Articles

236 thoughts on “Pockets of Vaccine Noncompliance in California

  1. wales says:

    oh BTW, the other pseudonym tip off was the self-referential citation to the other blog. you could have just referenced the original journal paper.

    nice editing of my comment.

    oh the goings-on behind the scenes…..unsuspecting mortals are easily duped aren’t they? very shakespearean.

  2. Th1Th2 says:

    Weing,

    Vaccines do not prevent diseases. They are designed to induce diseases, obviously. Feed a malnourished kid with good food and the kid will survive. However, if you vaccinate them, the kid will deteriorate and even die.

  3. Th1Th2 says:

    David,

    Nonsense? This is what nonsense is:

    “Currently available vaccines have largely been developed
    empirically, with little or no understanding on how they
    activate the immune system.”http://www.who.int/immunization/documents/Elsevier_Vaccine_immunology.pdf

    Now, refute this fact.

  4. weing says:

    Wow,
    A real antivaccinationist idiot who thinks nutrition will protect against measles. The arrogance of ignorance is truly amazing.

  5. weing says:

    Empirical Medicine works. What’s to refute? Smallpox is gone because of it.

  6. Th1Th2 says:

    You have nothing to say that’s why you are throwing invectives instead. Amazing.

  7. weing says:

    I told you that there is nothing to refute as empirical medicine works and has worked despite not knowing how. Smallpox has been wiped off the face of the earth. Unless some bioweapons labs still harbor the virus. How dense are you?

  8. Th1Th2 says:

    So that is your science-based answer? You better be off to Las Vegas instead and roll the dice. The smallpox vaccine was responsible for the surge of epidemic and case mortality of smallpox in the Philippines FYI. Why? Because the smallpox vaccine, physiologically, causes the disease itself (progressive and generalized vaccinia). If I were you I would never guess.

  9. weing says:

    Thanks for the answer. Very dense indeed. The disease is gone. Get it? Gone. No one said it was a safe vaccine. Believe me, I still have the scars on my arms from my vaccinations as a child. It was still a helluva lot milder than smallpox. It did the job. Sure, I’ll go to Vegas if you make sure I get loaded dice.

  10. Th1Th2 says:

    Yes, indeed, you’ve gotten the milder form of smallpox, congratulations.

  11. weing says:

    That was the point. Maybe we can send you as a volunteer to the bioweapons lab. Put you in isolation, well fed and expose you to the real virus and observe how you do with your well fed theory protecting you. I think the Russians may be agreeable to test it out for you.

  12. Th1Th2 says:

    You don’t have to look further. They have been giving biohazards to children a long time ago. Read this:

    “Biological hazards (biohazards, biohazardous materials) are exempt from coverage under the HCS if the only hazard they pose is biological. However, if the material also possesses physical or health hazard, then an MSDS is required.

    Examples of biohazards include microbes, anthrax, VACCINES, and cell cultures.” http://www.ilpi.com/msds/faq/partb.html

    So stop dreaming and educate yourself.

  13. qetzal says:

    Th1Th2,

    Do you even know what an MSDS is? Do you honestly think the quoted passage supports your claim that “they” have been givine biohazards to children?

    If so, you’re a dolt. Go back to your natural fallacy Mother Earth counter-culture. Try not to win a Darwin award.

  14. Th1Th2 says:

    Surprised? Don’t take my word for it. If you have any violent complaints, write them up. Ain’t your mama.

    Or better yet, refute that fact than resorting to such childhood behaviour.

  15. Th1Th2 says:

    Surprised? Don’t take my word for it. If you have any violent complaints, write them up. Ain’t your mama.

    Or better yet, refute that fact than resorting to such childish behaviour.

  16. weing says:

    I knew it. You are a broken record. You are too bent on refuting. You should try understanding instead, but that’s obviously beyond your capabilities. Till then you are condemned to wallow in your own ignorance.

  17. Th1Th2 says:

    I thought this site lives to its name, unfortunately, its overflowing with ad hominem. What a waste.

  18. nwtk2007 says:

    That is exactly right Th1Th2.

    When confronted with something they have no answer for, they resort to the good old ad hom for restitution.

    One thing is for sure, they truly love to read themselves on the internet. And so intellectual too.

  19. HCN says:

    Yes, it is hard to discuss things with folks who have closed minds, argue by blatant assertion and just make crap up. Even wales/”just the facts” did not understand that the papers he referenced did not say what he inferred.

    Still waiting for someone, anyone to post the real actual factual scientific evidence in a journal I can find in my local medical school library that shows that:

    1) The MMR is worse than measles, mumps and rubella.

    2) The DTaP is worse than diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis.

    3) The Hib is worse than haemophilus influenzae type b.

    Oh, yeah… Th1Th2 (Thing 1 and Thing 2?), what kind of biohazard do the toxins produced by pertussis and tetanus compare to the actual vaccines? Do you think you live in a sterile bubble where you will never encounter a free virus or bacterium? If you do choose to answer, I will ignore all responses that are void of real evidence.

  20. Th1Th2 says:

    HCN,

    Fascinating. You are looking for scientific evidence and yet you don’t even know what Th1 and Th2 stand for? It’s not surprising a lot of people talk about vaccines but lacks the knowledge on basic human immunology. You just gave me a clue. Vaccines are only worth discussing its toxic side-effects and other sequelae. You can check each vaccine package inserts and you will find out what you are looking for.

  21. wales says:

    Huh? The papers I referenced stated that due to vaccine induced immunity replacing naturally acquired immunity (for measles) there are new groups of susceptibles (infants and adults). These new groups of high risk susceptibles are a by-product of universal vaccination practices. The conclusion is that universal vaccination is not as universally beneficial or benign as it is purported to be. What is it that you think I misunderstand?

  22. weing says:

    You don’t even know what an ad hominem attack is. I didn’t say your arguments are idiotic because you are an idiot. That would be an ad hominem. I said that you are moron because your arguments, after analysis are moronic. It is just the obvious conclusion. That is a crucial difference.

  23. weing says:

    wales,
    Everything. You start out implying that having acquired immunity by having the disease is preferable to having vaccine induced immunity. That means the disease is preferable to the vaccine. Then you imply that if they didn’t receive the vaccine they would be somehow resistant but because they got the vaccine they have now become susceptible. Again, they would have to have had to have had the disease in order not to be susceptible now. Then you assume that someone with a waning immunity will have as severe an illness as someone with no immunity whatsoever. That’s because you don’t know medicine but it’s still a wrong assumption. Then you draw your false conclusion that whether you immunize or not is simply a preference with no consequences. The more logical conclusion is don’t expect to be rid of measles anytime soon with our current vaccination schedule.

  24. Th1Th2 says:

    There are 3 things you need to know before you scream like a baby.
    1. Ad hominem
    2. Character assassination
    3. Generalization
    4. and your favorite, Rationalization.
    Wiki might help. Try it.

  25. weing says:

    Th,
    You can call me an idiot too if I say that nicotene gum and patches are worse than smoking because of all the toxic effects noted on the package inserts.

  26. Th1Th2 says:

    Vaccines and smoking are NOT man’s physiologic needs, kwim? You are just comparing a poison with another poison. Its that the best analogy you can come up with?

  27. weing says:

    You mean diseases like measles, mumps, rubella, smallpox, etc and smoking are not man’s physiologic needs don’t you?

  28. Th1Th2 says:

    I said clearly, vaccines and smoking are NOT man’s physiologic needs. What is it that you don’t understand?

  29. weing says:

    I don’t understand how anyone could consider the diseases mentioned to be physiologic needs.

  30. Th1Th2 says:

    You mean vaccine-induced diseases? You tell me.

  31. Dr Benway says:

    “Man’s physiologic needs”? Like typing on the Intarwebs?

    Zillions of vaccines have been given for decades. The percentage of serious adverse reactions has been tiny. Lightning strikes are more common.

    Few things in medicine kick ass like vaccines. Best preventive product to date. We need more of ‘em.

  32. Mark Crislip says:

    I was thinking (always problematic) about the measles vaccine model’s. Models are entertaining, but like the drake equation, what you decide to plug in as your conditions leads to widely varying results. I have seen a lot of id models over the years, and I can’t say thy have been all that helpful with reality.

    At least the climate models can compare to reality and see how close they are.

    An Hypothesis

    1) infections tend to cull out the most susceptible, but people may be genetically predisposed to die from some infections (pubmed toll, polymorphism, infection to see many example of this interesting, if young, field)
    As a result of vaccines there is an increased population of people more likely to die or have complications from vaccine preventable illnesses. 50 years of no culling in the US

    2) infections in populations may attenuate their virulence, as probably happened with syphilis after it arrived in europe. If the infections kills people too fast, it cant spread, so organisms have to balance virulence/lethality with infectivity to help maximize spread.

    A partially vaccinated population would enhance infectivity and lethality, since opportunity for spread is decreased, the bug has to be more infectious/virulent to perpetuate.

    I predict what will happen in California and in the Waldorf schools when there is an outbreak of measles or whooping cough it will
    1) have a higher attack rate than historical controls
    2) It will have a higher complication rate with more severe illness than historical controls
    3) It will have a higher mortality rate than historical controls

    someone who is way smarter with numbers than me needs to use these hypothesis to come up with a model of what may happen as vaccine rates decline.
    this is of course a very simplified approach to a complicated issue

    alternatively, I could just be talking out my butt. that’s the problem with models.

  33. Th1Th2 says:

    Dr Benway,

    How could vaccines be the “best preventive product” when prevention means resistance from diseases? You don’t prevent diseases by injecting the physiologic evidence of the disease in the blood stream of a non-diseased, do you? So what’s the use of prevention when the idea behind vaccination per se is the inoculation of the physiologic evidence of the disease in the blood stream? Vaccines are not designed to prevent diseases but rather to transmit diseases.

  34. aalonzo says:

    Th1Th2

    Are you for real? I’m not making a joke or anything. Some of the things you say just seem so contrary it’s almost as if you just enjoying poking a stick at the bee’s nest.

    I mean, anyone who’s read about vaccines knows that the idea behind them is indeed injecting a weak or dead version of the virus for the body to fight/get to know. So ya, they do what you say. I suppose it’s like practice fighting to prepare for the real fight. Accidents happen and people get hurt during practice, but the alternative would be going into battle or a fight with no idea how to do it.
    Are you actually saying lets not do any more practice?

  35. Th1Th2 says:

    aalonzo,

    Exactly what I am saying. Vaccines are designed to introduce the disease to the immune system, so the body can recognize the vaccine-induced disease in preparation for the “real fight” (natural infection). So what’s your point?

  36. Dr Benway says:

    You don’t prevent diseases by injecting the physiologic evidence of the disease in the blood stream of a non-diseased, do you?

    No, proteins aren’t disease. They’re just proteins.

    Disease is when you’re sick.

  37. Th1Th2 says:

    What do you mean they are “just proteins”? I assume you know that they are bacterial and viral antigens from extraneous diseases and these antigens will induce antigen-specific antibodies against the disease. Vaccine-derived immunity is the result of exposure to vaccine-induced diseases. Obviously, you haven’t read any vaccine package inserts that account myriad of post-vaccinal adverse reactions including vaccine-induced diseases.

  38. qetzal says:

    No, vaccine-derived immunity is the result of exposure to antigens. Antigens are not diseases.

    Dolt.

  39. Th1Th2 says:

    Antigens are the PHYSIOLOGIC evidence of the disease, for example HbsAg is to Hepatitis B, PRP Hib is to Hib disease. Vaccine-induced immunity is immunity against the disease and not the antigen.

    What do you think of vaccines, PLACEBOS? Noob.

  40. qetzal says:

    Not only are you wrong, you clearly don’t even understand the meaning of the words you’re using.

  41. Th1Th2 says:

    You cannot say anything because you will only contradict yourself. Next time, please educate yourself noob.

  42. qetzal says:

    I have a PhD in molecular biology. I doubt you can even pronounce “PhD.”

  43. Dr Benway says:

    Th1Th2,

    If you were to eat a bowl of HBsAg, the acids in your stomach and the protease made by your pancreas would break it down into its constituent amino acids, which your body then would absorb as food. From your body’s point of view, oral HBsAg would look about the same as any other source of protein, such as a thick and delicious steak.

    HBsAg isn’t a disease. It’s a protein.

  44. wales says:

    My dear friend Weing: Sorry to interrupt the current dialogue. I confess I am suffering from sbm fatigue, but I have one more comment before I take a break. Your assumptions about my comprehension are inaccurate. And with regard to consequences, of course actions have consequences, some have unintended negative consequences (including mass vaccine induced immunity for measles, for which the remedy will be yet more vaccine boosters).

    The proliferation of new vaccines in the past few decades and the burgeoning ACIP schedule ensure that there will be more scrutiny of vaccination by parents and continued resistance from some segments of the public. Not all of these exemptors are “woo pushers”. Rational people may question the justification for compulsory vaccination of millions of children every year with more new vaccines for diseases affecting relatively small percentages of the population. Hib, for example, the annual estimates for pre-vaccine morbidity run to around 20,000 (amounting to ½ of 1% of a birth cohort of 4 million). And HPV, etc.. Other diseases, like Measles had very high pre-vaccine morbidity and very low mortality and complication rates (<1%). Or Polio: “Up to 95% of all polio infections are inapparent or asymptomatic. Estimates of the ratio of inapparent to paralytic illness vary from 50:1 to 1,000:1 (usually 200:1)” [CDC’s Pink Book]. The more vaccines and doses that are added to the schedule, the more questioning will occur.

    And many people ARE old enough to remember when measles and chicken pox were routine childhood experiences. My father-in-law also contracted Polio, with no paralysis.

    I expect this will generate a spate of comments from others about the tragedies they witnessed with regard to these diseases, just keep in mind the statistical odds of those tragedies. For health care professionals who work in emergency rooms and infectious disease wards these odds take on greater significance. Of course cases of disease complication and mortality are tragic for the affected individuals. But so are the cases of vaccine injury. For those victims the odds of vaccine injury take on greater significance. I know sbm prefers to dismiss VAERS statistics because there is no proof of causation of vaccine injury, but conversely there is no proof that the statistics do NOT represent cases of vaccine injury, thus parents do consult these statistics. If you eliminate the 1% of litigation related cases, focus only on the 84% of cases reported by vaccine manufacturers, health care professionals and public health departments and allow a wide margin for the Incredible Hulk factor by dismissing the 16% of cases reported by parents and other sources (though I don’t believe that is justified) you are left with 24,914 VAERS reports for 2008 alone (more than the annual pre-vaccine cases of Hib of 20,000). Not all VAERS cases are life threatening, but many resulted in ER visits. Of course, this doesn’t take into consideration that VAERS as a passive surveillance system is subject to substantial underreporting. Some estimates state that less than 10% of vaccine injury cases are reported to VAERS.

    When parents analyze the data and learn that the risks on both sides of the decision may be statistically insignificant, it’s not surprising that some arrive at a rational decision to abstain from vaccination or choose selective vaccination. When educated parents realize that the 1 to 2 page Vaccine Information Statements are written at a 5th to 7th grade reading level (according to an IOM report) and discover the discrepancies in risk disclosure between the VIS and the vaccine package insert, they become alarmed. There are legitimate reasons to question vaccine safety and to allow for choice rather than coercion.

    I expect that you/someone will now attempt to poke holes in my comments and/or deride my intelligence. Have at it. I am not trying to win an argument or prove anything, I am pointing out some of the reasons for the reality of increasing rates of vaccine exemptions.

  45. Dacks says:

    “I know sbm prefers to dismiss VAERS statistics because there is no proof of causation of vaccine injury, but conversely there is no proof that the statistics do NOT represent cases of vaccine injury, thus parents do consult these statistics.”

    What can they truly learn from these statistics? As you say, they no more prove vaccine injury than they prove lack of vaccine injury – in other words they really do not add any information that can tell you anything about the risks of vaccines vs. the risks of disease.

    Mark Twain said it best:”There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.”

  46. Th1Th2 says:

    Dr Benway,

    The HbsAg in the vaccine is not designed to be taken per orem nor it is a mucosal vaccine. I am quite amazed you missed that. Just like any parenteral (injectable) vaccines, they are designed to bypass the GI tract to avoid being destroyed by GI enzymes and protease. Instead, they are injected to the blood stream and the antigen, in this case, HbsAg, is taken up and processed by the cells.

    FYI, Hepatitis B is a blood-borne disease and the presence of HbsAg is an indicator of Hepatitis B infection. The HbsAg-containing vaccine given to a newborn is the same as giving them the Hepatitis B disease.

    Another example, does the presence of HIV antigen in the blood mean to you? Oh, I know, it’s just a protein. Nothing to worry about. Well, good luck with that.

  47. weing says:

    So, if I boil some corn and give it to you to plant, it will grow?

  48. Th1Th2 says:

    So you are a PhD-turned farmer. Nice shift.

    If you inject the boiled corn into your blood stream, then you are insane. It will not grow, but you will die of infection. Large protein molecules, foreign bodies and toxins are immunogenic causing adverse immune reactions.

    You could try it so you would know what I am saying.

  49. weing says:

    Why would you inject corn into anyone’s bloodstream? It would be insane to inject it. Would it be insane to expect it to grow if you planted it? I know, I know. It’s a really hard question but I have great faith in you.

  50. Th1Th2 says:

    Like I said, I am not a farmer. You are talking of organic proteins which are totally different from proteins found in vaccines. The proteins in the vaccines are genetically and chemically modified, stabilized and preserved. They were produced and grown in culture medium. Even though they were killed or inactivated (non-replicating) in the vaccine, the amount of the antigens (proteins) plus the addition of adjuvants are more than significant to induce resultant IMMUNOGENICITY. If you don’t know what that means, it means your immune system will react to the presenting antigen and produce symptoms specific for that antigen. For example, HbsAg will elicit symptoms of Hepatitis B disease because HbsAg is an indicator of Hepatitis B infection.

    Now, how much more will it manifest if it were live vaccines?

    It’s not a hard question, you just need some common sense and books to read.

  51. Chris says:

    To piggyback onto Dr. Crislip bit on computer modeling: I am a structural engineer. Many years ago I was involved in computer modeling for aircraft structures. This involved lots of data, lots of coordination to the various groups who provided the nodes that defined the structure, the mass of the materials, other properties of the material and the forces that would be applied.

    After hours of computer time, some back and forth on the tweaks and changes of requirement, test models of the part was then made. It was then subjected to several forms of structural test inside several test rigs. The most spectacular can be found on youtube (look for wing box tests).

    I would venture to say that we know more about the parameters used in structural computer modeling, than those that predict the disease outbreaks (for one thing, Young’s Modulus is not as likely to change as much as “vaccine uptake”). I would also venture to say that neither wales nor Th1Th2 would board a new airplane if it had only gone through computer testing and skipped the expensive structural testing.

    (oh, and Dr. Crislip’s first entry here is directly tied to that concept: Alternative Flight)

    Some recommended reading for anyone with an open mind:
    Lies, Damned Lies, and Science

  52. weing says:

    “If you don’t know what that means, it means your immune system will react to the presenting antigen and produce symptoms specific for that antigen. For example, HbsAg will elicit symptoms of Hepatitis B disease because HbsAg is an indicator of Hepatitis B infection.”
    Can you explain that? Are you saying you don’t need the live virus to have Hep B disease? Isn’t that analogous to growing corn from boiled seeds.
    Yes, you will make antibodies to the HbsAg proteins, that’s the point. But the virus will not be replicating in your liver. HbsAg is a protein and is an indicator of infection only if you have the live virus. The protein, without the live virus, will only elicit an antibody response and not the symptoms of Hep B.

  53. wales says:

    Dacks, Lack of proof of causality for vaccine injury does not render VAERS statistics worthless in decision making. The statistics highlight the fact that there are uncertainties surrounding vaccine safety and adverse reactions.

    “Fundamental uncertainty about the future occurrence or nonoccurrence of a given outcome lies at the core of the notion of risk.”

    Communicating the Uncertainty of Harms and Benefits of Medical Interventions
    Mary C. Politi, Paul K. J. Han and Nananda F. Col, Med Decis Making 2007; 27; 681

    http://mdm.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/27/5/681

  54. wales says:

    Chris, the models ARE undergoing “structural testing”. Highlighted by your citation of the 3 recent measles cases in PA, two children and their 33 year old father. If the measles models are accurate, we will see more of this, children and their parents contracting measles together. I have no idea if the models are accurate, but there is supporting evidence of the increased susceptibility of infants of mothers with vaccine induced immunity. Only time will tell. Unfortunately, we didn’t knowingly choose to be part of this particular experiment.

  55. Th1Th2 says:

    “The protein, without the live virus, will only elicit an antibody response and not the symptoms of Hep B.”

    FYI, antibody production is NOT the primary and ultimate function of the immune system. Cell-mediated immunity takes precedence over humoral immunity. And every event of an induced immune response will be externalized into symptoms. An immune response does NOT correlate with antibody production because there is immunity without the antibodies and that is cell-mediated immunity.

    Vaccines, prepared with dead or inactivated microorganisms, subunit or virus-like particles (VLPs), are designed to mitigate the symptoms of the disease, that is, vaccines transmute an infectious disease to become non-infectious, by keeping the disease inside the body.

    Below, are just some of the adverse reactions to Hepatitis B vaccine and I call these an immune response to the vaccine. Now, tell me if these symptoms are not symptoms of Hepatitis B disease.

    ADVERSE REACTIONS

    BODY AS A WHOLE
    The most frequent systemic complaints include fatigue/weakness; headache; fever (≥100°F); and
    malaise.
    DIGESTIVE SYSTEM
    Nausea; and diarrhea
    DIGESTIVE SYSTEM
    Vomiting; abdominal pains/cramps; dyspepsia; and diminished appetite
    RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
    Rhinitis; influenza; and cough
    INTEGUMENTARY SYSTEM
    Pruritus; rash (non-specified); angioedema; and urticaria
    MUSCULOSKELETAL SYSTEM
    Arthralgia including monoarticular; myalgia; back pain; neck pain; shoulder pain; and neck stiffness
    HEMIC/LYMPHATIC SYSTEM
    Lymphadenopathy
    DIGESTIVE SYSTEM
    Elevation of liver enzymes; constipation

    http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/r/recombivax_hb/recombivax_pi.pdf

  56. weing says:

    Sounds scary doesn’t it? Just like my patients reading the package insert on Nicorette were too scared to try it and continued smoking instead. Why not look up what the real Hep B virus causes? Also you didn’t give the incidence rates of these adverse reactions. Why not do that and compare them to the actual Hep B virus effects and their incidence?

  57. Th1Th2 says:

    Comparing a non-diseased newborn to a smoker is an absolute nonsense. You don’t recommend Nicorette to someone who does not smoke. And also, it is not an auspicious way to start a healthy life of a non-diseased newborn by injecting them the physiologic evidence of disease in their blood stream in the very first place.

    Hepatitis B is a self-limiting disease. It only gets worse in the event of sever malnutrition, inappropriate management or when the person becomes a patient in the hospital under allopathic treatment.

    “Why not look up what the real Hep B virus causes?”

    Vaccines are the number one cause.

    “the following guidelines are recommended for
    persons who have been exposed to hepatitis B virus such as through (1) percutaneous (needlestick),
    ocular, mucous membrane exposure to blood known or presumed to contain HBsAg, (2) human bites by
    known or presumed HBsAg carriers, that penetrate the skin, or (3) following intimate sexual contact with
    known or presumed HBsAg carriers.”

    http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/r/recombivax_hb/recombivax_pi.pdf

    Hepatitis B vaccine contains HbsAg.

  58. Dr Benway says:

    wales, you left out the risk to pregnant women and their unborn children in your calculation of risk due to wild type infections.

    Th1Th2, you totally missed my point about the bowl of ABsAb, which in my hypothetical was a delicious food, not a vaccine. I was simply pointing out that it’s a protein, not a “disease.” Ah, well.

    You seem to have a number of misconceptions regarding infection and immunity. Vaccine reactions –e.g., fever, myalgias– aren’t specific to any particular disease.

    Here’s something basic regarding infection and immunity that might help get you up to speed:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNaAisFiPdU&feature=player_embedded

  59. Dr Benway says:

    Th1Th2:

    You don’t recommend Nicorette to someone who does not smoke.

    Th1Th2, have you ever heard the expression, “People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.”

    Can you explain what that expression means?

  60. weing says:

    “Hepatitis B is a self-limiting disease. It only gets worse in the event of sever malnutrition, inappropriate management or when the person becomes a patient in the hospital under allopathic treatment.”

    Your source for that gem is? Care to enlighten us on the appropriate management? Are you saying people are still using leeches, an allopathic treatment, to treat Hep B?

  61. Th1Th2 says:

    “You seem to have a number of misconceptions regarding infection and immunity. Vaccine reactions –e.g., fever, myalgias– aren’t specific to any particular disease.”

    Of course, they are not specific because they are the prodromal symptoms of a disease. Have you ever heard of asymptomatic infection? Even having the pathognomonic signs and symptoms are inconclusive of a particular disease.

    “Nonspecific prodrome of malaise, fever, headache, myalgia”
    http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/Slides/HepB10.ppt

    These Hepatitis B symptoms are the same symptoms you get from Hepatitis B vaccine.

  62. weing says:

    “These Hepatitis B symptoms are the same symptoms you get from Hepatitis B vaccine.”
    Sources, please.

  63. Th1Th2 says:

    Hepatitis B is a self-limiting disease.

    “Hepatitis B virus infection may either be acute (self-limiting) or chronic (long-standing). Persons with self-limiting infection clear the infection spontaneously within weeks to months” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hepatitis_B

    “Hepatitis B is usually a self- limiting disease, which means that most patients go through the infection within three to six months.” http://www.advocate.com/print_article_ektid61733.asp

    “Infection with hepatitis B virus (HBV) leads to a variety of conditions including an asymptomatic chronic state, acute
    self-limiting infection and fulminant hepatitis.” http://www.specialtylabs.com/education/download_PDF/TN_HBV.pdf

    “The condition can be self limiting, healing on its own or can progress to scarring of the liver.” http://www.askdrwiki.com/mediawiki/index.php?title=Hepatitis

    “Most cases are self-limiting.” http://ngc.gov/summary/summary.aspx?view_id=1&doc_id=12806

    “Most of the time, hepatitis B is a self-limiting condition. Treatment consists of fluids and bed rest.” http://www.topsurgeons.com/gastroenterology/hepatitis-b.php

  64. Th1Th2 says:

    From the CDC website:

    What are the signs and symptoms of HBV infection?

    The presence of signs and symptoms varies by age. Most children under age 5 years and newly infected immunosuppressed adults are asymptomatic, whereas 30%–50% of persons aged ≥5 years have initial signs and symptoms. When present, signs and symptoms can include

    * Fever
    * Fatigue
    * Loss of appetite
    * Nausea
    * Vomiting
    * Abdominal pain
    * Dark urine
    * Clay-colored bowel movements
    * Joint pain
    * Jaundice

    http://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/HBV/HBVfaq.htm#treatment

    Now compare these symptoms from the symptoms of adverse reactions to the Hepatitis B vaccine I quoted earlier here:

    http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/r/recombivax_hb/recombivax_pi.pdf

  65. Chris says:

    wales said

    Chris, the models ARE undergoing “structural testing”. Highlighted by your citation of the 3 recent measles cases in PA, two children and their 33 year old father. If the measles models are accurate, we will see more of this, children and their parents contracting measles together. .

    Actually, this shows you did not understand the conclusions of those models, the news article I posted and what I said.

    You must have missed that the father had only one MMR as a child (two is the norm now), and that neither child had even one MMR vaccine. They were all either not vaccinated or under vaccinated. This is completely counter to the your next sentence:

    I have no idea if the models are accurate, but there is supporting evidence of the increased susceptibility of infants of mothers with vaccine induced immunity

    Well, yeah! They are susceptible if they are not vaccinated.

    What the two papers with the mathematical models were saying was that high vaccine rates need to be maintained, and that also means that if needed more boosters for things like the MMR may be required. Just like the every ten years booster for tetanus and diphtheria.

    Which means that herd immunity must be maintained by having high levels of vaccine uptake. This is not rocket science. Well, of course, I keep forgetting that since I am a rocket scientist (aerospace engineer), this is obvious to me. For you, not so much.

  66. wales says:

    chris, yes I read the PA report and saw that the children were unvaccinated and the father had only one dose of vaccine in childhood (ACIP finally had to recommend another due to the inefficacy of one dose).

    you missed my point. whether the father had one or two doses, at 33 he is now susceptible to measles as an adult (which the models predict). The children at the ages of 1 and 5 are not infants. My comment on infants was referring to the Pediatrics article I cited in my response to your comments on Gorski’s Feb. 2 blog, which is evidence of the new susceptible group of infants (which the models predict).

    Increased Susceptibility to Measles in Infants in the United States
    Mark Papania, MD, MPH et al PEDIATRICS Vol. 104 No. 5 November 1999, p. e59

    thanks for reminding us yet again of your cerebral capacity.

  67. weing says:

    Do you just cite references without reading them? Do you mean that between 3,000 and 5,000 people in the US do not die of chronic HBV? Are you saying infants are not most at risk of getting chronic HBV even though they are unlikely to show signs of the acute disease?

  68. Th1Th2 says:

    People with chronic Hepatitis B die of severe malnutrition, iatrogenic events like drug toxicities and immunosuppression from chronic drug treatments, and from unnecessary invasive procedures and surgeries. Hepatitis B carriers can live healthy later in life.

    Newborns are born disease-free and are NOT supposed to get any physiologic evidence of diseases from extraneous sources, like vaccines. It’s inhumane and unethical.

  69. weing says:

    What are your sources? Yeah, you get malnourished with chronic HBV but that’s from the cirrhosis and the liver cancers. And what is this “physiologic evidence of diseases from extraneous sources” gobbledygoop? Newborns are healthy until they get infected and they tend to get infected unless they are immunized. No one is supposed to get infected, but they do? You want to condemn them to chronic HBV and have them die from cirrhosis or liver cancer? I don’t.

  70. Th1Th2 says:

    Maybe you should know that immunity can be acquired naturally (from natural infection/disease) or artificially (from vaccines). So what’s the difference of getting the HbsAg from Hepatitis B and the HbsAg from the Hepatitis B vaccine? Post-vaccinal symptoms are immune responses to inflammation and infection i.e. vaccine-induced hepatitis.

    Like I said vaccines do NOT prevent diseases but rather transmit diseases to non-diseased newborns. And vaccinating newborns is the first stage of getting diseased. From IPV to Gardasil, the medical community has been transmitting diseases to non-diseased individuals particularly to newborns where they acquire at least 14 vaccine-induced diseases by the age of 1 year. Absolutely appalling.

    Again, sequelae of Hepatitis B (cirrhosis and liver CA) is the result of poor nutrition, improper management, chronic drug toxicity, immunosuppression, secondary infections and invasive procedures.

    Vaccination is contamination. Keep that in mind.

  71. Th1Th2 says:

    Maybe you should know that immunity can be acquired naturally (from natural infection/disease) or artificially (from vaccines). So what’s the difference of getting the HbsAg from Hepatitis B and the HbsAg from the Hepatitis B vaccine? Post-vaccinal symptoms are immune responses to inflammation and infection i.e. vaccine-induced hepatitis.

    Like I said vaccines do NOT prevent diseases but rather transmit diseases to non-diseased newborns. And vaccinating newborns is the first stage of getting diseased. From IPV to Gardasil, the medical community has been transmitting diseases to non-diseased individuals particularly to newborns where they acquire at least 14 vaccine-induced diseases by the age of 1 year. Absolutely appalling.

    Again, sequelae of Hepatitis B (cirrhosis and liver CA) is the result of poor nutrition, improper management, chronic drug toxicity, immunosuppression, secondary infections and invasive procedures.

    Vaccination means biologic contamination. Keep that in mind.

  72. weing says:

    You sound like the people in Idiocracy talking about electrolytes.

  73. weing says:

    Basically your “physiologic evidence of diseases from extraneous sources” is simply a slogan or mantra used to stop thinking. That way you can equate vaccination with HBV with the actual infection, cowpox with smallpox, etc.

    Regarding
    “Again, sequelae of Hepatitis B (cirrhosis and liver CA) is the result of poor nutrition, improper management, chronic drug toxicity, immunosuppression, secondary infections and invasive procedures.”

    Care to back up those statements? Is this based on your vast experience of treating patients? How do you know that the sequelae are not due to say aural sex, reading and believing antivax nonsense, etc?

  74. Dr Benway says:

    Th1Th2 provokes in me an urge to do a Mini Mental Status exam.

  75. Chris says:

    wales posted this paper title without reading it: Increased Susceptibility to Measles in Infants in the United States
    Mark Papania, MD, MPH et al PEDIATRICS Vol. 104 No. 5 November 1999, p. e59

    Note the conclusing in the abstract:

    Infants whose mothers were born after 1963 are more susceptible to measles than are infants of older mothers. An increasing proportion of infants born in the United States may be susceptible to measles. Infants at high risk of exposure to measles should be vaccinated at 12 months of age. Vaccination programs that reduce transmission of the measles virus in the general population reduce the risk of infant exposure to measles.

    Here is the full paper (free!):
    http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/104/5/e59

    Check out the last paragraph of the full paper:

    To prevent increased infant
    morbidity and mortality attributable to measles,
    timely vaccination of infants and intensive efforts to
    decrease the transmission of measles disease by ensuring
    immunity in older children are now more
    important than ever
    . This potential increase in infant
    mortality should provide additional impetus to
    strengthen efforts toward global eradication of measles
    disease.

    So, what I am assuming wales is arguing here is that herd immunity must be maintained by keeping vaccine uptake high. All the papers he has listed have concluded that vaccines are very important.

    Thank you, wales… I was thinking you were an anti-vaxxer, when in fact you are arguing for a good vaccine program.

  76. Harry says:

    @ Th1Th2on 05 Apr 2009 at 11:46 pm
    Maybe you should know that immunity can be acquired naturally (from natural infection/disease) or artificially (from vaccines). So what’s the difference of getting the HbsAg from Hepatitis B and the HbsAg from the Hepatitis B vaccine? Post-vaccinal symptoms are immune responses to inflammation and infection i.e. vaccine-induced hepatitis.

    In a horribly distorted way, you are some what correct… in the same way that some people may find Michael Jackson or Donatella Versace attractive.

    You are correct in that the body doesn’t care about the actual source of HbsAg. You are also correct that the body mounts an immune response to HbsAg. What you are incorrect about, is equating a vaccine’s ‘infection’ to the actual viral infection. HbsAg in the vaccine is attached to an adjuvant whereas HbsAg in Heb B is attached to the virus. This is a critical difference and is at the heart of how vaccinations work. The body recognizes the foreign antigen and mounts a naive immune response resulting in the production of antibodies against the HbsAg. The difference is that the vaccine does not fight back resulting in an infection whereas the actual Hep B virus fights back and can result in infection. The naive immune system is not able to build the antibodies it needs fast enough to clear Hep B when it is first exposed to it. Upon exposure to the actual Hep B, a vaccinated individual’s immune system will mount a non-naive response and is able to clear the virus without letting it cause a chronic infection.

    HbsAg+adjuvant is a…. straw man!

  77. Harry says:

    @ # Th1Th2on 05 Apr 2009 at 7:31 pm
    Hepatitis B is a self-limiting disease.

    Life is also a self-limiting state.

    While some people do clear the virus, many people do not. What does that mean in terms of actual numbers? 2 billion people in the world are infected. 350 million people have chronic infections. 500,000 to 1.2 million people die every year from Heb B. If 350 million out of 2,000 million people have chronic infections, then 17.5% of people who are exposed are unable to control the infection and thus it is NOT self-limiting in their case.

    Lavanchy D. “Hepatitis B virus epidemiology, disease burden, treatment, and current and emerging prevention and control measures.” J Viral Hepat. 2004 Mar;11(2):97-107.

    Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is a serious global health problem, with 2 billion people infected worldwide, and 350 million suffering from chronic HBV infection. The 10th leading cause of death worldwide, HBV infections result in 500 000 to 1.2 million deaths per year caused by chronic hepatitis, cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma; the last accounts for 320 000 deaths per year. In Western countries, the disease is relatively rare and acquired primarily in adulthood, whereas in Asia and most of Africa, chronic HBV infection is common and usually acquired perinatally or in childhood. More efficacious treatments, mass immunization programs, and safe injection techniques are essential for eliminating HBV infection and reducing global HBV-related morbidity and mortality. Safe and effective vaccines against HBV infection have been available since 1982. The implementation of mass immunization programs, which have been recommended by the World Health Organization since 1991, have dramatically decreased the incidence of HBV infection among infants, children, and adolescents in many countries. However, not all countries have adopted these recommendations and there remains a large number of persons that were infected with HBV prior to the implementation of immunization programs. Antiviral treatment is the only way to reduce morbidity and mortality from chronic HBV infection. Conventional interferon alfa and lamivudine have been the primary treatments to date. Conventional interferon alfa produces a durable response in a moderate proportion of patients but has undesirable side-effects and must be administered subcutaneously three times per week. Lamivudine also produces a response in a modest proportion of patients and causes few side-effects. However, prolonged treatment is often necessary to prevent relapse on cessation of therapy, and continuous treatment can lead to the development of lamivudine resistance. Promising emerging new treatments include adefovir, entecavir and peginterferon alfa-2a (40 kDa).

  78. wales says:

    Chris, you keep missing the point, intentionally or not (perchlorate exposure perhaps). Of course an article published in Pediatrics is going to recommend vaccination and maintaining herd immunity, duh.

    My point was that the article gives evidence of the fact that infants are a new group of susceptibles due to vaccine induced herd immunity replacing naturally acquired immunity, which is one of the factors discussed in the measles models.

  79. storkdok says:

    lol, Dr. Benway!

    Hard to believe how much ignorance is out there.

  80. weing says:

    Those infants would not be susceptible if their mothers had had the disease instead of the vaccine? What about after 6 months of age? What if their mothers never had the disease? Would they be considered susceptible because their mothers never had the disease?

  81. Calli Arcale says:

    This is rather late in the thread, but I couldn’t help but respond to a comment relevant to an incident in my home state (Minnesota). This pertains to polio cases in an Amish community.

    Chris, yes boosters are necessary for adults now. But it is unlikely we will see the high vaccination coverage rates we see in children as there is no enforcement (such as school entry requirements).

    Back to the polio for a moment, quite an irony that unvaccinated children acquired polio from vaccinated individuals, huh?

    This is precisely the reason why the recommended vaccination schedule includes the IPV vaccine instead of the oral one — the oral vaccine uses live virus, and there is a small risk of developing polio, and even of passing it on. It is definitely not as virulent as wild-type polio, but still, most American clinics will only use the inactivated poliovirus (IPV) vaccine. The drawbacks are the use of a hypodermic needle (which has a certain “ouch” factor, of course) and cost — oral vaccine is cheaper. The cost concern is also why the oral vaccine is what’s used in developing countries, despite the fact that IPV is safer. In most of the countries where the oral vaccine is used, polio is endemic, so the risk from the vaccine is still significantly less than the risk from the disease itself.

    BTW, regarding why adults are vaccinated less commonly, part of this is the lack of a mandatory program for vaccination of adults. The reason for that is probably equal parts political (adults are voters), practical (what do you deny adults, that is equivalent to denying children entry to public school?), and economic (it’s hard enough now for vaccine manufacturers to keep up with demand). But there is another reason: adults are less prone to spreading the diseases. Children, due to their generally immature hygiene practices, are the primary vectors of disease transmission. It’s the same reason we fight rabies by vaccinating dogs and cats, even though rabies can certainly kill humans (and any mammal, actually). Of all the vectors and reservoirs for the disease, the one we can most easily reach is our household pets. By contrast, human-to-human transmission is vanishingly rare, so there’s no point routinely vaccinating humans against rabies. Instead, we vaccinate the vectors — our pets.

    The same strategy is what we use against things like pertussis. Adult immunity definitely wanes. Most adults are protected not by being immune themselves but by most of the vectors (small children) around them being immune. You don’t really need herd immunity in the entire population — just in the subset most likely to harbor and transmit the disease, which in many cases is children.

  82. wales says:

    weing, reading the paper will supply your answers. it’s free.

  83. Th1Th2 says:

    Harry,

    Let me say this again, seroconversion does not correlate to protective immunity and antibody production is NOT the primary and ultimate function of the immune system. There can be immunity without antibody production and that is cell-mediated immunity—this confers true immunity because this is the first line of defense. Cellular immunity takes precedence over humoral immunity because of the presence of killer cells like macrophages, NK, CTLs, etc. where each of these cells can promote destruction, apoptosis and elimination of microorganisms. Antibodies do NOT kill microorganisms, they just identify and bind with the antigen. They are useless without the effector mechanism of CMI and the complement. This is the reason vaccines are worthless, toxic, unsafe, and most of all pathogenic.

    FYI, HbsAg, per se is highly immunogenic and pathogenic. The essence of HBV replication in vivo is the same as growing recombinant HbsAg in vitro, that is, to produce more antigens necessary to induce the disease in the body thus causing an immune response. That means, the amount and concentration of antigens in vaccines plus the addition of adjuvants are more than significant regardless the vaccine is prepared with live or attenuated microorganisms. The use of adjuvants in vaccines skews the normal physiology of the immune system. Aluminum-adjuvanted antigens, like the HbsAg in vaccines, are exclusively Th2-promoting causing resultant Th1-inhibition. Instead of the normal pattern of antigen-presentation and destruction at the cellular level, aluminum-adjuvanted HbsAg, are protected from proteolytic desctruction, dilution, rapid degradation and delays elimination by the host causing prolonged but ABNORMAL immune response. This is the reason vaccinees are keeping the vaccine-induced disease that should have been eliminated otherwise as compared to natural infection/disease.

    Vaccines are designed to cause the disease of interest. For example, in order for live, attenuated viral vaccines, like MMR, to be effective, they must be capable of REPLICATION after vaccination. In short, without the disease, there will be no immunity. Moreover, vaccines prepared with dead or inactivated microorganisms, are specifically designed to mitigate SYMPTOMS of the disease. For example, Hib vaccine can cause an early-onset Hib disease, and IAIV can cause flu-like symptoms. What’s surprising is that the medical community would favor rejection of causation especially if the person is vaccinated. This really what makes vaccination a myth, the medical community still believes in “ghost” microorganisms. No wonder a lot of diseases are classified idiopathic until they find a new microorganism to blame.

    The symptoms of vaccine-induced diseases are abundant in every vaccine package inserts. Name the vaccine and you can identify the disease by perusing each symptoms listed in the adverse reaction section.

  84. Dr Benway says:

    Th1Th2, the old saying, “People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones,” means you shouldn’t throw stones because you’ll break the glass, am I right?

  85. Th1Th2 says:

    “Life is also a self-limiting state.”

    That is a lame alibi.

    There is a clear distinction between health and sickness. You don’t describe a self-limiting disease by discussing morbid complications. That’s oxymoronic. Likewise, you don’t discuss poisons and biohazards like vaccines with nutrition. It doesn’t make any sense.

  86. Th1Th2 says:

    Dr. Benway,

    Argumentum ad hominem is something I do not apply let alone character assassination. If ever I did say something unfavorable, it is for the sake of the argument because I will stand with my position about vaccination.

  87. weing says:

    So, now we have true immunity and not so true immunity? So my reaction to poison ivy is true immunity and my antibody levels to HBS are the not so true immunity and have not really protected me all these years?

    wales,
    Only you can give me your understanding of it. I want to know what conclusions you got out of the paper.

  88. weing says:

    Th,
    You mean you stand in your way?

  89. Th1Th2 says:

    The word “protection” is the most common mistake used by many vaccine apologists. Protection is to safeguard the host from any opportunistic microorganisms and antigens from entering the body causing disease, for example, HbsAg. Vaccination defeats that purpose instead causes the host, not only to become susceptible, but infected as well.

    HbsAg is an indicator of hepatitis B infection regardless of anti-Hbs.

  90. weing says:

    And you see nothing wrong with that circular logic? Amazing. You really do expect to grow corn from cooked seeds.

  91. Dr Benway says:

    Th1Th2,

    You’d say that an apple and an orange are similar, in that they’re both things to eat, am I right?

  92. Th1Th2 says:

    “And you see nothing wrong with that circular logic? Amazing. You really do expect to grow corn from cooked seeds.”

    Antigens are pathogenic regardless whether the vaccine is prepared with live, attenuated or killed (inactivated) microorganisms. There are several factors that influence the degree of antigen pathogenicity.

    1. Replication of the microorganism in the body causing increased production of antigens. Ex. MMR vaccine.

    2. By increasing antigen quantification in the vaccine. This is the reason why inactivated (dead) vaccines are also pathogenic.

    3. Use of adjuvants.

    These are necessary to induce and enhance an immune response. Without the disease, there will be no immunity.

  93. weing says:

    You still see nothing wrong with your definition of disease? You are also using the term pathogenic instead of immunogenic. Intentional? If you were a med student you would flunk basic immunology. Whoever taught you that taught you wrong. Maybe they teach that kind of silliness in ND schools. You gotta get back to the books kid, if you want to make any sense to others.

  94. Th1Th2 says:

    Let me guide you on how you developed your anti-Hbs, shall we?
    In chronological order:

    1. Exposure (via natural infection or VACCINES)
    2. Disease process (pathogenicity)
    3. Immunogenicity

    I am not surprised, the magical world of vaccination rests on fantasy and superstitious belief.

  95. weing says:

    Wrong. You clearly don’t understand basic immunology. Go back to the books and learn.

  96. weing says:

    Get an actual immunology book not some alternate world immunology text.

  97. Th1Th2 says:

    Why you can’t accept the fact that you were once exposed intentionally to Hepatitis B (HbsAg) by way of vaccination? Remember, there will be no anti-Hbs without the HbsAg. And having the HbsAg is an indicator of Hepatitis B infection regardless whether it was acquired naturally or artificially (vaccines).

    Until then.

  98. weing says:

    Let’s see if I can make it simple enough for you. It works as if the vaccine fools your immune system into thinking you have an infection. It sees no difference between the antigen on the vaccine and an actual virus. It produces an antibody response, which is what we want. The HBsAg from the vaccine does not replicate in your body, just like boiled corn will not grow if you plant it. Normally HBsAg would be an indicator of infection, just like freshly picked corn would be expected to grow if you planted it, but not in this case.

  99. Chris says:

    Wow, wales… you really are hard core. I highlighted the parts of the papers that basically said that a high vaccine uptake must be maintained to keep up herd immunity in at least two of the studies, and you say I don’t get the point. Man, are you clueless.

    Here is something interesting: measles is a disease that is only vectored in humans. Unlike tetanus and influenza that can be spread by other animals (or spores in dirt in the case of tetanus), measles only causes illness in humans (with about 1 in 1000 getting serious physical impacts like blindness, deafness, paralysis, permanent mental impairment, and even death). With a high enough vaccine uptake measles cannot spread.

    In fact, the US, UK and many other countries measles was down to a very low count due to effective immunization programs. It was only after Wakefield’s scaremongering (without real data) did the vaccine rates go down, and measles returned. With the deaths of several children in Europe (http://www.eurosurveillance.org/ViewArticle.aspx?ArticleId=18837).

    Measles is a disease that can be wiped off the face of this planet. It can go the way of smallpox. If you read the papers you listed (and I cannot understand why you don’t post the links like I do, are you thinking we will not find them and read them?), they all encourage high vaccine coverage. And if the vaccine coverage is high enough, we would no longer have to vaccinate for measles.

    I have a scar from several smallpox innoculations, my children do not. Do you know why?

    I personally believe that if measles vaccination uptake is high enough to ensure herd immunity, that my grandchildren would never need to worry about the vaccine or the disease. But Wakefield’s greed and ego has made sure that will not happen for a long time.

    (oh by the noodly appendage of the flying spaghetti monster… Th1Th2 — the HepB vaccine is only a small bit of the virus, it cannot transmit the disease! I have been ignoring you, but I am sure that this has been told to you)

Comments are closed.