Talk to me about serotype replacement (sp?)

[CanidFL]

What exactly is this?

What vaccines use this?

Why is this bad?

I would like to start learning/researching this. I hear about it on these boards and do not understand.

Thanks

[carriebft]

The niche left by destroying one type of bacteria often is taken up by another. So if you destroy hypothetical bactera serotype A, then bacteria serotype B takes its place. (very brief version of explaination!)

[mamakay]

Here's a thead:
http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=574250

[13Sandals]

all bacterial vaccines can cause this - Prevnar most notably (try googling Prevnar and staph). Also a concern with Gardasil (hpv) vax, as there are over 30 cancer causing strains of the virus, but only two of these covered by the vax..

[julieann199930]

HIB to prevnar and now meningitis vax in toddlers/schoolage
HPV vax..other types not in the vaccine may very well increase
cp to increase in shingles

Screw with Mother Nature and she bites back!

[Gitti]

Originally Posted by Canada

What exactly is this?

When we try and eliminate a bacteria (for instance made-up type A) with a vaccine we create a void which will be taken up by some other bacteria. Let's say type B which has been a harmless bacteria up to now.

So now type B bacteria has a lot more room to become invasive and turns out to be a greater pathogen or nuisance than bacteria type A which we got rid of.

But there is no vaccine for type B and kids are getting sick with a B bacterial infection.

The conclusion is the Vaccine against type A bacteria is successful. 95% less sickness by type A bacteria.

No one mentions that kids are now becoming very sick and some are dying from bacteria B. But the medical community knows it. They start to develop a vaccine for type B bacteria.

Suddenly you hear about a "new" disease. Bacterial type B infection.
But "anti-B" vaccine will save our kids....

On and on.

There is no end to vaccines against bacteria. We have a never ending supply of bacteria in our body and the only way to prevent disease is to keep them in check and balance which nature does very well.


The vaccines that are notorious for serotype replacement are Hib and Prevnar.

[amydep]

OK....let me ask this question because I am really uneducated on serotype replacement. Let's say Hib protects against bacteria "A". But then by doing that it allows for bacteria "B" and "C" (or whatever) to fill the void. Bacteria "B" and "C" are already there, right? So, if you vaccinate against "A", then maybe you are still able to be exposed to "B" and "C", but no longer "A". But, someone NOT vaccinated at all is still able to get "A", "B" and "C". By not vaccinating, it is not like you are keeping yourself from being exposed to "B" and "C", right? Or am I completely confused??? :

[mamakay]

Originally Posted by amydep

OK....let me ask this question because I am really uneducated on serotype replacement. Let's say Hib protects against bacteria "A". But then by doing that it allows for bacteria "B" and "C" (or whatever) to fill the void. Bacteria "B" and "C" are already there, right? So, if you vaccinate against "A", then maybe you are still able to be exposed to "B" and "C", but no longer "A". But, someone NOT vaccinated at all is still able to get "A", "B" and "C". By not vaccinating, it is not like you are keeping yourself from being exposed to "B" and "C", right? Or am I completely confused??? :

Sorta.
The thing is that you're often colonized with multiple potentially pathogenic types of bacteria at one time, and there's something (sometimes it's mysterious) that happens that causes those bacteria to quit behaving as flora and become causes of "infection". (often a viral illness, for example...catch the flu and recover, except for that lingering sinus infection, type of thing.)

So because there's more "space" for the non-vaccine species, they do what the vaccine types would have done, and they make you sick.

That's the most basic part of what goes on. It gets more complicated though in that bacteria are able to exchange genetic information with each other just by basically bumping into each other, so when you go changing the ecosystem, all kinds of crazy things can happen. Nobody really knows what all is going on with all that quite yet, though.

[amydep]

Originally Posted by mamakay

Sorta.
The thing is that you're often colonized with multiple potentially pathogenic types of bacteria at one time, and there's something (sometimes it's mysterious) that happens that causes those bacteria to quit behaving as flora and become causes of "infection". (often a viral illness, for example...catch the flu and recover, except for that lingering sinus infection, type of thing.)

So because there's more "space" for the non-vaccine species, they do what the vaccine types would have done, and they make you sick.

That's the most basic part of what goes on. It gets more complicated though in that bacteria are able to exchange genetic information with each other just by basically bumping nto each other, so when you go changing the ecosystem, all kinds of crazy things can happen. Nobody really knows what all is going on with all that quite yet, though.

So, it would basically be a never-ending process and they would have to keep coming up with new vaccines to take care of the bacteria that become the dominant ones, right? So, is it then better to NOT get the vaccines and leave the bacteria in a natural balance so that the ones that are currently the dominant ones STAY dominant instead of allowing the secondary bacteria to then become dominant?

[Gitti]

There are millions of bacteria in our body. Our body is composed of more bacterial and viral cells than what we consider human cells. We are a part of them and they are a part of us. We depend on them and we believe they depend on us. Each human being is an ecosystem in himself.

No one knows how the immune system works. No one. We know less about the immune system than we know about the solar system. And that is basically nothing.

With each new finding in the field of immunology many new questions arise.

I bank my explanation on gut instinct and common sense and will explain it the best way I can.

There are people here who are scientists and certainly can explain things a lot better but no one knows exactly how it all works together. And no one knows what happens to the vaccine once it is injected. It is all guess work and theory.

Originally Posted by armydep

But then by doing that it allows for bacteria "B" and "C" (or whatever) to fill the void. Bacteria "B" and "C" are already there, right?

Let's say, yes, B and C are already in the body. Of course so may have been A. They may all be gut flora.

So, if you vaccinate against "A", then maybe you are still able to be exposed to "B" and "C", but no longer "A".

It is not necessarily about exposure. It is about the body-ecosystem which is becoming off balance. You got rid of "A" and now "B" and "C" take over.

But, someone NOT vaccinated at all is still able to get "A", "B" and "C".

Or have A B and C and none overwhelm. So none can turn into a pathogen.

By not vaccinating, it is not like you are keeping yourself from being exposed to "B" and "C", right?

You may have all three and they keep each other in balance. That is the more likely scenario IMO.

[Gitti]

Originally Posted by amydep

So, it would basically be a never-ending process and they would have to keep coming up with new vaccines to take care of the bacteria that become the dominant ones, right? So, is it then better to NOT get the vaccines and leave the bacteria in a natural balance so that the ones that are currently the dominant ones STAY dominant instead of allowing the secondary bacteria to then become dominant?

That is soooooooooooo right!

Vaccinating against bacteria is like opening a can of worms.

[amydep]

So, what do you do when you have already partially vaccinated your child against HIB? Or, completely vaccinated one and partially vaccinated the other?

[attachedmamaof3]

It depends on what you WANT to do.

IMO, stop vaccinating the sooner the better. But, understand, I'm biased and don't vax at all.

[amydep]

Originally Posted by attachedmamaof3

It depends on what you WANT to do.

IMO, stop vaccinating the sooner the better. But, understand, I'm biased and don't vax at all.

What I WANT is for my kids to be the healthiest that they can possibly be. I used to think that this was accomplished by getting them vaccines, but thankfully MDC has shown me the other side of the coin. I have learned more here than I have learned anywhere else! The vaccine issue is something more complex than I can wrap my brain around. There are some things that are discussed on this board that are way beyond my understanding. :

[attachedmamaof3]

I gotcha.

I just meant that it's a very personal decision based out of what we think is in the best interests of our children. Two parents may come to two totally different decisions based on the same information.

If I understand you correctly you're worried about doing more harm by stopping the series you've already started? From what I've found, stopping mid-series does not have ill effects. The balance would be slightly off-set from normal, but easier to recover from than a complete series. That's what I meant by stopping sooner rather than later. You can always "catch-up" on your vaccinations if that's what you decide to do, but you can't undo what have already been given.

[attachedmamaof3]

Just an FYI, my oldest is partially vaxxed and my two youngest not at all. There's a LOT of us on here that have stopped mid-series or mid-vax schedule after beginning to question the validity of vax science.

[Gitti]

Originally Posted by armydep

So, what do you do when you have already partially vaccinated your child against HIB? Or, completely vaccinated one and partially vaccinated the other?

You stop vaccinating. Period. That is the best you can do for them. My oldest grandson was vaccinated up to 15 mo. Then we got enlightened and stopped. Thank heavens. He had some pretty long fevers around age 5 and 6. Some very high and long. We did not intervene but kept him comfortable. I really believe he rid himself of the poisons at that time. After those times he improved in a lot of ways. He is a normal, healthy, and popular 10 yo now.

Originally Posted by armydep

What I WANT is for my kids to be the healthiest that they can possibly be. I used to think that this was accomplished by getting them vaccines...

Unfortunately a lot of people believe that. But in fact studies have shown that vaccine-free kids are by far healthier than vaccinated kids. Unfortunately the vaccine manufacturers will NEVER do that sort of study. IMO this is not because it is "unethical" but rather because they fear the results.

[amydep]

Originally Posted by attachedmamaof3

Just an FYI, my oldest is partially vaxxed and my two youngest not at all. There's a LOT of us on here that have stopped mid-series or mid-vax schedule after beginning to question the validity of vax science.

This is good to know! I certainly wouldn't want to cause MORE problems by stopping in the middle of a series.

[amydep]

Originally Posted by Gitti

Unfortunately a lot of people believe that. But in fact studies have shown that vaccine-free kids are by far healthier than vaccinated kids. Unfortunately the vaccine manufacturers will NEVER do that sort of study. IMO this is not because it is "unethical" but rather because they fear the results.

Of course they wouldn't do that kind of study. If they did and it showed that unvaxed kids are healthier, then people would stop vaxing. They would then lose money from not only not selling their vaxes, but also from not selling the drugs that people have to buy because they are chronically ill due to being immune compromised from the vaccines that they received in the past. I think I'm finally getting it....

[carriebft]

But in fact studies have shown that vaccine-free kids are by far healthier than vaccinated kids.

Could you post these? I would love to take a look at them.