[Article] Is Vaccine Refusal Worth The Risk?

Reason

Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2008
Messages
8,674
Health & Science
Is Vaccine Refusal Worth The Risk?

Morning Edition, May 26, 2009 ·

Over the past 10 years, a highly contagious and sometimes fatal bacterial disease once thought to have been eradicated from the U.S. has re-emerged, threatening the youngest and weakest. Pertussis is a bacterial infection of the lungs and spreads from person to person through moisture droplets in the air, probably from coughs or sneezes. A person with pertussis develops a severe cough that usually lasts four to six weeks or longer.

Health officials cite an increase in the incidence of pertussis, particularly among infants and teenagers. In 1976, there were just over 1,000 reported cases of pertussis in the United States; by 2004, it had climbed to nearly 26,000 cases; and between 2000 and 2005, there were 140 deaths resulting from pertussis in the U.S.

At the same time, studies and anecdotal reports from doctors nationwide report an increase in the number of parents refusing to vaccinate their children against childhood diseases.

Much of this refusal has to do with perceived vaccine safety issues, such as purported associations between vaccines and autism, attention deficit disorder, seizures and epilepsy. None of these concerns have been upheld in research. In fact, all scientific studies show vaccines to be highly effective and safe, with only rare, moderate, adverse side effects.

Results of a new study, published in the June issue of the journal Pediatrics, show that the biggest risk among children who are not vaccinated is the disease itself, as well as the risk of spreading it to more vulnerable populations who, for age or medical reasons, are unable to get vaccinated.

In pertussis, coughing occurs in sudden uncontrollable bursts, where one cough follows the next without a break for breath. Many people make a high-pitched whooping sound when breathing in after a coughing episode, hence the nickname "whooping cough." Coughing can be so severe, patients can vomit or break ribs.

A patient's face or lips may look blue from lack of oxygen, and the cough is often worse at night. Between coughing spells, the person seems well, but the illness is exhausting over time. Coughing episodes gradually become less frequent, but may continue for several weeks or even months until the lungs heal.

People of any age can get pertussis. Older children and adults usually have a less severe illness, but they can still spread the disease to infants and young children.

Pertussis in infants is often severe, and infants are more likely than older children or adults to develop complications, the most common of which is bacterial pneumonia. Rare complications include seizures, inflammation of the brain and death.

In the study published in Pediatrics, researchers from Kaiser Permanente Colorado's Institute for Health Research used electronic health records to look for immunization refusal and possible pertussis infections.

Specifically, researchers examined the medical records of children 2 months old to 18 years old who were members of Kaiser Permanente Colorado between 1996 and 2007. First, investigators confirmed which children had pertussis infections. Next, they verified whether parents had refused some or all vaccines for their children.

Researchers found that children of parents who refused the vaccine were 23 times more likely to get whooping cough compared to fully immunized children. "A 23-fold increase is huge," says Jason Glanz, a senior scientist at Kaiser Permanente's Institute for Health Research who headed the study.

Glanz says the findings should help "dispel one of the commonly held beliefs among vaccine-refusing parents: that their children are not at risk for vaccine preventable diseases."

And from a larger perspective, Glanz says the findings also show "that the decision to refuse immunizations could have important ramifications for the health of the entire community. Based on our analysis, we found that 1 in 10 additional whooping cough infections could have been prevented by immunization."

Glanz, a father of young children himself, says vaccines "can pose confusing and difficult choices." The purpose of the study was to give parents more information to weigh the benefits and risks, he says, as well as to provide pediatricians with more information to help them participate in the discussion.

For the physician, "it's an uphill battle", says Glanz, since most pediatricians today have so little time to spend with parents, and it's difficult to discuss the risks and benefits of vaccines with parents who have lots of questions and want thorough answers.

On top of that, physicians are battling a lot of misinformation, says Glanz. The Internet, for example, is easily accessible and often misleading, with numerous scary descriptions of devastating diseases purported to result from vaccines.

All of this adds up to a critical need for the public health community to develop effective "risk communications messages" that "resonate with parents" in order to help them make truly informed decisions about vaccinating children, he says.

Doctors need simple targeted information about the actual risks of having the vaccine and the risks of not having it. They need to know, says Glanz, that their child could actually become infected by the pertussis bacteria.

In addition, Glanz says, it should be very clear among parents "that by keeping immunization rates high, we protect everyone, including the most vulnerable populations."

There are a number of individuals for whom vaccination against pertussis is not possible. The vaccination is not effective for babies younger than 2 months old because their immune system is not yet fully developed and capable of responding.

Then, there are older children who suffer other medical conditions that compromise their immune system and also make pertussis vaccination ineffective. When parents protect their own child, says Glanz, they "also protect this most vulnerable population."

Dr. Randy Bergen, a pediatrician who specializes in infectious diseases, says some of the most compelling data he's seen comes from California, which reports that between 2001 and 2006, there were 24 deaths from pertussis. All of those deaths occurred in infants younger than 2 months of age.

The only way to protect these infants, says Bergen, is by "cocooning, where we immunize and protect those around the infants. And that's where the real concern is, especially when it comes to pertussis; that by not vaccinating school-age children, adolescents and young adults, we're leaving these infants unprotected."

Bergen suggests that, ironically, vaccines are almost victims of their own success. "Unfortunately, vaccines have been so successful in reducing diseases that not only are parents unaware of the potential severity of these diseases, but many pediatricians have rarely seen them and don't know the potential severity of these diseases either."

The recent number of infant deaths from pertussis should certainly serve as a wake-up call. As for vaccine safety, Bergen says there have been a large number of studies that have looked at safety over the past 10 years: "None of these studies have proved any association between a vaccine, a preservative in a vaccine or a combination of vaccines, and significant adverse problems." Vaccines in this country are safe, he adds; they "prevent diseases that can maim and kill."

The childhood vaccine known as DTaP protects against diptheria, pertussis and tetanus. It is given in a series to children at 2 months, 4 months, 6 months and 15-18 months of age; a booster is given before kindergarten. The DTaP vaccine, like other routine childhood immunizations, has been shown to be more than 98 percent effective.

Recent outbreaks of pertussis among teenagers have led to investigations into the long-term efficacy of the vaccine. They conclude that potency wanes as children get older. Today, federal health officials recommend children get another booster shot at around 11-13 years of age.
 
With the rise in learning disabilities, epilepsy, and autism it does seem like they could take the mercury out of vaccine just in case....

It is because of mercury in vaccines that most people object to them. In case nobody knows mercury is a toxic metal and it doesn't belong in the body or teeth either.
 
No 'perceived' risk here. My son did have a reaction. At 8 years old he still struggles every day. My pediatrician has recommended not vaccinating my youngest based on what happened to my middle child. My oldest son did fine with his vaccinations. Russian roulette.

The vax doesn't provide immunity for babies who are most susceptible. Breastfeeding does, however if the mother has antibodies which most do.

Small babies are supposed to be home- not all over the place and exposed to hacking people. They don't need to go grocery shopping or to Aunt Suzie's family dinner. Keep them home, keep them safe. Coughing people should not be near babies and people should sterilize their hands before touching as well, jic.

Common sense is a great way to prevent the spread of disease, too. ;)

In fact, all scientific studies show vaccines to be highly effective and safe, with only rare, moderate, adverse side effects.

I'm going to fix that.

In fact, all scientific studies CONDUCTED BY THE VACCINE MANUFACTURERS AND/OR SCIENTISTS WITH FINANCIAL TIES TO THE VACCINE INDUSTRY show vaccines to be highly effective (FOR HOW LONG?) and safe (DEAD CHILDREN AND GRIEVING PARENTS WOULD DISAGREE), with only rare, moderate, adverse side effects BUT WE HAVEN'T ACTUALLY RESEARCHED LONG TERM SIDE EFFECTS AS OUR STUDIES TEND TO ONLY COUNT SIDE EFFECTS THAT HAPPEN WITHIN WEEKS OF VACCINATING.

:D

This article is so biased, so slanted I can't bring myself to pay a lot of attention to it to be honest. I do understand the concern but most parents who have decided to delay or not vax haven't made that decision in a vacuum.
 
VACCINES, are known to cause cancer and ruehmatism and luekmia in a % of the users, but if the numbers are small, less than 10% the government considers them, acceptable losses. and that, is a crime in itself,.
 
source

The Vaccine-Autism Court Document Every American Should Read

By David Kirby

Posted February 26, 2008 | 02:38 PM (EST)

Below is a verbatim copy of the US Government concession filed last November in a vaccine-autism case in the Court of Federal Claims, with the names of the family redacted. It is the subject of my post yesterday.

Every American should read this document, and interpret for themselves what they think their government is trying to say about the relationship, if any, between immunizations and a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder.

If you feel this document suggests that some kind of link may be possible, you might consider forwarding it to your elected representatives for further investigation.

But, of course, if you feel that this document in no way implicates vaccines, then let's just keep going about our business as usual and not pay any attention to all those sick kids behind the curtain.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS


CHILD, a minor,

by her Parents and Natural Guardians,

Petitioners,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent.

RESPONDENT'S RULE 4(c) REPORT

In accordance with RCFC, Appendix B, Vaccine Rule 4(c), the Secretary of Health and Human Services submits the following response to the petition for compensation filed in this case.

FACTS

CHILD ("CHILD") was born on December --, 1998, and weighed eight pounds, ten ounces. Petitioners' Exhibit ("Pet. Ex.") 54 at 13. The pregnancy was complicated by gestational diabetes. Id. at 13. CHILD received her first Hepatitis B immunization on December 27, 1998. Pet. Ex. 31 at 2.

From January 26, 1999 through June 28, 1999, CHILD visited the Pediatric Center, in Catonsville, Maryland, for well-child examinations and minor complaints, including fever and eczema. Pet. Ex. 31 at 5-10, 19. During this time period, she received the following pediatric vaccinations, without incident:

Vaccine Dates Administered

Hep B 12/27/98; 1/26/99

IPV 3/12/99; 4/27/99

Hib 3/12/99; 4/27/99; 6/28/99

DTaP 3/12/99; 4/27/99; 6/28/99

Id. at 2.

At seven months of age, CHILD was diagnosed with bilateral otitis media. Pet. Ex. 31 at 20. In the subsequent months between July 1999 and January 2000, she had frequent bouts of otitis media, which doctors treated with multiple antibiotics. Pet. Ex. 2 at 4. On December 3,1999, CHILD was seen by Karl Diehn, M.D., at Ear, Nose, and Throat Associates of the Greater Baltimore Medical Center ("ENT Associates"). Pet. Ex. 31 at 44. Dr. Diehn recommend that CHILD receive PE tubes for her "recurrent otitis media and serious otitis." Id. CHILD received PE tubes in January 2000. Pet. Ex. 24 at 7. Due to CHILD's otitis media, her mother did not allow CHILD to receive the standard 12 and 15 month childhood immunizations. Pet. Ex. 2 at 4.

According to the medical records, CHILD consistently met her developmental milestones during the first eighteen months of her life. The record of an October 5, 1999 visit to the Pediatric Center notes that CHILD was mimicking sounds, crawling, and sitting. Pet. Ex. 31 at 9. The record of her 12-month pediatric examination notes that she was using the words "Mom" and "Dad," pulling herself up, and cruising. Id. at 10.

At a July 19, 2000 pediatric visit, the pediatrician observed that CHILD "spoke well" and was "alert and active." Pet. Ex. 31 at 11. CHILD's mother reported that CHILD had regular bowel movements and slept through the night. Id. At the July 19, 2000 examination, CHILD received five vaccinations - DTaP, Hib, MMR, Varivax, and IPV. Id. at 2, 11.

According to her mother's affidavit, CHILD developed a fever of 102.3 degrees two days after her immunizations and was lethargic, irritable, and cried for long periods of time. Pet. Ex. 2 at 6. She exhibited intermittent, high-pitched screaming and a decreased response to stimuli. Id. MOM spoke with the pediatrician, who told her that CHILD was having a normal reaction to her immunizations. Id. According to CHILD's mother, this behavior continued over the next ten days, and CHILD also began to arch her back when she cried. Id.

On July 31, 2000, CHILD presented to the Pediatric Center with a 101-102 degree temperature, a diminished appetite, and small red dots on her chest. Pet. Ex. 31 at 28. The nurse practitioner recorded that CHILD was extremely irritable and inconsolable. Id. She was diagnosed with a post-varicella vaccination rash. Id. at 29.

Two months later, on September 26, 2000, CHILD returned to the Pediatric Center with a temperature of 102 degrees, diarrhea, nasal discharge, a reduced appetite, and pulling at her left ear. Id. at 29. Two days later, on September 28, 2000, CHILD was again seen at the Pediatric Center because her diarrhea continued, she was congested, and her mother reported that CHILD was crying during urination. Id. at 32. On November 1, 2000, CHILD received bilateral PE tubes. Id. at 38. On November 13, 2000, a physician at ENT Associates noted that CHILD was "obviously hearing better" and her audiogram was normal. Id. at 38. On November 27, 2000, CHILD was seen at the Pediatric Center with complaints of diarrhea, vomiting, diminished energy, fever, and a rash on her cheek. Id. at 33. At a follow-up visit, on December 14, 2000, the doctor noted that CHILD had a possible speech delay. Id.

CHILD was evaluated at the Howard County Infants and Toddlers Program, on November 17, 2000, and November 28, 2000, due to concerns about her language development. Pet. Ex. 19 at 2, 7. The assessment team observed deficits in CHILD's communication and social development. Id. at 6. CHILD's mother reported that CHILD had become less responsive to verbal direction in the previous four months and had lost some language skills. Id. At 2.

On December 21, 2000, CHILD returned to ENT Associates because of an obstruction in her right ear and fussiness. Pet. Ex. 31 at 39. Dr. Grace Matesic identified a middle ear effusion and recorded that CHILD was having some balance issues and not progressing with her speech. Id. On December 27, 2000, CHILD visited ENT Associates, where Dr. Grace Matesic observed that CHILD's left PE tube was obstructed with crust. Pet. Ex. 14 at 6. The tube was replaced on January 17, 2001. Id.

Dr. Andrew Zimmerman, a pediatric neurologist, evaluated CHILD at the Kennedy Krieger Children's Hospital Neurology Clinic ("Krieger Institute"), on February 8, 2001. Pet. Ex. 25 at 1. Dr. Zimmerman reported that after CHILD's immunizations of July 19, 2000, an "encephalopathy progressed to persistent loss of previously acquired language, eye contact, and relatedness." Id. He noted a disruption in CHILD's sleep patterns, persistent screaming and arching, the development of pica to foreign objects, and loose stools. Id. Dr. Zimmerman observed that CHILD watched the fluorescent lights repeatedly during the examination and

would not make eye contact. Id. He diagnosed CHILD with "regressive encephalopathy with features consistent with an autistic spectrum disorder, following normal development." Id. At 2. Dr. Zimmerman ordered genetic testing, a magnetic resonance imaging test ("MRI"), and an electroencephalogram ("EEG"). Id.

Dr. Zimmerman referred CHILD to the Krieger Institute's Occupational Therapy Clinic and the Center for Autism and Related Disorders ("CARDS"). Pet. Ex. 25 at 40. She was evaluated at the Occupational Therapy Clinic by Stacey Merenstein, OTR/L, on February 23, 2001. Id. The evaluation report summarized that CHILD had deficits in "many areas of sensory processing which decrease[d] her ability to interpret sensory input and influence[d] her motor performance as a result." Id. at 45. CHILD was evaluated by Alice Kau and Kelley Duff, on May 16, 2001, at CARDS. Pet. Ex. 25 at 17. The clinicians concluded that CHILD was developmentally delayed and demonstrated features of autistic disorder. Id. at 22.

CHILD returned to Dr. Zimmerman, on May 17, 2001, for a follow-up consultation. Pet. Ex. 25 at 4. An overnight EEG, performed on April 6, 2001, showed no seizure discharges. Id. at 16. An MRI, performed on March 14, 2001, was normal. Pet. Ex. 24 at 16. A G-band test revealed a normal karyotype. Pet. Ex. 25 at 16. Laboratory studies, however, strongly indicated an underlying mitochondrial disorder. Id. at 4.

Dr. Zimmerman referred CHILD for a neurogenetics consultation to evaluate her abnormal metabolic test results. Pet. Ex. 25 at 8. CHILD met with Dr. Richard Kelley, a specialist in neurogenetics, on May 22, 2001, at the Krieger Institute. Id. In his assessment, Dr. Kelley affirmed that CHILD's history and lab results were consistent with "an etiologically unexplained metabolic disorder that appear[ed] to be a common cause of developmental regression." Id. at 7. He continued to note that children with biochemical profiles similar to CHILD's develop normally until sometime between the first and second year of life when their metabolic pattern becomes apparent, at which time they developmentally regress. Id. Dr. Kelley described this condition as "mitochondrial PPD." Id.

On October 4, 2001, Dr. John Schoffner, at Horizon Molecular Medicine in Norcross, Georgia, examined CHILD to assess whether her clinical manifestations were related to a defect in cellular energetics. Pet. Ex. 16 at 26. After reviewing her history, Dr. Schoffner agreed that the previous metabolic testing was "suggestive of a defect in cellular energetics." Id. Dr. Schoffner recommended a muscle biopsy, genetic testing, metabolic testing, and cell culture based testing. Id. at 36. A CSF organic acids test, on January 8, 2002, displayed an increased lactate to pyruvate ratio of 28,1 which can be seen in disorders of mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation. Id. at 22. A muscle biopsy test for oxidative phosphorylation disease revealed abnormal results for Type One and Three. Id. at 3. The most prominent findings were scattered atrophic myofibers that were mostly type one oxidative phosphorylation dependent myofibers, mild increase in lipid in selected myofibers, and occasional myofiber with reduced cytochrome c oxidase activity. Id. at 7. After reviewing these laboratory results, Dr. Schoffner diagnosed CHILD with oxidative phosphorylation disease. Id. at 3. In February 2004, a mitochondrial DNA ("mtDNA") point mutation analysis revealed a single nucleotide change in the 16S ribosomal RNA gene (T2387C). Id. at 11.

CHILD returned to the Krieger Institute, on July 7, 2004, for a follow-up evaluation with Dr. Zimmerman. Pet. Ex. 57 at 9. He reported CHILD "had done very well" with treatment for a mitochondrial dysfunction. Dr. Zimmerman concluded that CHILD would continue to require services in speech, occupational, physical, and behavioral therapy. Id.

On April 14, 2006, CHILD was brought by ambulance to Athens Regional Hospital and developed a tonic seizure en route. Pet. Ex. 10 at 38. An EEG showed diffuse slowing. Id. At 40. She was diagnosed with having experienced a prolonged complex partial seizure and transferred to Scottish Rite Hospital. Id. at 39, 44. She experienced no more seizures while at Scottish Rite Hospital and was discharged on the medications Trileptal and Diastal. Id. at 44. A follow-up MRI of the brain, on June 16, 2006, was normal with evidence of a left mastoiditis manifested by distortion of the air cells. Id. at 36. An EEG, performed on August 15, 2006,

showed "rhythmic epileptiform discharges in the right temporal region and then focal slowing during a witnessed clinical seizure." Id. At 37. CHILD continues to suffer from a seizure disorder.

ANALYSIS

Medical personnel at the Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation, Department of Health and Human Services (DVIC) have reviewed the facts of this case, as presented by the petition, medical records, and affidavits. After a thorough review, DVIC has concluded that compensation is appropriate in this case.

In sum, DVIC has concluded that the facts of this case meet the statutory criteria for demonstrating that the vaccinations CHILD received on July 19, 2000, significantly aggravated an underlying mitochondrial disorder, which predisposed her to deficits in cellular energy metabolism, and manifested as a regressive encephalopathy with features of autism spectrum disorder. Therefore, respondent recommends that compensation be awarded to petitioners in accordance with 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-11(c)(1)(C)(ii).

DVIC has concluded that CHILD's complex partial seizure disorder, with an onset of almost six years after her July 19, 2000 vaccinations, is not related to a vaccine-injury.

Respectfully submitted,

PETER D. KEISLER
Assistant Attorney General

TIMOTHY P. GARREN
Director
Torts Branch, Civil Division

MARK W. ROGERS
Deputy Director
Torts Branch, Civil Division

VINCENT J. MATANOSKI
Assistant Director
Torts Branch, Civil Division

s/ Linda S. Renzi by s/ Lynn E. Ricciardella
LINDA S. RENZI
Senior Trial Counsel
Torts Branch, Civil Division
U.S. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 146
Benjamin Franklin Station
Washington, D.C. 20044
(202) 616-4133


DATE: November 9, 2007

PS: On Friday, February 22, HHS conceded that this child's complex partial seizure disorder was also caused by her vaccines. Now we the taxpayers will award this family compensation to finance her seizure medication. Surely ALL decent people can agree that is a good thing.

By the way, it''s worth noting that her seizures did not begin until six years after the date of vaccination, yet the government acknowledges they were, indeed, linked to the immunizations of July, 2000, - DK
 
I got the pertussis vaccine when I was an infant and went into convulsions all night that night with a very high fever. No seizures before or since.

Now I have an ASD. I'm lucky though I'm high functioning.

Also, I got pertussis when I was 16. I had the extremely characteristic whooping coughing fits where you can't breathe for over a minute then vomit. Woke me up from sleeping. Scary when you can't breathe. Doctors refused to diagnose pertussis because I had the vaccine so it would be "impossible". FUCK THAT SHIT FUCKING LYING RETARDS AND ASSHOLES GIVING PEOPLE BRAIN DAMAGE AND IT DOESNT EVEN FUCKING WORK AND UNDERREPORTED SIDE EFFECTS AND UNEFFECTIVENESS BECAUSE DOCTORS ARE BRAINWASHED THEY PRETEND YOU DONT EXIST!!!!!
 
I got the pertussis vaccine when I was an infant and went into convulsions all night that night with a very high fever. No seizures before or since.

Now I have an ASD. I'm lucky though I'm high functioning.

Also, I got pertussis when I was 16. I had the extremely characteristic whooping coughing fits where you can't breathe for over a minute then vomit. Woke me up from sleeping. Scary when you can't breathe. Doctors refused to diagnose pertussis because I had the vaccine so it would be "impossible". FUCK THAT SHIT FUCKING LYING RETARDS AND ASSHOLES GIVING PEOPLE BRAIN DAMAGE AND IT DOESNT EVEN FUCKING WORK AND UNDERREPORTED SIDE EFFECTS AND UNEFFECTIVENESS BECAUSE DOCTORS ARE BRAINWASHED THEY PRETEND YOU DONT EXIST!!!!!

Ya, western medicine really pisses me off sometimes.

So does the author in the OP.. I mean jeez.. I've seen plenty of evidence that vaccines can hurt people.. yet this person states unequivocally that they are safe.. nothing to see here..
 
Last edited:
Sometimes I wish I knew what all the injections I had to get in basic training were...

Then I realize I probably don't want to know...
 
Back
Top