Sunday, December 29, 2013

Dec 29, 2013 - China and Hep B

It's been reported that there have been 8 infant deaths (not sure if they were infants, meaning <1 year of age or neonates, meaning <28 days old) in the last 2 months following vaccination for Hepatitis B; The vaccine had been made by Shenzhen Kangtai (#1). China is an area of the world where the incidence and prevalence of Hep B is much higher than other areas. Hepatitis B can be a transitory infection or it can become chronic. Those who have chronic Hep B are at greater risk for liver cancer and other liver problems, and they can also transmit the disease to others with whom they have sex or share needles. Generally newborns who are born to mothers who are chronic carriers are given Hep B immune globulin and are vaccinated against Hep B (which requires a series of 3 shots - initial injection, 2 months, 6 months). 

The second link (#2) is the testimony before Congress of Dr. Orient (1999) regarding the practice of universal Hep B vaccination of infants and why it might be prudent to re-consider. She makes some excellent points. While her testimony was given 14+ years ago, it remains relevant today, as Hep B is still not so prevalent that universal vaccination makes sense. 

For those who are at high risk (multiple sex partners, injection drug user, infants born to mother who is a chronic carrier, healthcare workers) it would make sense for them to discuss with their healthcare provider if the benefit/risk ratio of vaccination falls in favor of vaccination. But to vaccinate an infant because they MIGHT fall into a high risk group at some point in their life does not make sense. Especially since the risk reduction (of contracting Hep B if exposed) is unlikely to last their entire life (#3). Better to start vaccinating if/when the risk reduction is greater than the risk of the intervention. 

Hep B vaccines have been associated with adverse events/reactions following their use (#4), so a careful assessment of risk vs benefit must be done prior to vaccination. Some may think the risk/benefit ratio does not favor vaccination, even if they are at high risk due to personal lifestyle choices. 

Because vaccination is not risk free, the decision to vaccinate should be both personal, and private - between patient/client and health care provider. Vaccination should not be mandatory, nor compulsory. There needs to be better treatment options for those who do contract Hepatitis B, regardless of vaccination status. 



( 2013 Jan;57(1):37-45. doi: 10.1002/hep.25988. Epub 2012 Dec 28.) 


Thursday, December 19, 2013

Dec 19, 2013 - Conflicts of Interest

Link below to a post by Age of Autism regarding an on-line facet of conflict of interest (COI) ... the allegation of being paid to post comments about a topic as a strategy to influence others.

The article summarizes various professional relationships and how they are linked, and also reviews how these relationships may be part of COI. This piece focuses on Dorit Rubenstein Reiss and two aspects of COI: 1) part of the speculation around the allegation of COI with her multiple posts in response to the issues around Gardasil raised by Katie Couric and 2) how she frames herself as a concerned parent when she is actually involved in vaccines on a professional level as well.

This is only one part of COI issues - there are many more facets to this, so never take a claim for transparency at face value - trust but verify!

Monday, December 16, 2013

Dec 16, 2013 - Mama bear, Papa bear

Some of the most interesting posts I come across are written by parents who have linked health problems in their children with receipt of vaccines. They are finding, and writing on very interesting research regarding the patho-physiology that can happen as a consequence of vaccination ... 

Joel Lord, of Vaccine Resistance Movement, in particular posts articles detailing this phenomena. VacFacts is another good source.

The second link posted is about HPV, and how some people groups are more likely to be infected/exposed to types of HPV not included in the current vaccines - which begs the question, why take on the risk of vaccination when the likelihood of any benefit is even less than the presumed benefit to begin with?  

The third link is to an article discussing the effect of vaccination upon the immune system and how it may lead to an imbalance of the different types of immunity we have. 

The last link is to an article discussing the theory of herd immunity - a theory left wanting as we still have disease among groups that are nearly 100% vaccinated. 

Friday, December 13, 2013

Dec 13, 2013 - why question vaccine (or drug) safety ... here's why

God bless people like Dr. Marciniak ... and may God also protect him, as he is actually DOING HIS JOB as an FDA investigator! What a concept - he actually LOOKS AT THE DATA. He asks very pertinent (and impertinent) questions ABOUT the data ... like why are significant amounts of it missing, and what happened to the REAL PEOPLE the (missing) data represent?

The link below is to an article about this ... it looks like The Refusers are quoting (perhaps copying and pasting) the BMJ article they cite (a link is provided at the end of the article - you must pay for access beyond a brief blurb).

If only more of us adopted the following approach:
“If I, as a federal employee or simply as an ethical individual, see evidence of a threat to public health, I have an obligation to report it regardless of whether the issue is assigned to me or not,” he says.

There are too many people/organizations inserting themselves into the relationship between provider and patient ... guidelines are used not as guidelines, but as billy-clubs to beat providers into submission (kind of hard to provide individualized care to each patient if doing so leads you to stray outside of the "guidelines" - this takes coloring inside the lines to a whole new level!)

While modern, conventional medicine has helped many, there are too many legitimate questions about many of the medications and procedures were are using - and for this reason there needs to be far greater freedom in the decisions providers and patients make about their healthcare.

Thursday, December 12, 2013

Dec 12, 2013

Today's first link is an excellent op-ed ... very balanced.

The second link, while from last year, is very thorough in reviewing why there is no justification for making flu shots mandatory - for anyone.

Lastly, an NVIC article ...

From New Hamphire NVIC:

From Sept 2012:

Next up is an article discussing a new flu vaccine that also uses squalene, an adjuvant used
to provoke an immune response - one linked with serious side effects. It begs the question,
if a vaccine requires an adjuvant to cause an immune response how effective could it be?
In other words, if the antigenic response is low without an adjuvant perhaps the concept is
flawed and we need to revisit what we're doing.

Sunday, December 08, 2013

Dec 8, 2013 - focus on flu (but wait, there's more)

Some links are to websites, others to articles or other blogs. As I've stated on previous posts,
because there is so much controversy regarding vaccination I think any/all vaccines should be
voluntary, not mandatory. If an authority can justify violating personal autonomy for one reason,
an authority (whether an employer or a government) can justify violating personal autonomy for
another. The last two links in particular have interesting data that should be reason to wonder why we continue to add more vaccines to the current childhood schedule, and if vaccines are
not necessarily good for children, why are we contemplating expanding the adult "schedule"
as well?

Home page for Health Care Providers for Vaccine Choice:

2012 article regarding mandatory flu vac for healthcare providers/workers:

A 2010 article:
(this is primarily pointing out the conflict of interest of someone who calls for mandatory
vaccination); (part 1) (part 2)

This is not about flu vac specifically, but may be worth a read (long)

And when people say the flu vaccine made them sick ... well they may just be right!

From Age of Autism, a post on "secondary" side effects of vaccination's side effects - it's
not just the recipient of a vaccine who is affected:

And also from Age of Autism, a blurb encouraging those who are in the NYC area to go
to a demonstration against Mayor Blumberg's attempt to force two vaccines on children
in NYC (flu/pneumococcal shot, or Prevnar) ... inserting himself into a decision that should
be left to parents. Where does it end?

I've concluded (from all that I've seen/read over the last several years, long before I
started this blog) that we will not vaccinate our way to good health. Indeed, vaccines
may be contributing to poor health - but here are two important articles with intriguing

Infant vaccination regressed against infant mortality:

As always, please email me if there are links you want posted!

Friday, December 06, 2013

Links Dec 6, 2013 - Gardasil/flu and more ...

I took a few days off over Thanksgiving ... here are links I've come across over the last few days
and today.

Interestingly enough, Utah has made the rational decision to be more neutral regarding Gardasil! I'll start with that - the headline of the article (see link below) is mis-leading though, because the first line of the article makes it clear that the vaccine is not banned, just not recommended, nor stocked by the Utah Dept of Public Health - which means it is still available through private physician offices for those who decide they want it (the article later acknowledges this, though the headline might lead some to think otherwise).

The article quotes Dr. Cosgrove, a pediatrician and vaccine advocate, who makes some strong statements about this development. His statements indicate he is quite worried and
upset about this, though it does not make sense to stock a product parents are not requesting for their children when the benefit from this vaccine is unknown in relation to the risks of the vaccine compared to the risk of cervical cancer. While many people are exposed to HPV,
exposure does not mean one will automatically develop cervical cancer, or warts for that matter. I think Dr. Cosgrove indulges in some hyper-bole in some of what he says.

What is also unknown is if the cost, and risks, of vaccination are worth any benefit as there is no reason to believe receiving the vaccine as a pre-teen or teen will confer lifelong "protection". If people (male or female) need to be re-vaccinated on a regular basis throughout their life to obtain any level of risk reduction against HPV is the cost (in dollars) worth it when women will continue to need paps on a regular basis, and vaccination (of any kind) is not without risk of side effects - both short term and long term.

The article cites Dr. David Blodgett as the decision-maker for discontinuing the vaccine in UT
Dept of Public Health clinics and implies this is not a new or recent decision, though it does not
say specifically when this vaccine was no longer stocked in their clinics. It is not clear why this is an issue now!

Here's the link to the full article:

This blog is apparently from July 2013, though it would be nice if it were more precisely
dated - very well done, makes some important points.

Katie Couric did a segment on HPV/Gardasil recently that has kicked up some
controversy - I watched video segments posted (I did not watch the show as it
aired) and it seems to me the segments were fairly balanced. The fact that a
mainstream media journalist acknowledged the controversy is unusual in itself,
and Ms. Couric is to be commended (and thanked) for presenting this other

This is a link to an unofficial transcript:

And here's a link to an opinion piece (link provided by, via email)
where Couric and Dr. Harper (a guest who was part of the HPV discussion) were
accused of disinformation and linked to Jenny McCarthy (said link apparently intended
to discredit them):

A graphic (contained in this post) scrolled through my Facebook feed, and with some
cajoling the original poster provided this as the source:

This article (from 2009) by Dr. Blaylock discussing the concept of herd immunity (among
other things):

And this one about animals, and oddly enough, we seem to be a bit more willing to make
rational decisions for the sake of our animals - why won't we do this for our children and
The adverse reactions caused by vaccines is acknowledged, and apparently some vets
are changing their practice because of it! (AVMA says annual vaccination is not necessary).

On flu vaccine (which thankfully, provides refs):