Advertisement

Opinion: Vaccinate at Birth

Improved immunization efforts are required to prevent infections during the first 6 months of life, when newborn and infants are highly susceptible to disease.

By | August 9, 2011

CDC PUBLIC HEALTH IMAGE LIBRARY, JAMES GATHANY

More than 2 million newborns and infants under the age of 6 months die from infection worldwide each year—that's more than 200 every hour. In this context, vaccines are second only to clean drinking water as a cost-effective measure to reduce infant morbidity and mortality. The global eradication of smallpox and the hopefully forthcoming eradication of polio demonstrate the potential power of immunization programs. But despite a suite of vaccinations recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO), including those for tuberculosis, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, and measles, neonates and infants continue to fall victim to such infections each year, highlighting early-life susceptibility and an unmet global need for improved immunization.

Immunization of pregnant mothers, with the consequent, passive trans-placental transmission of antibodies to the fetus, is one potential option to protect neonates. However, this promising strategy might be limited by safety and medico-legal concerns that could be triggered by any real or perceived associations between immunization and premature delivery or other adverse pregnancy outcomes. Another option is to vaccinate newborns at birth. Most infant vaccines are given at 2, 4, and 6 months of age, leaving a 2 to 6 month window of susceptibility in which immune immaturity and incomplete vaccine protection render infants particularly vulnerable to infection. Because birth is the single most reliable point of healthcare contact worldwide, vaccines given at birth, such as bacille Calmette Guérin (BCG) given to prevent tuberculosis early in life, achieve high population penetration and could substantially reduce that window of susceptibility. Unfortunately, there are currently only three vaccines licensed for immunization at birth—those for hepatitis B, tuberculosis, and polio—and only the hepatitis B vaccine (the first dose of a multi-dose immunization series) is given at birth in the United States.

Furthermore, even those vaccines approved for neonate use are based on ad hoc evaluations of vaccinations originally developed for use in older individuals. Optimal development of novel vaccine formulations should take into account a growing body of research characterizing age-dependent development of immunity. White blood cells (leukocytes), in particular antigen-presenting cells, demonstrate impaired immune responses to many stimuli in the first months of life, including reduced production of certain immune signaling proteins (cytokines) required for robust cell-mediated immunity. Adjuvants, molecules that enhance responses to vaccine antigens, can be added to vaccine formulations and represent an important strategy to boost immune responses, but neonatal leukocytes demonstrate distinct responses to different adjuvants when compared to adult leukocytes.

To consider these differences when developing novel vaccines for infants, researchers can use human neonatal and infant primary leukocytes cultured with the relevant human humoral components, including autologous blood plasma that contains distinct components that modulate early-life immunity. Results from such in vitro studies should inform the selection of appropriate preclinical animal models that most closely mimic the neonatal and infant immune responses. Follow up clinical trials should ensure that rigorous biomarker evaluation, including genome-wide transcriptional and proteomic approaches, are used to further refine age-specific markers of safety and efficacy, and should be designed to test earlier ages of initial immunization.

Optimizing neonatal and infant vaccine formulations will also entail evaluation of distinct routes of administration, combination vaccines, live vector vaccines, and the possibility of genetic immunization. Finally, post-approval phase IV clinical evaluations can ultimately verify that immune responses known to be protective in adults or older children are also protective against disease in neonates and young infants.

Although there are several challenges in developing vaccines for newborns and infants, proof-of-concept exists that this approach can be safe and effective and represents a promising strategy to reduce infant mortality. The time for change is now. More than 3 newborns and young infants die each minute from infection worldwide, but improved vaccination programs can go a long way to mitigating this terrible loss.

Ofer Levy, MD, PhD, is a staff physician in the Division of Infectious Diseases at Children’s Hospital Boston and an Assistant Professor at Harvard Medical School. His laboratory studies immunity in immunocompromised hosts. He can be reached at ofer.levy@childrens.harvard.edu. For more on Levy’s views on infant vaccinations, see his recent perspective in Science Translational Medicine.

Advertisement

Add a Comment

Avatar of: You

You

Processing...
Processing...

Sign In with your LabX Media Group Passport to leave a comment

Not a member? Register Now!

LabX Media Group Passport Logo

Comments

Avatar of: Ahaim

Anonymous

August 9, 2011

Yes, the world population shrinks so drastically because of all these newborn-related diseases that we have to do something about this right now without further delay! Anyway, Dr. Levy, once you vaccinate your own newborns the way you preach, I will vaccinate mine...

Avatar of: Jim

Anonymous

August 9, 2011

Why not vaccinate the fetus while we are at it?  It's so normal to have "random stuff" injected into people.  How did we ever live without it.   Seriously, it would be safer to feed them their mom's milk which contain the necessary antibodies. -- oh that's right, you can't get a patent on mom's milk.

Has anybody done a study on how these early vaccinations skews the resulting immune cell population in an individual.  Sure they may protected against, say pathogen A. (I use the word "may" because it's not 100% effective)  But does it also make them more susceptible to pathogen B? allergies?

Avatar of: Amy

Anonymous

August 9, 2011

Medical interventions in the first days after birth may cause poor feeding. When the neonate does not latch on to to breast often and effectively, it disrupts the establishment of the mother's milk supply. The infant is at risk of dehydration, weight loss and jaundice. At this point, many new mothers begin to supplement with infant formula, which further disrupts the supply-and-demand regulation of milk production. Fewer interventions during this critical post-natal period and greater support for well-established breastfeeding are needed. A recent study showed that the US alone would save $13 Billion in health care costs if infants received their mother's milk for at least the first 6 months of life. 

Avatar of: Hilary Butler

Anonymous

August 9, 2011

Dr Levy, in your Science article abstract you say:  " Immune responses of human newborns and infants are distinct and cannot be predicted from those of human adults or animal models. Therefore, understanding and modeling age-specific human immune responses will be vital to the rational design and development of safe and effective vaccines for newborns and infants. "

You are right.  While you like to think you know something about antibodies, what is the state of your understanding of the neonatal immune system?  The information already available, might suggest that anyone who is considering vaccinating PREGNANT women and new born babies need their heads examined:

See http://www.beyondconformity.or...

 http://www.beyondconformity.or...

http://www.beyondconformity.or... 

Download the full medical articles and read them.  Then sit back and consider the massive chronic illness problems we have in children today, which did not exist in 1950, and ask yourself whether or not immunologists (who then knew virtually nothing about the immune system at all) might have had a hand in swapping acute disease, for far more untreatable chronic disease.

I seriously wonder how you educated doctors cannot see this.

Furthermore, vaccines aren't the second most important medical intervention.  If you're lucky they come a miserable tenth.  I can think of a list of things which are far more important.                  

Avatar of: Othiesascott

Anonymous

August 9, 2011

I'm pregnant and I just had a TB test done. Was it safe for me to have it?

Avatar of: Roma

Anonymous

August 9, 2011

It's so easy for those of us in the US to denigrate the value of infant/childhood vaccination. We don't live with polio, diptheria, and the potentially life-long effects of Rubella anymore, nor do we see much in the way of infant killers like pertussis. Ask the Somalian refugee mother with a 3 month old dying of pertussis if she'd would have liked her child to have been vaccinated at birth, and I think you'll get a different answer -- one that's not half-baked in complacency and conspiracy theories

Avatar of: Hilary Butler

Anonymous

August 9, 2011

Actually Roma, if you look at USA pertussis statistics, you will see that whooping cough is now endemic throughout USA with most of the cases in fully, appropriately vaccinated children.  Go to CDC and read - do a pubmed search and educate yourself.

A properly nourished mother, breastfeeding a 3 month baby with whooping cough - if taught correct management of the infection, will manage just fine.  Many of us have been there, and done that.

The key is "knowledge of skills" - not promote a vaccine which has an unlisted side effect called "Learned Helplessness".

The only person here who mentioned "complacency" and "conspiracy" was you.  And given the fact that you appear to have no idea what's happening in your own country with regard to whooping cough, what does that say?

Avatar of: Roma

Anonymous

August 9, 2011

Hillary, I specialize in infectious disease, and I can assure you, I'm not uneducated -- there's no reason to be nasty just because someone disagrees with your opinion. Endemicity simply refers to the level of presence of a disease organism in a population -- not it's virulence, periodic or otherwise. Pertussis outbreaks occur predominantly in unvaccinated infants and in adolescents and adults in whom immunity has waned. The reservoir is maintained in the latter group, hence the new CDC recommendation for one-time adolescent/adult administration of the DTaP vaccine.

While I agree with you that nursing can offer some protection and is the best source of infant nutrition, (I nursed my children until they self-weaned at 8 and 16 mos.), it is only protective if the mother has sufficient immunity to the specific antigen. If the mother's immunity to Bordatella pertussis has waned, what do you think will be available to the child? Really, probably the best way to protect young infants until they can achieve sufficient immunity is to make sure that the adults and children around them have either been sufficiently vaccinated or avoid contact if they are ill. BTW, there's only two ways to gain that immunity past the initial 3 - 6 months of nursing: get the disease and build the immunity (assuming the child survives, or get vaccinated. Both achieve the same results via the same mechanisms of the immune system. (If you don't believe me, take a basic immunology course.)

You're right -- this has been an epidemic year, especially in CA, where I live. Epidemic is a somewhat relative term, however. It doesn't mean that everyone will get a particular disease, only that a greater than average incidence is observed. In 2010, the CDC reports that 9,477 cases were reported (although many more presumably were unreported), but with a population of just over 37 million, that's a drop in the bucket (2.5 cases/100,000). Compare this to the 1958 incidence of 26.0 cases/100,000, before immunization was as wide spread (although available). Of the 9,477 cases reported in CA in 2010 (approximately 17K US), 60% occurred in babies < 6mos of age, in other words, the unimmunized or underimmunized. The remaining 40% occurred in adolescents over 12 and adults -- most likely because immunity had waned, but also possibly because the vaccine failed. That does happen -- no vaccine is 100% effective, and as with any host/pathogen interaction, in all likelihood there are some strains of B. pertussis capable of evading the immune system as a mechanism of natural evolution. In those with at least partial immunity, however, the disease may have milder and less recognized symptoms, thus contributing to its spread.

In my opinion -- and this is purely my opinion, many parents have become complacent in this country, to some extent indicated by waning immunization rates. Additionally, untoward immunization fears were generated by the unprincipled actions of Wakeland, which may take a generation or more to undo. What a shame, because immunizations have truly reduced the disease burden in the last 50 years. Consider the trade off, using pertussis again as an example: a vaccine series costing as little as $61, vs. the cost of hospitalization for several days, administration of oxygen, and antibiotics (with concomitant side effects), not to mention the incalculable cost of the risk of other morbidity or mortality. Personally, I'll take the vaccine.

As far as my use of the term "conspiracy" is concerned, perhaps it was a bit extreme, but what better term to use when the accusation is raised that a health care professional's/researcher's sole interest in developing preventative or curative strategies is motivated only by industry remuneration? (And by the way, I am not affiliated in any way with the pharmaceutical
industry, nor am I a licensed practitioner, so I don't "profit" from
immunizations in any way.) Not to say that there aren't "bad apples", but most of the people I know who entered into the health care and biological research professions did so because we care about the health and welfare of humanity, not because we were driven by greed (my paycheck will certainly attest to this!). I think it is grossly unfair to put forth allegations without the facts to support them.

Avatar of: Hilary Butler

Anonymous

August 9, 2011

Dr Levy,
in your Science article abstract you say: " Immune responses of human
newborns and infants are distinct and cannot be predicted from those of human
adults or animal models. Therefore, understanding and modeling age-specific
human immune responses will be vital to the rational design and development of
safe and effective vaccines for newborns and infants. "

You are
right. While you like to think you know something about antibodies, what is the
state of your understanding of the neonatal immune system? The information
already available, might suggest that anyone who is considering vaccinating
PREGNANT women and new born babies need their heads examined:

See http://www.beyondconformity.or...

http://www.beyondconformity.or...

http://www.beyondconformity.or...

Download
the full medical articles and read them. Then sit back and consider the massive
chronic illness problems we have in children today, which did not exist in
1950, and ask yourself whether or not immunologists (who then knew virtually
nothing about the immune system at all) might have had a hand in swapping acute
disease, for far more untreatable chronic disease.

I
seriously wonder how you educated doctors cannot see this.

Furthermore,
vaccines aren't the second most important medical intervention. If you're lucky
they come a miserable tenth. I can think of a list of things which are far more
important.

Avatar of: Garbosmed

Garbosmed

Posts: 1

August 9, 2011

There's little doubt vaccine developers are excited by the prospect of shooting up the world's infants at birth, but in their zeal to ply their trade they fail to consider that the immature infant immune system's failure to produce sufficient cytokines may actually be a feature rather than a bug.  If low or suppressed inflammatory cytokine production is biologically normal and has a protective effect on the brain during critical early neurological development, what long-term neurological and immunological consequences will be seen when this perceived "deficit" is overcome by artificially overstimulating the immature infant immune system with adjuvants and multiple antigens?  One must hope that the answer to this question will be required as part of any approval process for new birth vaccines, and will be taken into account when cost/benefit analyses are done.

Avatar of: Angela McNabe

Anonymous

August 9, 2011

Dr Levy is either stupid, uneducated in his field, lacking wisdom or being paid by you know who...

Avatar of: Anna

Anonymous

August 9, 2011

I vote for "being paid by you know who..."

Avatar of: Anna

Anonymous

August 9, 2011

Dr. Levy, what is wrong with you? Are you determined to have 100% of children with autsm and neurological diseases? And yes, I'm the mother of a vaccine injured beautiful girl that is paying the price of me listening to my idiotic pediatrician, that just like you, cared more about getting the money from the pharmaceutical companies than the health of my baby... What amazes me is how arrogant doctors are becoming and how little they care about the results of their actions... Will you even feel guilty when the number of children with neurological diseases becomes 100% or will you sleep nice and tight in your pharma mac-house?

Avatar of: Ginger Taylor

Ginger Taylor

Posts: 1457

August 9, 2011

Dr. Leavy  forgot to disclose 2.4 million other reasons that he might be advocating for newborn vaccinations.  

http://www.healthtechzone.com/...
"June 21, 2010Healthcare Technology and News: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Offers a Funding of $2.4 Million Grant to Children's Hospital Boston
Share

0digg
A $2.4 million grant has been received by Children’s Hospital Boston, from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The research concerning the development of novel vaccines for newborns, spearheaded by Ofer Levy, MD, Ph.D., a principal investigator in the Division of Infectious Diseases at Children’s, is supported by the grant...."

Avatar of: Debbycarr

Anonymous

August 9, 2011

You don't know what your talking about.  I know at least 20 babies who now have autism because of the shots. I know they don't need all the shots that your giving to babies today. a whole lot more than when my kids had them. Your not stopping the disease Your causeing more babis to be sickly. I tell all moms not to give there babies the shots  there killing the babies and your being paid to say all these lies.

Avatar of: Dr. Jonas Moses

Anonymous

August 9, 2011

Well, I confess that - after reading this article - I was intending to write a scathing refutation of Dr. Levy's assertions. However, a review of the comments previously posted revealed that there are many others who have already done an excellent job of blasting Levy. Well done, folks! Thank you for weighing in so articulately and emphatically against the practice of immunizing newborns.

For those of you who think such vaccinations are a good idea, I recommend that you review the Nuremberg trials...those were designed to publicize the atrocity of wholesale human experimentation and prevent this from ever happening again. Now, you want to experiment on our young? For shame.

Respectfully submitted, Dr. Jonas Moses

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Yes, the world population shrinks so drastically because of all these newborn-related diseases that we have to do something about this right now without further delay! Anyway, Dr. Levy, once you vaccinate your own newborns the way you preach, I will vaccinate mine...

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Why not vaccinate the fetus while we are at it?  It's so normal to have "random stuff" injected into people.  How did we ever live without it.   Seriously, it would be safer to feed them their mom's milk which contain the necessary antibodies. -- oh that's right, you can't get a patent on mom's milk.

Has anybody done a study on how these early vaccinations skews the resulting immune cell population in an individual.  Sure they may protected against, say pathogen A. (I use the word "may" because it's not 100% effective)  But does it also make them more susceptible to pathogen B? allergies?

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Medical interventions in the first days after birth may cause poor feeding. When the neonate does not latch on to to breast often and effectively, it disrupts the establishment of the mother's milk supply. The infant is at risk of dehydration, weight loss and jaundice. At this point, many new mothers begin to supplement with infant formula, which further disrupts the supply-and-demand regulation of milk production. Fewer interventions during this critical post-natal period and greater support for well-established breastfeeding are needed. A recent study showed that the US alone would save $13 Billion in health care costs if infants received their mother's milk for at least the first 6 months of life. 

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Dr Levy, in your Science article abstract you say:  " Immune responses of human newborns and infants are distinct and cannot be predicted from those of human adults or animal models. Therefore, understanding and modeling age-specific human immune responses will be vital to the rational design and development of safe and effective vaccines for newborns and infants. "

You are right.  While you like to think you know something about antibodies, what is the state of your understanding of the neonatal immune system?  The information already available, might suggest that anyone who is considering vaccinating PREGNANT women and new born babies need their heads examined:

See http://www.beyondconformity.or...

 http://www.beyondconformity.or...

http://www.beyondconformity.or... 

Download the full medical articles and read them.  Then sit back and consider the massive chronic illness problems we have in children today, which did not exist in 1950, and ask yourself whether or not immunologists (who then knew virtually nothing about the immune system at all) might have had a hand in swapping acute disease, for far more untreatable chronic disease.

I seriously wonder how you educated doctors cannot see this.

Furthermore, vaccines aren't the second most important medical intervention.  If you're lucky they come a miserable tenth.  I can think of a list of things which are far more important.                  

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

I'm pregnant and I just had a TB test done. Was it safe for me to have it?

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

It's so easy for those of us in the US to denigrate the value of infant/childhood vaccination. We don't live with polio, diptheria, and the potentially life-long effects of Rubella anymore, nor do we see much in the way of infant killers like pertussis. Ask the Somalian refugee mother with a 3 month old dying of pertussis if she'd would have liked her child to have been vaccinated at birth, and I think you'll get a different answer -- one that's not half-baked in complacency and conspiracy theories

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Actually Roma, if you look at USA pertussis statistics, you will see that whooping cough is now endemic throughout USA with most of the cases in fully, appropriately vaccinated children.  Go to CDC and read - do a pubmed search and educate yourself.

A properly nourished mother, breastfeeding a 3 month baby with whooping cough - if taught correct management of the infection, will manage just fine.  Many of us have been there, and done that.

The key is "knowledge of skills" - not promote a vaccine which has an unlisted side effect called "Learned Helplessness".

The only person here who mentioned "complacency" and "conspiracy" was you.  And given the fact that you appear to have no idea what's happening in your own country with regard to whooping cough, what does that say?

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Hillary, I specialize in infectious disease, and I can assure you, I'm not uneducated -- there's no reason to be nasty just because someone disagrees with your opinion. Endemicity simply refers to the level of presence of a disease organism in a population -- not it's virulence, periodic or otherwise. Pertussis outbreaks occur predominantly in unvaccinated infants and in adolescents and adults in whom immunity has waned. The reservoir is maintained in the latter group, hence the new CDC recommendation for one-time adolescent/adult administration of the DTaP vaccine.

While I agree with you that nursing can offer some protection and is the best source of infant nutrition, (I nursed my children until they self-weaned at 8 and 16 mos.), it is only protective if the mother has sufficient immunity to the specific antigen. If the mother's immunity to Bordatella pertussis has waned, what do you think will be available to the child? Really, probably the best way to protect young infants until they can achieve sufficient immunity is to make sure that the adults and children around them have either been sufficiently vaccinated or avoid contact if they are ill. BTW, there's only two ways to gain that immunity past the initial 3 - 6 months of nursing: get the disease and build the immunity (assuming the child survives, or get vaccinated. Both achieve the same results via the same mechanisms of the immune system. (If you don't believe me, take a basic immunology course.)

You're right -- this has been an epidemic year, especially in CA, where I live. Epidemic is a somewhat relative term, however. It doesn't mean that everyone will get a particular disease, only that a greater than average incidence is observed. In 2010, the CDC reports that 9,477 cases were reported (although many more presumably were unreported), but with a population of just over 37 million, that's a drop in the bucket (2.5 cases/100,000). Compare this to the 1958 incidence of 26.0 cases/100,000, before immunization was as wide spread (although available). Of the 9,477 cases reported in CA in 2010 (approximately 17K US), 60% occurred in babies < 6mos of age, in other words, the unimmunized or underimmunized. The remaining 40% occurred in adolescents over 12 and adults -- most likely because immunity had waned, but also possibly because the vaccine failed. That does happen -- no vaccine is 100% effective, and as with any host/pathogen interaction, in all likelihood there are some strains of B. pertussis capable of evading the immune system as a mechanism of natural evolution. In those with at least partial immunity, however, the disease may have milder and less recognized symptoms, thus contributing to its spread.

In my opinion -- and this is purely my opinion, many parents have become complacent in this country, to some extent indicated by waning immunization rates. Additionally, untoward immunization fears were generated by the unprincipled actions of Wakeland, which may take a generation or more to undo. What a shame, because immunizations have truly reduced the disease burden in the last 50 years. Consider the trade off, using pertussis again as an example: a vaccine series costing as little as $61, vs. the cost of hospitalization for several days, administration of oxygen, and antibiotics (with concomitant side effects), not to mention the incalculable cost of the risk of other morbidity or mortality. Personally, I'll take the vaccine.

As far as my use of the term "conspiracy" is concerned, perhaps it was a bit extreme, but what better term to use when the accusation is raised that a health care professional's/researcher's sole interest in developing preventative or curative strategies is motivated only by industry remuneration? (And by the way, I am not affiliated in any way with the pharmaceutical
industry, nor am I a licensed practitioner, so I don't "profit" from
immunizations in any way.) Not to say that there aren't "bad apples", but most of the people I know who entered into the health care and biological research professions did so because we care about the health and welfare of humanity, not because we were driven by greed (my paycheck will certainly attest to this!). I think it is grossly unfair to put forth allegations without the facts to support them.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Dr Levy,
in your Science article abstract you say: " Immune responses of human
newborns and infants are distinct and cannot be predicted from those of human
adults or animal models. Therefore, understanding and modeling age-specific
human immune responses will be vital to the rational design and development of
safe and effective vaccines for newborns and infants. "

You are
right. While you like to think you know something about antibodies, what is the
state of your understanding of the neonatal immune system? The information
already available, might suggest that anyone who is considering vaccinating
PREGNANT women and new born babies need their heads examined:

See http://www.beyondconformity.or...

http://www.beyondconformity.or...

http://www.beyondconformity.or...

Download
the full medical articles and read them. Then sit back and consider the massive
chronic illness problems we have in children today, which did not exist in
1950, and ask yourself whether or not immunologists (who then knew virtually
nothing about the immune system at all) might have had a hand in swapping acute
disease, for far more untreatable chronic disease.

I
seriously wonder how you educated doctors cannot see this.

Furthermore,
vaccines aren't the second most important medical intervention. If you're lucky
they come a miserable tenth. I can think of a list of things which are far more
important.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

There's little doubt vaccine developers are excited by the prospect of shooting up the world's infants at birth, but in their zeal to ply their trade they fail to consider that the immature infant immune system's failure to produce sufficient cytokines may actually be a feature rather than a bug.  If low or suppressed inflammatory cytokine production is biologically normal and has a protective effect on the brain during critical early neurological development, what long-term neurological and immunological consequences will be seen when this perceived "deficit" is overcome by artificially overstimulating the immature infant immune system with adjuvants and multiple antigens?  One must hope that the answer to this question will be required as part of any approval process for new birth vaccines, and will be taken into account when cost/benefit analyses are done.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Dr Levy is either stupid, uneducated in his field, lacking wisdom or being paid by you know who...

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

I vote for "being paid by you know who..."

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Dr. Levy, what is wrong with you? Are you determined to have 100% of children with autsm and neurological diseases? And yes, I'm the mother of a vaccine injured beautiful girl that is paying the price of me listening to my idiotic pediatrician, that just like you, cared more about getting the money from the pharmaceutical companies than the health of my baby... What amazes me is how arrogant doctors are becoming and how little they care about the results of their actions... Will you even feel guilty when the number of children with neurological diseases becomes 100% or will you sleep nice and tight in your pharma mac-house?

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Dr. Leavy  forgot to disclose 2.4 million other reasons that he might be advocating for newborn vaccinations.  

http://www.healthtechzone.com/...
"June 21, 2010Healthcare Technology and News: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Offers a Funding of $2.4 Million Grant to Children's Hospital Boston
Share

0digg
A $2.4 million grant has been received by Children’s Hospital Boston, from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The research concerning the development of novel vaccines for newborns, spearheaded by Ofer Levy, MD, Ph.D., a principal investigator in the Division of Infectious Diseases at Children’s, is supported by the grant...."

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

You don't know what your talking about.  I know at least 20 babies who now have autism because of the shots. I know they don't need all the shots that your giving to babies today. a whole lot more than when my kids had them. Your not stopping the disease Your causeing more babis to be sickly. I tell all moms not to give there babies the shots  there killing the babies and your being paid to say all these lies.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Well, I confess that - after reading this article - I was intending to write a scathing refutation of Dr. Levy's assertions. However, a review of the comments previously posted revealed that there are many others who have already done an excellent job of blasting Levy. Well done, folks! Thank you for weighing in so articulately and emphatically against the practice of immunizing newborns.

For those of you who think such vaccinations are a good idea, I recommend that you review the Nuremberg trials...those were designed to publicize the atrocity of wholesale human experimentation and prevent this from ever happening again. Now, you want to experiment on our young? For shame.

Respectfully submitted, Dr. Jonas Moses

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Yes, the world population shrinks so drastically because of all these newborn-related diseases that we have to do something about this right now without further delay! Anyway, Dr. Levy, once you vaccinate your own newborns the way you preach, I will vaccinate mine...

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Why not vaccinate the fetus while we are at it?  It's so normal to have "random stuff" injected into people.  How did we ever live without it.   Seriously, it would be safer to feed them their mom's milk which contain the necessary antibodies. -- oh that's right, you can't get a patent on mom's milk.

Has anybody done a study on how these early vaccinations skews the resulting immune cell population in an individual.  Sure they may protected against, say pathogen A. (I use the word "may" because it's not 100% effective)  But does it also make them more susceptible to pathogen B? allergies?

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Medical interventions in the first days after birth may cause poor feeding. When the neonate does not latch on to to breast often and effectively, it disrupts the establishment of the mother's milk supply. The infant is at risk of dehydration, weight loss and jaundice. At this point, many new mothers begin to supplement with infant formula, which further disrupts the supply-and-demand regulation of milk production. Fewer interventions during this critical post-natal period and greater support for well-established breastfeeding are needed. A recent study showed that the US alone would save $13 Billion in health care costs if infants received their mother's milk for at least the first 6 months of life. 

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Dr Levy, in your Science article abstract you say:  " Immune responses of human newborns and infants are distinct and cannot be predicted from those of human adults or animal models. Therefore, understanding and modeling age-specific human immune responses will be vital to the rational design and development of safe and effective vaccines for newborns and infants. "

You are right.  While you like to think you know something about antibodies, what is the state of your understanding of the neonatal immune system?  The information already available, might suggest that anyone who is considering vaccinating PREGNANT women and new born babies need their heads examined:

See http://www.beyondconformity.or...

 http://www.beyondconformity.or...

http://www.beyondconformity.or... 

Download the full medical articles and read them.  Then sit back and consider the massive chronic illness problems we have in children today, which did not exist in 1950, and ask yourself whether or not immunologists (who then knew virtually nothing about the immune system at all) might have had a hand in swapping acute disease, for far more untreatable chronic disease.

I seriously wonder how you educated doctors cannot see this.

Furthermore, vaccines aren't the second most important medical intervention.  If you're lucky they come a miserable tenth.  I can think of a list of things which are far more important.                  

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

I'm pregnant and I just had a TB test done. Was it safe for me to have it?

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

It's so easy for those of us in the US to denigrate the value of infant/childhood vaccination. We don't live with polio, diptheria, and the potentially life-long effects of Rubella anymore, nor do we see much in the way of infant killers like pertussis. Ask the Somalian refugee mother with a 3 month old dying of pertussis if she'd would have liked her child to have been vaccinated at birth, and I think you'll get a different answer -- one that's not half-baked in complacency and conspiracy theories

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Actually Roma, if you look at USA pertussis statistics, you will see that whooping cough is now endemic throughout USA with most of the cases in fully, appropriately vaccinated children.  Go to CDC and read - do a pubmed search and educate yourself.

A properly nourished mother, breastfeeding a 3 month baby with whooping cough - if taught correct management of the infection, will manage just fine.  Many of us have been there, and done that.

The key is "knowledge of skills" - not promote a vaccine which has an unlisted side effect called "Learned Helplessness".

The only person here who mentioned "complacency" and "conspiracy" was you.  And given the fact that you appear to have no idea what's happening in your own country with regard to whooping cough, what does that say?

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Hillary, I specialize in infectious disease, and I can assure you, I'm not uneducated -- there's no reason to be nasty just because someone disagrees with your opinion. Endemicity simply refers to the level of presence of a disease organism in a population -- not it's virulence, periodic or otherwise. Pertussis outbreaks occur predominantly in unvaccinated infants and in adolescents and adults in whom immunity has waned. The reservoir is maintained in the latter group, hence the new CDC recommendation for one-time adolescent/adult administration of the DTaP vaccine.

While I agree with you that nursing can offer some protection and is the best source of infant nutrition, (I nursed my children until they self-weaned at 8 and 16 mos.), it is only protective if the mother has sufficient immunity to the specific antigen. If the mother's immunity to Bordatella pertussis has waned, what do you think will be available to the child? Really, probably the best way to protect young infants until they can achieve sufficient immunity is to make sure that the adults and children around them have either been sufficiently vaccinated or avoid contact if they are ill. BTW, there's only two ways to gain that immunity past the initial 3 - 6 months of nursing: get the disease and build the immunity (assuming the child survives, or get vaccinated. Both achieve the same results via the same mechanisms of the immune system. (If you don't believe me, take a basic immunology course.)

You're right -- this has been an epidemic year, especially in CA, where I live. Epidemic is a somewhat relative term, however. It doesn't mean that everyone will get a particular disease, only that a greater than average incidence is observed. In 2010, the CDC reports that 9,477 cases were reported (although many more presumably were unreported), but with a population of just over 37 million, that's a drop in the bucket (2.5 cases/100,000). Compare this to the 1958 incidence of 26.0 cases/100,000, before immunization was as wide spread (although available). Of the 9,477 cases reported in CA in 2010 (approximately 17K US), 60% occurred in babies < 6mos of age, in other words, the unimmunized or underimmunized. The remaining 40% occurred in adolescents over 12 and adults -- most likely because immunity had waned, but also possibly because the vaccine failed. That does happen -- no vaccine is 100% effective, and as with any host/pathogen interaction, in all likelihood there are some strains of B. pertussis capable of evading the immune system as a mechanism of natural evolution. In those with at least partial immunity, however, the disease may have milder and less recognized symptoms, thus contributing to its spread.

In my opinion -- and this is purely my opinion, many parents have become complacent in this country, to some extent indicated by waning immunization rates. Additionally, untoward immunization fears were generated by the unprincipled actions of Wakeland, which may take a generation or more to undo. What a shame, because immunizations have truly reduced the disease burden in the last 50 years. Consider the trade off, using pertussis again as an example: a vaccine series costing as little as $61, vs. the cost of hospitalization for several days, administration of oxygen, and antibiotics (with concomitant side effects), not to mention the incalculable cost of the risk of other morbidity or mortality. Personally, I'll take the vaccine.

As far as my use of the term "conspiracy" is concerned, perhaps it was a bit extreme, but what better term to use when the accusation is raised that a health care professional's/researcher's sole interest in developing preventative or curative strategies is motivated only by industry remuneration? (And by the way, I am not affiliated in any way with the pharmaceutical
industry, nor am I a licensed practitioner, so I don't "profit" from
immunizations in any way.) Not to say that there aren't "bad apples", but most of the people I know who entered into the health care and biological research professions did so because we care about the health and welfare of humanity, not because we were driven by greed (my paycheck will certainly attest to this!). I think it is grossly unfair to put forth allegations without the facts to support them.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Dr Levy,
in your Science article abstract you say: " Immune responses of human
newborns and infants are distinct and cannot be predicted from those of human
adults or animal models. Therefore, understanding and modeling age-specific
human immune responses will be vital to the rational design and development of
safe and effective vaccines for newborns and infants. "

You are
right. While you like to think you know something about antibodies, what is the
state of your understanding of the neonatal immune system? The information
already available, might suggest that anyone who is considering vaccinating
PREGNANT women and new born babies need their heads examined:

See http://www.beyondconformity.or...

http://www.beyondconformity.or...

http://www.beyondconformity.or...

Download
the full medical articles and read them. Then sit back and consider the massive
chronic illness problems we have in children today, which did not exist in
1950, and ask yourself whether or not immunologists (who then knew virtually
nothing about the immune system at all) might have had a hand in swapping acute
disease, for far more untreatable chronic disease.

I
seriously wonder how you educated doctors cannot see this.

Furthermore,
vaccines aren't the second most important medical intervention. If you're lucky
they come a miserable tenth. I can think of a list of things which are far more
important.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

There's little doubt vaccine developers are excited by the prospect of shooting up the world's infants at birth, but in their zeal to ply their trade they fail to consider that the immature infant immune system's failure to produce sufficient cytokines may actually be a feature rather than a bug.  If low or suppressed inflammatory cytokine production is biologically normal and has a protective effect on the brain during critical early neurological development, what long-term neurological and immunological consequences will be seen when this perceived "deficit" is overcome by artificially overstimulating the immature infant immune system with adjuvants and multiple antigens?  One must hope that the answer to this question will be required as part of any approval process for new birth vaccines, and will be taken into account when cost/benefit analyses are done.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Dr Levy is either stupid, uneducated in his field, lacking wisdom or being paid by you know who...

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

I vote for "being paid by you know who..."

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Dr. Levy, what is wrong with you? Are you determined to have 100% of children with autsm and neurological diseases? And yes, I'm the mother of a vaccine injured beautiful girl that is paying the price of me listening to my idiotic pediatrician, that just like you, cared more about getting the money from the pharmaceutical companies than the health of my baby... What amazes me is how arrogant doctors are becoming and how little they care about the results of their actions... Will you even feel guilty when the number of children with neurological diseases becomes 100% or will you sleep nice and tight in your pharma mac-house?

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Dr. Leavy  forgot to disclose 2.4 million other reasons that he might be advocating for newborn vaccinations.  

http://www.healthtechzone.com/...
"June 21, 2010Healthcare Technology and News: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Offers a Funding of $2.4 Million Grant to Children's Hospital Boston
Share

0digg
A $2.4 million grant has been received by Children’s Hospital Boston, from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The research concerning the development of novel vaccines for newborns, spearheaded by Ofer Levy, MD, Ph.D., a principal investigator in the Division of Infectious Diseases at Children’s, is supported by the grant...."

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

You don't know what your talking about.  I know at least 20 babies who now have autism because of the shots. I know they don't need all the shots that your giving to babies today. a whole lot more than when my kids had them. Your not stopping the disease Your causeing more babis to be sickly. I tell all moms not to give there babies the shots  there killing the babies and your being paid to say all these lies.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 9, 2011

Well, I confess that - after reading this article - I was intending to write a scathing refutation of Dr. Levy's assertions. However, a review of the comments previously posted revealed that there are many others who have already done an excellent job of blasting Levy. Well done, folks! Thank you for weighing in so articulately and emphatically against the practice of immunizing newborns.

For those of you who think such vaccinations are a good idea, I recommend that you review the Nuremberg trials...those were designed to publicize the atrocity of wholesale human experimentation and prevent this from ever happening again. Now, you want to experiment on our young? For shame.

Respectfully submitted, Dr. Jonas Moses

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Amen!

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

What clown college did you get your doctor's degree?  I'm going to take leap of faith and say it's not a medical degree is it.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Medical doctors are not gods, dude... and I bet you're one of those idiots who doesn't believe in chiropractors too?

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Kudos for those who show the emperor has no clothes. As a mouthpiece fronting for big pharma all the pseudo scientific talk by Dr. Levy are highly suspect. That he avoids citing controversial studies for one. Or that he ignores evidence from pesticide and toxicological studies from the environmental literature showing defects from alterations during windows of vulnerability in immune , nervous system and other system development.
I come from the clinical side. Now retired from a PA in surgery, neurosurgery, family pracice and eight years in ICU. I have more than dabbled in reading about neurodevelopment and the intricate mulple factors both intrinsic and extrinsic affecting the complex processes in the organization of the nervous system.
I no more trust authority from an outsider than I do from one in the field who turns his back on the facts.
Let us hear from more people with an axe to grind.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Let see the CDC get out of this corner they have painted there selves into.THe CDC Danish studies the CDC had done revealed that a little mercury was actually good for a childs IQ.We now know why, the researcher the CDC hired to do the studies on Thimerosal was Poul Thorsen from Denmark.  The CDC gave him 11 million Dollars and told him   psst! were only interested in what will exonerate. the CDC and Vaccines.  Well as the story goes, the researcher the CDC hand picked to do all those fraudulent studies that proved putting mercury into our young babies is 100% safe and does not cause Autism.   Is now indicted on 13 counts of wire fraud an 9 counts of money laundering here in the US.He bought him self a house, next to the CDC and a new harley motorcycle two cars and wired himself almost 1 million dollars of CDC Autism research dollars.Why Oh! Why wouldn't this knowledge be breaking news ????? Answer the media is being   controlled by the CDC and Pharma to suppress this Bomb shell.This new research from Australia destroys the credibility of the corrupted CDC. ATLANTA, Aug. 9, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Researchers from Australia have identified an ancestry of Pink Disease (Infantile Acrodynia) as a risk factor for Autism Spectrum Disorders. Pink disease was common in the first half of the 20th century ...
The new study, published July 28th in the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health available athttp://www.tandfonline.com/d..., investigated the hypothesis that autism can result from the interaction between mercury exposure and a genetic predisposition to sensitivity to mercury. Currently, 43 peer-reviewed studies support a link between mercury and autism, and experts agree that autism is caused by the interaction of genetic susceptibility and environmental exposures.The Australian researchers, David Austin, Ph.D. and Kerrie Shandley investigated whether individuals with a known hypersensitivity to mercury were more likely to have descendants with an autism spectrum disorder. They surveyed 522 adult survivors of Pink Disease about the health of their grandchildren. They found that 1 in 25 of these grandchildren had an autism spectrum disorder compared to 1 in 160 children of the same ages in the general population in Australia, a staggering six-fold increase in relative risk. Dr. Austin had the following comment, "The large elevation in autism prevalence in this group of children was startling especially given that rates of other childhood disorders were at expected levels. The thing that differentiates these children from the general population, to which they were compared, is a family history of mercury sensitivity. We were simply blown away by the results." 

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

According to my copy of Bacterial Adherence B Pertussis is effectively unattached by substances is breast milk. I agree with the critics.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

The Emperor ( CDC ) never had any clothes.

 1st  they say, if you do not like the findings on your child's NVICP case you have the right to sue the manufacturer.
Next the law makers under the disguise of tort reform, create a 250,000  cap all the while knowing it cost that much to bring forth a vaccine suit in state court. 
Thus achieving their goal of a parent being able to get an attorney to take these cases.
When they find they have no!!!!! science to defend in a court of law, the Supreme Court rules that the parents cannot sue the Manufacturer.  For even those Idiots know, you cannot win with useless, and worse than useless that was done in Denmark.House Appropriations Committee asked the NIH to evaluate the CDC 's vaccines as a cause for Autism science,the NIH charged the NEIHS to do the task.        The head of the NIEHS 's panel said in a report to Congress that the science was so riddled full of design flaws that  it rendered them to be en effect useless.The CDC's Dir. was asked to defend her studies by Congressional comittee,she did not! in fact she agreed to the findings.   Even to the point, that she the CDC Dir. said any further use of the VSD looking at vaccines as a cause for Autism environmental would be misleading.. She the Dir said, that they would not be using the VSD any more for looking for a environmental cause for Autism....If some one reading this, says that you are just interpreting what she said wrong.The CDC Dir. set it in stone the fact that she was using junk studies all along with the following statement, that makes it Dam clear! that the Emperor [ the CDC ] had no clothes all along. She the Dir. then said; "but if you do give us more time we will do good quality studies"The NIEHS panel head said this, which says it all "that leaves the CDC with very little to say, that Vaccines and Autism are not connected in any way.The NIEHS panels head also said this;As bad as the studies that were done in the VSD were, they were an improvement over the other two [ the two Denmark studies ].Since this was years before the indictment of the author of the Denmark studies,it appears [ the NIEHS panels head researcher, knows fraud when she sees it ].Also, even knowing this. That the CDC had only junk studies,   That's, according to the NIH's NIEHS findings.   The special masters of the Vaccine compensation program was to rule on the Autism vaccine test cases, the special masters said that the science was so over whelming against the parents, they had no choice to rule how they ruled against the parents.    What science special masters Hastings would that be?? the en effect useless or the worse than useless that was done by a Danish researcher that is now being indicted for 13 counts of wire fraud and 9 counts of money laundering.Like I said, you cannot win in a real court..... [with useless and worth than useless as a defense]....So, you get the Supreme court to take away a childs due process. Now that's, Democracy at it's best! Destroy a child's brain, and then deny them the very remedy that Congress created for the protection of the industry.This is the greatest scandal, in American history. And the most cruel, that shows how low Senators Congressman and Presidents and Media people can go.  Oh! I forgot the Pharma co'sThe national vaccine compensation program was supposed to be a non confrontational 
& no fault system. Congressman Dan Burton said at a vaccine compensation hearing this; You are not doing! the spirit of the law, we including myself who created the law meant if you even think a child's been harmed!!! then you pay them, and you pay them very well.Everything they heard, (speaking of the Vaccine compensation program Dir. that was representing the program) that day went in one ear, and out of the other. It is corrupted to it's core,the people in charge .. the special masters, are paid for life only after judging a few cases a year.    What a Gig! And the Dir. of the CDC after misleading the public,is now is employed by the very industry that profited from her deceiving the American public.  For her deceit she was rewarded with 2 million a year contract with Merck .....  I recently found out this, Medco the company that we get 440 diapers a month from a tax payers paid program [ is owned by Merck ].( End User License: Merck-Medco Managed Care, L.L.C. )The perfect crime, destroy neurologically a child to a point they are now 20 yr's oldand still in diapers with their mandated tax payer vaccine program. And make a cool billion doing so, and then sell the government diapers and wet wipes. [ for the life of the child ].   Our elected representatives, wonder why we are trillions in debt. Here's the answer      [they are paying it out, to their constituents,] 
[ the pharmaceutical co's ] for the damage!!! they done, to our American children..... Ps the big question here that should be on every bodys minds, should be if Congress finds an agency committing something as close to treason as this is Why did they not act to protect the American children????????And by not acting they are responsible for the prolonging of the Autism Pandemic not Epidemic.....costing Trillions for the life long care cost..The head of the IACC Thomas Insel, said this after yr's of denial that the increase in Autism is real.  It is appearing the increase cannot be explained away. He then said this, how we prepare a Nation for 1 million Adults that may need significant amounts of services. They are working their way through system like a wave.... He left out the Key word   [ TIDAL  ] WAVE

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Every child by two got us here, Autism in (1 in 110 children 1 in 68 being boys ) now you want to go even earlier, with the Toxins and heavy metals and finish off the rest of the American children.

You people in main stream medicine have lost your moral compass,all you can see are the pharma dollars.....

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

The Autism study was not only fake, but the man behind it deliberately falsified records for personal gain.  

http://www.businessweek.com/li...

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Would it not be better to spend all that money on feeding starving mothers and infants, rather than wasting it on harmful toxins? If you really care about the health of newborns, you should implement methods to eradicate world hunger and advocate for breast beeding.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

So the new question now should be as the AAP said, when they found out the children were over taxed with Thimerosal that is 50% mercury by weight.

Yr's ago the AAP said upon finding out the vaccines contained mercury this;

This is accumulative in the body,we must find the best chelating agent and get with it!!!

Then they went to the secret Simpson wood meeting,where they were all informed they were all in a bad position from the stand point of defending law suits.

Chelating a child from that day forward, was to be viewed as voodoo science 
only one problem.  If this new study is right, it was chelation that halted the 
pinks pandemic in fact their words from history was this; chelation worked so 
fast they could not get a study together fast enough, before it chelation had 
eradicated pinks....
The reason the AAP said that, was they must have read the MSDS of Thimerosal 

Thimerosal is accumulative in the body,and it targets the organs of the body in particular the brain and the lining around the brain.

So the question should be, if we had listened to the parents in the beginning and chelated the children.  Would we still be supporting trillion $$ babies for life???????

Here is a warning from 1948 that should have made them err on the side of caution 
when allowing Thimerosal as a preservative.

Dr. Engley 1948 we find Thimerosal toxic down to an unbelievable level down to one one millionth of a gram,and that's about as toxic as you can get as toxic   

AMA paid for blue ribbon panel study on Thimerosal from 1948
back when the AMA had integrity “Dr. Frank Engley is a retired chairman and professor of Microbiology at the University of Missouri.He served on various committees and panels and has consulted for the CDC, NASA, the FDA, and EPA. He did some of the first research on the toxicity of thimerosal.**
His work is in two prestigious journals, isn't it strange how no one can recall his work or his dire warnings on Thimerosal  
It should be noted that this article was published in the January1948 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association## It should be noted that this article was published in 1950 in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 
Maybe we should be asking the AMA why they don’t come forward on this important subject and save the children. 
After all it was their money that paid for the study.It seems greed runs ramped in the AMA and they care little or not at all, for little children.
The reason they are fighting this so hard is that they ignored two very strong warnings one from 1948 and another from 1982 and now the damage is to wide spread and severehence this statement from Dr. Engley QUOTE

â€쳌if they had followed through on our 82 report the vaccines would have been freed of thimerosal and all this autism they tell me would not have occurredâ€쳌 (That makes you wonder who all knows)
This was taken from the actual report  It is clear from this research supported by a grant from the Medical Association that Thimerosal is neither efficacious nor safe, and should be removed as a preservative in prescription biologics and pharmaceutical products, as well as from topical over-the-counter products such as Butt-Balm that have Thimerosal present in their formulations as an active ingredient.â€쳌 Just before this courageous researcher died he set the record straight, with this quote from Dr. Engley and probably the most important of all.   That truly shows how the CDC, FDA, AAP, IOM, and the NIH, all were asleep at the switch for decades. And even to present, 
QUOTEâ€쳌if they had followed through on our 82 report the vaccines would have been freed of Thimerosal and all this autism they tell me would not have occurredâ€쳌 

In other words no trillion dollar babies, to support for life.

My son was born in 1990 if they had listened to the report and followed through my son would be playing football in school instead he is being baby sited in school with the mental capacity of a about a two yr old thanks CDC FDA AAP IOM you truly are serving the people well NOT!!!!! 

Who was this courageous researcher that apparently loved children, here are the credentials of this great man Dr.Frank Engley studied thimerosal as far back as 1942. Dr. Engley is responsible for the 4 year School of Medicine at the University of Missouri. He has consulted for the CDC, IOM, NASA, FDA, EPA, CIA, AAMI, USP, Armed Forces Epidemiological boards, Army, Navy, Air Force as well as Director of research grants and training grants for NIH. Engley Served on the Council of the NIH Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease and a consultant on many Epidemiological Boards too many to list. Dr. Engley has been a visiting Professor in over 40 foreign countries medical schools. He has produced films, written text books, Laboratory Manuals, over 100 publications, served on editorial boards for numerous scientific journals and periodicals, including four American, two British and one German. Engley is certified by the American Board of Micro Biology and served as the Chair of the Laboratory of American Public Health Association. He has been listed in American Men and Women of Science, Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in American Education, Who’s Who among Consultants and Who’s Who in the World. His toxicity studies of mercurials in human tissue culture revealed the mercurials were extremely toxic for human cells and the Thimerosal — the most active, toxic down to the nanogram. The amounts of mercury have gone down but vaccines still have 100 times that amount when they are in preservative free and reduced thimerosal vaccines. Now who do we listen to ? a man who is nearing the end of his life and has nothing to gain, or Paul Offit vaccine sales man extraordinaire with a vacc. patent that he will not even disclose how much money he has made off the broken bodies of little children.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

"proof-of-concept exists that this approach can be safe and effective and
represents a promising strategy to reduce infant mortality".    Think you better concentrate on proof that vaccines work at all first.  

Jim, lots of us moms with children injured from vaccinations don't need Studies to prove to us that they skew the immune system.  

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Seriously. This is ridiculous. Who wrote this article... Merck?

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Second only to what!??! Don't you mean third only to BREASTFEEDING and clean water - as per WHO guidelines? Go look at the breastfeeding rates in Africa before postulating garbage. Some countries are down to 1% breastfeeding.
One percent.
In Africa.
That's 99% feeding infants with dirty water in unsterilized bottles and you have the gall to say it is vaccines that are the solution? Shame on you. When you can find ONE vaccine safety trial that uses a true control and a fully benign placebo, then come tell us vaccines are safe for malnourished and sick babies.
Sickening.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Statistics show that the countries with the most vaccines have the highest infant mortality rates and those with the least vaccines enjoy the lowest infant mortality rates. 

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

What Statistics are thoes?  No Offence, but I think you're making that up. Polio, Hep B, Rotavirus, Diphtheria these are things you don't want and half of us would not be here if it wasn't for the vaccines that stop them.  children in countries that don't have these vaccines die from them in high numbers.   Don't spit out nonsense it makes you look dumb.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Right. And you definitely aren't making up the statistic that 50% of us would die if we weren't vaccinated... Wow I guess I should be worried about half my family ;)

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Find IMRs for the developed world and vaccine schedule for the developed world, plot against each other on a graph and hey presto! The more you vaccinate the higher your infant mortality rate. While you're looking, go find the survey that shows the more educated vaccinate less.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

"Improved immunization efforts are required to prevent infections during the first 6 months of life"
 
The best immunization given at birth is colostrum from the breast, nothing this pharma shill can induce could remotely compare

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

For thoes of you who don't think vaccines are a good idea watch this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

I get all my facts from Penn and Teller too.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Find me a statment in that video thats proven wrong and I'll refute them.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

I'm immune to Pertussis...  because I've HAD IT. And you know what? It was NO BIG DEAL! I would so much rather my 10 month old son contract whooping cough than die from "SIDS" thank you very much.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

There has been no credible study linking SIDS and vaccines but there has been for Polio, Diphtheria & Rotavirus.

You ever see a baby suffering from Diphtheria? I have Trust me it's one of the ways you don't want to die.

It's sad when children die from misconceptions and ignorance that could easily be avoided by simple fact checking.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

For thoes of you who don't think vaccines is a good idea watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

It is about time new clinical trials guidelines were adopted, where investigators can only enroll babies and subjects of those who will benefit from the profit-making experiment or project, test the drugs on their kids first and then recruit other subjects.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

 The summary appears in New Scientist
magazine:]
http://www.wemove.org/stayconn...

Seems the immune system may be a lot more flexible than previously
thought--Initially, T-helper (Th) cells were thought to be of 2
types: Th1 which sent viruses and bacteria from host cells and Th2
cells that fought parasites and bacteria in blood in other body
fluids and also fought allergens. 2 new classes of cells were
discovered: regulatory T cells (T-regs) which attenuate the immune
system response and Th17 cells that trigger inflammation and
autoimmunity. Problem with this categorization was discovered when
the T-regs behaved like Th1 cells when the T-regs cells were exposed
to the molecults that normally result in a Th response. (Immunity,
COI:10:1016/j.immuni.2008.12.009). Whoops--

In addition, study by Casey Weaver at Univ of Alabama showed
that "Th17 cells can also morph into Th1-like cells" under certain
conditions. Article concludes that "if Th1 cells are equally flexible
vaccines may not work as they are intended, says Christopher Wilson
of hte Univ of Washington State in Seattle. For instance, if a
vaccine against a virus triggers a Th1 response but the Th1 cells
change their identity for some reason, 'the pathogen might yetsubvert the protection induced by the vaccine', he says"

[Occurs to me that vaccines may result in immune responses in which
the correct immune cell morphs into the wrong cell--causing
inflammation or autoimmunity when none was wanted.......author cites
the safety study in which 6 individuals in Northwick park hosp in
london in March, 06 were given a drug that was to activate T-reg
cells, but instead they were made seriously ill. Perhaps the T-regs
morphed into Th17 causing an autoimmune response?]

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Wow.  This is interesting.  When I went to nursing school back in 84 (and there has been no evidence-based science to refute since...the common knowledge was...infants younger than 6 months (mininum) are incapable of mounting an immune response (is'nt that a very big reason, for example, that MMR is not given before 1 year?).

Giving a child immunizations before the age of 6 months...could be nothing more than priming the pump (or the shareholders profits) because boosters of ALL the vaccines given before 6 months require boosters...things that make one go hmmmm.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Before vaccinations, neonates and infants were protected from infectious diseases by virtue of the fact that their mothers had acquired preventive immune factors through exposure to those diseases. It’s only since the inception of universal vaccination that this protection has largely been lost. Meanwhile, we have vaccine enthusiasts clamoring for ever more of the destruction of this idyllic system.
 
No matter how many brilliant researchers attempt to come close to natural prevention, they’ll never do it; nature’s method is direct, non-invasive, relatively cheap, and, at the same time, allows for thinning the population according to “survival of the fittestâ€쳌.
 
It wasn’t vaccination which eradicated smallpox. Smallpox was already gone in 80% of countries before 1967 when the WHO launched its vaccination campaign. But, where it was mandated in the 19th and early 20th centuries, the vaccine certainly eradicated many of those injected! And one wonders how many it eradicated during the WHO campaign.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Dr. Paul Offit says it's safe to give 10,000 vaccines at once.  Why not give all newborns 10,000 vaccines on the day of birth?  Then they'll be protected from 10,000 diseases.  Any adverse reactions will obviously be just a coincidence, anecdotal, reports by parents who don't understand science.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

It is about time new clinical trials guidelines were adopted, where investigators can only enroll babies and subjects of those who will benefit from the profit-making experiment or project, test the drugs on their kids first and then recruit other subjects.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

 The summary appears in New Scientist
magazine:]
http://www.wemove.org/stayconn...

Seems the immune system may be a lot more flexible than previously
thought--Initially, T-helper (Th) cells were thought to be of 2
types: Th1 which sent viruses and bacteria from host cells and Th2
cells that fought parasites and bacteria in blood in other body
fluids and also fought allergens. 2 new classes of cells were
discovered: regulatory T cells (T-regs) which attenuate the immune
system response and Th17 cells that trigger inflammation and
autoimmunity. Problem with this categorization was discovered when
the T-regs behaved like Th1 cells when the T-regs cells were exposed
to the molecults that normally result in a Th response. (Immunity,
COI:10:1016/j.immuni.2008.12.009). Whoops--

In addition, study by Casey Weaver at Univ of Alabama showed
that "Th17 cells can also morph into Th1-like cells" under certain
conditions. Article concludes that "if Th1 cells are equally flexible
vaccines may not work as they are intended, says Christopher Wilson
of hte Univ of Washington State in Seattle. For instance, if a
vaccine against a virus triggers a Th1 response but the Th1 cells
change their identity for some reason, 'the pathogen might yetsubvert the protection induced by the vaccine', he says"

[Occurs to me that vaccines may result in immune responses in which
the correct immune cell morphs into the wrong cell--causing
inflammation or autoimmunity when none was wanted.......author cites
the safety study in which 6 individuals in Northwick park hosp in
london in March, 06 were given a drug that was to activate T-reg
cells, but instead they were made seriously ill. Perhaps the T-regs
morphed into Th17 causing an autoimmune response?]

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Wow.  This is interesting.  When I went to nursing school back in 84 (and there has been no evidence-based science to refute since...the common knowledge was...infants younger than 6 months (mininum) are incapable of mounting an immune response (is'nt that a very big reason, for example, that MMR is not given before 1 year?).

Giving a child immunizations before the age of 6 months...could be nothing more than priming the pump (or the shareholders profits) because boosters of ALL the vaccines given before 6 months require boosters...things that make one go hmmmm.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

"Improved immunization efforts are required to prevent infections during the first 6 months of life"
 
The best immunization given at birth is colostrum from the breast, nothing this pharma shill can induce could remotely compare

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

For thoes of you who don't think vaccines are a good idea watch this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

I get all my facts from Penn and Teller too.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Find me a statment in that video thats proven wrong and I'll refute them.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

I'm immune to Pertussis...  because I've HAD IT. And you know what? It was NO BIG DEAL! I would so much rather my 10 month old son contract whooping cough than die from "SIDS" thank you very much.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

There has been no credible study linking SIDS and vaccines but there has been for Polio, Diphtheria & Rotavirus.

You ever see a baby suffering from Diphtheria? I have Trust me it's one of the ways you don't want to die.

It's sad when children die from misconceptions and ignorance that could easily be avoided by simple fact checking.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

For thoes of you who don't think vaccines is a good idea watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Before vaccinations, neonates and infants were protected from infectious diseases by virtue of the fact that their mothers had acquired preventive immune factors through exposure to those diseases. It’s only since the inception of universal vaccination that this protection has largely been lost. Meanwhile, we have vaccine enthusiasts clamoring for ever more of the destruction of this idyllic system.
 
No matter how many brilliant researchers attempt to come close to natural prevention, they’ll never do it; nature’s method is direct, non-invasive, relatively cheap, and, at the same time, allows for thinning the population according to “survival of the fittestâ€쳌.
 
It wasn’t vaccination which eradicated smallpox. Smallpox was already gone in 80% of countries before 1967 when the WHO launched its vaccination campaign. But, where it was mandated in the 19th and early 20th centuries, the vaccine certainly eradicated many of those injected! And one wonders how many it eradicated during the WHO campaign.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Amen!

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

What clown college did you get your doctor's degree?  I'm going to take leap of faith and say it's not a medical degree is it.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Medical doctors are not gods, dude... and I bet you're one of those idiots who doesn't believe in chiropractors too?

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Kudos for those who show the emperor has no clothes. As a mouthpiece fronting for big pharma all the pseudo scientific talk by Dr. Levy are highly suspect. That he avoids citing controversial studies for one. Or that he ignores evidence from pesticide and toxicological studies from the environmental literature showing defects from alterations during windows of vulnerability in immune , nervous system and other system development.
I come from the clinical side. Now retired from a PA in surgery, neurosurgery, family pracice and eight years in ICU. I have more than dabbled in reading about neurodevelopment and the intricate mulple factors both intrinsic and extrinsic affecting the complex processes in the organization of the nervous system.
I no more trust authority from an outsider than I do from one in the field who turns his back on the facts.
Let us hear from more people with an axe to grind.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Let see the CDC get out of this corner they have painted there selves into.THe CDC Danish studies the CDC had done revealed that a little mercury was actually good for a childs IQ.We now know why, the researcher the CDC hired to do the studies on Thimerosal was Poul Thorsen from Denmark.  The CDC gave him 11 million Dollars and told him   psst! were only interested in what will exonerate. the CDC and Vaccines.  Well as the story goes, the researcher the CDC hand picked to do all those fraudulent studies that proved putting mercury into our young babies is 100% safe and does not cause Autism.   Is now indicted on 13 counts of wire fraud an 9 counts of money laundering here in the US.He bought him self a house, next to the CDC and a new harley motorcycle two cars and wired himself almost 1 million dollars of CDC Autism research dollars.Why Oh! Why wouldn't this knowledge be breaking news ????? Answer the media is being   controlled by the CDC and Pharma to suppress this Bomb shell.This new research from Australia destroys the credibility of the corrupted CDC. ATLANTA, Aug. 9, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Researchers from Australia have identified an ancestry of Pink Disease (Infantile Acrodynia) as a risk factor for Autism Spectrum Disorders. Pink disease was common in the first half of the 20th century ...
The new study, published July 28th in the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health available athttp://www.tandfonline.com/d..., investigated the hypothesis that autism can result from the interaction between mercury exposure and a genetic predisposition to sensitivity to mercury. Currently, 43 peer-reviewed studies support a link between mercury and autism, and experts agree that autism is caused by the interaction of genetic susceptibility and environmental exposures.The Australian researchers, David Austin, Ph.D. and Kerrie Shandley investigated whether individuals with a known hypersensitivity to mercury were more likely to have descendants with an autism spectrum disorder. They surveyed 522 adult survivors of Pink Disease about the health of their grandchildren. They found that 1 in 25 of these grandchildren had an autism spectrum disorder compared to 1 in 160 children of the same ages in the general population in Australia, a staggering six-fold increase in relative risk. Dr. Austin had the following comment, "The large elevation in autism prevalence in this group of children was startling especially given that rates of other childhood disorders were at expected levels. The thing that differentiates these children from the general population, to which they were compared, is a family history of mercury sensitivity. We were simply blown away by the results." 

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Statistics show that the countries with the most vaccines have the highest infant mortality rates and those with the least vaccines enjoy the lowest infant mortality rates. 

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

What Statistics are thoes?  No Offence, but I think you're making that up. Polio, Hep B, Rotavirus, Diphtheria these are things you don't want and half of us would not be here if it wasn't for the vaccines that stop them.  children in countries that don't have these vaccines die from them in high numbers.   Don't spit out nonsense it makes you look dumb.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Right. And you definitely aren't making up the statistic that 50% of us would die if we weren't vaccinated... Wow I guess I should be worried about half my family ;)

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Find IMRs for the developed world and vaccine schedule for the developed world, plot against each other on a graph and hey presto! The more you vaccinate the higher your infant mortality rate. While you're looking, go find the survey that shows the more educated vaccinate less.

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

The Emperor ( CDC ) never had any clothes.

 1st  they say, if you do not like the findings on your child's NVICP case you have the right to sue the manufacturer.
Next the law makers under the disguise of tort reform, create a 250,000  cap all the while knowing it cost that much to bring forth a vaccine suit in state court. 
Thus achieving their goal of a parent being able to get an attorney to take these cases.
When they find they have no!!!!! science to defend in a court of law, the Supreme Court rules that the parents cannot sue the Manufacturer.  For even those Idiots know, you cannot win with useless, and worse than useless that was done in Denmark.House Appropriations Committee asked the NIH to evaluate the CDC 's vaccines as a cause for Autism science,the NIH charged the NEIHS to do the task.        The head of the NIEHS 's panel said in a report to Congress that the science was so riddled full of design flaws that  it rendered them to be en effect useless.The CDC's Dir. was asked to defend her studies by Congressional comittee,she did not! in fact she agreed to the findings.   Even to the point, that she the CDC Dir. said any further use of the VSD looking at vaccines as a cause for Autism environmental would be misleading.. She the Dir said, that they would not be using the VSD any more for looking for a environmental cause for Autism....If some one reading this, says that you are just interpreting what she said wrong.The CDC Dir. set it in stone the fact that she was using junk studies all along with the following statement, that makes it Dam clear! that the Emperor [ the CDC ] had no clothes all along. She the Dir. then said; "but if you do give us more time we will do good quality studies"The NIEHS panel head said this, which says it all "that leaves the CDC with very little to say, that Vaccines and Autism are not connected in any way.The NIEHS panels head also said this;As bad as the studies that were done in the VSD were, they were an improvement over the other two [ the two Denmark studies ].Since this was years before the indictment of the author of the Denmark studies,it appears [ the NIEHS panels head researcher, knows fraud when she sees it ].Also, even knowing this. That the CDC had only junk studies,   That's, according to the NIH's NIEHS findings.   The special masters of the Vaccine compensation program was to rule on the Autism vaccine test cases, the special masters said that the science was so over whelming against the parents, they had no choice to rule how they ruled against the parents.    What science special masters Hastings would that be?? the en effect useless or the worse than useless that was done by a Danish researcher that is now being indicted for 13 counts of wire fraud and 9 counts of money laundering.Like I said, you cannot win in a real court..... [with useless and worth than useless as a defense]....So, you get the Supreme court to take away a childs due process. Now that's, Democracy at it's best! Destroy a child's brain, and then deny them the very remedy that Congress created for the protection of the industry.This is the greatest scandal, in American history. And the most cruel, that shows how low Senators Congressman and Presidents and Media people can go.  Oh! I forgot the Pharma co'sThe national vaccine compensation program was supposed to be a non confrontational 
& no fault system. Congressman Dan Burton said at a vaccine compensation hearing this; You are not doing! the spirit of the law, we including myself who created the law meant if you even think a child's been harmed!!! then you pay them, and you pay them very well.Everything they heard, (speaking of the Vaccine compensation program Dir. that was representing the program) that day went in one ear, and out of the other. It is corrupted to it's core,the people in charge .. the special masters, are paid for life only after judging a few cases a year.    What a Gig! And the Dir. of the CDC after misleading the public,is now is employed by the very industry that profited from her deceiving the American public.  For her deceit she was rewarded with 2 million a year contract with Merck .....  I recently found out this, Medco the company that we get 440 diapers a month from a tax payers paid program [ is owned by Merck ].( End User License: Merck-Medco Managed Care, L.L.C. )The perfect crime, destroy neurologically a child to a point they are now 20 yr's oldand still in diapers with their mandated tax payer vaccine program. And make a cool billion doing so, and then sell the government diapers and wet wipes. [ for the life of the child ].   Our elected representatives, wonder why we are trillions in debt. Here's the answer      [they are paying it out, to their constituents,] 
[ the pharmaceutical co's ] for the damage!!! they done, to our American children..... Ps the big question here that should be on every bodys minds, should be if Congress finds an agency committing something as close to treason as this is Why did they not act to protect the American children????????And by not acting they are responsible for the prolonging of the Autism Pandemic not Epidemic.....costing Trillions for the life long care cost..The head of the IACC Thomas Insel, said this after yr's of denial that the increase in Autism is real.  It is appearing the increase cannot be explained away. He then said this, how we prepare a Nation for 1 million Adults that may need significant amounts of services. They are working their way through system like a wave.... He left out the Key word   [ TIDAL  ] WAVE

Avatar of:

Posts: 0

August 10, 2011

Every child by two got us here, Autism in (1 in 110 children 1 in 68 being boys ) now you want to go even earlier, with the Toxins and heavy metals and finish off the rest of the American children.

You people in main stream medicine have lost your moral compass,all you can see are the pharma dollars.....

Follow The Scientist

icon-facebook icon-linkedin icon-twitter icon-vimeo icon-youtube
Advertisement

Stay Connected with The Scientist

  • icon-facebook The Scientist Magazine
  • icon-facebook The Scientist Careers
  • icon-facebook Neuroscience Research Techniques
  • icon-facebook Genetic Research Techniques
  • icon-facebook Cell Culture Techniques
  • icon-facebook Microbiology and Immunology
  • icon-facebook Cancer Research and Technology
  • icon-facebook Stem Cell and Regenerative Science
Advertisement
Mirus Bio LLC
Mirus Bio LLC
Advertisement