An Open Letter to Legislators Currently Considering Vaccine Legislation from Tetyana Obukhanych, PhD in Immunology
Thank you to Thinking Moms' Revolution for reprint permission.
Re: VACCINE LEGISLATION
Dear Legislator:
My name is Tetyana Obukhanych. I hold a PhD in Immunology. I am writing this letter in the hope that it will correct several common misperceptions about vaccines in order to help you formulate a fair and balanced understanding that is supported by accepted vaccine theory and new scientific findings.
Do unvaccinated children pose a higher threat to the public than the vaccinated?
It is often stated that those who choose not to vaccinate their children for reasons of conscience endanger the rest of the public, and this is the rationale behind most of the legislation to end vaccine exemptions currently being considered by federal and state legislators country-wide. You should be aware that the nature of protection afforded by many modern vaccines – and that includes most of the vaccines recommended by the CDC for children – is not consistent with such a statement. I have outlined below the recommended vaccines that cannot prevent transmission of disease either because they are not designed to prevent the transmission of infection (rather, they are intended to prevent disease symptoms), or because they are for non-communicable diseases. People who have not received the vaccines mentioned below pose no higher threat to the general public than those who have, implying that discrimination against non-immunized children in a
public school setting may not be warranted.
State Senator Richard Pan of California, sponsor of vaccine legislation
IPV (inactivated poliovirus vaccine) cannot prevent transmission of poliovirus (see appendix for the scientific study, Item #1). Wild poliovirus has been non-existent in the USA for at least two decades. Even if wild poliovirus were to be re-imported by travel, vaccinating for polio with IPV cannot affect the safety of public spaces. Please note that wild poliovirus eradication is attributed to the use of a different vaccine, OPV or oral poliovirus vaccine. Despite being capable of preventing wild poliovirus transmission, use of OPV was phased out long ago in the USA and replaced with IPV due to safety concerns.
- Tetanus is not a contagious disease, but rather acquired from deep-puncture wounds contaminated with C. tetani spores. Vaccinating for tetanus (via the DTaP combination vaccine) cannot alter the safety of public spaces; it is intended to render personal protection only.
- While intended to prevent the disease-causing effects of the diphtheria toxin, the diphtheria toxoid vaccine (also contained in the DTaP vaccine) is not designed to prevent colonization and transmission of C. diphtheriae. Vaccinating for diphtheria cannot alter the safety of public spaces; it is likewise intended for personal protection only.
- The acellular pertussis (aP) vaccine (the final element of the DTaP combined vaccine), now in use in the USA, replaced the whole cell pertussis vaccine in the late 1990s, which was followed by an unprecedented resurgence of whooping cough. An experiment with deliberate pertussis infection in primates revealed that the aP vaccine is not capable of preventing colonization and transmission of B. pertussis (see appendix for the scientific study, Item #2). The FDA has issued a warning regarding this crucial finding.[1]
Furthermore, the 2013 meeting of the Board of Scientific Counselors at the CDC revealed additional alarming data that pertussis variants (PRN-negative strains) currently circulating in the USA acquired a selective advantage to infect those who are up-to-date for their DTaP boosters (see appendix for the CDC document, Item #3), meaning that people who are up-to-date are more likely to be infected, and thus contagious, than people who are not vaccinated.
State Senator Elizabeth Steiner-Hayward of Oregon, sponsor of vaccine legislation
- Among numerous types of H. influenzae, the Hib vaccine covers only type b. Despite its sole intention to reduce symptomatic and asymptomatic (disease-less) Hib carriage, the introduction of the Hib vaccine has inadvertently shifted strain dominance towards other types of H. influenzae (types a through f). These types have been causing invasive disease of high severity and increasing incidence in adults in the era of Hib vaccination of children (see appendix for the scientific study, Item #4). The general population is more vulnerable to the invasive disease now than it was prior to the start of the Hib vaccination campaign. Discriminating against children who are not vaccinated for Hib does not make any scientific sense in the era of non-type b H. influenzae disease.
- Hepatitis B is a blood-borne virus. It does not spread in a community setting, especially among children who are unlikely to engage in high-risk behaviors, such as needle sharing or sex. Vaccinating children for hepatitis B cannot significantly alter the safety of public spaces. Further, school admission is not prohibited for children who are chronic hepatitis B carriers. To prohibit school admission for those who are simply unvaccinated – and do not even carry hepatitis B – would constitute unreasonable and illogical discrimination.
In summary, a person who is not vaccinated with IPV, DTaP, HepB, and Hib vaccines due to reasons of conscience poses no extra danger to the public than a person who is. No discrimination is warranted.
How often do serious vaccine adverse events happen?
It is often stated that vaccination rarely leads to serious adverse events. Unfortunately, this statement is not supported by science. A recent study done in Ontario, Canada, established that vaccination actually leads to an emergency room visit for 1 in 168 children following their 12-month vaccination appointment and for 1 in 730 children following their 18-month vaccination appointment (see appendix for a scientific study, Item #5).
When the risk of an adverse event requiring an ER visit after well-baby vaccinations is demonstrably so high, vaccination must remain a choice for parents, who may understandably be unwilling to assume this immediate risk in order to protect their children from diseases that are generally considered mild or that their children may never be exposed to.
State Senator Kevin Mullin of Vermont, sponsor of vaccine legislation
Can discrimination against families who oppose vaccines for reasons of conscience prevent future disease outbreaks of communicable viral diseases, such as measles?
Measles research scientists have for a long time been aware of the “measles paradox.” I quote from the article by Poland & Jacobson (1994) “Failure to Reach the Goal of Measles Elimination: Apparent Paradox of Measles Infections in Immunized Persons.” Arch Intern Med 154:1815-1820:
“The apparent paradox is that as measles immunization rates rise to high levels in a population, measles becomes a disease of immunized persons.”[2]
Further research determined that behind the “measles paradox” is a fraction of the population called LOW VACCINE RESPONDERS. Low-responders are those who respond poorly to the first dose of the measles vaccine. These individuals then mount a weak immune response to subsequent RE-vaccination and quickly return to the pool of “susceptibles’’ within 2-5 years, despite being fully vaccinated.[3]
Re-vaccination cannot correct low-responsiveness: it appears to be an immuno-genetic trait.[4] The proportion of low-responders among children was estimated to be 4.7% in the USA.[5]
Studies of measles outbreaks in Quebec, Canada, and China attest that outbreaks of measles still happen, even when vaccination compliance is in the highest bracket (95-97% or even 99%, see appendix for scientific studies, Items #6&7). This is because even in high vaccine responders, vaccine-induced antibodies wane over time. Vaccine immunity does not equal life-long immunity acquired after natural exposure.
It has been documented that vaccinated persons who develop breakthrough measles are contagious. In fact, two major measles outbreaks in 2011 (in Quebec, Canada, and in New York, NY) were re-imported by previously vaccinated individuals.[6]-[7]
Taken together, these data make it apparent that elimination of vaccine exemptions, currently only utilized by a small percentage of families anyway, will neither solve the problem of disease resurgence nor prevent re-importation and outbreaks of previously eliminated diseases.
Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, sponsor of federal vaccine legislation
Is discrimination against conscientious vaccine objectors the only practical solution?
The majority of measles cases in recent US outbreaks (including the recent Disneyland outbreak) are adults and very young babies, whereas in the pre-vaccination era, measles occurred mainly between the ages 1 and 15. Natural exposure to measles was followed by lifelong immunity from re-infection, whereas vaccine immunity wanes over time, leaving adults unprotected by their childhood shots. Measles is more dangerous for infants and for adults than for school-aged children.
Despite high chances of exposure in the pre-vaccination era, measles practically never happened in babies much younger than one year of age due to the robust maternal immunity transfer mechanism. The vulnerability of very young babies to measles today is the direct outcome of the prolonged mass vaccination campaign of the past, during which their mothers, themselves vaccinated in their childhood, were not able to experience measles naturally at a safe school age and establish the lifelong immunity that would also be transferred to their babies and protect them from measles for the first year of life.
Luckily, a therapeutic backup exists to mimic now-eroded maternal immunity. Infants as well as other vulnerable or immunocompromised individuals, are eligible to receive immunoglobulin, a potentially life-saving measure that supplies antibodies directed against the virus to prevent or ameliorate disease upon exposure (see appendix, Item #8).
In summary: 1) due to the properties of modern vaccines, non-vaccinated individuals pose no greater risk of transmission of polio, diphtheria, pertussis, and numerous non-type b H. influenzae strains than vaccinated individuals do, non-vaccinated individuals pose virtually no danger of transmission of hepatitis B in a school setting, and tetanus is not transmissible at all; 2) there is a significantly elevated risk of emergency room visits after childhood vaccination appointments attesting that vaccination is not risk-free; 3) outbreaks of measles cannot be entirely prevented even if we had nearly perfect vaccination compliance; and 4) an effective method of preventing measles and other viral diseases in vaccine-ineligible infants and the immunocompromised, immunoglobulin, is available for those who may be exposed to these diseases.
Taken together, these four facts make it clear that discrimination in a public school setting against children who are not vaccinated for reasons of conscience is completely unwarranted as the vaccine status of conscientious objectors poses no undue public health risk.
Sincerely Yours,
~ Tetyana Obukhanych, PhD
Tetyana Obukhanych, PhD, is the author of the book Vaccine Illusion. She has studied immunology in some of the world’s most prestigious medical institutions. She earned her PhD in Immunology at the Rockefeller University in New York and did postdoctoral training at Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA and Stanford University in California.
Dr. Obukhanych offers online classes for those who want to gain deeper understanding of how the immune system works and whether the immunologic benefits of vaccines are worth the risks: Natural Immunity Fundamentals.
Appendix
Item #1. The Cuba IPV Study collaborative group. (2007) Randomized controlled trial of inactivated poliovirus vaccine in Cuba. N Engl J Med 356:1536-44
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17429085
The table below from the Cuban IPV study documents that 91% of children receiving no IPV (control group B) were colonized with live attenuated poliovirus upon deliberate experimental inoculation. Children who were vaccinated with IPV (groups A and C) were similarly colonized at the rate of 94-97%. High counts of live virus were recovered from the stool of children in all groups. These results make it clear that IPV cannot be relied upon for the control of polioviruses.
Item #2. Warfel et al. (2014) Acellular pertussis vaccines protect against disease but fail to prevent infection and transmission in a nonhuman primate model. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111:787-92
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24277828
“Baboons vaccinated with aP were protected from severe pertussis-associated symptoms but not from colonization, did not clear the infection faster than naïve [unvaccinated] animals, and readily transmitted B. pertussis to unvaccinated contacts. By comparison, previously infected [naturally-immune] animals were not colonized upon secondary infection.”
Item #3. Meeting of the Board of Scientific Counselors, Office of Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Tom Harkins Global Communication Center, Atlanta, Georgia, December 11-12, 2013
http://www.cdc.gov/maso/facm/pdfs/BSCOID/2013121112_BSCOID_Minutes.pdf
Resurgence of Pertussis (p.6)
“Findings indicated that 85% of the isolates [from six Enhanced Pertussis Surveillance Sites and from epidemics in Washington and Vermont in 2012] were PRN-deficient and vaccinated patients had significantly higher odds than unvaccinated patients of being infected with PRN-deficient strains. Moreover, when patients with up-to-date DTaP vaccinations were compared to unvaccinated patients, the odds of being infected with PRN-deficient strains increased, suggesting that PRN-bacteria may have a selective advantage in infecting DTaP-vaccinated persons.”
Item #4. Rubach et al. (2011) Increasing incidence of invasive Haemophilus influenzae disease in adults, Utah, USA. Emerg Infect Dis 17:1645-50
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21888789
The chart below from Rubach et al. shows the number of invasive cases of H. influenzae (all types) in Utah in the decade of childhood vaccination for Hib.
Item #5. Wilson et al. (2011) Adverse events following 12 and 18 month vaccinations: a population-based, self-controlled case series analysis. PLoS One 6:e27897
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22174753
“Four to 12 days post 12 month vaccination, children had a 1.33 (1.29-1.38) increased relative incidence of the combined endpoint compared to the control period, or at least one event during the risk interval for every 168 children vaccinated. Ten to 12 days post 18 month vaccination, the relative incidence was 1.25 (95%, 1.17-1.33) which represented at least one excess event for every 730 children vaccinated. The primary reason for increased events was statistically significant elevations in emergency room visits following all vaccinations.”
Item #6. De Serres et al. (2013) Largest measles epidemic in North America in a decade--Quebec, Canada, 2011: contribution of susceptibility, serendipity, and superspreading events. J Infect Dis 207:990-98
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23264672
“The largest measles epidemic in North America in the last decade occurred in 2011 in Quebec, Canada.”
“A super-spreading event triggered by 1 importation resulted in sustained transmission and 678 cases.”
“The index case patient was a 30-39-year old adult, after returning to Canada from the Caribbean. The index case patient received measles vaccine in childhood.”
“Provincial [Quebec] vaccine coverage surveys conducted in 2006, 2008, and 2010 consistently showed that by 24 months of age, approximately 96% of children had received 1 dose and approximately 85% had received 2 doses of measles vaccine, increasing to 97% and 90%, respectively, by 28 months of age. With additional first and second doses administered between 28 and 59 months of age, population measles vaccine coverage is even higher by school entry.”
“Among adolescents, 22% [of measles cases] had received 2 vaccine doses. Outbreak investigation showed this proportion to have been an underestimate; active case finding identified 130% more cases among 2-dose recipients.”
Item #7. Wang et al. (2014) Difficulties in eliminating measles and controlling rubella and mumps: a cross-sectional study of a first measles and rubella vaccination and a second measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination. PLoS One 9:e89361
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24586717
“The reported coverage of the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine is greater than 99.0% in Zhejiang province. However, the incidence of measles, mumps, and rubella remains high.”
Item #8. Immunoglobulin Handbook, Health Protection Agency
HUMAN NORMAL IMMUNOGLOBULIN (HNIG):
Indications
- To prevent or attenuate an attack in immuno-compromised contacts
- To prevent or attenuate an attack in pregnant women
- To prevent or attenuate an attack in infants under the age of 9 months
[1] http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm376937.htm
[2] http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=619215
[3] Poland (1998) Am J Hum Genet 62:215-220
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9463343
“ ‘poor responders,’ who were re-immunized and developed poor or low-level antibody responses only to lose detectable antibody and develop measles on exposure 2–5 years later.”
[4] ibid
“Our ongoing studies suggest that seronegativity after vaccination [for measles] clusters among related family members, that genetic polymorphisms within the HLA [genes] significantly influence antibody levels.”
[5] LeBaron et al. (2007) Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 161:294-301
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17339511
“Titers fell significantly over time [after second MMR] for the study population overall and, by the final collection, 4.7% of children were potentially susceptible.”
[6] De Serres et al. (2013) J Infect Dis 207:990-998
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23264672
“The index case patient received measles vaccine in childhood.”
[7] Rosen et al. (2014) Clin Infect Dis 58:1205-1210
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24585562
“The index patient had 2 doses of measles-containing vaccine.”
Below is a video that carries forth much of the info in this letter - featuring the directors of Trace Amount, AofA Contributor Laura Hayes and others.
Bob Moffitt said: "...we are long past time for other scientific disciplines .. such as .. toxicology and immunology .. to make their voices heard .. because .. to remain silent as they appear to have done for decades .. is the response of "cowards"."
Which begs the question: What are they afraid of?
When we answer that question, I believe we will take a huge step toward a true solution.
Posted by: Karen M | April 22, 2015 at 02:50 PM
"""It puzzles me, why Americans must fight with pharma-political mafia so hard to protect their children and themselves from vaccine injuries and deaths, while in Europe, Australia, and many Asiatic countries vaccines are only voluntary.""
Not now in Australia. We pay taxes, and these get returned in something called child rebates. A form of control... for poor and middle income earners. No jab, no money..... It is obscene. In the last 10- years? My 9 grandkids were born. From very, very healthy stock....... 4 are autistic. The only common denominator? Those damn new immunisations, and the horrific mixtures they are in.
Hitler was timid in comparision ............ imagine him forcibly injecting the whole population with untested drugs, mecury, detergent, raw eggs, live monkey cells, aluminium? But it happens in the Western World.
Most horrible thing? Bill GAtes. It has been known that live polio virus carried HIV, and two other monkey viruses, deadly when injected into humans... Now? There is a whole new outbreak of poio, from live polio virus.......... Emperors New Clothes, no-one wants to see what is the truth, if you see the truth (which sorry, is blatantly obvious)..... dubbed as some sort of irrational radical? Anyway this article is fantastic, am keeping the reference.
Posted by: ang | April 22, 2015 at 12:31 AM
Oh, dear; I am so slow.
I kept seeing the protest sign saying Education is a right, not a privilege; and did not notice it is Doc- tore - Pan helping to hold it up!
Well now in all fairness - it did not say how they were to be educated - - the board has the materials a home school parent and pick up - that is true because I was hired to home school two kids here, by a family that hit it big in the construction business before it all went south.
Hmmmm - He is a very intelligent - snake in the grass. Now here folks is true evil for he really does have a choice unlike the over medicated mental patient under too much psych medicines that has finally gone over to the really deep end of psychosis.
Posted by: Benedetta | April 21, 2015 at 01:10 PM
Put this with:
http://www.westonaprice.org/press/public-health-officials-know-recently-vaccinated-individuals-spread-disease/ .
this article proving that the immune compromised are threatened by vaccinated, and we SHOULD have a slam dunk. Tetyana, thanks for speaking out. You have courage. God I wish one of us with a vaccine-injured child would win a huge lotto so that we could give prizes to researchers and doctors such as Tetyana for the courage to speak out.
Posted by: Anita Donnelly | April 21, 2015 at 12:12 PM
@Barry -- Thanks for your follow up.
The SV40 virus was implanted in about 100 million Americans in the 1950s and 1960s by both polio vaccines (oral and injected). After Eddy's discovery, a law passed that prohibited the vaccines from being manufactured with SV40, but existing vaccines were not destroyed (sound familiar?) nor was the seed material used to make polio vaccines for the next four decades.
After the American law was passed, the SV40 was still found for many years in the polio vaccines of foreign manufacturers, and it is thought that 100's of millions of humans were infected. The SV40 virus was still being spread by vaccines in 1963 and, some believe, up to the 1990s.
The SV40 has been implicated in about 40% of all soft tissue cancers in America.
More important, SV40 is now found in today's children of adults once infected with the virus, indicating a genetic linkage.
All of this info is easily gathered through a Google search of Bernadette Eddy SV40 polio vaccine.
In April of this year, the CDC scrubbed its website of the page that discussed the linkage of polio vaccines to cancer-causing viruses.
Posted by: David Taylor | April 21, 2015 at 12:07 PM
"The incidence of swine flu among the vaccinated was seven times greater than it was among those who had not been vaccinated, according to news reports. In addition, 12 Americans who had been vaccinated against swine flu died of complications related to Guillain-Barre syndrome, a polyneuropathy affecting the peripheral nervous system. More than 200 were paralyzed, news accounts said."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/vaccine-specialist-j-anthony-morris-dies-at-95/2014/07/03/e786b9b8-0228-11e4-8572-4b1b969b6322_story.html
Posted by: Ottoschnaut | April 21, 2015 at 09:13 AM
For those following CA's SB 277, sponsored by Senator Pan, here is a new 2-min. video by Josh Coleman of Roseville, CA titled "Pan's Lies"...I think you're going to like it :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caiCn57RNFc&feature=youtu.be
Posted by: Laura Hayes | April 21, 2015 at 12:42 AM
And sexist for targeting nurses and daycare workers, and classist and racist for targeting head start children.
Posted by: @danchi | April 20, 2015 at 07:56 PM
Bernice Eddy's revelations in the 1950s about the polio vaccines' SV-40 contamination eventually caused a change in one vaccine, not the corrupt industry and govt. agencies responsible for the catastrophe.
****************
Are you sure it caused a change in one vaccine?
http://www.sv40foundation.org/Who-we-are.html
You can read this link yourself, but it talks about little Alexander Horwin. He was born in June 96, was administered the oral polio vaccine in November 97, was diagnosed with a malignant brain cancer in August 98, and then sadly he passed away on January 31, 1999.
According to this website, four independent laboratories examined Alexanders tumour for the presence of SV40, and each one found that the tumor tissue contained the virus.
Yet Alexander’s cord blood (… blood shared by Alexander and his mother at the time of Alexander's birth) was tested for SV40, and it did not contain SV40.
Alexander’s parents were also tested for SV40 by two independent laboratories. And all tests demonstrated that the parents did not carry the virus.
Do you happen to know what inspired Dr. Eddy first to suspect, and then to find a way of proving to herself that SV40 was a carcinogenic virus?
Posted by: Barry | April 20, 2015 at 07:04 PM
"If I remember right when beliefs change -- things like the Holy spirit came like a great whirlwind bringing flaming tongues of fire into the heart and soul of men and those flames spread into a wild fire that spread across the world."
I LOVE this, Benedetta; it's so beautiful.
Posted by: Bayareamom | April 20, 2015 at 05:42 PM
"When Congress gave over power of governance to 185 independent agencies, the game was over. We won't win playing that game. We have to end the game and start anew."
And there it is; completely agree.
Posted by: Bayareamom | April 20, 2015 at 05:40 PM
It puzzles me, why Americans must fight with pharma-political mafia so hard to protect their children and themselves from vaccine injuries and deaths, while in Europe, Australia, and many Asiatic countries vaccines are only voluntary.
It is clear to me that US is not a democracy, rather it has a system of totalitarian fascism, where criminal corporations control all society and are free to kill and maim everybody for profits. The final result of this criminal policy of the regime and big pharma is predictable. We can expect soon a complete collapse of US as most Americans will be autistic or crippled other way by vaccines. Such society has no future.
Posted by: no-vac | April 20, 2015 at 05:17 PM
And yet even Orac seems to be very concerned in his blog article today at the backlash regarding Dr. Oz and Miller over GMO's. The pressure and the more aggressive stance is definitely the way to go. They are afraid of their money trail and legal lapses being exposed. Feet to the fire is working.
Posted by: @ David Taylor | April 20, 2015 at 05:05 PM
David Taylor; I too was a true believer, once upon a time.
If I remember right when beliefs change -- things like the Holy spirit came like a great whirlwind bringing flaming tongues of fire into the heart and soul of men and those flames spread into a wild fire that spread across the world.
Posted by: Benedetta | April 20, 2015 at 04:27 PM
In support of Dr. Obukhanych’s fine work, I wanted to reemphasize two of the factors that prevent the theory of “herd immunity” from functioning in the real world: genetically based variations in individual response to vaccines and impact of obesity on immune responses to vaccines.
First, Dr. Gregory Poland’s research highlights the variations in individual responses to measles vaccine.
http://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/journal.ppat.1002344#ppat-1002344-g002
“Our population-based MMR vaccine studies also determined that host gene polymorphisms are associated with measurable inter-individual variations in measles vaccine–induced immunity.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3570049/
Second, 17% of American youth are obese (JAMA 2014;311(8):806-814. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.732). It is known that obesity impairs immune response to influenza, Hep B and tetanus vaccines. One can extrapolate that obesity-related immune impairment applies to other vaccines as well. A minimum 17% rate of impaired response to vaccines does not bode well for the theory of “herd immunity”. I think this matter should be made more public, not to scapegoat the obese, but to point out the weaknesses of herd immunity theory.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3270113/
http://uthscsa.edu/micro-immunology/faculty/pclab/print/2006%20Cooper%20Autoimmunity.pdf
I suspect that obese children are intentionally excluded from vaccination study protocols such as the ones conducted by Gregory Poland and vaccine manufacturers, just as children with many other pre-existing conditions are excluded from those types of studies in order to obtain the highest possible rates of sero-conversion. This is one reason for the disparity between clinical vs. real-world vaccine efficacy: clinical studies are conducted with a pre-selected group of individuals designed to be high responders.
Lastly, we need a protocol for the advance identification of individuals who may experience adverse vaccine reactions due to genetic predisposition before we can, with any degree of good conscience, even consider disallowing all but “medically sanctioned” vaccine exemptions.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16816003
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2722448/?ref=nf
“The goal of pharmacogenomics and vaccinomics is to identify genetic variants that predict adverse responses to vaccines, predict aberrant immune responses, contribute to personalized therapy and that predict susceptibility to diseases and response to vaccines.”
Posted by: reader | April 20, 2015 at 04:23 PM
Last night had a long, civil, and detailed exchange with pediatrician Saul Hymes on Twitter about Dr. Obukhanych and her work, especially her work with aluminum adjuvants. Dr. Hymes rejects her work as weak on a number of bases. When I pointed out that aluminum has never been tested for toxic effects in humans by FDA, CDC or any vaccine maker, he responded that the amount in vaccines is safe and to have a toxic effect a human would have to drink "a barrel full."
Dr. Hymes believes in vaccine orthodoxy and said, "When the science changes so will my practice." My conclusion is that he, like policy makers, is a True Believer. True Believers create elaborate defense mechanisms to maintain their belief, including blinders to science that raises doubt about orthodox assumptions and practice regarding vaccines.
Dr. Obukhanych's letter is unlikely to have any effect on policy makers who are True Believers (whether out of profit, cowardice or ignorance).
Socially and politically, we are far from a tipping point regarding vaccines during which True Believers may entertain doubt. Bernice Eddy's revelations in the 1950s about the polio vaccines' SV-40 contamination eventually caused a change in one vaccine, not the corrupt industry and govt. agencies responsible for the catastrophe.
Dr. J. Anthony Morris, Chief Vaccine Control Office and Research Virologist, is one of the most important whistleblowers ever to come out of the FDA. His testimony before a 1972 Senate hearing (S. 3419) and published in the Congressional Record: "There is a great deal of evidence to prove that immunization of children does more harm than good."
The hearing covered many topics related to vaccines. Fraudulent studies, cover ups, useless and dangerous vaccines--Drs. Morris and Isacson spilled it all, just as Thompson and the Merck employees are trying to today.
Outcome? Firings and harassment, but no governmental, medical or societal shift in vaccine policy, practice and orthodoxy. You can even watch videos of Dr. Morris here:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgH2vCx5TOgXqctrxf-malkssiZajeo29 (info courtesy Dr. Suzanne Humphries).
So I have no hopes for Dr. Obukhanych's letter, Dr. William Thompson's and Congressman Posey's efforts, or those of the Merck whistleblowers.
When Congress gave over power of governance to 185 independent agencies, the game was over. We won't win playing that game. We have to end the game and start anew.
Posted by: David Taylor | April 20, 2015 at 03:48 PM
And is it me or do a lot more children have a diagnosis of Crohns or pancreatitis these days. It would be the right thing for more internists etc. to speak out.
Posted by: Concerned momma | April 20, 2015 at 01:39 PM
THANK YOU!!!!! Very well written.
Posted by: Arden Donahue | April 20, 2015 at 01:28 PM
I read this a few days ago and it's even better the second time around because many tings clicked in my mind that I didn't consider originally. I greatly appreciated all the researchers, MD's and other scientist who have put it on the line for the protection of the population who has been and continues to be abused by the system.
The Pro-Choice or Anti-Vaxx movements are another form of the Civil Rights Movement. The behavior of the following: The Government agencies-CDC, FDA, HHS, The Justice Dept, Bill Gates, The WHO and all their attached charities, government Researchers, private agencies that produce fraudulent test for the government: IOM, IOH, RAND, and others, The Pharmetutical Companies, bought and paid for state &b local legislators: Senator Dianne Feinstein, Hillary Clinton, Chris Christie, Rand Paul, State Senator Richard Pan, State Senator Elizabeth Steiner-Hayward of Oregon, Senator Liu, State Senator Kevin Mullin of Vermont, Sen. Holly Mitchell, Sen. Andy Vidak, all legislators in every state that has taken a penny from the pharmaceutical industry either directly or through a PAC, Forbes, LA Times, USA Today, Wall Street Journal, NYT, shot of prevention, voices for vaccines, every child by two, ALL the Science Based Medicine Blogs run by you know who, every MMS or so called alternatives site like Slate, Salon, RAW, Mother Jones, local newspapers in every state and the list goes on-----all are in collusion with the Pharmetutical Industry and the government to violate the Nuremberg Code and civil rights of individuals and who chose medical autonomy. IMHO this is just another form of RACISM. Institutionalized Racism perpetuated on a group of people based on perceived perceptions of superiority.
The Pro-Vaccine apologist and well, Jihadist, which is what I call them, has spent the last 5 years in a state of bliss as their profits have hit the upper stratosphere. In the next 5 years profits are expected to exceed 300 billion. With the exception of the online paid trolls, doctors who suffer will willful ignorance, uneducated parents who are useful idiots and a few others-everyone who has pushed the vaccine agenda gets a piece of that pie. Even a sliver can be significant financially. Prime example is Paul Proffit. Spend some time on Dollar for Docs website and see just how much money is being given to doctors either directly or through the facility they work at. Also, politicians receive a cut either directly or through various party PACS. It benefits this group of people to lump everyone who questions or opposes vaccines into one group to demonize and eliminated them from the public discourse. Vaccines are not only about money, they are also about CONTROL. Profit, greed, arrogance, denial, control of all information, and protection of careers are the reasons the system continues to operate. There are too many with too much to lose if the truth should be known.(vaccinefacts.com) So this group acts as one entity who sees others who are different as ignorant, unintelligent, terrorist as Dr. Dan states and there's no need to repeat what Paul the prophet says. So, based on the many definitions of Racism-the Pro-Vaccine Apologist are Racist.
Pro-vaccine apologist want the country to legally discriminate against anyone who challenges their unscientific conclusions and through various strong arm practices and mafia like tactics they continue to suppressed cogent, life saving information from the public. They have judged all opposing viewpoints as ignorant, unscientific and dangerous and the only way to insure their position is the only one heard, is through suppression. All of these are elements of Racism. Based on these facts I deem the Pro Vaccine Movement -Racist. This is my opinion and no one has to agree but I see it for what it is.
Posted by: Danchi | April 20, 2015 at 10:43 AM
It would obviously be very good if Senator Pan had this article put to him.
Posted by: John Stone | April 20, 2015 at 09:10 AM
Worth reading a second time ..
"People who have not received the vaccines mentioned below pose no higher threat to the general public than those who have, implying that discrimination against non-immunized children in a public school setting may not be warranted."
"In summary, a person who is not vaccinated with IPV, DTaP, HepB, and Hib vaccines due to reasons of conscience poses no extra danger to the public than a person who is. No discrimination is warranted."
"In summary: 1) due to the properties of modern vaccines, non-vaccinated individuals pose no greater risk of transmission of polio, diphtheria, pertussis, and numerous non-type b H. influenzae strains than vaccinated individuals do, non-vaccinated individuals pose virtually no danger of transmission of hepatitis B in a school setting, and tetanus is not transmissible at all; 2) there is a significantly elevated risk of emergency room visits after childhood vaccination appointments attesting that vaccination is not risk-free; 3) outbreaks of measles cannot be entirely prevented even if we had nearly perfect vaccination compliance; and 4) an effective method of preventing measles and other viral diseases in vaccine-ineligible infants and the immunocompromised, immunoglobulin, is available for those who may be exposed to these diseases."
"Taken together, these four facts make it clear that discrimination in a public school setting against children who are not vaccinated for reasons of conscience is completely unwarranted as the vaccine status of conscientious objectors poses no undue public health risk."
I found it odd Tetyana Obukhanych, PhD, began her excellent .. well informed and corraborated research
comments thus: "discrimination against non-immunized children in a public school setting MAY NOT BE WARRANTED."
and ended same with:
"discrimination in a public school setting against children who are not vaccinated for reasons of conscience is COMPLETELY UNWARRANTED as the vaccine status of conscientious objectors poses no undue public health risk."
I agree .. discrimination against unvaccinated children in a public school setting is COMPLETELY UNWARRANTED .. as these very inconvenient facts regarding our vaccines and the policies by which they are recommended and approved clearly demonstrates.
My question is .. why are "immunologists" not speaking out as did this brave woman .. when they witness and have knowledge of all the flaws in presently recommended and approved vaccines?
My second question is .. where are the "toxicologists" who know the potential consequences of injecting various ingredients .. such as .. formaldehyde, mercury and aluminum .. into perfectly healthy toddlers?
In other words .. we are long past time for other scientific disciplines .. such as .. toxicology and immunology .. to make their voices heard .. because .. to remain silent as they appear to have done for decades .. is not the response of "scientists" .. it is the response of "cowards".
Posted by: Bob moffitt | April 20, 2015 at 07:04 AM