or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Polio
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Polio - Page 2

post #21 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by lenore80 View Post
Here is the link to the CDC page if you would like to read about it.

http://www.cdc.gov/nip/vacsafe/conce.../default.htm#4
Once again, the "parent pages" of the CDC website do not paint the entire picture.
post #22 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by LongIsland View Post
Once again, the "parent pages" of the CDC website do not paint the entire picture.
Yes, they tend to be a little...one-sided and inaccurate at times, don't they?

:
post #23 of 66
Are there other sources of SV40 besides vaccines (and direct contact with monkeys, I guess)? In other words, are all tumors that contain SV40 ultimately derived from vaccines? If so, can the SV40 be passed down from parent to child or must the child himself be injected with an SV40-containing vaccine?
post #24 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarahmck View Post
Are there other sources of SV40 besides vaccines (and direct contact with monkeys, I guess)? In other words, are all tumors that contain SV40 ultimately derived from vaccines? If so, can the SV40 be passed down from parent to child or must the child himself be injected with an SV40-containing vaccine?
It appears to pass from mothers to babies now. Kids today are turning up with SV40 brain tumors, and in monkeys, it appears to be transferred vertically.

At this time, there is no evidence that any SV40 in the human population came from any source other than contaminated polio vaccines.
post #25 of 66
I am so grateful to my parents for not believing in vaxes. I don't have SV40 unless I got it by having sex with someone who was a carrier. I wonder if it can be transmitted that way? Yikes!
post #26 of 66
http://jasn.asnjournals.org/cgi/cont...ract/13/9/2320

Quote:
ABSTRACT. Simian virus 40 (SV40), a monkey polyomavirus that is believed to have entered the human population through contaminated vaccines, is known to be renotropic in simians. If indeed SV40 is endemic within the human population, the route of transmission is unknown. It was therefore hypothesized that SV40 might be renotropic in humans and be detected more frequently in samples obtained from patients with kidney diseases. This study found that typical polyomavirus cytopathic effects (CPE) were present and SV40 T antigen was detected in CV-1 cells cultured with peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) or urinary cells obtained from patients with kidney disease and healthy volunteers. DNA sequences homologous to the SV40 viral regulatory genome were detected by PCR in urinary cells from 15 (41%) of 36 patients with focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS), 2 (10%) of 20 patients with other kidney diseases, and 1 (4%) of 22 healthy volunteers (FSGS compared with other glomerular disease, P < 0.02; FSGS compared with healthy volunteers, P = 0.003). SV40 viral regulatory region genome was detected from PBMC at similar frequencies in patients with FSGS (35%), other glomerular diseases (20%), and healthy volunteers (22%). SV40 genome was detected by PCR in kidney tissues from 17 (56%) of 30 of patients with FSGS and 4 (20%) of 20 patients with minimal change disease and membranous nephropathy (P < 0.01). Considerable genetic heterogeneity of the viral regulatory region was detected, which argues against laboratory contamination. SV40 genome was localized to renal tubular epithelial cell nuclei in renal biopsies of patients with FSGS by in situ hybridization. This study demonstrates for the first time that human kidney can serve as a reservoir for SV40 replication and that SV40 may contribute to the pathogenesis of kidney disease, particularly FSGS.
And an SV40 vaccine might be on the way.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Citation

Quote:
Simian virus 40 (SV40) is a monkey virus that was introduced in the human population by contaminated poliovaccines, produced in SV40-infected monkey cells, between 1955 and 1963. Epidemiological evidence now suggests that SV40 may be contagiously transmitted in humans by horizontal infection, independent of the earlier administration of SV40-contaminated poliovaccines. This evidence includes detection of SV40 DNA sequences in human tissues and of SV40 antibodies in human sera, as well as rescue of infectious SV40 from a human tumor. Detection of SV40 DNA sequences in blood and sperm and of SV40 virions in sewage points to the hematic, sexual, and orofecal routes as means of virus transmission in humans. The site of latent infection in humans is not known, but the presence of SV40 in urine suggests the kidney as a possible site of latency, as it occurs in the natural monkey host. SV40 in humans is associated with inflammatory kidney diseases and with specific tumor types: mesothelioma, lymphoma, brain, and bone. These human tumors correspond to the neoplasms that are induced by SV40 experimental inoculation in rodents and by generation of transgenic mice with the SV40 early region gene directed by its own early promoter-enhancer. The mechanisms of SV40 tumorigenesis in humans are related to the properties of the two viral oncoproteins, the large T antigen (Tag) and the small t antigen (tag). Tag acts mainly by blocking the functions of p53 and RB tumor suppressor proteins, as well as by inducing chromosomal aberrations in the host cell. These chromosome alterations may hit genes important in oncogenesis and generate genetic instability in tumor cells. The clastogenic activity of Tag, which fixes the chromosome damage in the infected cells, may explain the low viral load in SV40-positive human tumors and the observation that Tag is expressed only in a fraction of tumor cells. "Hit and run" seems the most plausible mechanism to support this situation. The small tag, like large Tag, displays several functions, but its principal role in transformation is to bind the protein phosphatase PP2A. This leads to constitutive activation of the Wnt pathway, resulting in continuous cell proliferation. The possibility that SV40 is implicated as a cofactor in the etiology of some human tumors has stimulated the preparation of a vaccine against the large Tag. Such a vaccine may represent in the future a useful immunoprophylactic and immunotherapeutic intervention against human tumors associated with SV40.
http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.co...581de359355bb/

Quote:
Papilloma and Polyoma DNA Tumor Virus Sequences in Female Genital Tumors

Abstract
Human papillomaviruses (HPVs) and BKV, JCV, and SV40 polyomaviruses (PYVs) are oncogenic viruses associated with different human tumors. Our aim was to determine if PYV and HPV sequences could be detected in human genital tumors. HPV types 6b, 11, 16, and 18 and PYV were investigated in 22 genital tumor samples and the corresponding adjacent normal tissues, by PCR and filter hybridization. HPV and PYV sequences were also searched in six sperm fluid and four peripheral blood cell (PBC) samples. HPV‐16 sequences were revealed in 7 of 14 cervical tumors and 1 of 1 vaginal adenocarcinoma, whereas 1 of 14 cervical carcinoma tested positive for HPV‐18. Interestingly, each normal cervical tissue surrounding the neoplasm obtained from the same patient was positive for HPV type‐16 and ‐18 with the same prevalence detected in tumors. BKV sequences were found in 9 of 14 cervical tumors, 1 of 7 vulvar tumors, and 1 of 1 adenocarcinoma, but also in normal tissues from cervix (13 of 14), vulva (6 of 7), sperm fluid (5 of 6) and PBC (3 of 4) samples. SV40 sequences were detected in 1 of 14 normal cervical tissue, 2 of 6 sperm fluids and 1 of 4 PBCs. None of the samples were JCV positive. To our knowledge, this is the first investigation reporting on the simultaneous association of both HPV and PYV with human genital tumors. These results suggest that PYV, together with HPV, may be involved as a cofactor in the onset/progression of human genital tumors, and raise the possibility that PYV act synergistically with HPV to enhance their pathogenicity in vivo. In addition, HPV and PYV may complement each other in infecting human genital tissues.
post #27 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by LongIsland View Post
What are you implying - the MMR vaccine does not cause encephalitis, meningitis and arthritis? It does and it is well known that it does so I don't think you would go there. Otherwise, what point are you trying make? That you can get encephalitis, meningitis and arthritis as a complication from natural infection too?

Based on the number of VICP compensated claims for encephalitis and arthritis from the MMR, MR, M and R vaccines, I'd rather take my chances with the naturally-acquired illness, particularly since they're often mild or asymptomatic . . . not to mention gaining life-long immunity to the disease.
Actually Long Island that is the point I am trying to make. I am well aware of the vaccine reactions but let's review the natural infection reactions:
Measles:subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE), subacute measles encephalitis (SME), acute measles encephalitis, otosclerosis, autoimmune disease, death.
Mumps: aseptic meningitis, encephalitis, orchitis/sterility (males), pancreatitis, deafness.
Rubella:Congenital abnormalities (pregnant women), Encephalitis, thrombocytopenia with hemorrhagic manifestations.
Notice some similiarities? Yes, most of the time the disease course is not severe and conversely the vast majority of MMR vaccinations go off without a hitch so it is another case of individual risk/benefit analysis.

SM
post #28 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom View Post
Yes, most of the time the disease course is not severe and conversely the vast majority of MMR vaccinations go off without a hitch so it is another case of individual risk/benefit analysis.
So WHY should kids be vaccinated?
post #29 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gitti View Post
So WHY should kids be vaccinated?
Gitti, this is exactly the same question that popped into my head on reading SM's post. Why indeed?
post #30 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom View Post
another case of individual risk/benefit analysis.
Another case of risk/benefit analysis? Hardly.

How many parents believe the MMR vaccine causes anything other than a fever and soreness at the injection site? In fact, the CDC tells parents: Getting MMR vaccine [not once, but twice] is much safer than getting any of these three diseases.

And then you have the "other" risk/benefit analysis. That's the psuedo analysis from the new generation of parents who want to split up the MMR and/or delay the first dose until their child is talking . . . [psssst - because of that autism thingy they keep reading about] . . . but still have no clue about what the MMR vaccine is capable of doing, let alone know why it's even linked to autism. And of course, since they didn't notice a reaction with the first dose, the second dose at four years of age is A-OK because their child is already talking.
post #31 of 66
post #32 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by LongIsland View Post
Another case of risk/benefit analysis? Hardly.

How many parents believe the MMR vaccine causes anything other than a fever and soreness at the injection site? In fact, the CDC tells parents: Getting MMR vaccine [not once, but twice] is much safer than getting any of these three diseases.

And then you have the "other" risk/benefit analysis. That's the psuedo analysis from the new generation of parents who want to split up the MMR and/or delay the first dose until their child is talking . . . [psssst - because of that autism thingy they keep reading about] . . . but still have no clue about what the MMR vaccine is capable of doing, let alone know why it's even linked to autism. And of course, since they didn't notice a reaction with the first dose, the second dose at four years of age is A-OK because their child is already talking.
Interesting that the severe pathologies of natural infection were completely glossed over, cute but transparent. Because many of you are viewing these diseases from a temporally stagnant and geocentric viewpoint where adverse vaccine reactions are disproportionate to severe disease symptomology. One only needs look at what is occurring in the UK, Switzerland, Germany and now Denmark to see that large gaps in vaccine coverage are allowing previously lowly endemic diseases, particularly measles, to gain a foothold again and cases of SSPE, encephalopathies and measles fatalities are ascending. So you believe that you are the annointed ones and everyone else is only capable of 'pseudo analyses'? I can only speak for myself and I have a great deal of confidence in my abilities to interpret and critically assess the ever-evolving body of literature in order for me to reach the conclusions that are right for me and my family; I trust you do as well.

SM
post #33 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by lenore80 View Post
NOOOO!!!!!!!!!! Current vaccines are NOT contaminated!

"The polio vaccine currently used in the U.S. (inactivated polio vaccine, or IPV) is no longer prepared in primary rhesus monkey kidney cells. It is produced in human or African green monkey cell lines that have been extensively tested for contaminants, including SV40. "


Here is the link to the CDC page if you would like to read about it.

http://www.cdc.gov/nip/vacsafe/conce.../default.htm#4
Thanks for the link & info Lenore!
post #34 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom View Post
One only needs look at what is occurring in the UK, Switzerland, Germany and now Denmark to see that large gaps in vaccine coverage are allowing previously lowly endemic diseases, particularly measles, to gain a foothold again and cases of SSPE, encephalopathies and measles fatalities are ascending.
SM
In what population are measles fatalities occurring? Is it in the elderly, the immune compromised?
A person in good health with access to clean water and proper nutrition should be able to deal with the measles relatively well.
post #35 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by mykdsmomy View Post
In what population are measles fatalities occurring? Is it in the elderly, the immune compromised?
A person in good health with access to clean water and proper nutrition should be able to deal with the measles relatively well.
In previously healthy children and adults. I do believe that UK, Switzerland, Germany and Denmark have standards of living that, in many ways, exceed America's. Access to clean water and proper nutrition do not preclude one from contracting measles and developing severe disease symptomolgy.

SM
post #36 of 66
Okay Science Mom. Could you please supply some actual links to information on deaths from measles in Switzerland, Germany and Denmark? So we can assess the information for ourselves? I'm not assailing your truthfulness, but it would be good to see what is actually going on. We might all decide that we need to start vaccinating for measles after all!
post #37 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom View Post
In previously healthy children and adults. I do believe that UK, Switzerland, Germany and Denmark have standards of living that, in many ways, exceed America's. Access to clean water and proper nutrition do not preclude one from contracting measles and developing severe disease symptomolgy.

SM
The one measles fatality in the UK was in a severely immuocompromised kid. Not that it makes it ok, but it is the truth.

As a general rule, measles doesn't kill healthy kids. It's no piece of cake a lot of times, but it's not a big killer of healthy kids.

But if we were to have a massive resurgence of measles in the US now, it would hit a lot of adults and infants, resulting in a lot of mortality. The UK and German situation aren't at all comparable to the US, because the US has been vaccinating much longer at we've had a lot higher vaccine coverage than anywhere in Europe. The US 1991 outbreak was much smaller than what's been going on in Germany or the UK...but our fatality ratio was much, much higher.
post #38 of 66
I wouldn't be so sure the vaccine is free of contaminants.
http://www.uku.fi/~kajander/threat.html
Quote:
As with many other cell culturers, we faced a problem about 10 years ago of poorly thrivingo cells not attributable to any known contaminant. In this report, we describe the discovery of a new bacterium from mammalian blood and blood products, tentatively named as Nanobacterium sanguineum gen. et sp. nov., and show that this agent is common and harmful.
I know the polio vaccine is made from monkey culture, not bovine culture, but it seems the better technology gets, the more we find.
post #39 of 66
There's a lot of controversy over whether or not nanobacteria even exist.
post #40 of 66
I haven't read a lot about the nanobacteria, but it seems the argument against them is they are too small, and they haven't found a DNA sequence(because it's so small). Kind of reminds me of when Drs. wouldn't wash their hands because they didn't believe in germs. Because they couldn't see them they didn't believe in them.

Even if its not alive, but just a crystal growing, its still a contaminant that seems to be causing problems, alive or dead. What do you think?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Polio