Melb baby dies of whooping cough...

This is such a sad story and i can do nothing but symapthise with this family... that poor baby would of had the fight of his/her life and no one could help which is even worse...

I had Whooping cough when i was 18 and i had it for 3 months before anyone (dr) could tell me what was wrong with me.. i felt as though i was literally dying and thati would go into one massive coughing fit and die from suffocating of lack of being able to breathe through the cough i still am haunted by what i went through cause it was just devastating for me..
And also due to not knowing what i had and trying to be vigilant of my ds's at the time, my ds2 actually caught it and he was 1 yrs old.. Already having being vaccinated and also having lung problems he only caught a mild case but due to other complications he still suffered alot and was hospitalised in case he stopped breathing or his lungs collapsed due to the stress.. i was so frustrated and felt so guilty that he had caught it.. it was horrible..

When a person contracts whooping cough the dr's are actually meant to contact the health authorities in which contact you to get a list of whom you have been in contact with and who your children/partner have also been near.. you may carry the virus without even becoming ill.. Whooping cough is an actual airborn virus, from what i have been told all i had to do was cough into the air and the particules would do the work and infect someone else..

I have children who are all vaccinated and i would say im happy with it but i also second guess them, i know they arent 100% reliable but i know that if they get something it probably wont be as severe.
My kids have been vaccinated and have caught chicken pox my son had measles, also whooping cough.
But i dont condemn those who dont thats their choice.. and i respect it i have often thought of not vaccinating plenty, i also delay them dd is 3 months and only just got her 8 week shots yesterday..
I have 2 boys who react quite severly to immunisation and have since 8 weeks old but i do get scared if i dont vaccinate it will be my fault if they get something and dont survive..
Its always a lose/win situation and its definently scary.. you never know what will happen with or without vaccination..
sorry for babbling :)

:

---

, if your baby is vax'd then it wouldnt get it?

---

I'm not sure why you would assume that vaccinated people don't ever get the disease. I was vaccinated & I got whooping cough as a child. But unlike the unvaccinated kids in my class, I didn't get admitted into hospital. That's a really peculiar thing to assume as a Dr would never advocate that. It reduces the impact of the disease on the body as the body is primed to fight it better - it's not a force shield. I'm not sure why there is a misconception that, for a single person, to be vaccinated makes you 100% immune to the things you're being vaccinated against.

I'm also not sure why the article was claimed to be propaganda (except that it's in the Herald Sun!!). What if the family would like to spread the word about vaccinating because it might have saved their child? Isn't popular media a good choice to get the word out to lots of people? Pro-breastfeeding articles are in news papers (and magazines) more & mroe frequently. does that mean the ABA are scare-mongering? No, of course not! It's an effective way to get a message out to many people (1.3 million for the HS).

The definition of Propaganda - Propaganda is a form of communication that is aimed at influencing the attitude of a community toward some cause or position.
As opposed to impartially providing information, propaganda, in its most basic sense, presents information primarily to influence an audience. "

The article didn't provide both sides, but is one sided and biased. It completely ignores ALL the studies that shows there is absolutely no clustering of outbreaks amongst the unvaccinated, yet blames the unvaccinated for spreading the disease. It ignores the fact that vaccination for some reason does not effect infection rates with a whopping 85% of whooping cough cases occuring in the fully vaccinated, and the bulk of the 15% unvaccinated are under the age of vaccination or elderly who are always the most vulnerable because of their immature immunes systems (which would be the case vaccinated or not). The article doesn't touch on the fact that vaccination can be ineffective, it doesn't touch on the side effects, but touts plenty of assumed and untested theory as fact, especially the holy grail of untested theories "heard immunity". Aka propaganda. Ethical news is meant to present binary facts, not push an agenda, otherwise it's not news anymore.

:

---

The article didn't provide both sides, but is one sided and biased.

---

That's the Feral Scum for you....errrrr...I mean, the Herald Sun...

Yeah, what N2L said - it's the Herald Sun!! They have never published anything impartially.

So these 'absolutely no clusting of outbreaks' - how does that reconcile with polio rates in third world countries compared to polio rates in Australia?

:

---

It trains your body to develop antibodies. In most cases this only reduces the severity and duration of the illness. It does not stop it all together. You can still catch it, you can still be contagious. All that is happening is your body is fighting it quicker and more efficiently because it has 'encountered' it before.

---

Well, that's good enough for me!!

:

---

Yeah, what N2L said - it's the Herald Sun!! They have never published anything impartially.

So these 'absolutely no clusting of outbreaks' - how does that reconcile with polio rates in third world countries compared to polio rates in Australia?

---

I said, "No clustering of outbreaks amongst the unvaccinated". This doesn't mean there isn't disease clusters (or areas/times where it is more prevalent) within general populations but that there isn't a higher ratio of infection amongst the unvaccinated as compared to the vaccinated within those populations. So say there was an outbreak in a population that had a 90% vaccination rate, logically you would think that a higher proportion of the 10% (i.e 70% of that 10%) of unvaccinated would catch the disease and less of the 90% (i.e. 30% of that 90%) would catch it, but this isn't the case. Clusters are actually occurring in the vaccinated not the unvaccinated... that should be concerning, but instead of investigating it, we get the "vaccines will mean you just get a milder case" which isn't always true either. A-typical measles (which only occurs in the vaccinated) is far more deadly than the original because instead of the pustules coming out on the skin, they occur on internal organs, and because it's not visible the same there can be a huge delay in receiving treatment.

Polio rates in third world countries are quite easy to reconcile, seeing they have a lack of resources/hygiene and nutritional issues (water/food/sanitation) and still, in general, use the OPV live polio vaccine. The reason IPV is used in Western countries is because we know that the OPV can actually give people polio.

RIP little bubba. So so sad :cry:

:

---

Well, that's good enough for me!!

---

Yes, but the point is, it debunks the mythos that babies unable to be vaxxed are catching it because of the great unwash...er, unvaxxed. They can catch it from either.

My heart goes out to this family and all others who have lost a child. No parent should outlive their child.

:

---

I know there are diseases that are beating vaccines at the moment, my niece was vaccinated against chicken pox and she still caught it this year from a kid from overseas. Then she exposed us to it as well. DS didn't catch it, presumably because he has been vaccinated and it did protect him in this instance. But doctors hardly ever see chicken pox now, when I was a child everyone expected to have it. So vaccines clearly do protect a huge number of people.

---

Doctors hardly ever see chickenpox... because you usually don't need to go to the doctor when you have chickenpox. My kids both had it. It didn't even occur to me to go to the doc unless there were complications - what for?

If anything - and I have discussed this with some European doctors at length - herd immunity might be WEAKENED in the long run with the chickenpox vax. This is why: when we were little most kids got chickenpox and developed natural LIFE-LONG immunity. These days, most kids get vaccinated which will wear off eventually. It is a fact that adults are pretty slack with getting boosters. So these vaccinated kids are quite likely to get chickenpox as adults, when it is a much worse disease. They might get it when pregnant or pass it on to newborns, too young to have been vaccinated. Or get it when they are older and immune suppressed.

While I am glad we got the chickenpox thing over and done with, I have seen firsthand that it is NOT true that vaccinated children get a milder form. My friends 2 boys and some of the other kids at kindy who caught it from them, had much more severe cases than mine (both not vaxed for CP). My 3yo only had one night where she was uncomfortable and took a pinetarsol bath. I gave her daily oatmeal baths for a few days, but that just cause I felt I should be doing something. She was her normal, energetic self. My son, who was just over 1 at the time had a few pustules but they seemed neither itchy nor did he have a temperature or anything. He slept well, ate well and if it hadn't been for the spots, I would have sworn he didn't have CP.

Also, my friend thought nothing of taking her (vaxed) younger son to kindy when her (also vaxed) older son had contracted CP at school. This is how CP got introduced into DD's kindy and it spread like wildfire within this mostly vaxed community. I on the other hand knew DD would be likely getting it from my friend's son, so I quarantined her before she was even symptomatic and then I quarantined DS before he showed symptoms (CP is the most infectious the from a couple of days before spots appear. So no-one could have caught it from us). Yes, it was soooo frustrating, essentially being stuck at home for a month. And it wouldn't be easy to do that when you have to work.
So, in my opinion, it is the NEED to send our children to daycare/school so that we can go to work that has to carry some of the blame for the rapid spread of diseases like this. Please know, I am not judging working mums or blaming them. But it is understandable that it is much harder to isolate a child on a mere suspicion when you have to try and keep a job.

I do agree with your anger towards people who come to see a newborn while knowingly sick. I don't understand that, that is just careless. I am in mo way someone to ask for virtual "sterility" around small children. But people have to use some common sense.

Sasa

I should ad: I am a partial vaxer. My kids have most of the common vaccines. But I decided against CP and I delayed HepB.

So sad :(

I choose to vaccinate my kids, I feel if it affords them the difference between illness or death then its worth the risk. So far we've been exposed to whooping cough, measles, chicken pox and mumps with none of us catching any of them. I guess we are lucky.

My GP actually told me when I had my WC booster last year that its ADULTS spreading the disease. Theyve noticed alot of adults in their 50's and older who are suddenly catching the disease even though they were vaccinated as children and realised that the vaccination must have worn off; allowing them to catch and spread the disease. Alot of these people are probably grandparents and have no idea theyre at risk of spreading the disease to children. Which is why they have now started the campaign for booster shots for all those adults who come into contact with kids on a regular basis.

I wonder how many people would think to just wander into their GPs office and have their immunity tested. I had it done for my nursing degree and have amazing immunity for everything from varicella to Hep B and C. I had to have no boosters whatsoever. I was vaccinated as per the schedule 26 years ago and caught chicken pox naturally at age 6. My sister just had to be tested in order to work in a healthcare setting as a social worker and she had to have boosters of Hep B, MMR and something else because her immunity was low enough to put her at high risk of contracting and spreading any of those diseases. So it proves the theory that different people get different immunity from the vaccines; we were both vaccinated the same yet I have the higher immunity.

:

---

It is a fact that adults are pretty slack with getting boosters.

---

I think most adults don't realise they need boosters. Vaccinations don't last forever, unfortunately. :(
I read on a poster in my Paed's office that something like 70% of infant WC cases are caught from their mother. I know how guilty I would feel if I gave my baby WC!

such a tragedy!
I really wish we had an adult vaxx schedule, so that people received boosters and provided the herd immunity for our kids! I had pertussis as a newborn, and was also vaxxed against it (delayed though) and I *STILL* dont keep immunity! I had a booster for DDs sake, but they dont think that it will "hold" in my body.
Still though an 85% chance of DD not getting sick/as sick is worth it for me.

I remember when I was at my doctor's one of the interns said that she had had the Hepatitis shots 4 times and just doesn't develop immunity. How annoying would that be?

:

---

I remember when I was at my doctor's one of the interns said that she had had the Hepatitis shots 4 times and just doesn't develop immunity. How annoying would that be?

---

my DH is the same with hep a/b, it jus doesnt take!

:

---

So it proves the theory that different people get different immunity from the vaccines; we were both vaccinated the same yet I have the higher immunity.

---

Thats actually very interesting because I experienced something similar.

In fairness, my sister is 2 years older than me, however. We both got Rubella as children, but only she got the High School Booster (I was moving from one school to another and the one I was at had not yet done it, and the one I moved to did it at the beginning of the year, so I was missed). So my only exposure to Rubella was back in the early 80s as a vax. She got needles as a child, Measles as a child and the high school booster.

In 2006, her pg bloods showed no immunity.
In 2009 mine still read 26. So dropping but still there almost 30 years later.

It is obviously not her fault her immunity to it isn't awesome. Ironically, she was also the only one of us to ever catch chicken pox. None of us were immunised, but all my kids have had it. I just never get it.

Certainly with all this we cannot continue to blame anti-vaxxers for these very very unfortunate losses.

A bit OT but I had something strange happen with my Rubella immunity and this has reminded me to ask my Dr about it tomorrow!

I fell pregnant with my DS in March 09 and had my immunity checked around April. I had borderline immunity. I was last vaccinated against Rubella when I was 12 (so 16 years beforehand).
Anywho, I didn't do anything about my borderline status as I'd thought I'd wait until I was no longer immune to worry about it.
I'm now pregnant again. Had my immunity checked again in November '10 and I'm suddenly immune... What the!? I definately haven't been vaccinated since and I definately haven't contracted Rubella in the meantime. I am really, REALLY interested to know why I suddenly have immunity. Seems very, very odd to me.

No idea. But it would be interesting to know how accurate these test results are. Maybe one of the tests was a fluke?

I don't know. I asked my midwife too and she is stumped. My immunity is huge at the moment too.. I don't know what units they measure it in but it was 29 and it's now 224!

Herein comes one of the greatest lies about vaccination. Vaccination only produces IgG antibodies, however there are 5 types of antibodies that work in fighting off a disease, therefore high or low levels of IgG antibody alone doesn't mean much. People have caught the disease they are immunised against when they have high IgG and haven't caught it when unimmunised and have lower IgG. This also is where the lie of "herd immunity" through vaccination comes in too, because herd immunity has only ever been proven with real virus' and real virus' produce at least 3 of the antibodies, not just one!

The break down:
IgG antibodies are predominantly involved in the secondary immune response, as in, it has to have got past all the other checks and balances before this antibody even comes into play in fighting off a disease.
IgM is a common antibody and is the first formed in response to an infection once it has begun.
IgE is a low concentration antibody involved in allergic reactions and fighting eukaryotic protozoa.
IgA is present in the mouth and intestinal tract, which is the main way for virus' and bacteria enter the body, therefore first line of defence.
IgD is found on the surface of B-lymphocytes and together with monomeric IgM, serves as antigen receptor for the activation of B cell and is very important in slowing or stopping the spread of a pathogen during the initial stages of an illness.

And hence the reason vaccination (at most) can only claim to maybe mean you only get a milder case of whatever disease, not to stop the disease altogether. If you don't get the disease at all, it's because the other antibodies (which aren't effected by vaccination) have done their job first.

Have you been exposed to rubella at all? Could explain the sudden leap in circulating antibodies.

:

---

Herein comes one of the greatest lies about vaccination. Vaccination only produces IgG antibodies, however there are 5 types of antibodies that work in fighting off a disease, therefore high or low levels of IgG antibody alone doesn't mean much. People have caught the disease they are immunised against when they have high IgG and haven't caught it when unimmunised and have lower IgG. This also is where the lie of "herd immunity" through vaccination comes in too, because herd immunity has only ever been proven with real virus' and real virus' produce at least 3 of the antibodies, not just one!

The break down:
IgG antibodies are predominantly involved in the secondary immune response, as in, it has to have got past all the other checks and balances before this antibody even comes into play in fighting off a disease.
IgM is a common antibody and is the first formed in response to an infection once it has begun.
IgE is a low concentration antibody involved in allergic reactions and fighting eukaryotic protozoa.
IgA is present in the mouth and intestinal tract, which is the main way for virus' and bacteria enter the body, therefore first line of defence.
IgD is found on the surface of B-lymphocytes and together with monomeric IgM, serves as antigen receptor for the activation of B cell and is very important in slowing or stopping the spread of a pathogen during the initial stages of an illness.

And hence the reason vaccination (at most) can only claim to maybe mean you only get a milder case of whatever disease, not to stop the disease altogether. If you don't get the disease at all, it's because the other antibodies (which aren't effected by vaccination) have done their job first.

---

So, basically, it doesn't really matter what my immunity is. If I'm going to contract rubella, I will. Is that right? So, does my new immunity status mean that my natural antibodies are strong or am I just totally confused!? Haha

As far as I am aware I have not been exposed to Rubella. Definately not in the last year or so anyway!

That is strange indeed. I vaguely remember reading IgA somewhere - and I don't mean the supermarket!

Is it possible that we have had the exposure, the previous antibodies killed it at the first line of defence - so we didn't get sick or affect iykwim - but the rest of the body responded anyway and formed all the others that has kept our immune systems boosted?

I can't tell you if you are more likely to get a disease or not, but I can say without a doubt that there is absolutely no 100% guarantee that you can't catch a disease, irrelevant of what the blood test says. My point was that the focus on IgG antibodies alone is an incomplete and simplistic picture of a very complex biological system, and it is this simplistic view that is the basis for most of vaccination's assumptions about disease protection.

A blood test will show IgA antibodies if it is testing immunity, but that doesn't mean these mucus based antibodies have been created by an intravenous vaccination iykwim.

Yeddi, I must spread the love, so have to thank you this way for an amazingly informative post.

:thumbsup:

Yes, thankyou Yeddi!

In a study of children who died of SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) two-thirds had been vaccinated with pertussis (whooping cough) prior to death. Of these, 6.5%died with 12 hours of vaccination; 13% within 24 hours; 26% within three days; and 37, 61 and 70% within one, two and three weeks, respectively. Source: Torch, WC. Neurology 1982;32(4): pt.2.

"vaccination is the single most prevalent and most preventable cause of infant deaths" Source: Vaccination: 100 Years of Orthodox Research by Dr. Viera Scheibner, M.D - formerly pro-vaccination.

Challenging information - but if you delve into it far enough, I'd be surprised to find anyone who claims this vaccine is safe, let alone beneficial- for not even the vaccine manufacturers have done so, although they have led us to believe otherwise.
This is not to take away from the terrible tragedy of the loss of a new baby's life to pertussis - however keeping the virus alive perpetually via vaccination instead of letting it die out naturally like many other diseases have over past millenia is the surest way to ensure sad cases like this continue to happen.

:

---

In a study of children who died of SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) two-thirds had been vaccinated with pertussis (whooping cough) prior to death. Of these, 6.5%died with 12 hours of vaccination; 13% within 24 hours; 26% within three days; and 70% within one, two and three weeks, respectively. Source: Torch, WC. Neurology 1982;32(4): pt.2.

"vaccination is the single most prevalent and most preventable cause of infant deaths" Source: Vaccination: 100 Years of Orthodox Research by Dr. Viera Scheibner, M.D - formerly pro-vaccination.

Challenging information - but if you delve into it far enough, I'd be surprised to find anyone who claims this vaccine is safe, let alone beneficial- for not even the vaccine manufacturers have done so, although they have led us to believe otherwise.
This is not to take away from the terrible tragedy of the loss of a new baby's life to pertussis - however keeping the virus alive perpetually via vaccination instead of letting it die out naturally like many other diseases have over past millenia is the surest way to ensure sad cases like this continue to happen.

---

OK. I'm not too good at maths but I believe that
70%+
26%+
13%+
6.5%
=115.5%

Call me a cynic but I find it hard to take anyone seriously if they can't add to 100.

Vaccinate or don't vaccinate. Just make sure it is an informed decision, both sides! Yes it's tricky to make a decision because it is very black or white, but at the end of the day, you are making the decision for your child, so make it informed! You can put off vaccinations until you have enough information to make a decision not out of fear or bullying. At the end of the day you have to stand behind the outcomes
My family were mortified that I stopped vaccinating my first daughter due to the reactions she got. My mother new a person who's child has severe brain damage due to vaccinations, yet she insisted it was worth the chance. WHAT????
The first half vaccinated child was plagued with illness and has asthma (confirmed by several Dr's) as a result of vaccines. And my next two. no needles, no illnesses!

Considering about 80% of children are vaccinated routinely, and have been for a long time, plus the SIDS rate has fallen dramatically despite continuing vaccination, it's hard to say that it is the main cause of SIDS. Vaccination is not keeping pertussis alive, the bacteria in the vaccine is dead.

I have to agree with the questionability of the general blanket vaccination causes SIDS connection. Perhaps in some cases it would be a factor, where the odd child has had a hidden anaphylactic response to the vaccine but not all as SIDS is a fine one moment, not the next event and a reaction to a vaccine would have some lead in indicators. I know this will be controversial, but I think that one of the chemicals in some brands of disposable nappies might have more to do some of the random SIDS cases. I mean if this chemical has been linked to toxic shock (which is a quick and unexpected way of dying) and can kill a cat if it breaths it in, what is it doing on a babies bottom?

But an interesting thing I have found out was a study that showed children who had asthma and then have caught whooping cough no longer have asthma. It miraculously goes away, which is very interesting. There was a study that had it's funding pulled half way through (surprise surprise) which was having a look at whether or not a percentage of childhood asthma was actually chronic mild whooping cough, and that the huge increase in asthma was actually a rise in chronic whooping cough that's provoked by cold weather etc. instead. It's a shame the study wasn't allowed to continue, but apparently these things that openly question the safety of vaccination aren't even allowed to be tested.

Onyx I went back to my resource and I had missed 2 important figures (accidentally I swear!) and I have edited the reference. I still don't really get the 37%, 61% and 70% part but that is the esteemed Journal of Neurology for you...

Yeddi, I personally, like you, do not believe that vaccination is a blanket cause of SIDS, I believe it is a complex combination of immune status (affected by premature birth, genetic conditions, maternal toxicity levels, absence of breastmilk derived antibodies in early months, diet of mother whilst pregnant & breastfeeding, chemicals in personal care including commercialised nappies as well as the presence of the common flame retardant chemicals arsenic, antimony and phosphorus in baby mattresses and bedding).
But since infants aquire such a vast array of toxic and carcinogenic substances into their bloodstream when they receive certain vaccinations, and such a disproportionately large number of sudden infant deaths occur close to vaccination, that is why Dr. Vera Scheibner makes the above claim. She has done extensive research on the topic - particularly in the recording of changing breathing patterns in infants following vaccination - some of them up until death. She is quick to acknowledge that there are other potential causes, and most definitely a combination of causes that lead to SIDS, in particular the state of health, toxicity and immune strength at the time of receiving these chemicals into the body.

:

---

In a study of children who died of SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) two-thirds had been vaccinated with pertussis (whooping cough) prior to death. Of these, 6.5%died with 12 hours of vaccination; 13% within 24 hours; 26% within three days; and 37, 61 and 70% within one, two and three weeks, respectively. Source: Torch, WC. Neurology 1982;32(4): pt.2.

---

I'm not sure if I'm right, but the way I read these stats is this way:
6.5% died within 12 hours
13% died within 24 hours (which includes the 6.5% from before, so only 6.5 died between12 & 24 hours after vax)
26% died within 3 days (the 13 % that died within the first day + a further 13%)
37% died within a week (26% in the first 3 days and 11% in the next 4 days)
61% died within 2 weeks (37% within the first week, 24% in the second week)
70% died within 3 weeks (61% within the first 2 weeks and 9% in the third week)

So all up 70% died within 3 weeks (the article doesn't say when the other 30& died, might have been much later)
0-12 hours: 6.5%
12-24 hours: 6.5%
Days 2&3:13%
Days 4,5,6%7: 11%
Week 2: 24%
Week 3: 9%
6.5
+ 6.5
+ 13
+11
+24
+9
= 70

Lol- Good on you sunshine_sieben. ;)
I hated stats at uni - was never my forte! I figured there must be some reasonable explanation given this study comes from an esteemed medical journal...

Those DTP/SIDS stats were from a journal in 1982 - ie nearly 30 years ago. Is there anything more recent that comfirms these findings, beyond other sites that refer to similarly aged references? I am interested in reading further but can't find anything much more recent except for studies showing no correlation.

Can someone point me in the right direction if there is anything more recent?

Hi Bug's Mum,

A good place to start would be the book mentioned in my signature, which references over 1000 studies - including recent ones. You can check it out/order it from Think Twice dot com. (No gaps!) And also The Vaccine Safety Manual, also on the site.

When it comes to vaccines we have to keep in mind the amount of money and power the modern pharmaceutical companies possess, and the fact that they largely influence the direction of medical studies by providing research grants to research proposals they deem worthy of investigation. For example, the 1998 Finnish study published in Lancet used by pro-vaxers to dismiss a link between MMR vaccine and autism was funded by the manufacturers of the MMR vaccine, Merck.
It makes absolutely no sense for their personal interests to fund a study which aims to assess the adverse reactions of a vaccine and its potential link to disease or death. Numerous scientists/doctors and whilstle blowers from within the vaccine/pharma industry have been vilified for doing so.
We are living in an increasingly letigious society, and I guess that is one of the reasons many medical researchers increasingly shy away from 'swimming upstream' - so to speak. It doesn't pay to bite the hand that feeds you!

I think it's a good comment you make though, and one of the criticisms from non-vaxers is that there are not enough studies being done to assess the efficacy and safety of vaccines. For example, there has never been a study that compares the rate of autism amoung vaccinated children with unvaccinated children of the same demographic, age etc. Certainly we in the non-vaxing community (especially those with vaxed and unvaxed children) have our hypothesis on that one! However, it is probably more likely that the world will end next year than a study of this nature be awarded attention and publication within the mainstream medical community.

Personally I think the one of the best things to look at is the raw ingredients of a vaccine, and how these measure up against the recommended maximum dosages for such substances in the human body. Many exceed the maximum recommended dosage for adults, let alone newborn babies, even according to the FDA who approve of these vaccines. The WAVE website (World Association for Vaccine Education) lists all the vaccine ingredients according to pathogen type and manufacturer.

I hope this helps you find what you are after. I was skeptical too when I started delving into this stuff 7 years ago, but I am so glad I did. Unfortunately it was not enough to prevent a number of serious adverse reactions to my friends babies and a close family member..... :shakehead:

Sorry, pretty sure there were a few studies that compared MMR vaccinated kids to not, same stats etc. Don't think the world ended but can't guarantee there weren't big guys in suits and dark glasses fudging the data. ;)

I'm not trying to be inflammatory here, I do realise that I can talk down to people about this stuff.
I'm not any kind of authority figure and I don't even know what a pro-vax lobby group is, I just hate bad science with a passion and these threads in particular are full of it and this drives me crazy!


I just want to highlight some points related to this thread:

I had a quick look into Dr Mayer Einstein. His theories about autism are a bit off, the statement that we had no autism when we had no vaccinations is missing some important information. Attitudes toward mental health have changes somewhat in the last hundred years and the word autism was first coined in 1910 but referred to morbid self-fascination in schizophrenia diagnosis. Even now definitions are changing rapidly with ASD now used or PDD and diagnosis along the spectrum can be difficult let alone producing prevelance figures. Comparing what we now know as ASD with something that didn't even have a name 100 years ago is a big leap. The reference below discusses whether increasing reported rates are due to actual rises or changes in diagnosis methods.

ewschaffer CJ, Croen LA, Daniels J et al. The epidemiology of autism spectrum disorders [PDF]. Annu Rev Public Health. 2007;28:235–58. doi:10.1146/annurev.publhealth.28.021406.144007. PMID 17367287


I have read where people are complaining that vaccination is not 100% effective in preventing disease. Even natural immunity is not 100% effective. No amount of exposure to a bacteria/virus, no amount of crystals, organic food or Tony Robbins lectures will prevent a human immune system from being overrun by a bacteria or virus if there are enough of them introduced into the body.

The myth of herd immunity seems like a common issue, people claim that it needs to be proven and that its an arbitary figured derived from a flawed study conducted in the 30's. A quick look on the net showed that its not an arbitary number, that there is a fair bit of thought behind it, have a look at:
Herd immunity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Mathamatical modelling spreading of disease is quite sophisticated, have a look on TED for some fantastic demonstrations. Modelling depends on good maths for predictions, in this case herd immunity thresholds are very good maths and can be calculated to a fraction of a percent. Some more journal articles on herd immunity are referenced on the wiki page.Even despite the science of herd immunity, it just makes sense to me that this would happen considering how disease spreads and even natural immunity works. If i had the time or energy I would build a game that would demonstrate the logic better.

...As for a vaccines and SIDS study 30 years old...

LOL, Do you only spend your time just stalking vaccination threads trying to correct us wacky anti-vaxers? I swear I've never seen you anywhere else. An agenda maybe...

As for misinformation... well...

Are you seriously trying to tell me that a 273 percent rise over the last 11 years is based purely on better diagnosis? It's an asinine attempt to belittle the rising rates and is the proverbial ostrich head in the sand.

But if we want to talk about how a change in diagnosis criteria fudges the numbers, why don't you have a look at how a diagnosis of Polio changed in 1955 (conveniently 5 years after the introduction of the vaccine). It went from only requiring an examination 24 hours apart to needing a minimum of 10 days, without being able to confirm definitively unless it exceeded 70 days. Don't you think this would change the statistics? There's your polio cure - change the criteria! Perhaps you can cure autism the same way...

As for your proof on vaccine induced herd immunity (I do not disagree that natural exposure will lead to herd immunity), I'm glad the man with his computer was able to make some wonderfully complex mathematical simulations, but anyone who has done something on a simulator knows there is often a very big difference between it and the real thing. Lets see what science says about what is happening in real life....

1. Measles vaccine failures: lack of sustained measles specific immunoglobulin G responses in revaccinated adolescents and young adults. Department of Pediatrics, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC 20007. Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal. 13(1):34-8, 1994 Jan.

2. Measles outbreak in 31 schools: risk factors for vaccine failure and evaluation of a selective revaccination strategy. Department of Preventive Medicine and Biostatistics, University of Toronto, Ont. Canadian Medical Association Journal. 150(7):1093-8, 1994 Apr 1.

3. Haemophilus b disease after vaccination with Haemophilus b polysaccharide or conjugate vaccine. Institution Division of Bacterial Products, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Bethesda, Md 20892. American Journal of Diseases of Children. 145(12):1379-82, 1991 Dec.

4. Sustained transmission of mumps in a highly vaccinated population: assessment of primary vaccine failure and waning vaccine-induced immunity. Division of Field Epidemiology, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia. Journal of Infectious Diseases. 169(1):77-82, 1994 Jan. 1.

5. Secondary measles vaccine failure in healthcare workers exposed to infected patients. Department of Pediatrics, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, PA 19104. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology. 14(2):81-6, 1993 Feb.

6. MMWR (Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report) 38 (8-9), 12/29/89.

7. MMWR "Measles." 1989; 38:329-330.

8. MMWR. 33(24),6/22/84.

9. Failure to reach the goal of measles elimination. Apparent paradox of measles infections in immunized persons. Review article: 50 REFS. Dept. of Internal Medicine, Mayo Vaccine Research Group, Mayo Clinic and Foundation, Rochester, MN. Archives of Internal Medicine. 154(16):1815-20, 1994 Aug 22.

10. Clinical Immunology and Immunopathology, May 1996; 79(2): 163-170.

11. Trevor Gunn, Mass Immunization, A Point in Question, at 15 (citing E.D. Hume, Pasteur Exposed-The False Foundations of Modern Medicine, Bookreal, Australia, 1989.)

12. Physician William Howard Hay's address of June 25, 1937; printed in the Congressional Record.

13. Outbreak of paralytic poliomyelitis in Oman; evidence for widespread transmission among fully vaccinated children. Lancet vol 338: Sept 21, 1991; 715-720.


I've got at least forty more peer reviewed and published references like these if you want, but those should keep you going for now.

Did you really just give us references from the 1980's??? And a spectacular entry from 1937?? And many of those references are incomplete.

Regardless of which side of the fence you fall on, it is worth considering literature & studies (read: NOT an address to congress from the 1930's!) from the last 10-15 years.

In addition, addresses to congress and MMWR reports are NOT peer reviewed. Literature reviews are also not science (it's like a book report).

And lastly: Yes, change the criteria of diagnosis for any disease may fudge the numbers. So so so many diseases have gone under/over/NOT diagnosed for a long time, but that doesn't mean they weren't there. I'm certain a lot of people with spectrum disorders were labled as 'naughty children/teens', or 'peculiar', or worse. I'm sure many ADHD (when I went to school, it was just ADD...) suffers may actually be on the spectrum & never diagnosed. I know of a woman who fought for 9 long years to finally get her son diagnosed correctly - she was told he was just a naughty boy. And I know of family members that probably should be diagnosed, but haven't been for a rainbow of reasons.

(and who cares if RockinSAHD only looks at the vaccination threads. His choice! He might not feel an interest in breastfeeding, cloth pads, or other more feminine things. Vaccination information isn't just for anti-vaxers. Life would be a bit dull with only one POV)