Shifting the demographics of disease

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-14-2005
Shifting the demographics of disease
51
Tue, 11-10-2009 - 3:42pm

There is so much debate on vaccine safety, etc I think it is interesting to look at the other unintended consequences of vaccination. This is from an old post: http://messageboards.ivillage.com/iv-ppvaccinedb/?msg=4211.24 and talks about the shifting of the age in which people are susceptible to getting disease.

--

"Instead vaccination programs are shifting the demographic in which people get some of these diseases to ages where the complications are greater."

Responding in advance to myself because I know I will be asked to defend the above statement... so here is my defense for my belief based on a post I made on an another board:

You can also argue with some of the VPDs that more vaccination leads to a more vulnerable newborn population (measles) or adult population (chicken pox). By this I mean the age at which people might get the disease shifts (too younger or older or both), making the disease potentially more harmful.

Using measles as an example, maternal antibodies cross the placenta and offer protection to a newborn (who can not be vaccinated for measles at birth). The effects of maternal antibody transfer are much higher for mothers who have had wild measles.

It strikes me that mother nature intended protection to be conferred via maternal antibodies and breastfeeding.

Why muck with intentions of mother nature? Which is what the vaccine program has done: mothers no longer get measles and no longer pass those antibodies to the newborns leaving them extremely vulnerable because most Doctors give the first dose of MMR vaccine between 12-15 months.

"In addition, measles susceptibility of infants younger than 1 year of age may have increased. During the 1989–1991 measles resurgence, incidence rates for infants were more than twice as high as those in any other age group. The mothers of many infants who developed measles were young, and their measles immunity was most often due to vaccination rather than infection with wild virus. As a result, a smaller amount of antibody was transferred across the placenta to the fetus, compared with antibody transfer from mothers who had higher antibody titers resulting from wild-virus infection. The lower quantity of antibody resulted in immunity that waned more rapidly, making infants susceptible at a younger age than in the past." Soure: CDC Pink Book: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/meas.pdf

Chicken pox vaccine, only now are we seeing when secondary vaccine failure might occur and when boosters may be added to the schedule. Chicken pox contracted as a child rarely has serious consequences. Those consequences however become more serious with age. Which the reason a lot of people who selectively vaccinate omit this vaccine.

"In the New England Journal of Medicine, the researchers confirm what doctors have already known — that the vaccine has sharply reduced the number of cases in children but that its protection does not last long. With fewer natural cases of the disease, the study says, unvaccinated children or those whose first dose of the vaccine fails to work are getting chickenpox later in life, when the risk of complications is higher. “If you’re unvaccinated and you get it later in life, there’s a 20-times greater risk of dying compared to a child, and a 10- to 15-times greater chance of getting hospitalized,” said Dr. Jane Seward of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, who worked on the study....The United States has been vaccinating against chickenpox since 1995. But tests have shown that the vaccine is not very effective in 15 percent to 20 percent of children who receive only one dose. A second dose would provide extra protection, but it is not clear how much..." - Reuters, New York Times , March 15, 2007, Chickenpox Vaccine Loses Effectiveness in Study http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/15/health/15pox.html?ex=1331611200&en=8439a613bed73800&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

"Children between the ages of 8 and 12 years who had been vaccinated at least 5 years previously were significantly more likely to have moderate or severe disease than were those who had been vaccinated less than 5 years previously. The annual rate of breakthrough varicella significantly increased with the time since vaccination, from 1.6 cases per 1000 person-years within 1 year after vaccination to 9.0 per 1000 person-years at 5 years and 58.2 per 1000 person-years at 9 years." - Sandra Chavez, M.D. et al., New England Journal of Medicine Loss of Vaccine-Induced Immunity to Varicella over Time, March 15, 2007 http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/356/11/1121

Recently in the Canadian media there was an interesting discussion on immunological memory which also leads to "less community". For those unfamiliar with the term see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immunity_(medical)
http://www.ann.com.au/MedSci/immunolo.htm
http://www.britannica.com/eb/topic-725435/immunological-memory

Before vaccination became commonplace, adults often came in contact with youngsters suffering from mumps, measles and the other childhood diseases. That remained the case in the early days of vaccine administration when these diseases still commonly circulated.

If people had protection - natural or vaccine-acquired - those exposures were actually helpful. They acted as a sort of natural booster shot, reminding the immune system to be on guard for this threat.

Some experts now wonder whether these unrecorded natural boosts may have led the medical community to overestimate the durability of immunity generated by childhood vaccinations. These days, few people are getting natural boosting to these diseases.

Questions about the durability of immunity are on the minds of public health authorities in countries where childhood vaccines have been in use the longest, says Jane Seward, an expert in vaccine-preventable diseases with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta.

"It's certainly a reasonable hypothesis that immunity might wane more quickly in the absence of external boosting. Whether that's the case or not, we don't know. But it's a reasonable thing to postulate," she says.

From http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080508.wxlvaccine08/BNStory/specialScienceandHealth/home

I am going to use myself has an example because I have had measles, rubella, mumps and chicken pox. So after the MMR was introduced initially the wild virus still circulated boosted my immunological memory. As a result, it also artificially inflated the estimated vaccine efficacy, because people who got the vaccine, still encountered the viruses occasionally.

As vaccine uptake increased, the ability for immunity to be "boosted" by natural exposure disappeared. Such logic is being admitted to now as in the above article and is leading to research on "adult booster" schedules.

The above to me, illustrates that when vaccine programs are introduced the "long-term" consequences to the community or herd are not known and still not known as this has been area identified for further research. So we still won't know for decades.

This leads me to conclude:

1) Without the wild version of diseases circulating around - vaccines lose their efficacy (secondary vaccine failure) and someone like me who had natural immunity is not getting my immunological memory triggered.

2) Conclusion 1 results in adults being more vulnerable to childhood illnesses (Mumps in Iowa: http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/358/15/1580), which generally have more serious or dangerous consequences for grown-ups than for children.

3) Conclusion 1 also leads to infants being born with significantly less passive immunity (measles was my example) from their mothers, putting them at risk of serious complications (possibly even death).

Isn't it possible that Mother Nature knows more about protecting people from disease than the vaccine manufacturers?

--






iVillage Member
Registered: 10-18-2007
Fri, 11-13-2009 - 10:40pm

Rubbish, my friend.

<<>>

Wishful thinking. Please cite relative case law that demonstrates this laughable waste of money: "This study was performed to determine if the county health directors were aware of this statute and whether they had ever utilized it to enforce age-appropriate immunization."

Who cares what ill-informed robots think or know? I surely don't.

"Much of the hesitancy for such efforts likely comes from the fear of the confusing, hard-to-understand legal procedures and from the potential negative impact on public opinion that these tactics may create."

Ya think? Have you some irrelevant case law you'd like to proffer? At this point, a bunch of yahoos discussing the best way to scare the public with legal action seems a little obvious.

Personally, I'm never surprised at how I offended I become when a self-proclaimed, intellectually superior person undermines the ability of normal people to use reason and logic.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2005
Sun, 11-15-2009 - 4:39pm

"This is also a very hard, expensive and long-term solution."

That is ridiculous. Surely you know what PVC is, it's not that expensive. Those people need access to clean water and plumbing - and I know for a fact that it costs less than major vaccine programs (but would that leave us with no one to serve as guinea pigs?).

As far as lack of hospitals goes - build it and they will come...install the plumbing and hospitals could be built. Those living in underdeveloped countries who live in poverty, are kept that way by their governments. Clean water and plumbing would go a hell of a long way in providing better health for those people. You think its about vaccines? Then prove it. Not with some advertisement from the CDC - but show us the studies.

And by "long-term" are you considering how very SHORT-TERM most vaccines retain their effectiveness? Why are people so convinced that vaccines offer 100% efficacy???

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2005
Sun, 11-15-2009 - 5:00pm

"I hope you support society's decision to require it if you wish to participate in publicly provided activities. I would also expect you to understand if your insurance company requires a higher premium for future care if you elect not to vaccinate."

Where in the world did you get your brainwashing from? lmao!

I would like for you to explain how myself and all the other GEORGIA non-vaccinating parents manage to avoid all this nonsense you speak of? And without even ever hearing of most of it... Do you make this chit up?

I know two boys in college right now who were never vaccinated. I guess they must have fake documents of their vaccination status .

If my insurance company wanted to charge me more, I would simply find a new insurance company 'cause right now, I have the freedom to do so. They have never asked my vaccination status, nor have they inquired as to the vaccination status of my children or husband.

My kids participate in different groups in different counties about four days a week. The activities rotate about every 6 weeks, we've done this for 5 years now. I have yet to have anyone ask me about my vaccination status or my child's. Come to think of it, when our family joined the YMCA, we were not asked. No one at church has ever required any proof of our vaccine status. We visit at least a dozen different parks and museums each and every year, never been asked. They don't ask at the skating rink or the movies or the bowling alley, not at Chuck E Cheese either! My kids take music lessons, gymnastics, dance, karate...and no one has ever ONCE asked me about vaccine status. Why is that ya think???

When I worked for three state schools, I wasn't ever once - asked about my vaccination status. I would think that if the students had no legal rights in the regard to vaccines then the professors wouldn't either.

You have no idea what you're talking about. None.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2005
Sun, 11-15-2009 - 5:16pm

"I note Canada follows a similar immunization schedule recommendation as the rest of the rational world."

You would benefit from learning that other countries are much more rational about the schedule. Babies in other countries are not assaulted on day one (or two) with a vaccine against a sexually transmitted disease. If the mother has it, fine, then a vaccine may be warranted. But to vaccinate every baby who's mother is not a prostitute or drug addict is just insane!

Add insult to injury, most hospitals use the multi-use vials. Add MORE insult to injury, the vaccine is known for primary and secondary failure.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2005
Sun, 11-15-2009 - 5:24pm

I'm sure you are aware of this, but I wanted to point out that even someone who was not vaccinated can fail to present symptoms and still gain immunity.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-28-2007
Sun, 11-15-2009 - 7:29pm

<>

Lol, yes here in Georgia I have been asked about my childrens' vaccine status only when enrolling them into public school or the church preschool dd attends. I printed off the religious exemption, popped into the UPS store that also provides a notary service and hey presto, I have never been asked again, not even in subsequent years.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2005
Sun, 11-15-2009 - 8:09pm
Exactly. My oldest went to kindergarten at a church, they did ask for the exemption letter to be placed in his file. Simple. And legal.
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-06-2009
Mon, 11-16-2009 - 9:06pm

crunchymomto2, I have clearly upset you, which was not my intent.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-28-2007
Mon, 11-16-2009 - 9:52pm

Goodness!

I have not not seen any attacking or infringement on your part. I hope fervently that your cease and desist was not sent by one of the regular posters here. If they have done so I hope they back off and allow for the give and take of debate without perceiving the meotion.

Dee

p.s btw: get those "stoppits" from time to time....not a biggie

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-18-2007
Mon, 11-16-2009 - 10:29pm
Happens to me all the time. Lots of people lurk, more than do post, you never know who you'll offend. Don't let it deter you from posting.
Photobucket