Regular Flu Vaccine Actually INCREASES Risk of Swine Flu

Published works/trials of interest
Post Reply
User avatar
kenobewan
Registered User
Posts: 18130
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: Australia

Post by kenobewan » Thu Jul 07, 2011 7:34 am

Some pediatricians taking stand for vaccine program

A small but growing number of parents think vaccines against childhood diseases are unsafe and are refusing or delaying shots for their children, despite the discrediting of a medical study linking vaccines and autism that stirred alarm.

Ground zero in the debate is the pediatrician's office.

Some frustrated pediatricians are drawing a line in the sand by requiring parents in their medical practices to vaccinate their children or seek health care elsewhere, a position that rubs some medical professionals the wrong way.

Among those taking a stand are the eight pediatricians of Northwestern Children's Practice in Chicago. They no longer see children whose parents refuse to follow the childhood immunization schedule developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Academy of Pediatrics. A letter and email sent to parents this year announced the policy, which went into effect in June.

"All of the available research shows that the safest and most effective way to vaccinate children is on the schedule set by the CDC and AAP," said Dr. Scott Goldstein, one of the pediatricians. "To go against that schedule goes against proven scientific research and puts patients who do follow the schedule at risk."

So far, fewer than a dozen families have chosen to leave the practice of about 5,000 to 6,000 patients, said Goldstein, who participates in the Illinois Immunization Patient Advocacy Leadership Initiative run by the Illinois chapter of the AAP.

Statistics show that the vast majority of parents support vaccination, regarded by many physicians as one of the greatest success stories in public health. But the number of parents resisting shots for their children has been increasing.

"Our data clearly shows that in most counties, the percentage of parents seeking (vaccine) waivers has gone up over the last 10 years," said Dr. Douglas S. Diekema, referring to statistics from his home state of Washington. "I think that reflects what's going on in the nation."

Diekema, lead author of an AAP policy paper, Responding to Parental Refusals of Immunization of Children, said it's too early to know if the trend will continue because statistics were gathered before the medical journal Lancet more than a year ago retracted a highly publicized study that suggested that the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine could cause autism.

The 1998 report by Dr. Andrew Wakefield, whose British medical license was revoked last year, had an immediate impact on vaccination rates. A study last year in the journal Pediatrics reported that about 12 percent of parents have declined at least one recommended vaccine.

Of those who refused a vaccine, human papilloma was the most commonly refused, followed by varicella (chickenpox), meningococcal conjugate and MMR.

Diekema said vaccine refusals deeply trouble many physicians. About 5 percent to 10 percent of pediatricians have discharged a family if, after educational efforts, parents still withheld permission for an immunization, he said.

But the AAP and its Illinois chapter encourage pediatricians to continue to provide care to children whose parents are unwilling to follow the vaccination schedule.

"Families with doubts about immunization should still have access to good medical care, and maintaining the relationship in the face of disagreement conveys respect and at the same time allows the child access to medical care," the AAP policy states. "Furthermore, a continuing relationship allows additional opportunity to discuss the issue of immunization over time."

Unvaccinated children are vulnerable to potentially fatal but preventable diseases, and they also can put the health of others at risk.

This year, the U.S. has recorded the highest number of measles cases since 1996: 118 through May, according to the CDC. Most of the cases were linked to people who got measles overseas, and most, but not all, were unvaccinated.

Overall, vaccination rates remain high in Illinois schools, at 98 percent. But a recent Tribune analysis of public and private schools found that the immunization rate against certain diseases fell below 60 percent in some schools, and the number of schools below 90 percent for measles, mumps, polio, rubella or the diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis vaccination more than doubled between 2003 and 2010, from 83 to 198.

Health officials aim for an immunization rate of no lower than 90 percent in order to prevent epidemics, and say clusters of unvaccinated people weaken the "herd immunity" made possible through vaccines. That raises the risk of disease outbreaks.

Those who cannot be vaccinated, such as infants too young to get all their shots and children with underlying medical problems, rely on herd immunity, as do children who have gotten their shots but don't develop immunity.

Dr. Minal Giri, medical director of Melrose Park Pediatrics, said only a handful of parents expressed concern after her medical practice implemented a vaccine policy in fall 2008.

"The impetus behind the policy was to protect our patients," she said. "We have newborns, we have pregnant moms, we have kids with cancer who are immune-compromised, and it is a risk for them to have people coming in who have not been vaccinated."

Experts say educating parents is paramount.

"Pediatricians need to do a better job of letting parents know the risks of not getting vaccinated," Diekema said. "Parents don't have a lot of first-hand experience with these diseases anymore."

http://www.latimes.com/health/ct-x-0706 ... 7793.story

User avatar
kenobewan
Registered User
Posts: 18130
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: Australia

Post by kenobewan » Fri Jul 08, 2011 7:39 am

L.A. Unified takes new tack on whooping cough vaccine

Los Angeles school nurses on Wednesday exhausted their entire supply of 600 doses of thewhoopingcoughvaccine on students who began their academic year this week at area campuses that are on a year-round schedule.

But officials came up with a new strategy that they hope will keep hundreds of students in class. If students return signed consent forms from parents or guardians, they can remain in school until the school district receives more vaccine doses, said Kimberly Uyeda, the district's director of student medical services.

The vaccine, which comes in the form of the Tdap booster shot, is mandatory for students in grades seven through 12 under a state law that was approved last fall and took effect July 1. Without it, students wouldn't be allowed to remain in school, unless they applied for an exemption related to personal beliefs.

More than half of the 8,700 Los Angeles-area students who began school Tuesday either hadn't obtained the vaccine or couldn't verify that they had. The situation at Huntington Park High was the worst, with 76% of the 2,420 students not cleared for the vaccine.

The other schools opening Tuesday in the L.A. Unified School District were Fremont High School in South Los Angeles, Bell High School, Gage Middle School in Huntington Park and Ochoa Learning Center in Cudahy.

In the fall, when most district schools open, more than 250,000 students will need to have been vaccinated.

The district has ordered 8,000 doses of Tdap—for tetanus, diphtheria andpertussis, or whooping cough—through a federal program that provides free vaccines for the uninsured and those enrolled in state-subsidized medical care, Uyeda said. Nearly all students at the year-round schools would qualify.

In addition, county health workers vaccinated about 135 students at Fremont on Tuesday and will return Thursday. The district dispatched 23 extra nurses to affected schools to review vaccination records on Tuesday. By Wednesday, they also were giving shots.

L.A. Unified is not alone in trying to get the word out.

In Riverside County, the Murrieta Valley, Hemet and Corona-Norco school districts required parents to provide proof that they had vaccinated their child or obtained an exemption before they could receive their child's class schedule, said Ken August, a spokesman for the California Department of Public Health.

In Stockton, some schools promoted vaccination at school dances and other events.

In Fresno, the Central Unified School District began working with parents to immunize students in May and recently reported an 80% vaccination rate, August said.

"We know that parents are very busy, and we have been concerned that some may not make time to have their child vaccinated until right before school starts," August said. "We really want parents to understand they should not wait."

Last year's epidemic of whooping cough was the largest to hit the state in decades, and health officials said unimmunized teenagers were a factor in the disease's spread.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me ... ?track=rss

User avatar
kenobewan
Registered User
Posts: 18130
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: Australia

Post by kenobewan » Sat Jul 09, 2011 7:53 am

Natural antibody discovery paves way for single universal flu vaccine

Washington, July 08 (ANI): Scientists at the Scripps Research Institute and Dutch biopharmaceutical company Crucell have reported that annually changing flu vaccines with their hit-and-miss effectiveness may soon give way to a single, near-universal flu vaccine.

They describe an antibody that, in animal tests, can prevent or cure infections with a broad variety of influenza viruses, including seasonal and potentially pandemic strains.

The finding showed that the influenza subtypes neutralized with the new antibody include H3N2, strains of which killed an estimated one million people in Asia in the late 1960s.

“Together this antibody and the one we reported in 2009 have the potential to protect people against most influenza viruses,” said Ian Wilson, who is the Hansen Professor of Structural Biology and a member of the Skaggs Institute for Chemical Biology at Scripps Research, as well as senior author of the new paper with Crucell’s chief scientific officer Jaap Goudsmit.

Crucell is about to begin initial clinical trials of CR6261 in human volunteers, and the company expects eventually to begin similar trials of CR8020. If those trials succeed, aside from a vaccine the two antibodies could be combined and used in a “passive immunotherapy” approach.

The study is detailed in the journal Science Express. (ANI)

http://truthdive.com/2011/07/08/Natural ... ccine.html

User avatar
kenobewan
Registered User
Posts: 18130
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: Australia

Post by kenobewan » Sun Jul 10, 2011 7:28 am

FDA approves Glaxo combo vaccine for seniors

The Food and Drug Administration said Friday it approved GlaxoSmithKline's combination vaccine Boostrix for a new use in patients 65 and older.

Boostrix offers protection against tetanus, diphtheria and whooping cough. It was previously approved as a booster vaccine for adolescents ages 10 to 18 and for adults ages 19 to 64.

Currently there are individual vaccines to prevent each of the diseases, but the FDA said Boostrix is the first vaccine approved to prevent all three in the senior age group.

Whooping cough can linger for weeks in older patients, who usually recover from it. But they can spread it to not-yet-vaccinated infants who can die from the bacterial infection, also called pertussis.

"Pertusis is a highly contagious disease, and outbreaks have occurred among the elderly in nursing homes and hospitals," said Karen Midthun, of the FDA's center for biologics evaluation. "With this approval, adults 65 and older now have the opportunity to receive a vaccine that prevents pertussis, as well as tetanus and diphtheria."

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financia ... BP0O80.htm

User avatar
kenobewan
Registered User
Posts: 18130
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: Australia

Post by kenobewan » Mon Jul 11, 2011 7:14 am

Putting Vaccines to the Test

Measuring gene and protein expression levels throughout the body, researchers can predict who will muster up a rousing immune response to the flu virus just a few days after vaccination, and presumably be better protected against a subsequent infection. The findings, published yesterday (July 10) in Nature Immunology, could explain why vaccines work in some patients but not others, and provide general principles to determine which vaccines will be most effective in a given population.

The approach—using system-wide expression data to predict immune response—is new, and could lead to improved vaccine development, said Sanae Sasaki, an immunologist at Stanford University, who was not involved in the study. “If they can find a key factor that is related [to] immune response, maybe they can find an alternative [vaccine] to induce the immune system” in people who do not have a robust immune response.

Vaccine trials are often slow and expensive, because researchers must vaccinate thousands of people and then wait until some get sick to see if the prevention was successful, said Bali Pulendran, an immunologist at Emory University and co-author of the study. Several years ago, Pulendran and his colleagues began wondering whether system-wide gene and protein expression could predict immune response and thus speed up the clinical trial process.

In 2009, the team used gene and protein expression data to predict immune response to the yellow fever vaccine, identifying a suite of specific markers that could forecast the vaccine’s effectiveness in a given patient. But because that vaccine uses a live virus that replicates inside the host body, it wasn’t clear that the same approach would work for inactivated virus or carbohydrate vaccines.

To test these other vaccine types, Pulendran and colleagues took blood samples from 56 healthy young adults who received either an inactivated influenza or a live attenuated influenza vaccine. At 3 days and a week after vaccination, the researchers measured subjects’ levels of gene expression and inflammatory chemicals known to play a role in immune response. They used mathematical modeling to pinpoint changes in several thousand genes, including several B-cell associated genes, in subjects that went on to have more robust antibody production a month later, regardless of which vaccine they had received.

“We initially began having no preconceived ideas of what genes were important, but as this thing progressed, we could come up with signatures that could predict vaccine efficacy,” Pulendran said. In addition, gene expression analyses revealed noticeable differences that could explain why those vaccinated with the inactivated virus mounted a stronger immune response than those who received attenuated live virus.

The new approach could be used to vet early vaccine candidates in small studies before investing in costly Phase III trials, Pulendran said. Furthermore, researchers can use the technique to retrospectively analyze data to see why some patients responded to a vaccine when others didn’t, he added, which may provide clues for improving the vaccine’s efficacy. Ultimately, the team hopes to deduce general principles about the gene and protein expression that signal an effective immune response for a wide variety of vaccines, and is currently studying whether the approach will work for other existing vaccines, including malaria and shingles.

Follow-up work should also test “individuals who are immune-compromised—the elderly, very young children, or infected individuals—where we need to see why vaccines work less well,” added Rafick-Pierre Sékaly, director of the Vaccine and Gene Therapy Institute of Florida and an author of an accompanying News & Views piece in Nature Immunology.

http://the-scientist.com/2011/07/10/put ... -the-test/

User avatar
kenobewan
Registered User
Posts: 18130
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: Australia

Post by kenobewan » Sat Jul 16, 2011 7:30 am

7 reasons schools should NOT mandate vaccines

(NaturalNews) Health authorities do not believe that your child is entitled to be educated unless he or she has first been indoctrinated and intoxicated by the demigods of vaccination. Parents who question the necessity and morality of this dangerous and invasive policy are derisively informed that unvaccinated children are a scourge on society. We are told that everyone -- your children and mine -- must be vaccinated or the "protective cocoon" will fail. Apparently, vaccines are a colossal waste of technology unless market share is complete!

Vaccines are not legally required for your child to enter school. Each state offers legal exemptions to "mandatory" injections. Health authorities rarely inform parents of their rights. If you are opposed to vaccines for your child, read your state vaccine laws and submit an exemption.

Some parents are not sure whether to vaccinate their children; it seems like a difficult decision. It may also be scary to oppose the authorities. However, vaccination may not be the right choice for your family. To help you see through the nonsense and confusion, I have compiled 7 reasons schools should NOT mandate vaccines.

1. Parents should not be obligated to play Russian Roulette with their children.

Vaccines pose serious risks. These hazards are acknowledged by vaccine manufacturers in their product inserts, documented in numerous studies, substantiated by the federal government's Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), and confirmed anecdotally by parents. For example, the MMR vaccine manufacturer concedes that diabetes, thrombocytopenia (a serious blood disorder), arthritis, encephalitis (brain inflammation), Guillain-Barre syndrome (paralysis), and death, have all been reported during clinical trials of its vaccine.

Peer-reviewed studies link the haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) vaccine to epidemics of type 1 diabetes, the hepatitis B vaccine to autoimmune and neurological disorders, and the flu vaccine to paralytic ailments. These are just a few examples. Medical and scientific journals contain hundreds of other peer-reviewed studies linking vaccines to debilitating ailments. (Many of these studies are summarized in the Vaccine Safety Manual.)

In addition, every year approximately 25,000 people file vaccine adverse reaction reports with the CDC. In the past 5 years, more than 21,000 young American females filed adverse reaction reports after receiving the new HPV vaccine. Thousands of these cases were labeled "serious," requiring hospitalization, resulting in life-threatening disabilities or death.

VAERS is a passive reporting system, so the number of people believed to be hurt by vaccines is vastly underreported. According to Dr. David Kessler, former head of the FDA, "only about 1 percent of serious events -- adverse drug reactions -- are reported."(1) This is confirmed by the Thinktwice Global Vaccine Institute, which receives unsolicited personal stories of vaccine damage every day. The families telling these dreadful stories rarely file official reports.

Of course, these stories do not constitute "proof" of vaccine damage -- at least no more than a child's cry after skinning his knee is "proof" of pain. However, patterns of adverse vaccine reactions are easily observed when unrelated families consistently report similar stories of healthy children prior to their shots and hospitalized children after their shots. These patterns tell a larger story.

A medical industry that errs on the side of denial rather than concern is backward and criminally negligent. In an enlightened healthcare community, we would listen to the larger story with sincerity, and opt to protect additional children from harm. Pretending that serious reactions to vaccines are rare does not make it true, incapacitates our children, and degrades our society. Since reputed vaccine risk-to-benefit ratios are bogus, and pharmaceutical shots are considerably more unsafe than officially acknowledged, it is morally unconscionable to mandate vaccines for entry into an educational institution.

2. Unvaccinated children cannot threaten vaccinated children if the shots are effective.

When students contract disease, vaccine proponents are quick to blame the outbreaks on unvaccinated children. Yet, the official data tells a different story: a majority of cases occur in fully vaccinated populations. Dr. William Atkinson, former senior epidemiologist with the CDC, admitted that "measles transmission has been clearly documented among vaccinated persons. In some large outbreaks...over 95% of cases have a history of vaccination."(2)

Similar problems with vaccine efficacy plague other vaccines as well. For example, in a recent outbreak of pertussis, 4 of every 5 people who contracted the disease were vaccinated against it.(3) In a large outbreak of mumps in the United States, 92% of the cases were in people who were vaccinated against mumps.(4) These outbreaks provide evidence that herd immunity -- the idea that when a proportion of people within a targeted population are immune to a disease, transmission rates are reduced -- may not apply to vaccinated populations. Vaccination and immunity are not synonymous.

Authorities claim that vaccines won't work for society unless a very high number of people in the targeted population -- school children -- take them. Apparently, unvaccinated children are a threat to the group. But this does not make sense. By this reasoning, the unvaccinated -- who are being coerced into taking the shots -- are somehow responsible for protecting the vaccinated. How ironic!

If some students are vaccinated, that's their family's choice. If other students are unvaccinated, that's their family's informed decision as well. Vaccinated students take their chances hoping to avoid serious adverse reactions, while unvaccinated students risk contracting the disease. However, if vaccinated students contract the disease, the shot was ineffective, NOT the fault of unvaccinated students. Officials ignore their own ineffective vaccine, choosing instead to smear the unvaccinated. Outrage should be vented in the proper direction -- at those who developed ineffective shots and falsely promoted a defective product.

3. Some vaccines required for school entry are clearly unnecessary.

Our children have become captive instruments of the vaccine industry, accessible by mandate to satisfy other purposes. For example, children rarely develop hepatitis B. In the United States, less than 1% of all reported hepatitis B cases occur in persons less than 15 years of age.

When the hepatitis B vaccine was initially introduced, 87% of pediatricians did NOT believe it was needed by their patients. Doctors knew that children rarely develop this disease. According to the hepatitis B vaccine manufacturer, children are targeted "because a vaccination strategy limited to high-risk individuals has failed."(5) In other words, because high-risk groups -- sexually promiscuous adults and IV drug users -- are difficult to reach or have rejected this vaccine, authorities are targeting children.

Authorities believe that by vaccinating children (a low-risk herd) they will protect unvaccinated adults (a high-risk herd). Since children are unlikely to contract hepatitis B, and studies show that vaccine efficacy declines after a few years, children are being subjected to all of the risks of the hepatitis B vaccine without the expected benefit.

The chickenpox vaccine is another drug that should not have been mandated for all children. It was available since the 1970s but authorities were reluctant to license and promote it because the disease is rarely dangerous and confers lifelong immunity. The vaccine, however, contains a weakened form of the virus; once injected, it remains in the body indefinitely. Authorities were concerned that it could reawaken years after the vaccination and cause serious problems. (Today, devastating epidemics of shingles have been linked to overuse of the chickenpox vaccine.)

In addition, the chickenpox vaccine was originally developed for children with leukemia or compromised immune systems, a small population at greater risk for complications from the disease. But vaccine manufacturers quickly sought a wider market for their potentially lucrative product. A study conducted by the CDC in 1985 determined that the vaccine was not necessary. However, in 1995 it was promoted as "cost-effective" -- rather than essential -- because moms and dads would not have to miss work and stay home (an average of 1 day) to care for their sick children. It was licensed shortly thereafter.

Before the chickenpox vaccine was licensed, doctors would encourage parents to expose their children to the disease while they were young. Doctors recommended this course of action because they knew that chickenpox is relatively harmless when contracted prior to the teenage years (but more dangerous in adolescents and adults). However, after the vaccine was licensed, the CDC began warning parents about the dangers of chickenpox. Doctors stopped encouraging parents to expose their children to this disease. Instead, they were told to have their children vaccinated against chickenpox.

These examples confirm that some vaccines required for school entry are NOT essential. School officials have become henchmen for the vaccine industry. Low-risk children are being force-vaccinated to protect high-risk adults or to increase the vaccine manufacturer's profits. Blackmailing families by threatening to withhold a child's education for refusing needless vaccines is a moral outrage.

4. Conflicts of interest permeate the vaccine industry.

Vaccine recommendations and other important healthcare decisions that affect our nation's children are frequently based on ulterior motives. Safety and protection are NOT always top priorities. Instead, authorities may be influenced by monetary considerations or the urge to manipulate undesirable study results. For example, in June of 2000, two separate yet highly significant events rocked the vaccine industry:

Event #1: Congress held a hearing to determine if "the entire process [of licensing and recommending vaccines] has been polluted and the public trust has been violated." Two years earlier, vaccine authorities had evidence that a new vaccine under consideration (for diarrhea!) was dangerous, yet that didn't stop them from licensing and recommending it for every child in the USA. Shortly thereafter, this vaccine was linked to numerous cases of a life-threatening intestinal blockage and baby deaths.

After this vaccine was withdrawn from the market, Congress discovered that 60% of the FDA advisory committee members who voted to license this defective vaccine, and 50% of the CDC advisory committee members who voted to recommend it for every child in the country, had financial ties to the drug company that produced the vaccine or to two other companies developing their own potentially lucrative competing vaccines. For example, an FDA committee member who voted to license the defective vaccine had received more than $250,000 per year in research funds from the drug company that made the vaccine.

A CDC committee member who voted to recommend the defective vaccine for every child was paid by the industry to travel around the country teaching doctors that vaccines are safe. In addition, he held a potentially lucrative patent on a similar vaccine under development! Despite this important Congressional expose', no one at the FDA, CDC, or U.S. Department of Health and Human Services admitted a problem, and claimed that it's perfectly acceptable for committee members with obvious conflicts of interest to make healthcare recommendations for every child in this country -- even when they stand to benefit financially from their own decisions!

Event #2: Just one week prior to the Congressional investigation into conflicts of interest within the vaccine industry, a top-secret meeting of high-level officials from the CDC, FDA, World Health Organization (WHO), and representatives from every major vaccine manufacturer, was held at the secluded Simpsonwood conference center in Norcross, Georgia. They had gathered to discuss an alarming new study that confirmed a link between thimerosal (mercury) in childhood vaccines and neurological damage, including recent dramatic increases in autistic spectrum disorders. According to the lead researcher, "We have found statistically significant relationships between the exposures and outcomes."(5)

Since 1991, when the CDC and FDA started requiring babies to receive multiple doses of thimerosal-laced hepatitis B, Hib, and the already mandated diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis shots (via DPT and DTaP), cases of autism skyrocketed. Dr. Robert Chen, head of vaccine safety for the CDC, congratulated the group for their apparent success thus far at being able to keep the incriminating data out of "less responsible hands." Dr. John Clements, WHO vaccine advisor, was more blunt, declaring that perhaps the CDC study "should not have been done at all."(6)

Instead of warning the public and recalling the dangerous vaccines, this small group of federal health officials and vaccine industry executives spent the weekend calculating how to cover up the truth -- and followed through on their plot over the next few years.

First, the CDC's vast database on childhood vaccines was removed from public access so that unbiased researchers could not confirm the study results. Next, the incriminating data from the original study was reworked, and the new version was published in a peer-reviewed journal. However, this time "no consistent significant associations were found between thimerosal-containing vaccines and neurodevelopmental outcomes."

Finally, to complete the deception, the CDC would need additional "proof" that thimerosal-laced vaccines are safe. According to Dr. Gordon Douglas, the director of strategic planning at the National Institutes of Health (and former president of vaccinations for Merck, a major vaccine manufacturer), four new studies were currently taking place "to rule out the proposed link between autism and thimerosal."

These two events -- the Congressional hearing on conflicts of interest within the vaccine licensing and recommendation process, and the secret Simpsonwood conference -- confirm that U.S. health authorities have lost their ethical bearings and have NOT made our children's safety a top priority. Requiring vaccines for school entry when they may have been added to the childhood immunization schedule simply to line the pockets of powerful authorities is dangerous and corrupt. Withholding a child's education for refusing vaccines when crucial studies purporting to prove their safety are bogus, is both reprehensible and indefensible. Thus, every family must remain free to accept or reject vaccines.

5. Recovery from natural disease provides advantages over artificial immunity.

Measles, mumps, rubella and chickenpox usually confer permanent immunity; the child will rarely contract these ailments again. In contrast, vaccines provide temporary immunity; protection is incomplete, requiring booster doses. Vaccinated children are still susceptible to the disease. Studies also indicate that childhood diseases can have a favorable effect on the child's immune system. When children overcome illnesses on their own, their immune systems are stimulated: they build resistance to other diseases in later life. For example, several studies show that women are less likely to develop ovarian cancer if they have had mumps in childhood.

6. Few people utilize exemptions.

In 1991, the CDC concluded that outbreaks of disease can be avoided if 70% to 80% of children are vaccinated. A 1992 study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association confirmed that vaccination rates of "80% or less" should be sufficient to protect against disease outbreaks. Most parents obediently follow their doctor's orders and vaccinate their children. In addition, schools rarely publicize legal exemptions to "mandatory" vaccines. Thus, only about 2% of families file waivers to recommended shots. This number could substantially increase without threatening the notion of herd immunity.

7. Developed nations that require the most vaccines have the worst infant death rates.

In the United States, healthcare authorities, pediatricians, and school officials use coercive tactics to increase vaccination rates. Parents are intimidated and their children threatened with removal from school if vaccines are not "up to date." Other countries recommend fewer vaccines and do not require them for school entry; medical intervention is not compulsory, free will is honored, yet epidemics do not occur. Outbreaks of common ailments are manageable without requiring vaccines for school entry.

A new study published in Human and Experimental Toxicology -- I co-authored this paper -- found that developed nations with higher (worse) infant mortality rates tend to give their infants more vaccine doses. For example, the United States requires infants to receive 26 vaccines (the most in the world) yet more than 6 U.S. infants die per every 1000 live births. In contrast, Sweden and Japan administer 12 vaccines to infants, the least amount, and report less than 3 deaths per 1000 live births.

Our study found "a high statistically significant correlation between increasing number of vaccine doses and increasing infant mortality rates." This raises important questions: Would fewer vaccines administered to infants reduce the number of infant deaths? Would fewer vaccines given to school children actually improve their health? Mandatory vaccination for school entry must end.

http://www.naturalnews.com/032997_manda ... hools.html

User avatar
kenobewan
Registered User
Posts: 18130
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: Australia

Post by kenobewan » Wed Jul 20, 2011 7:16 am

Weather may be responsible for severe flu season

EXPERTS are baffled by a fourfold increase in the number of people suffering flu - even before the usual peak season in August and September.

Already nearly 8000 cases have been reported compared with about 2000 at the same time last year. The increase has disproportionately affected Queensland, NSW and South Australia.

Alan Hampson, an adviser to the World Health Organisation and the federal government on influenza, said the rates in summer and autumn were higher than any in the past decade.

In January and February more than 1700 people were recorded with flu, compared with fewer than 300 the year before. ''We might expect a severe flu season," he said.

Part of the reason could be the bad weather and flooding in parts of the country, including Queensland, where the outbreak is worst. It was not understood why flu seemed to be worse during high rainfall and cold weather, said Dr Hampson, who is the chairman of the Influenza Specialist Group, an expert team that aims to reduce the impact of flu and receives funding from drug companies that produce vaccines.

It could be the weather or other factors such as people spending more time indoors.

Dr Hampson said people at high risk from flu, such as the elderly or those with chronic health conditions, still had a limited time to be vaccinated.

If people took antivirals within the first day or two of illness they might reduce its length and severity, he said.

The head of the epidemiology unit at the Victorian Infectious Diseases Reference Laboratory, Heath Kelly, said swine flu was still the dominant strain, and pregnant women and the very overweight were at extra risk.

But large numbers of people were not needing intensive care as had occurred during the swine flu pandemic in 2009. "We suspect widespread disease in the first wave, plus the vaccine, plus a second wave of disease, has left a lot of vulnerable people protected," Dr Kelly said.

Robert Booy, a professor of paediatrics and child health at the Children's Hospital at Westmead, and the University of Sydney, said a relatively mild flu season last year could have contributed to the higher rates.

"Having a quiet winter often leads to a bad winter because people lose immunity," Professor Booy said.

Parents should not be concerned about children having the vaccine as it was different from the one that caused some to experience fevers and fits last year, Professor Booy said.

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/weath ... 1hncp.html

User avatar
kenobewan
Registered User
Posts: 18130
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: Australia

Post by kenobewan » Fri Jul 22, 2011 7:15 am

Bad flu season sparks vaccination call

A far west New South Wales health professional is expecting this year's flu season to get worse.

The Influenza Specialists Group says the number of diagnosed flu cases nationally is up four times the usual rate.

Clinical nurse consultant Carol George says the bad flu season has already been felt locally but people can do something to help themselves.

"It's not too late to get vaccinated, although it takes about a fortnight from the time you receive the vaccination until your body builds up the protection," she said.

"The peak period in our flu season is generally August and September.

"So even though our numbers are up from last year, we're still expecting them to continue rising through August and September."

Ms George says the local health system can handle the spike in flu cases.

"This spike is, as I say, higher than last year, it's something that we're concerned about," she said.

"We want the public to know about [it] so that they can take precautions and if they have ... thought about the vaccine and put it off, they know that this is not a good time to put it off.

"But it's certainly not beyond the capabilities of our health care system to look after the people who are ill and need it."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-21/b ... ll/2804054

User avatar
kenobewan
Registered User
Posts: 18130
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: Australia

Post by kenobewan » Sat Aug 06, 2011 6:39 am

Researchers make virus spread breakthrough

Newcastle scientists have had a massive breakthrough with the development of a technique that they say can stop viruses and bacteria multiplying in the body.

The team of researchers from Newcastle and Germany has developed compounds that inhibit 'clathrin', which is responsible for stimulating cell growth and the spread of infections.

The researchers say it will pave the way for new drugs to treat disease, cancer and neurological disorders.

Professor Adam McCluskey says the discovery means the virus cannot hijack cells and spread the disease throughout the body.

"What we've managed to do for the first time is develop compounds that block the action of clathrin," he said.

"So by blocking the action of clathrin we actually stop viruses getting in to the cells."

"We can block for example the entry of hepatitis C into a cell, we can block the entry of HIV into a cell."

Professor McCluskey says cancers, such as brain tumours, rely on clathrin to hijack cells and grow.

"With any drug discovery that allows us to sort of focus in on a protein's function we get that step closer to, not eradicating cancer, but maybe controlling it," he said.

"So every step we make in this basic science discovery puts us in a far, far better position to be smarter about how we deal with the drug.

"I mean, ideally we want a drug which will only target the bad guys."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-05/r ... =newcastle

User avatar
kenobewan
Registered User
Posts: 18130
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: Australia

Post by kenobewan » Sun Aug 07, 2011 7:06 am

Are we one step closer to a universal flu vaccine?

Unlike most vaccines, flu shots are something that most of us end up getting every year. The reason for that is that the influenza virus has a rapid rate of mutation, forcing companies that manufacture the vaccine to make their best guess as to which flu types will be more prevalent in a given season.

The results are pretty good, but not perfect — especially if the vaccine doesn't end up matching with the season's most commonly circulating viruses. The gold standard of flu shots, of course, would be a universal flu shot – a vaccine that doesn't have to be prepared seasonally and can provide protection against many more strains of the virus.

Now it looks like we may be one step closer – thanks to the human immune system itself.

A recent study published last month in Science described a rather remarkable discovery – some people who had been exposed to the H1N1 strain of flu produced antibodies that reacted to multiple strains of the flu.

This isn't the first time such an antibody has been discovered, but this particular antibody was much broader in scope than those described in previous studies. Moreover, the structure that the antibody binds to is one that's conserved across many viral strains, indicating that it's much less likely to mutate.

That means that a vaccine targeting the same site would provide much greater protection against flu viruses than the current vaccine.

Of course, an antibody by itself doesn't make for a vaccine. But studying the structure of the antibody and the protein on the flu virus that it targets could make it that much more likely for a universal vaccine to be developed.

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Health/201108 ... ne-110806/

User avatar
kenobewan
Registered User
Posts: 18130
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: Australia

Post by kenobewan » Mon Aug 08, 2011 7:32 am

Dear Parents: Why vaccines are vital

Dear Parents,

I'm afraid we have some work to do. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently published a report on childhood immunizations and our own state of Washington had the highest proportion of kindergartners who hadn't been vaccinated, at 6.2%. At the other end of the spectrum, Mississippi had the best performance with fewer than 1% of kids unvaccinated. That's right, Mississippi. Maybe we could learn a thing or two from the parents down there.

I know we've discussed this before, but please indulge me because it's really important. You've come up with all sorts of reasons to avoid vaccinating your children. There's the dad who says he doesn't want any junk from Big Pharma put into his kids. (Meanwhile, he loads them up with "natural" supplements like kelp and mega doses of vitamin C — as if that'll do any good against whooping cough.) There are the Chicken Littles of the world who believe there is a connection between vaccines and autism. Forgive me for being so politically incorrect, but that's absolute hogwash. This "theory" is based on a fraudulent paper that appeared in the British medical journal Lancet in 1998 and has since been retracted.

Time and again, vaccines have been shown to be safe and effective in preventing debilitating diseases. Smallpox has been eradicated from the general population thanks to vaccines. Likewise, polio, mumps, rubella, measles and other maladies have been relegated to the back burners of our healthcare minds because vaccines are so effective. But there are ugly stirrings of these diseases making a comeback, with outbreaks that have been deadly.

California recently endured the largest whooping cough outbreak in 65 years, sickening almost 9,500 people and killing 10 infants. So far this year, there have been more cases of measles in the United States than any year since 1996. This is not a harmless disease — 40% of people who get it need to be hospitalized.

You may think your children seem just fine without their vaccinations, but that's because of a phenomenon called "herd immunity." Let's say you live in a neighborhood where every kid has been immunized except yours. There's hardly any chance little Billy will contract whooping cough when he's out with his buddies because all of them are immune. In essence, this is immunization-by-proxy, and it takes advantage of everyone else's immunity. Rather than taking the high ground, you're sponging off the other parents on the block who chose to do the responsible thing. If, on the other hand, all the parents behaved like you and Susie came down with whooping cough, it would spread like wildfire through the playground.

You need to understand that your child does not live in a vacuum. He or she interacts with others everywhere. Unvaccinated children can be the vehicles for introducing deadly diseases into communities. Children with compromised immune systems who cannot be vaccinated are especially vulnerable.

I know, you think I'm biased. Guilty as charged. I believe prevention is the key to good health. It is far easier to prevent polio than to treat it, and the same goes for all the other diseases I've mentioned.

You may also suspect I'm in Big Pharma's pocket or that I am simply repeating the party line foisted upon me as a gullible medical student when in actual fact I should have been getting my information from that unbiased source of all good information, the Internet. Let me be clear: I am proud of my education at the University of Washington, a leading institution that is on the cutting edge of research.

If you want an unbiased view, I can direct you to a whole bunch of people who would be happy to fill you in: our senior citizens. They lived with the fear of these dread diseases (one octogenarian told me his dad took a 1,000-mile detour around Chicago when he heard there was a polio outbreak there in the 1930s). They rallied around a president stricken with polio (for those who need a history refresher, it was Franklin D. Roosevelt). They lost children and other loved ones to the diseases you are so nonchalant about. These are the ones who line up for their annual flu shots and ask when they are due for any other immunizations they may need. Yes, they have a healthy respect for these diseases. I wish you could catch some of their fear.

Those of you who know me may recall that I used to be a veterinarian. Vaccination is hugely important in the animal world as well. You wouldn't dream of allowing your dog to skip his rabies shot, on the off chance that he gets into a tussle with an infected bat. All I am asking is that you treat your children as well as your pets.

If you keep bringing your children to me, you must think I'm at least an OK doctor. So why won't you listen to me? I have toyed with the idea of asking you to find another doctor, but I prefer to keep you in my practice in the hopes that over time I will whittle down your resolve and get you to see that vaccination is about the single best advance in medicine — ever. That's why the Gates Foundation is pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into global immunization and disease eradication.

Now, how about if you put down that flyer on the evils of vaccination and pay me a visit. Let's talk.

Sincerely,

Your doctor

http://www.latimes.com/health/la-he-pra ... 0361.story

User avatar
kenobewan
Registered User
Posts: 18130
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: Australia

Post by kenobewan » Fri Aug 26, 2011 7:44 am

Teen vaccinations against cervical cancer lagging

ATLANTA – Only about half of the teenage girls in the U.S. have rolled up their sleeves for a controversial vaccine against cervical cancer — a rate well below those for two other vaccinations aimed at adolescents.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported Thursday that 49 percent of girls had gotten at least the first dose in the three-shot vaccination series against human papilloma virus, or HPV. The sexually-transmitted bug can cause cervical cancer and genital warts.

The reason for the low rate? Some experts think parents are uneasy with the sexual issues attached to the vaccination.

In contrast, the CDC said about two-thirds of teens have gotten shots for bacterial meningitis and tetanus, diphtheria and whooping cough.

http://yourlife.usatoday.com/health/sto ... 50136112/1

User avatar
kenobewan
Registered User
Posts: 18130
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: Australia

Post by kenobewan » Thu Feb 16, 2012 7:37 am

Flu shots with side-effects on offer again

A FLU vaccine banned for children and found to trigger the most side-effects in adults has again been selected for the nation's flu immunisation program, on the grounds an Australian-made product would guarantee supply.

Taxpayers will spend $117 million on a contract for Australian pharmaceutical giant CSL to supply the nation's seasonal and pandemic flu vaccines until 2016.

CSL's Fluvax product remains banned for children younger than five, having triggered febrile convulsions in one in 100 children in 2010. The federal Health Department's Therapeutic Goods Administration, which has yet to determine the cause of the fits in children, has released new data revealing Fluvax was four times more likely to trigger side-effects in adults than two rival vaccines.

The Australian can reveal that despite the finding, the Health Department has renewed CSL's contract to supply flu vaccines under the National Immunisation Program, which gives free flu shots to the over-65s, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, pregnant women, homeless people and children or adults with underlying health conditions such as impaired immunity, heart or respiratory disease and diabetes.

A Health Department spokeswoman said yesterday CSL was the only vaccine manufacturer able to guarantee sufficient supplies in time for the program to start next month. "CSL is the only onshore manufacturer of influenza vaccine and, as such, is the only supplier that can guarantee sufficient supply of influenza vaccine to allow the national vaccination program to commence on 15 March each year, and ensure protection of people well in advance of the influenza season," the spokeswoman said.

She said Fluvax would not be used in children younger than 10, who would be given Fluarix, which is manufactured by British-based GlaxoSmithKline, or Vaxigrip, which is made by French pharmaceutical company Sanofi.

Perth mother Kirsten Button, whose toddler Saba suffered brain damage after her Fluvax shot in 2010, said yesterday she was "shocked" the government would award the contract to CSL when it did not know why Fluvax had caused so many febrile convulsions. "What assurance does the public have, when they have not explained to us what happened with Fluvax in the first place?" Ms Button said.

She said Saba had been in perfect health before her flu shot, but 16 hours later was on life support, with brain injury and organ damage.

Now two months shy of her third birthday, Saba has epilepsy and is fed through a tube.

"She doesn't talk, she doesn't walk, she doesn't eat and she can't see properly," Ms Button said. However, the little girl does occasionally reward her parents with a smile.

CSL was awarded the $117m contract in December, and the information was published on the federal government's tender database last Friday.

Sanofi-Aventis was awarded a $69.5m contract while GlaxoSmithKline received a $14.7m contract - both to supply seasonal and pandemic flu vaccines for five years.

The contracts coincide with a new TGA review that reveals the risk of side-effects in adults from Fluvax in 2010 was "modestly higher" than for two rival brands.

Fluvax was 14.5 times more likely to cause a headache and nine times more likely to cause fatigue than Vaxigrip.

The data - based on an analysis of "adverse events" in adults vaccinated during the 2010 flu season - reveals Fluvax was 4.4 times more likely to cause vomiting and 10.7 times more likely to cause injection site pain than Influvac, made in The Netherlands for Abbott Australasia.

A CSL spokeswoman said the "key finding" of the TGA study was that "the safety profile of Fluvax in adolescents and adults continues to be acceptable, and that the vaccine therefore remains suitable for use in these age groups".

She said CSL was close to finishing its investigation into the cause of the convulsions, and would make the results public.

The Health spokeswoman said the TGA data did not show any adults suffered febrile convulsions after Fluvax, and most side-effects concerned pain around the injection area.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nationa ... 6272233348

User avatar
kenobewan
Registered User
Posts: 18130
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: Australia

Post by kenobewan » Fri Feb 17, 2012 6:33 am

CSL-linked experts reviewed flu vaccine

THE Health Department used immunisation experts with links to the nation's biggest drug company to review the safety of Australia's flu vaccines.

Two of the 12 members of the panel of experts and health officials that last week cleared the safety of Fluvax, manufactured by CSL, have also supervised clinical trials of CSL's flu vaccines.

Terry Nolan and Peter Richmond are the chairman and deputy chairman of the federal government's Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation.

The pair have previously stated they did not receive any personal funding from the CSL, which paid for the clinical trials through their research institutions. They were selected for the 12-member panel of ATAGI and Health Department officials who reviewed the safety of flu vaccines in adults.

The panel found the risk of side-effects from Fluvax was "likely to be modestly higher" than from rival brands Vaxigrip or Influvac. But it concluded that "Fluvax remains suitable for use" in the national immunisation program.

The Australian revealed on Thursday that CSL had won a $117m Health Department contract to supply the nation's seasonal and pandemic flu vaccines until 2016.

The other suppliers are Sanofi -- awarded a $69.5m contract -- and GlaxoSmithKline, which received a $14.7m contract.

The most recent minutes from ATAGI's meeting, last June, reveals that it wants free flu vaccines to be given to all children under the national immunisation program, which gives free flu shots to the elderly and at-risk groups.

"However, members were cognisant of issues relating to achieving high immunisation coverage rates in this age group, particularly in light of the increased occurrence of febrile convulsions related to the use of the CSL . . . influenza vaccine, Fluvax, which led to the suspension of use of all seasonal influenza vaccines in young children," the minutes state.

"ATAGI requested that the National Immunisation Committee consider issues relating to implementation of an annual influenza immunisation program for children aged six months to 59 months . . . who have a very high risk of complications from influenza."

Professor Nolan and Dr Richmond led a clinical trial of Fluvax in 298 children in 2005-06.

The results, reported in a medical journal in 2009, revealed that two three-year-old children had to be hospitalised after vomiting and a febrile convulsion.

Fluvax has been banned for the under-5s since 2010, when it was withdrawn after triggering febrile convulsions in 1 in 100 children.

The Health Department yesterday said it would "not be in the public interest" to preclude the researchers from advising on immunisation policy, because Australia did not have enough specialists to service both government and industry.

A spokeswoman said both ATAGI and the flu vaccine safety panel had policies in place to manage any conflict of interest.

"If government were precluded from sourcing advice from members of (the) finite pool of experts where they also have dealings with industry, the quality and depth of input available to government to inform its decisions would be reduced," she said.

Professor Nolan and Dr Richmond did not respond to questions from The Australian.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nationa ... 6273228061

User avatar
kenobewan
Registered User
Posts: 18130
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: Australia

Post by kenobewan » Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:23 am

Flu vaccines are good medicine

THE benefits of the flu vaccine will far outweigh the risk of side-effects, the AMA says.

The AMA yesterday welcomed the Federal Government giving pharmaceutical giant CSL a $117 million contract to supply seasonal and pandemic flu vaccines until 2016.

The Therapeutic Goods Administration late last year approved the use of CSL's Fluvax in people aged over 10.

This was despite a review that concluded the risk of side-effects from the vaccine was "likely to be modestly higher" in adults than two other products.

The vaccine has, however, been banned for use in children under five after it triggered febrile convulsions in some children in 2010.

AMA president Dr Steve Hambleton said the side-effects identified by the TGA were only minor and not sufficient to stop Fluvax from being used in Australia.

"There's no doubt that, (for people) above the age of 10, the benefits outweigh the risks in the vaccination program," he said.

"We've agreed with the conclusions of the TGA that it should be available."

A CSL spokeswoman denied recent claims Fluvax triggered the most side-effects in adults. Sharon McHale echoed the AMA's comment that the side-effects were only minor.

The federal Health Department also awarded contracts to British-based GlaxoSmithKline and French company Sanofi to provide vaccines Fluarix and Vaxigrip for children under 10.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/flu-jabs- ... 273301607#

Post Reply