or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Has there been a study of SIDS amongst non-vaxed babies?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Has there been a study of SIDS amongst non-vaxed babies?

post #1 of 25
Thread Starter 
The AAp is now frowning on co-sleeping in the name of preventing SIDS (which I know is bollocks) so I was curious...
post #2 of 25
i doubt they have, or ever will. Becaue we all know what it would show, and then they would have nothing to cover their largely exposed rear-ends.
post #3 of 25
Where would you get the sample from?
post #4 of 25
Quote:
If you consider that most SIDS deaths occur during the age range when 3 shots of DTP are given, you would expect DTP shots to precede a fair number of SIDS deaths simply by chance. In fact, when a number of well-controlled studies were conducted during the 1980's, the investigators found, nearly unanimously, that the number of SIDS deaths temporally associated with DTP vaccination was within the range expected to occur by chance. In other words, the SIDS deaths would have occurred even if no vaccinations had been given. In fact, in several of the studies children who had recently gotten a DTP shot were less likely to get SIDS. The Institute of Medicine reported that "all controlled studies that have compared immunized versus nonimmunized children have found either no association . . . or a decreased risk . . . of SIDS among immunized children" and concluded that "the evidence does not indicate a causal relation between [DTP] vaccine and SIDS."
http://www.cdc.gov/nip/publications/...aseshadalready

Obviously the cdc's website is pro-vax, but I would love to see something refuting what they are saying. If studies are being done/ were done, I'm sure the CDC's standards would be very high whether they would even consider the research reliable or reproducable (is that a word?).
post #5 of 25
What is interesting about that webpage is that they only give one reference, which i listed below. The "anti-vaccine literature" as they call it, usually gives several credible sources. It would interesting to read that book though! At least it is a 2004 copyright.

Reference:
Vaccines, 4th Edition
By Stanley A. Plotkin, MD and Walter A. Orenstein, MD
Approx. 1696 pages, Copyright 2004
http://www.us.elsevierhealth.com/pro...sbn=0721696880
post #6 of 25
Great question. :

I had heard on a thread here that Japan did delayed vaxes and had a lower SIDS rate.
post #7 of 25
So much depends on the methodology of studies... unfortunately, it's too easy to design a study that gives you the answer you want, not necessarily what is true. To know for sure if you can really trust a researcher's conclusions, you would really need to look at the details of how it was done and the data itself. That, of course, is impossible to do for every study! That's why it would be best if research was as separated as possible from financial interests (then the odds of data being manipulated intentionally would go down). I think the best thing, assuming you're not going to look at the actual studies, is to know who's doing/funding the study (and their possible motivations).
post #8 of 25
some of the discussions above are mentioned here...

http://www.shirleys-wellness-cafe.com/vaccine_sids.htm
post #9 of 25
Japan went from #17 in the world to #1 in the world for their infant mortality rate when they mandated no vaccines until age 2. Pretty impressive and enough to convince me...
post #10 of 25
wow do you have a link or other source for that?
post #11 of 25
post #12 of 25
I wish I had a source for you. Unfortunately, I dont right now.

Edited to say: I found it:

In 1975, when Japan raised the minimum age to recieve vaccines from 2 monthes to 2 yeas, crib death virtually disappeared as did meningitis, other infectious diseases and infantile seizures. Japan jumped from 17th in infant mortality to 1st. However, Japan was soon faced with a new crop of neurologically damaged two-year olds" Cherry JD, Brunell, PA, Golden GS, Karzon, DT et al. Report of the task force on pertussis and pertussis imunization - 1988. Pediatrics - Supplement: 939-984
post #13 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by nichole
It would interesting to read that book though!
It's humongous -- weighs about 50 pounds -- but a great source of info. There are chapters on vaccine theory, manufacturing and additives, as well as chapters on each disease (clinical presentation and epidemiology) and the vaxes that are supposed to prevent them. It's exhaustively (and exhaustingly) referenced, too -- each chapter contains hundreds of footnotes to published studies.

This thread links to abstracts of some of the sudies on SIDS and DTP vax.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hannahgrace
I wish I had a source for you. Unfortunately, I dont right now.

Edited to say: I found it:

In 1975, when Japan raised the minimum age to recieve vaccines from 2 monthes to 2 yeas, crib death virtually disappeared as did meningitis, other infectious diseases and infantile seizures. Japan jumped from 17th in infant mortality to 1st. However, Japan was soon faced with a new crop of neurologically damaged two-year olds" Cherry JD, Brunell, PA, Golden GS, Karzon, DT et al. Report of the task force on pertussis and pertussis imunization - 1988. Pediatrics - Supplement: 939-984
The "source" that hannahgrace has posted is a particularly striking example of how things can completely change meaning when you take them out of context. That section of the report she quotes was written to dissect exactly why the supposed link between delayed vaccination and reduced infant mortality is false. The quote provided is merely the one in which they begin to describe how the fallacy arises. James Cherry, the main author of the Task Force Report quoted by hannahgrace, is a staunch vax advocate, and recently wrote an editorial for Pediatrics that recommends pertussis vaccination for adults.

(hannahgrace: don't feel attacked by this. I'm not implying that you posted the quote with the intention of misleading anybody -- I assume it was taken out of context already, and you just posted what was there.)
post #14 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by hannahgrace
I wish I had a source for you. Unfortunately, I dont right now.

Edited to say: I found it:

In 1975, when Japan raised the minimum age to recieve vaccines from 2 monthes to 2 yeas, crib death virtually disappeared as did meningitis, other infectious diseases and infantile seizures. Japan jumped from 17th in infant mortality to 1st. However, Japan was soon faced with a new crop of neurologically damaged two-year olds" Cherry JD, Brunell, PA, Golden GS, Karzon, DT et al. Report of the task force on pertussis and pertussis imunization - 1988. Pediatrics - Supplement: 939-984

It took me a minute to understand the part in bold, but, WOW, what a statement. I'm soo disheartened that the people in power cant open their minds for a second to consider that something in the vax's might be causing a number of ailments. At this point, i know it will never change. Thank God, i know the truth.
post #15 of 25
sorry guys! I got it out of a book that a dr. actually gave me on the issue (anti-vax one), but I havent read the entire report.......you can only read so much, sometimes
post #16 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by CallMeIshmael
That section of the report she quotes was written to dissect exactly why the supposed link between delayed vaccination and reduced infant mortality is false. The quote provided is merely the one in which they begin to describe how the fallacy arises.
Do you have more text of that paper? I tried searching and couldn't find the text. I have long wondered about this "japanese evidence" as it seems to get mentioned by lots of people, but their sources were always secondary, none had a source of a published paper by the researchers. I've been meaning to track it down at the library for years. I. Must. Make. Time.
post #17 of 25
Don't have it in front of me -- sorry! If you click to the link that RedWine provided, though, it has a bit more -- and it explains the controversy too. Basically, Cherry asserts that the infant mortality data is coming from records of vaccine-injury claims. In other words, they reflect the number of legal claims asserting death by vaccine -- not the actual number of deaths. SIDS is by definition death in an infant under one year of age. When the age at which the DTP vax given was moved from 3 months to 2 years, there were no more claims of SIDS related to it, yet the actual number of SIDS cases increased according to autopsy records.

The other thing you could do is pull up some of Cherry's more recent papers via pubmed.com. From what I recall, some of them summarize the issue -- and because they're newer, you'll be able to pull up a full-text online copy if you have access.
post #18 of 25
Quote:
In 1975, when Japan raised the minimum age to recieve vaccines from 2 months to 2 years...Japan jumped from 17th in infant mortality to 1st.
I've also seen this statistic cited in other anti-vax writing as evidence that vaccines increase infant mortality.

I tried to track down the worldwide infant mortality rankings to verify it, but couldn't find them online. What I was able to find were the actual numbers. And there is no dramatic drop in overall infant mortality rates in the years when Japan had raised the vax age to 2, just a steady decline. When Japan lowered the age to 3 months again, there's the same steady decline. You can check it out for yourself here. Select table "010: Infant Mort Rates...", then key in "Japan" and "all available years".

Lies, damn lies, and statistics.
post #19 of 25
This is why I shun over-reliance on epidemiology. It’s not an error in logic to think that vaccination is linked to SIDS but it would be a huge misunderstanding to assume that epidemiological studies can conclude that no such link exists. If even one vaccine-related infant death is ascribed to SIDS each year then vaccination is de facto responsible for an elevated rate of SIDS. And if epidemiological studies can not reveal that link to statistical significance that does not mean the association is therefore minuscule.

In a comparison between vaxed and non-vaxed populations, any conclusion pertaining to causality based on the absence of an observation (i.e. no difference in the SIDS rate) is unsubstantiated crap. Are there no other differences between the two populations? Here’s just one example - family income correlates with vaccine status: lower income families have statistically more under- an non-vaccinated children (the reasons are irrelevant). Infant mortality is also higher in lower income families for a multitude of reasons not related to vaccines. So when comparing vaxed and non-vaxed populations, a highly significant vaccine-SIDS causal association could be entirely invisible: a decreased SIDS rate in the unvaxed group is negated by an increased SIDS rate due to another cause. [In some cases you might even see an false positive association indicating the vaccine had a ‘protective’ effect.] It doesn’t mean the vaccine-SIDS link is not real, only that the study didn’t turn one up. You can’t (responsibly) go concluding that no such link exists just cuz you didn’t see one.

You can’t retrospectively account for all confounding factors with this issue. You’d have to locate and define every detail that exists between the vaxed and un-vaxed populations, and then those differences would need to be quantified in relation to a syndrome with multiple unknown causes. It’s never going to happen because it’s just plain impossible. The name of the syndrome itself indicates the uncertain nature of the phenomenon yet it’s to be believed that retrospective analysis of handicapped epidemiological data has ruled out vaccination as a significant contributing source.

I’m not saying that vaccination is or is not a significant factor in SIDS. All I’m saying is that over-reliance on crappy epidemiology isn’t going to establish the truth one way or the other. JMO
post #20 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by hannahgrace
I wish I had a source for you. Unfortunately, I dont right now.

Edited to say: I found it:

In 1975, when Japan raised the minimum age to recieve vaccines from 2 monthes to 2 yeas, crib death virtually disappeared as did meningitis, other infectious diseases and infantile seizures. Japan jumped from 17th in infant mortality to 1st. However, Japan was soon faced with a new crop of neurologically damaged two-year olds" Cherry JD, Brunell, PA, Golden GS, Karzon, DT et al. Report of the task force on pertussis and pertussis imunization - 1988. Pediatrics - Supplement: 939-984
Just to be precise, the above is quoting someone else's interpretation of what the article says. It isn't what the actual article says at all. I have it somewhere, but right now, I'm doing a liver flush, so am perched on the wc most of the day.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Has there been a study of SIDS amongst non-vaxed babies?