the New England Journal of Medicine, it was
demonstrated that within just 5 years after vaccination, antibody levels had sharply declined or no longer existed in 42 percent of hepatitis B vaccine recipients.
A study in the American Journal of Public Health reported a significant antibody loss in 36 percent of healthcare personnel after just 3 years.
Still other studies have found more than 60 percent of vaccine recipients are no longer protected from hepatitis B
Australian Dental Journal
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j. 1834-7819.1994.tb04784.x/abstract
after 5 years, and one found that HALF of vaccinated people were not protected after 4 years!
So, if seroprotection is gone in less than 5 years, your baby is being subjected to ALL of the risks of the hepatitis B vaccine with NONE of the promised benefit.
A recent study looked at the immune reaction in newborn infants up to the age of one year who had received the HepB vaccine to see if their immune reaction differed from adults getting the same vaccine.27 What they found was that the infant, even after age one year, did react differently. Their antibody levels were substantially higher than adults (3-fold higher) and it remained higher throughout the study.
In essence, they found that the babies responded to the vaccine by having an intense Th2 response that persisted long after it should have disappeared, a completely abnormal response. If the baby’s immune system remains in a Th2 mode, it has a high risk of developing an autoimmune disorder, such as eczema, asthma or other allergies.
27. Martin OC et al. Hepatitis B immunization induces higher antibody and memory Th2 responses in new-borns than adults. Vaccine 2004; 22: 511-519.
According to a study in the United Kingdom, hepatitis B vaccines may increase risks for developing multiple sclerosis (MS) by a factor of three. Researchers discovered that people showed a three-fold increase in the incidence of MS within three years of being vaccinated. They weren't able to determine if the vaccine triggers the disease in those already susceptible, or if it speeds up the onset.
In addition to MS, studies also reveal a link between hepatitis B vaccines and the development of type 1 diabetes (insulin-dependent). In New Zealand, the incidence of type 1 diabetes rose 60 percent among children following a mass hepatitis B immunization campaign.
A study published September 2009 in Annals of Epidemiology found that giving hepatitis B vaccine to infant boys more than tripled their risk for an autism spectrum disorder. This was doubly concerning because an earlier study by the same
researcher group, using a different database, found the same results.
Yet another study, this one published in the journal Neurology in 2009, revealed that children who received a particular hepatitis B vaccine were more likely to develop "central nervous system inflammatory demyelination" than children who did not receive the vaccine.
Annals of Epidemiology
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article /pii/S1047279709002075
Selective vaccines
Studies have also shown that vaccines that cover only a few strains of a virus or bacteria that naturally have a great number of strains (some have over a hundred strains), can cause a shift in strain dominance so that the strain not included in the vaccine then becomes the dominant disease causing strain. We see this with the meningiococcal and pneumococcal vaccines
43. Pichichero ME et al. Pathogen shifts and changing cure rates for otitis media and tonsillopharyngitis. Clin Pediatr 2006; 45: 493-502.
44. Moore MR et al. Impact of conjugate vaccine on community wide coverage of nonsusceptible Streptococcus in Alaska. J Inf Dis 2004; 190: 2031-2038.
45. Pichichero ME, Cary JR. Emergence of a multiresistant serotype 19A pneumococcal strain not included in the 7-valent conjugate vaccine as an otopathogen in children. JAMA 2007; 298: 1772-1778.
HPV
There are more than 100 different strains of HPV. The vaccine is designed to protect against 4 only. The measure of vaccine given to a young girl of small body weight is the same as that give to an adult woman. Children administered high-titer vaccines can have higher infection and mortality rates.
Most recently, an oncology dietitian pointed out significant discrepancies2 in a new HPV vaccine effectiveness study published in the Journal of Infectious Diseases3, which evaluated data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES), 2003-2006 and 2007-2010.
“In 2007-2010, the overall prevalence of HPV was 50 percent in the vaccinated girls (14-19 years), but only 38.6 percent in the unvaccinated girls of the same age. Therefore, HPV prevalence dropped 27.3 percent in the unvaccinated girls, but only declined by 5.8 percent in the vaccinated group. In four out of five different measures, the unvaccinated girls had a lower incidence of HPV,” she writes.
Lancet
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16812 65
National Center for Biotechnology Information http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23785 124
According to Merck’s own research, if you have been exposed to HPV strains 16 or 18 prior to receipt of Gardasil vaccine, you could increase your risk of precancerous lesions, or worse, by 44.6 percent.
Other health problems associated with Gardasil vaccine include immune-based inflammatory neurodegenerative disorders, suggesting that something is causing the immune system to overreact in a detrimental way—sometimes fatally.
Between June 1, 2006 and December 31, 2008, there were 12,424 reported adverse events following Gardasil vaccination, including 32 deaths. The girls, who were on average 18 years old, died within two to 405 days after their last Gardasil injection
Between May 2009 and September 2010, 16 additional deaths after Gardasil vaccination were reported. For that timeframe, there were also 789 reports of "serious" Gardasil adverse reactions, including 213 cases of permanent disability and 25 diagnosed cases of Guillain-Barre Syndrome
Between September 1, 2010 and September 15, 2011, another 26 deaths were reported following HPV vaccination As of May 13, 2013, VAERS had received 29,686 reports of adverse events following HPV vaccinations, including 136
reports of death,7, as well as 922 reports of disability, and 550 life-threatening adverse events
FDA
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/06/bri efing/2006-4222B3.pdf
The reported death toll for the HPV vaccine now stands at 89. As of November 3, 2010, there were also 20,575 adverse reactions, and 352 reports of abnormal pap smears post vaccination. Keep in mind however, that it has been estimated that only 1 to 10 percent of all vaccine adverse events are ever reported
http://www.judicialwatch.org/files/document s/2010/VAERS-052009-to-092010.pdf
Published in the medical journal The Lancet in 1977 by the Department of Community Medicine in the United Kingdom also indicates that vaccines were not responsible for the decline in disease rates in that country.
"There was a continuous decline [whooping cough deaths], equal in each sex, from 1937 onward. Vaccination, beginning on small scale in some places around 1948 and on a national scale in 1957, did not affect the rate of decline if it be assumed that one attack usually confers immunity, as in most major communicable diseases of childhood. ... The steady decline of
whooping cough between 1930 and 1957 is predictive of a linear exponential decay characteristic of a general and progressive lessening in the volume and spread of infection among the susceptible population. With this pattern well
established before 1957, there is no evidence that vaccination played a major role in the decline in incidence and mortality in the trend of events."
Steward, Gordon T., "Vaccination Against Whooping-Cough Efficacy Versus Risks", The Lancet, January 29, 1977, pp. 234-237 http://www.thelancet.com/search/results?sea rchTerm=Vaccination+Against+Whooping-Cough+Efficacy+Versus+Risks&fieldName=AllF ields&journalFromWhichSearchStarted= Aluminium as an adjuvant
According to a new study published in Current Medical Chemistry, children up to 6 months of age receive 14.7 to 49 times more aluminum from vaccines than the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) safety limits allow. Experimental research clearly shows that aluminum adjuvants have a potential to induce serious immunological disorders in humans. In particular, aluminum in adjuvant form carries a risk for autoimmunity, long-term brain inflammation and associated neurological complications and may thus have profound and widespread adverse health consequences. In our opinion, the possibility that vaccine benefits may have been overrated and the risk of potential adverse effects underestimated, has not been rigorously evaluated in the medical and scientific community. We hope that the present paper will provide a framework for a much needed and long overdue assessment of this highly contentious medical issue.
Current Medicinal Chemistry
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/ben /cmc/2011/00000018/00000017/art00011
Aluminum is now being implicated as interfering with a variety of cellular and metabolic processes in the nervous system and in other tissues.
Pediatrics
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/ 97/3/413.abstract
Federal Admission of Vaccine Risks:
In 1986, Congress officially acknowledged the reality of vaccine-caused injuries and death by creating and passing The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (Public Law 99-660). The safety reform portion of this law requires doctors to provide parents with information about the benefits and risks of childhood vaccines prior to vaccination, and to report vaccine reactions to federal health officials. Doctors are required by law to report suspected cases of vaccine damage. To simplify and centralize this legal requisite, federal health officials established the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) -- operated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
It contains 1000’s upon 1000’s of adverse effects. The FDA recently acknowledged that 90 percent of doctors do not report
vaccine reactions. They are choosing to subvert this law by claiming the adverse event was, in their opinion, not related to the shot. In fact, every year between 12,000 and 14,000 reports of adverse reactions to vaccines are made to the FDA (data initially accessible only through the Freedom of Information Act). These figures include hospitalizations, irreversible brain damage, and hundreds of deaths. Considering that these numbers may represent just 10 percent, the true figures could be as high as 140,000 adverse events annually. However, even this figure could be conservative. According to Dr. David Kessler, former head of the Food and Drug Administration, "Only about 1 percent of serious events [adverse drug reactions] are reported to the FDA."
SIDS
A subset of infants may be more susceptible to SIDS shortly after being vaccinated, particularly after receiving multiple vaccines all at once. "Infant Mortality Rates Regressed Against Number of Vaccine Doses Routinely Given: Is There a Biochemical or Synergistic Toxicity?" found a high statistically significant correlation between increasing number of vaccine doses and increasing infant mortality rates
Human & Experimental Toxicology
http://het.sagepub.com/content/early/2011/ 05/04/0960327111407644.full.pdf+html
Pneumonia vaccinations for people over 65 are soon to be halted by the UK government, on the grounds that the injections do not save lives.
Millions of people were injected with the vaccine, which was supposed to offer ten-year protection against an infection that causes pneumonia. But independent expert government advisors say the program has had 'no discernible impact' on rates of pneumococcal disease. According to the Daily Mail:
"... [T]he protection provided by the vaccine is poor and not long-lasting in older people."
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications /jcvi-advice-on-pneumococcal-polysaccharide-vaccination-programme http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article- 1392594/Pneumonia-jabs-pensioners-scrapped-dont-work.html?ito=feeds-newsxml Flu shots
Giving young children flu shots appeared to have no impact on flu-related doctor visits or hospitalizations during two recent flu seasons, according to a study published in the Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine last year. The researchers concluded that "significant influenza vaccine effectiveness could not be demonstrated for any season, age, or setting" examined.
National Library of Medicine
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18838 647?ordinalpos=10&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEnt rez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_D efaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
A new study in The Lancet Infectious Diseases reveals that the flu vaccine prevents lab confirmed type A or type B influenza in only 1.5 out of every 100 vaccinated adults … but the media is reporting this to mean "60 percent effective."
It is estimated that, annually, only about 2.7% of adults get type A or type B influenza in the first place. The study showed that the use of flu vaccines appear to drop this down to about 1.2%. This is a roughly 60% drop, but that ignores the fact that the vaccine has no protective health benefit for 97.5% of adults.
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/art
One of the largest studies ever done, found that children below the age of 2 years received no protection at all from the seasonal flu vaccine.7
The recently completed study on the effectiveness of the new H1N1 vaccine reported by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease found that 75% of small children below age 35 months received no protection from the H1N1 vaccine and that 65% of children between the ages of 3 years and 9 years received no protection from the vaccine.8
Seasonal flu vaccinations have been suspended in Australia for all children under the age of five. The suspension comes after 23 children in Western Australia were admitted to hospitals with convulsions after receiving flu injections.
More than 250 children may have had adverse reactions to the vaccine, with symptoms including fever, vomiting and convulsions.
The Cochrane Collaboration: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2006 (1). Article number CD004879. In this review that analyzed 51 studies involving more than 260,000 children and found that below age 2 years, the seasonal flu vaccine offered no protection and those older than 2 years, only 33 to 36% had protective antibody response. http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/flu- vaccination-ban-goes-national-after-fever-convulsions-in-children-20100423-tglp.html
Research published in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine also confirms that there has been no decrease in deaths from influenza and pneumonia, despite the fact that vaccination coverage among the elderly has increased from 15 percent in 1980 to 65 percent now.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?orig_d b=PubMed&cmd=Search&term=American+jou rnal+of+respiratory+and+critical+care+medici ne%5BJour%5D+AND+527%5Bpage%5D+AND +2008%5Bpdat%5D
A study from 2005, published in the Archives of Internal Medicine also could not find support for the use of flu vaccine to prevent deaths in the elderly. The report highlights that although immunization rates in people over 65 have increased dramatically in the past 20 years, there has not been a consequent decline in flu-related deaths.
http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx ?articleid=486407
In 2007, researchers with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and the National Institutes of Health published this conclusion in the Lancet Infectious Diseases: “We conclude that frailty selection bias and use of non-specific endpoints such as all-cause mortality have led cohort studies to greatly exaggerate vaccine benefits.”
Lancet Infectious Diseases
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?orig_d b=PubMed&cmd=Search&term=%22The+Lanc et+infectious+diseases%22%5BJour%5D+AND +658%5Bpage%5D+AND+2007%5Bpdat%5D Parents who refuse vaccinations reported less asthma and allergies in their unvaccinated children The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
http://www.jacionline.org/article/S0091-6749(05)00026-6/abstract
The vaccine strain of measles virus has been found in 85% of samples taken from the guts of children with regressive autism, according to a study to be presented in Montreal, Canada, this week by Dr. Stephen Walker of the Wake Forest University
http://www.aapsonline.org/nod/newsofday29 5.php
School of Medicine in North Carolina.
Dr. Andrew Wakefield responds: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d40suCKnjbI
D. Wakefield has published about 130-140 peer-reviewed papers looking at the mechanism and cause of inflammatory bowel disease, and has extensively investigated the brain-bowel connection in the context of children with developmental disorders such as autism.
The story begins with the publication of a case series in the prestigious medical journal The Lancet, in February 1998. A case series essentially tells the clinical story of a group of patients with a constellation of signs and symptoms that link them together. In this case, it was a group of autistic children with gastric problems, which led to the discovery of a novel bowel disease.
But rather than celebrating the discovery of a tangible, treatable problem that can help these children and others suffering with similar health issues, it became a hotly debated controversy in which Dr. Wakefield’s reputation was smeared. Why?
Because part of the patients’ story included regression after a vaccine.
“… If those children had regressed after natural chickenpox, you and I would not be sitting here now. But they didn’t. They regressed after a vaccine,” says Wakefield.
The vaccine in question was the MMR vaccine.
Since then, Dr. Wakefield’s study -- which suggests there may be a link between the MMR vaccine, bowel disease, and autism -- has remained one of the most controversial studies on the topic of vaccine safety.
He knew he was about to enter treacherous waters when it was published, and he knew he needed to be prepared for the inevitable backlash from the vaccine industry. Says Dr. Wakefield:
“… I decided that I was going to review all of the safety studies about measles and measles-containing vaccines because if I was going to challenge the status quo and say things that might have an adverse effect on vaccine uptake, I had to know what I was talking about.
So I read all the papers, and I was absolutely appalled with the quality of the safety studies of the single [measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines], and the combined MMR vaccine in particular.”
His research led him to write a 250-page report, concluding that he could not support the use of the combined three-in-one
28 studies from around the world that support Dr. Wakefield’s controversial findings:
1. The Journal of Pediatrics November 1999; 135(5):559-63
2. The Journal of Pediatrics 2000; 138(3): 366-372
3. Journal of Clinical Immunology November 2003; 23(6): 504-517 4. Journal of Neuroimmunology 2005 5. Brain, Behavior and Immunity 1993; 7:
97-103
6. Pediatric Neurology 2003; 28(4): 1-3 7. Neuropsychobiology 2005; 51:77-85 8. The Journal of Pediatrics May
2005;146(5):605-10
9. Autism Insights 2009; 1: 1-11
10. Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology February 2009; 23(2): 95-98
11. Annals of Clinical Psychiatry 2009:21(3): 148-161
12. Journal of Child Neurology June 29, 2009; 000:1-6
13. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders March 2009;39(3):405-13
MMR vaccine.
In his opinion it simply was not safe.
This recommendation was made public during a press conference in February of 1998, at which time single vaccines were still available in the UK. But in order to protect MMR vaccine policy, in September of that same year, the British government withdrew the importation license for the single measles vaccine, leaving parents without any choice – they either had to vaccinate their children with the triple MMR vaccine, or not vaccinate.
The result?
A decline in vaccination, and an increase in measles outbreaks… But rather than acknowledging the lack of safe options, Dr. Wakefield was singled out as an “anti-vaccine advocate” whose recommendations caused a decline in children being vaccinated, and hence responsible for the increase in measles.
14. Medical Hypotheses August 1998;51:133-144.
15. Journal of Child Neurology July 2000; ;15(7):429-35
16. Lancet. 1972;2:883–884. 17. Journal of Autism and Childhood
Schizophrenia January-March 1971;1:48-62 18. Journal of Pediatrics March 2001;138:366-372. 19. Molecular Psychiatry 2002;7:375-382. 20. American Journal of Gastroenterolgy April 2004;598-605. 21. Journal of Clinical Immunology
November 2003;23:504-517. 22. Neuroimmunology April
2006;173(1-2):126-34.
23. Prog. Neuropsychopharmacol Biol. Psychiatry December 30 2006;30:1472-1477.
24. Clinical Infectious Diseases September 1 2002;35(Suppl 1):S6-S16
25. Applied and Environmental
Microbiology, 2004;70(11):6459-6465 26. Journal of Medical Microbiology
October 2005;54:987-991
pediatría 2006; Vol 69 (1): 19-25. 28. Gastroenterology. 2005:128 (Suppl
2);Abstract-303
Herd Immunity
Typically, vaccine promoters will stress the importance of compliance with the vaccine schedule that requires multiple doses of a vaccine in order to create and maintain vaccine induced "herd immunity," because a vaccine is never 100 percent effective. However, they never quite seem to be able to explain why the majority of outbreaks occur in areas that are
thought to HAVE herd immunity status, i.e. where the majority of people are vaccinated and "should" therefore never get the disease.
The problem is that there is, in fact, such a thing as natural herd immunity. But what has happened is that public health officials have taken this natural phenomenon and assumed that vaccine induced herd immunity is the same as disease induced herd immunity and it is not the same. The science clearly shows that there's a big difference between naturally developed herd immunity and vaccine-induced herd immunity in a population.
"The original concept of herd immunity is that when a population experiences the natural disease… natural immunity would be achieved – a robust, qualitatively superior natural herd immunity within the population, which would then protect other people from getting the disease in other age groups. It's the way infectious diseases work…But the vaccinologists have adopted this idea of vaccine induced herd immunity.
The problem with it is that all vaccines only confer temporary protection… Pertussis vaccine is one the best examples… Pertussis vaccines have been used for about 50 to 60 years, and the organism has started to evolve to become vaccine
resistant. I think this is not something that's really understood generally by the public: Vaccines do not confer the same type of immunity that natural exposure to the disease does."
Vaccine professionals would like you to believe they are the same, but they're qualitatively two entirely different types of immune responses.
"In most cases natural exposure to disease would give you a longer lasting, more robust, qualitatively superior immunity because it gives you both cell mediated immunity and humoral immunity. Humoral is the antibody production. The way you
1
CHOP Parents PACK August 15, 2012
2
GreenMedInfo.com August 29, 2012
3
Clinical Infectious Diseases March 15, 2012
4
Updated Recommendations for Use of Tetanus Toxoid, Reduced Diphtheria Toxoid and Acellular Pertussis (Tdap)
5
CDC Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Pertussis epidemic – Washington 2012, July 20, 2012 / 61(28);517-522
6 Investigative News Source August 15, 2012
7
KPBS August 15, 2012
8
The Journal of Pediatrics July 23, 2012 [Epub ahead of print]
9
Canadian Journal of Public Health May-June 1991;82(3):189-90
10
CHOP Vaccine Education Center March 2012
11
New England Journal of Medicine September 27, 2007
12
GreenMedInfo.com August 27, 2012
13
measure vaccine-induced immunity is by how high the antibody titers are. (How many antibodies you have, basically.)
But the problem is that cell mediated immunity is very important as well. Most vaccines evade cell mediated immunity and go straight for the antibodies, which is only one part of immunity. That's been the big problem with the production of vaccines."
Unvaccinated Population Falsely Blamed for Ineffective Vaccines
Recent disease outbreaks were traced back to personal belief exemptions... Really?
That's just not reality, and if you take the time to look into the truthfulness of that statement, you'll see it simply does not hold up. Many outbreaks of pertussis (whooping cough), measles, and mumps have occurred primarily in people who were vaccinated, and no one seems to be able to fully explain how that is the fault of those who are unvaccinated...
If the vaccine theory was correct, these people should have been protected because they were vaccinated. Published studies into the outbreaks have revealed that a lot of the blame should be placed on ineffective vaccines – not on the unvaccinated minority.
Consider the following findings about the last two whooping cough (pertussis) outbreaks.
In 2010, the largest outbreak of whooping cough in over 50 years occurred in California. Around that same time, a scare campaign was launched in California by Pharma-funded medical trade associations, state health officials and national media, targeting people opting out of receiving pertussis vaccine, falsely accusing them of causing the outbreak.
However, research published in March of this year3 shows that 81 percent of 2010 California whooping cough cases in people under the age of 18 occurred in those who were fully up to date on the whooping cough vaccine. Eleven percent had
received at least one shot, but not the entire recommended series, and only eight percent of those stricken were unvaccinated.
According to the authors:
"This first detailed analysis of a recent North American pertussis outbreak found widespread disease among fully vaccinated older children. Starting approximately three years after prior vaccine dose, attack rates markedly increased, suggesting
B. pertussis whooping cough is a cyclical disease with natural increases that tend to occur every 4-5 years, no matter how high the vaccination rate is in a population using DPT/DTaP or Tdap vaccines on a widespread basis. Whole cell DPT vaccines used in the U.S. from the 1950's until the late 1990's were estimated to be 63 to 94 percent effective and studies showed that vaccine-acquired immunity fell to about 40 percent after seven years.
In the study cited above, the researchers noted the vaccine's effectiveness was only 41 percent among 2- to 7-year-olds and a dismal 24 percent among those aged 8-12. With this shockingly low rate of DTaP vaccine effectiveness, the questionable solution public health officials have come up with is to declare that everybody has to get three primary shots and three follow-up booster shots in order to get long-lasting protection4 – and that's provided the vaccine gives you any protection at all!
The Washington State Secretary of Health also declared a pertussis epidemic on April 3, 2012, in response to a 1,300 percent increase in pertussis cases compared to 2011.5 Scientists are now considering adding a seventh inoculation6, in order to boost protection against whooping cough.
According to a recent article and video by KPBS:7
"New research confirms the whooping cough vaccine is failing at a higher rate than expected, and scientists are considering adding a seventh dose to the national immunization schedule published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Two recent studies8 have found the majority of people getting sick are up to date with their immunizations.”
Mumps and Measles Vaccines are Also Failing
Mumps: In 2010, more than 1,000 people in New Jersey and New York were also sickened with mumps. In the US, children typically receive their mumps vaccination as part of the Measles, Mumps, and Rubella (MMR) vaccine. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advises children to receive their first dose between 12 and 18 months, and their second between the ages of 4 and 6.
This vaccine is supposed to improve immunity to measles, mumps and rubella… yet 77 percent of the 1,000+ who came down with mumps were vaccinated. Similarly, in 2006, when mumps infected more than 6,500 people in the United States, cases occurred primarily among college students who had received two doses of MMR vaccine. At that time, just about the only people who were truly immune to mumps were older Americans who had recovered from mumps as children, and therefore had received natural, lifelong immunity.
Measles – The 1989 measles epidemic in the region of Quebec was largely attributed to incomplete vaccination coverage – until a study9 into the outbreak disclosed that the outbreak occurred in a population that had 99 percent vaccination coverage. The researchers concluded that: "Incomplete vaccination coverage is not a valid explanation for the Quebec City measles outbreak."
Conflicts of Interest – Not Science – Influence Most Vaccine Recommendations
The CHOP newsletter is delivered by email periodically to anyone who signs up for it, and almost always contains advice on getting all children vaccinated. The Vaccine Education Center10 at CHOP says it's funded by endowed chairs and "does not receive support from pharmaceutical companies."
But it neglects to mention that the hospital indirectly benefits from drug company money that helps fund endowed chairs like Merck's Maurice R. Hilleman Professor of Vaccinology, which is currently held by Paul Offit11, who not only is very public about his belief that infants could theoretically safely handle 10,000 vaccines all at once; he also openly opposes personal belief vaccine exemptions.12 Rarely is it mentioned that Offit has a financial stake in the vaccine industry, as he invented one of the vaccines CHOP promotes. He's also served on the scientific advisory board of Merck.
Offit's personal beliefs about forcing people to involuntarily use vaccines, which violates the informed consent ethic in medicine, along with the inaccurate statements he makes about vaccine safety, which are not backed by solid scientific evidence, are echoed throughout CHOP's pro-forced vaccination propaganda. For example, one of their Q&A brochures13 answers the question: Can too many vaccines overwhelm an infant's immune system? with the following statement: "No. Compared to the immunological challenges that infants handle every day, the challenge from the immunological components in vaccines is minuscule. Babies begin dealing with immunological challenges at birth. The mother's womb is a sterile environment, free from viruses, bacteria, parasites and fungi. But after babies pass through the birth canal and enter the world, they are immediately colonized with trillions of bacteria, which means that they carry the bacteria on their bodies but aren't infected by them. These bacteria live on the skin, nose, throat and intestines. To make sure that colonizing bacteria don't invade the bloodstream and cause harm, babies constantly make antibodies against them.
...Given that infants are colonized with trillions of bacteria, that each bacterium contains between 2,000 and 6,000
immunological components and that infants are infected with numerous viruses, the challenge from the 150 immunological components in vaccines is minuscule compared to what infants manage every day."
This is an astounding comparison and shockingly ignorant of foundational physiology.
Not only do these ignorant statements dismiss and disparage the role of beneficial gut bacteria – which we now know are absolutely essential and vital for human health and well-being – and characterize normal gut bacteria as potentially harmful, but there is a false characterization of the immunological challenge posed by multiple vaccines, each of which can contain either live or killed viruses and a number of different adjuvants and chemicals, injected into the tiny body of an infant. CHOP even takes Offit's ridiculous claim that infants can safely handle 10,000 vaccines at one time to brand new heights, stating that:14
"The purpose of vaccines is to prompt a child's body to make antibodies, which work by preventing bacteria and viruses from reproducing themselves and causing disease. So, how many different antibodies can babies make?
The best answer to this question came from a Nobel Prize-winning immunologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology named Susumu Tonegawa, who first figured out how people make antibodies. Tonegawa discovered that antibodies are made by rearranging and recombining many different genes, and found that people can make about 10 billion different antibodies. Given the number of antibody-producing cells in a child's bloodstream, and the number of immunological components contained in vaccines, it is reasonable to conclude that babies could effectively make antibodies to about 100,000 vaccines at one time."
The Difference Between Natural and Vaccine-Induced Immunity
Many still believe vaccines provide identical immunity to that obtained when you are naturally exposed to an infection, This widespread misconception needs to be corrected.
The presumed result of a vaccination is to help you build immunity to potentially harmful organisms that cause disease. What many fail to appreciate is that your body's immune system is already designed to do this in response to naturally-occurring infectious agents that you are constantly exposed to throughout life. One major difference between vaccine-induced immunity and natural immunity stems from how you're exposed to these organisms.
Most organisms that cause infection enter your body through the mucous membranes of your nose, mouth, lungs or your digestive tract.
These mucous membranes have their own immune system, called the secretory IgA immune system. It is a different system from the one activated when a vaccine is injected into your body. Your IgA immune system is your body's first line of defense
and its job is to address the infectious microorganism at their entry points, thus reducing or even eliminating the need for activation of your body's entire immune system.
However, when a laboratory altered or created infectious microorganism is injected into your body with a vaccine and, especially when combined with an immune adjuvant, such as aluminum, your IgA immune system is bypassed, stimulating your immune system to mount a very strong inflammatory response.
Vaccines can also trigger such a strong inflammatory response that the inflammation becomes chronic and leads to chronic illness or disability. (People with a personal or family history of severe allergy or autoimmunity should be cautious about vaccination because they already have a genetic predisposition to inflammatory responses that do not resolve and can lead to chronic health problems.)
Injecting these lab-altered microorganisms into your body in an attempt to provoke an atypical, temporary immunity is clearly not the same way your body develops naturally-acquired immunity. Your immune system simply was not designed to be injected with lab altered disease-causing organisms in this manner. While I am a great fan and avocate of technology it is very clear to me that this is one reason why vaccines almost always only provide a much more temporary immunity
compared to naturally acquired immunity.
Additionally, this plays a large role in why vaccines have the potential to do serious damage to your health.
Since vaccines bypass your natural first-line defense (your lgA immune system), they are clearly inferior to natural immunity and fail to provide the same kind of long lasting protection from future disease as they provide typically inferior immunity compared to that your body would acquire by experiencing and healing from the natural disease. In the case of mumps, for instance, immunity is typically permanent for those who contract the disease during childhood.
Ways of presenting information:
Some clinical trials are only able to show a meaningful benefit because they focus on relative risk reduction rather than absolute risk reduction. What's the difference?
Relative risk reduction is calculated by dividing the absolute risk reduction by the control event rate Absolute risk reduction is the decrease in risk of a treatment in relation to a control treatment
placebo, to examine the effect on breast cancer risk. After five years, two women in the drug group develop breast cancer, compared to four who took the placebo. This data could lead to either of the following headlines, and both would be correct: "New Miracle Drug Cuts Breast Cancer Risk by 50%!"
"New Drug Results in 2% Drop in Breast Cancer Risk!" How can this be?
The Annie Appleseed Project explains:
"The headlines represent two different ways to express the same data. The first headline expresses the relative risk reduction — the two women who took the drug (subjects) and developed breast cancer equal half the number (50%) of the four women who took the placebo (controls) and developed breast cancer.
The second headline expresses the absolute risk reduction — 2% of the subjects (2 out of 100) who took the drug developed breast cancer and 4% of the controls (4 out of 100) who took the placebo developed breast cancer — an absolute difference of 2% (4% minus 2%)."
You can now see why clinical trials, especially those funded by drug companies, will cite relative risk reductions rather than absolute risk reductions, and as a patient you need to be aware that statistics can be easily manipulated.
As STATS at George Mason University explains:
"An important feature of relative risk is that it tells you nothing about the actual risk."
More research.
Vaccines and Nervous System Changes:
Bondarev, VN et al, "The Changes of the Nervous System in Children After Vaccination", Pediatria, Jun 1969; 48:20-24. Ehrengut W, "Central nervous sequelae of vaccinations," Lancet 1986 May 31;1(8492):1275-1276.
Provvidenza, G et al, [On a Case of Benign Acute Cerebellar Ataxia in Childhood], Arch Ital Sci Med Trop, 43:189-194, Apr 1962.
Orient, 20:539-546, Nov - Dec 1963. Vaccines and Autism:
Eggers, C, "Autistic Syndrome (Kanner) And Vaccinations against Smallpox", Klin Paediatr, Mar 1976, 188(2):172-180. Kiln MR, "Autism, inflammatory bowel disease, and MMR vaccine." Lancet 1998 May 2;351(9112):1358.
Selway, "MMR vaccination and autism 1998. Medical practitioners need to give more than reassurance." BMJ 1998 Jun 13;316(7147):1824. Nicoll A, Elliman D, Ross E, "MMR vaccination and autism 1998," MJ 1998 Mar 7;316(7133):715-716.
Lindley K J, Milla PJ, "Autism, inflammatory bowel disease, and MMR vaccine."Lancet 1998 Mar 21;351(9106):907-908. Bedford H, et al, "Autism, inflammatory bowel disease, and MMR vaccine." Lancet 1998 Mar 21;351(9106):907.
Vijendra K. Singh, Sheren X. Lin, and Victor C. Yang, "Serological Association of Measles Virus and Human Herpesvirus-6 with Brain Autoantibodies in Autism," Clinical Immunology and Immunopathology, Oct 1998, Vol. 89, No. 1, p 105-108. ["None of the autistic children in the study had measles in the past, but all had the MMR" stated David Whalgren.
Vaccines and Demyelination:
Herroelen, L et al, "Central-Nervous-System Demyelination After Immunization with Recombinant Hepatitis B Vaccine", Lancet, Nov 9, 1991, 338(8776):1174-1175.
Kaplanski G, Retornaz F, Durand J, Soubeyrand J, "Central nervous system demyelination after vaccination against hepatitis B and HLA haplotype." J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1995 Jun; 58(6):758-759.
Matyszak MK, Perry VH, "Demyelination in the central nervous system following a delayed-type hypersensitivity response to bacillus Calmette-Guerin." Neuroscience 1995 Feb;64(4):967-977.
Tornatore CS, Richert JR, "CNS demyelination associated with diploid cell rabies vaccine." Lancet 1990 Jun 2;335(8701):1346-1347.
Adams, JM et al, "Neuromyelitis Optica: Severe Demyelination Occurring Years After Primary Smallpox Vaccinations", Rev Roum Neurol, 1973, 10:227-231. In 1988, Dietrich used MRI to show that developmentally delayed children had alterations in their myelin. Coulter described that central nervous system
damage can be exhibited as abnormal behavior of the child. In 1935, Thomas Rivers, experimental allergic encephalitis (EAE) can be the result of a viral or bacterial infection of the nervous system. "The fact of the matter is that it is a matter of record that it was known that vaccination produced encephalitis since 1926." The authors stated, "In regions in which there is no organized vaccination of the population, general paralysis is rare. ... It is impossible to deny a connection between vaccinations and the encephalitis (brain damage) which follows it." Vaccines have been linked to seizures, convulsions and epilepsy. Vaccines and Seizures:
Hirtz DG, Nelson KB, Ellenberg J H, "Seizures following childhood immunizations", Pediatr 1983 Jan; 102(1):14-18.
Cherry JD, Holtzman AE, Shields WD, Buch D, Nielsen, "Pertussis immunization and characteristics related to first seizures in infants and children,"J Pediatr 1993 Jun;122(6):900-903.
Coplan J, "Seizures following immunizations," J Pediatr 1983 Sep;103(3):496.
Barkin RM, Jabhour JT, Samuelson J S, "Immunizations, seizures, and subsequent evaluation," JAMA 1987 Jul 10;258(2):201. Griffin MR, et al, "Risk of seizures after measles-mumps-rubella immunization," Pediatrics 1991 Nov;88(5):881-885.
Griffin MR, et al, "Risk of seizures and encephalopathy after immunization with the diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine," JAMA 1990 Mar 23-30;263(12):1641-1645.
Cizewska S, Huber Z, Sluzewski W, "[Prophylactic inoculations and seizure activity in the EEG]," Neurol Neurochir Pol 1981 Sep-Dec;15(5-6):553-557. [Article in Polish]
Huttenlocher PR, Hapke RJ, "A follow-up study of intractable seizures in childhood." Ann Neurol 1990 Nov; 28(5):699-705.
Blumberg DA, "Severe reactions associated with diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine: detailed study of children with seizures, hypotonic-hypo-responsive episodes, high fevers, and persistent crying."Pediatrics 1993 Jun; 91(6):1158-1165.
Vaccines and Convulsions:
Prensky AL, et al, "History of convulsions and use of pertussis vaccine," J Pediatr 1985 Aug; 107(2):244-255.
Baraff LJ, "Infants and children with convulsions and hypotonic-hypo-responsive episodes following diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis immunization: follow-up evaluation," Pediatrics 1988 Jun; 81(6):789-794.
Jacobson V, "Relationship of pertussis immunization to the onset of epilepsy, febrile convulsions and central nervous system infections: a retrospective epidemiologic study," Tokai J Exp Clin Med 1988;13 Suppl: 137-142.
Cupic V,et al, "[Role of DTP vaccine in the convulsive syndromes in children]," Lijec Vjesn 1978 Jun; 100(6):345-348. [Article in Serbo-Croatian (Roman)] Pokrovskaia NIa, "[Convulsive syndrome in DPT vaccination (a clinico-experimental study)]," Pediatriia 1983 May;(5):37-39. [Article in Russian]
Vaccines and Epilepsy:
Ballerini, Ricci, B, et al, "On Neurological Complications of Vaccination, With Special Reference to Epileptic Syndromes," Riv Neurol, Jul-Aug 1973, 43:254-258.
Wolf SM, Forsythe A, "Epilepsy and mental retardation following febrile seizures in childhood," Acta Paediatr Scand 1989 Mar;78(2):291-295. Vaccines and Brain Swelling:
Iwasa, S et al, "Swelling of the Brain in Mice Caused by Pertussis ... Quantitative Determination and the Responsibility of the Vaccine", Jpn J Med Sci Biol, 1985 , 38(2):53-65.
Mathur R, Kumari S, "Bulging fontanel following triple vaccine." Indian Pediatr 1981 Jun;18(6):417-418.
Barry W, Lenney W, Hatcher G, "Bulging fontanelles in infants without meningitis." Arch Dis Child 1989 Apr;64(4):635-636. Shendurnikar N, "Bulging fontanel following DPT" Indian Pediatr 1986 Nov;23(11):960.
Gross TP, Milstien JB, Kuritsky JN, "Bulging fontanelle after immunization with diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine and diphtheria-tetanus vaccine." J Pediatr 1989 Mar;114(3):423-425.
Jacob J, Mannino F, "Increased intracranial pressure after diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis immunization." Am J Dis Child 1979 Feb;133(2):217-218. Dugmore, WN, "Bilateral Oedema at the Posterior Pole. Hypersensitivity Reaction to Alavac P injection." Br J Ophthalmol, Dec 1972, 55:848-849. Vaccines and Neurological Damage
Nedar P R, and Warren, R J, "Reported Neurological Disorders Following Live Measles Vaccine", 1968, Ped, 41:997-1001. Paradiso, G et al, "Multifocal Demyelinating Neuropathy after Tetanus Vaccine", Medicina (B Aires), 1990, 50(1):52-54.
Landrigan, PJ, Whitte, J, "Neurologic Disorders Following Live Measles-virus Vaccination", JAMA, Mar 26, 1973, v223(13):1459-1462. Turnbull, H M, "Encephalomyelitis Following Vaccination", Brit Jour Exper Path, 7:181, 1926.
Kulenkampff, M et al, "Neurological Complications of Pertussis Inoculation", Arch Dis Child, 1974, 49:46.
Strom, J, "Further Experience of Reactions, Especially of a Cerebral Nature in Conjunction with Triple Vaccination", Brit Med Jour, 1967, 4:320-323. Berg, J M, "Neurological Complications of Pertussis Immunization," Brit Med Jour, July 5,1958; p 24.
Bondarev, VN et al, "The Changes of the Nervous System in Children After Vaccination", Pediatria, Jun 1969; 48:20-24. Badalian, LO, "Vaccinal Lesions of the Nervous System in Children," Vop Okhr Materin Dets, Dec 1959, 13:54-59 Lorentz, IT, et al, "Post-Vaccinal Sensory Polyneuropathy with Myoclonus", Proc Aust Ass Neurol, 1969, 6:81-86.
Trump, R C, White, T R, "Cerebellar Ataxia Presumed Due To Live Attenuated Measles Virus Vaccine," JAMA, 1967, 199:165-166.
Allerdist, H, "Neurological Complications Following Measles Vaccination", Inter Symp, Brussels, 1978, Development Biol Std, Vol 43, 259-264. Finley, K H, "Pathogenesis of Encephalitis Occurring With Vaccination, Variola and Measles, Arch Neur and Psychologist, 1938; 39:1047-1054. Froissart, M et al, "Acute Meningoencephalitis Immediately after an Influenza Vaccination", Lille Med, Oct 1978, 23(8):548-551.
Pokrovskaia, Nia, et al, "Neurological Complications in Children From Smallpox Vaccination", Pediatriia, Dec 1978, (12):45-49.
Allerdist, H, "Neurological Complications Following Measles Virus Vaccination. Evaluation of the Cases seen Between 1971-1977", Monatsschr Kinderheilkd, Jan 1979, 127(1): 23-28.
Ehrengut, W et al, "On Convulsive Reactions Following Oral vaccination Against Polio", Klin Paediatr, May 1979, 191(3):261-270. Naumova, R P, et al, "Encephalitis Developing After Vaccination without a Local Skin Reaction", Vrach Delo, Jul 1979, (7):114-115. Goswamy, BM, "Neurological Complications After Smallpox Vaccination", J Ass Phys India, Jan 1969, 17:41-43.
Schchelkunov, SN et al, "The Role of Viruses in the Induction of Allergic Encephalomyelitis," Dokl Akad Nauk SSSR, 1990,315(1):252-255. [Vaccines contain viruses, too]
Walker AM, "Neurologic events following diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis immunization," Pediatrics 1988 Mar;81(3):345-349.
Shields WD, et al, "Relationship of pertussis immunization to the onset of neurologic disorders: a retrospective epidemiologic study," J Pediatr 1988 Nov; 113(5):801-805.
Wilson J, "Proceedings: Neurological complications of DPT inoculation in infancy," Arch Dis Child 1973 Oct; 48(10):829-830.
Iakunin IuA, "[Nervous system complications in children after preventive vaccinations]," Pediatriia 1968 Nov; 47(11):19-26. [Article in Russian] Greco D, et al, "Case-control study on encephalopathy associated with diphtheria-tetanus immunization in Campania, Italy," Bull World Health Organ
1985;63(5):919-925.
Ehrengut W at Institute of Vaccinology and Virology, Hamburg, Germany states, "Bias in the evaluation of CNS complications following pertussis
immunization are the following: 1) Notifications of post-immunization adverse events, 2) Publications by vaccine producers on the frequency of adverse reactions, 3) Comparison of permanent brain damage after DPT and DT immunization, 4) Pro-immunization, 5) Immunization associated viral encephalitis, 6) Accuracy of statistics, 7) Personal. A review of these points indicates an underestimation of CNS complications after pertussis immunization."
Reference: Ehrengut W, "Bias in evaluating CNS complications following pertussis immunization." Acta Paediatr Jpn, 1991 Aug; 33(4):421-427. The Mumps Vaccine and Neurological Disorders:
1987; 295:264-67.
Thomas, E. "A case of mumps meningitis: A complication of vaccination?" Journal of the Canadian Medical Association 1988; 138:135.
Champagne, S., et al. "A case of mumps meningitis: a post-immunization complication?" Canadian Disease Weekly Report 1988; 13-35:155-156. Ehrengut, W. "Mumps vaccine and meningitis." Lancet 1989; 2:751.
Von Muhlendahl, K.E. "Mumps meningitis following measles, mumps and rubella immunisations." Lancet (August 12, 1989), p. 394. Cizman, M., et al. "Aseptic meningitis after vaccination against measles and mumps." Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal 1989; 8:302-308.
McDonald, J., et al. "Clinical and epidemiological features of mumps meningo-encephalitis and possible vaccine-related disease." Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal (November 1989), pp. 751-754.
Gray, J.A., et al. "Mumps meningitis following measles, mumps, and rubella immunisation." Lancet 1989; i:98. Gray, J.A., et al. "Mumps vaccine meningitis." Lancet 1989; i:927.
Murray, M.W., et al. "Mumps meningitis after measles, mumps, and rubella immunisation." Lancet 1989; ii:877. \
"Mumps meningitis and MMR vaccination." [Editorial] Lancet 1989; ii:1015-1016.
Forsey, T., et al. "Mumps viruses and mumps, measles, and rubella vaccine." British Medical Journal 1989; 299:1340. Forsey, T., et al. "Mumps vaccines and meningitis." Lancet 1992; 340:980.
Miller, E., et al. "Risk of aseptic meningitis after measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine in U.K. children." Lancet 1993; 341:979. Sawada, et al. Lancet 1993; 342:371.
The Mumps Vaccine and Meningitis Attack Rates:
Sugiura, A., et al. "Aseptic meningitis as a complication of mumps vaccination." Journal of Pediatric Infectious Diseases 1991; 10:209-213. [1 case of meningitis per 2000 doses of mumps vaccine.]
Fujinaga, T., et al. "A prefecture-wide survey of mumps meningitis associated with measles, mumps and rubella vaccine." Journal of Pediatric Infectious Diseases 1991; 10:204-209. [6 cases of meningitis per 2000 doses of mumps vaccine.]
Colville, A., et al. "Mumps meningitis and measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine." Lancet 1992; 340:786. [1 case of meningitis per 3800 doses of mumps vaccine.]
The Mumps Vaccine and Diabetes:
Sultz, H.A., et al. "Is mumps virus an etiologic factor in juvenile diabetes mellitus?" Journal of Pediatrics 1975; 86:654-656. Sinaniotis, C.A., et al. "Diabetes mellitus after mumps vaccination (letter)." Archives of Disease in Childhood 1975; 50:749-750. Quast, U., et al. "Vaccine-induced mumps-like diseases." Developments in Biological Standardization 1979; 43:269-272.
Otten, A., et al. "Mumps, mumps vaccination, islet cell antibodies and the first manifestation of diabetes mellitus type I." Behring Institute Mitteilungen 1984; 75:83-88.
Helmke, K., et al. "Islet cell antibodies and the development of diabetes mellitus in relation to mumps infection and mumps vaccination." Diabetologia 1986; 29:30-33.
