or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Let's face it - the whooping cough vaccine is a flop
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Let's face it - the whooping cough vaccine is a flop

post #1 of 51
Thread Starter 

The CDC, can't blame the non vaxers for the outbreaks, the vaccine, from the CDC Press briefing transcript on the pertussis epidemic in WA:

 

Dr Anne Schuchat, CDC director for the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases:

 


"We know there are places around the country where there are large numbers of people who aren't vaccinated. However, we don't think those exemptors are driving this current wave. We think it is a bad thing that people aren't getting vaccinated or exempting, but we cannot blame this wave on that phenomenon. Next question"

 

 

Here is the full transcript:

 

http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2012/t0719_pertussis_epidemic.html

 

 

I highly recommending reading this chapter on Whooping Cough from Hilary Butler's book, "From One Prick to Another, because the reason why adults and children are spreading pertussis is because they were vaccinated in the first place. It can be accessed as a download from this article.

post #2 of 51

I've seen this before. The CDC has been admitting for awhile that pertussis outbreaks have nothing to do with unvaccinated people.

 

But I'm wondering, why is the CDC admitting that unvaccinated people aren't to blame? Is it because the evidence is so obvious, that they don't want to look like fools saying otherwise?

post #3 of 51
post #4 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by ma2two View Post

But I'm wondering, why is the CDC admitting that unvaccinated people aren't to blame? Is it because the evidence is so obvious, that they don't want to look like fools saying otherwise?

 

Or maybe they're actually telling the truth as they see it based on the evidence they've collected - maybe they are in other things too.... 

post #5 of 51

What I read was that these pertussis cases are caused by B. parapertussis. The regular pertussis vaccine does not work. Wanna bet the next vaccine that comes out on the market will cover B. parapertussis as well.
 

post #6 of 51

I couldn't agree more. I wrote about it on another thread, but it didn't get much attention. I don't know how it hasn't been removed/revamped or something by now. Here's the evidence I collected:

 

From the CDC Pink Book:

Pertussis incidence has been gradually increasing since the early 1980s. A total of 25,827 cases was reported in 2004, the largest number since 1959. The reasons for the increase are not clear.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/pert.html

 

I'm not familiar with this site, but I read most of the links- they are just news reports discussing pertussis outbreaks among vaccinated individuals and areas with high vaccine coverage:

 

http://www.dailypaul.com/167931/a-collection-of-mainstream-news-reports-and-studies-exploding-the-whooping-cough-vaccine-myth

 

 

Our results indicate that children ages 5-6 years and possibly younger, ages 2-3 years, play a role as silent reservoirs in the transmission of pertussis in the community. More studies are needed to find the immunologic basis of protection against infection and colonization and thus an effective way to eradicate pertussis.

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/414768_3

 

Vaccination Coverage over the last 30 years or so shows that the coverage has been high, between 94-96% since 1994:

http://apps.who.int/ghodata/?vid=80100

 

 

Disease Rates:

http://www.cdc.gov/pertussis/surv-reporting.html

 

 

Year Reported Cases*
2000 7,867
2001 7,580
2002 9,771
2003 11,647
2004 25,827
2005 25,616
2006 15,632
2007 10,454
2008 13,278
2009 16,858
2010 27,550
2011** 15,216

*Total reported cases include those with unknown age.
**2011 data are provisional

 

 

post #7 of 51
It makes you 9-23 times less likely to get whooping cough. What a flop.
post #8 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minerva23 View Post

What I read was that these pertussis cases are caused by B. parapertussis. The regular pertussis vaccine does not work. Wanna bet the next vaccine that comes out on the market will cover B. parapertussis as well.
 

 

That's what I thought too, based on how the CDC is acting. But out of the nearly 300 new vaccines currently in development, none are for parapertussis.

http://www.phrma.org/sites/default/files/2251/vaccines2012.pdf

post #9 of 51
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ma2two View Post

But I'm wondering, why is the CDC admitting that unvaccinated people aren't to blame? Is it because the evidence is so obvious, that they don't want to look like fools saying otherwise?

 

Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post
 

Or maybe they're actually telling the truth as they see it based on the evidence they've collected - maybe they are in other things too.... 

 

CDC's statement that unvaxed aren't to blame seems to contradict the oft-repeated claim that unvaxeds put others at risk. 

 

So - which statement is true?  Or, is it only for pertusis that unvaxeds do - not - put others at risk?  Or is it something entirely different?


Edited by MamaMunchkin - 8/14/12 at 7:13pm
post #10 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by MamaMunchkin View Post

 

CDC's statement that unvaxed aren't to blame seems to contradict the oft-repeated claim that unvaxeds put others at risk. 

 

So - which statement is true?  Or, is it only for pertusis that unvaxeds do - not - put others at risk?  Or is it something entirely different?

i dont think the CDC even knows what their own stance on this issue is...it changes from week to week to fit the current disease trend in the news

post #11 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

It makes you 9-23 times less likely to get whooping cough. What a flop.

 

What year is that data from?

post #12 of 51

This Cochrane review published in March 2012 (http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD001478/acellular-vaccines-for-preventing-whooping-cough-in-children) gives the efficacy of pertussiss vaccines to protect against the disease, separated into serious and mild whooping cough. Efficacy is related to how much less likely you are to get the disease if you have the vaccine than if you are unvaccinated. 

 

They say: 

 

 

 

Quote:
The efficacy of multi-component (≥ three) acellular vaccines varied from 84% to 85% in preventing typical whooping cough (characterised by 21 or more consecutive days of paroxysmal cough with confirmation of B. pertussis infection by culture, appropriate serology or contact with a household member who has culture-confirmed pertussis) and from 71% to 78% in preventing mild pertussis disease

 

Translating those percentage efficacies into how much more likely a vaccinated person is to get the disease than unvaccinated (which if you do the math is 1/(1-E/100) where E is the percent values above) I get from these numbers that a vaccinated person is 6-7 less likely to get a serious case of the disease following confirmed exposure, and 3.5-5 times less likely to get a mild version. 

 

Not exactly the same numbers as Rrrachel, but making the same point - it's not a flop, in that it will reduce your risk of catching whooping cough if you are exposed, and particularly reduces the risk of getting a serious case. Be nice if those efficacies were higher of course. 

post #13 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

This Cochrane review published in March 2012 (http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD001478/acellular-vaccines-for-preventing-whooping-cough-in-children) gives the efficacy of pertussiss vaccines to protect against the disease, separated into serious and mild whooping cough. Efficacy is related to how much less likely you are to get the disease if you have the vaccine than if you are unvaccinated. 

 

They say: 

 

 

 

 

Translating those percentage efficacies into how much more likely a vaccinated person is to get the disease than unvaccinated (which if you do the math is 1/(1-E/100) where E is the percent values above) I get from these numbers that a vaccinated person is 6-7 less likely to get a serious case of the disease following confirmed exposure, and 3.5-5 times less likely to get a mild version. 

 

Not exactly the same numbers as Rrrachel, but making the same point - it's not a flop, in that it will reduce your risk of catching whooping cough if you are exposed, and particularly reduces the risk of getting a serious case. Be nice if those efficacies were higher of course. 

 

But the studies in that review were up to January 2012 (and I couldn't tell from the abstract what dates the data were actually from), and with concerns that the bacterium has mutated, those numbers may not be accurate.

post #14 of 51

Flop or not, the bottomline is their expectation is off and they don't know why yet.

post #15 of 51

Sanofi Pasteur is one of two pharmaceutical companies that supply pertussis vaccines to the U.S. In an email the company said it has new pertussis vaccines in late-stage clinical trials, some of which are being studied for use in the U.S. Sanofi also maintains that as a class, its pertussis vaccines are 80 to 85 percent effective.

http://www.kpbs.org/news/2012/aug/15/whooping-cough-vaccine-failures-increasing/

 

What do you know!

 

So in this article they are actually aiming for yet another booster shot (No. 7). If a little is good, more is better - or what!  I am just wondering because pertussis is always combined with tetanus and diphtheria. I have read that one can get overdosed/ overvaccinated with the tetanus component. Does anybody here know of such thing or can provide further data for me. That would be nice.
 

post #16 of 51
I had to take a vaccine class for work and remember learning about arthus type reactions after a tetanus shot, it is associated with receiving too many tetanus boosters in too short a time. If you google arthus reactions after tetanus shot you get a lot of links, mainly to provaccine sites. Of course say all say this phemomenon is "rare." eyesroll.gif
post #17 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

It makes you 9-23 times less likely to get whooping cough. What a flop.

 

I'm sorry, but with all the figures I posted, I cannot wrap my mind around how anyone can believe it works. You can look at studies that tout the efficacy, but you can also look around you. The disease rates are going up, not down, all while vaccine rates are increasing. I do not believe that all vaccines do not work- I think they carry a lot more risk than it appears, but I don't think as a whole they do not do their job...but yes, Rachel, the whooping cough vaccine IS a flop, or the components of pertussis have changed, something. Otherwise, there would be less people getting it, not more. Read those newspaper articles I linked...outbreaks in areas with nearly 100% vaccination coverage.

http://www.dailypaul.com/167931/a-collection-of-mainstream-news-reports-and-studies-exploding-the-whooping-cough-vaccine-myth

 

SAN DIEGO — A KPBS investigation has raised questions about how effective the whooping cough vaccine is in preventing people from getting sick. Nearly two out of three people diagnosed with whooping cough in San Diego County this year, were fully immunized....

KPBS examined data from San Diego County’s Health and Human Services Agency. Of the 332 confirmed cases of whooping cough in the county so far this year, 197 of the people who got sick were up to date with their immunizations. That's nearly 2 out of 3 cases.

 

 

If I told you I had a cure for the common cold, and people took my medicine, yet still had colds....would you not think I was wrong, no matter what the studies said?

post #18 of 51

Interesting, an article that doesn't outright blame non-vaxer's.  

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/08/16/why-whooping-cough-is-back/

post #19 of 51
Thread Starter 

Another commentary on the pertussis situation:

 

Whooping Cough: Under-Diagnosed or Coming Back? Here are the Facts

post #20 of 51
In fact an interesting article can be found in ‘Emerging Infections Diseases Vol. 6, No. 5, September-October 2000,’ that states that recently vaccinated adults can infect unprotected infants.
via.pngWV Outpost (http://s.tt/1cno9)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Let's face it - the whooping cough vaccine is a flop