Surprise! Whooping Cough Spreads Mainly through Vaccinated Populations - Mothering Forums
I'm Not Vaccinating > Surprise! Whooping Cough Spreads Mainly through Vaccinated Populations
Louisw's Avatar Louisw 07:03 AM 07-31-2012

Whooping Cough is Cyclical Disease

 

B. pertussis whooping cough is a cyclical disease with natural increases that tend to occur every 4-5 years, no matter how high the vaccination rate is in a population using DPT/DTaP or Tdap vaccines on a widespread basis. Whole cell DPT vaccines used in the U.S. from the 1950's until the late 1990's were estimated to be 63 to 94 percent effective and studies showed that vaccine-acquired immunity fell to about 40 percent after seven years.

 

In the study cited above, the researchers noted the vaccine's effectiveness was only 41 percent among 2- to 7-year-olds and a dismal 24 percent among those aged 8-125.

 

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/07/30/whooping-cough-vaccine.aspx?e_cid=20120730_DNL_artNew_1

 

What is so disastrous about this whole pertussis mess IMO is that the "pertussis vaccine" is highly toxic to your immune system. For the CDC et al to attempt to shove more of this TOTALLY INEFFECTIVE crap down our throats cannot be justified on a rational basis. Why is the CDC so concerned about bringing down our immune systems? I am afraid we will soon find out.

 

"A large study from Australia showed that the risk of developing encephalitis from the pertussis vaccine was 5 times greater than the risk of developing encephalitis by contacting pertussis by natural methods."   Why You Should Avoid Taking Vaccines, Note one of the reasons given to take the pertussis toxin "vaccine" was to supposedly prevent encephalitis

 

“In the1986 Kansas whooping cough outbreak, 90 percent of the affected children had been fully vaccinated. In the 1994 outbreak in Ohio, 82 percent had been vaccinated, and 74 percent of kids had their shots in the 1996 Vermont outbreak. I personally had whooping cough as a child after being given the vaccine that was supposed to prevent it. This means that the majority of infections occur in fully vaccinated kids, not in those who have not been vaccinated. It also confirms that the herd immunity idea is a myth, since even the vaccinated children are not being protected.”   Doctor Russell Blaylock MD

 

"According to a recently published paper not only does whooping cough vaccine “wear off” within as little as three years of administration [assuming it ever "wore on" in the first place] but [according to Reuters] the original manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline never bothered to check whether it worked.  And 81 percent of recent whooping cough cases in California were in children fully vaccinated and teenagers and adults are now put at risk when they would have had lifelong immunity contracting the disease naturally:"   Whooping Cough Vaccine – Doesn’t Work – GSK Says “We Never Bothered to Check”

 

 

Pertussis May have a Simple "Cure"

 

What is so pathetic about this whole episode is that IMO vitamin C in sufficient amounts, and vitamin D in sufficient amounts, looks to be all that is required to prevent or greatly alleviate pertussis. If we look at the pertussis "epidemics" globally we find that most occur in areas that receive little winter sun thus low vitamin D levels. We see the epidemiological correlation between pertussis and scurvy, a VERY low vitamin C level.

 

Figure 3 Measles and Figure 9 Pertussis appear to be "Cured" by Vitamin C

 

We already know the 'Seasonal Flu" and other viruses are "Cured" by high levels of vitamin D. We know much of atherosclerosis is "Cured" by high levels of vitamins C and E. Could it be most childhood "Diseases" can be "Cured" or strongly alleviated by adequate amounts of common vitamins and nutrition?

 

YES it could.

 

Why does the Food and Nutrition Board say you only need 90 mg of vitamin C a day? Why do they say you only need 200 IU of vitamin D a day and to stay the hell out of the sun? IMO get at least three grams of vitamin C/day and 1000 IU of vitamin D3/ 20 pounds of body weight/day OR LOTS of sun. Vociferously refuse all "vaccinations" and enjoy your health.



QueenOfTheMeadow's Avatar QueenOfTheMeadow 09:50 AM 08-01-2012

I just wanted to address this part of your post, having dealt with it a lot when working at WFs in the Whole Body department. 

 

Quote:
Why does the Food and Nutrition Board say you only need 90 mg of vitamin C a day? Why do they say you only need 200 IU of vitamin D a day and to stay the hell out of the sun?

The daily values really just represent how much you need of something not to show nutritional definciencies.  People used to get annoyed because pretty much every multivitamin we carried had many vitamins that were listed at 300% of the daily value or higher, not to mention some of the B vitamin supplements that were at the 1000s% of the DV.  You're body can usually make use of a lot more than the DV for optimal health and to help to support your immune system, digestive system, and pretty much any system you've got!  lol.gif 

 

P.S. The DV for D is now at 400 IUs, but from what I've heard it will shortly be raised to 1000 IUs, so at least that's the right direction! 


Louisw's Avatar Louisw 01:43 PM 08-01-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenOfTheMeadow View Post

 

The daily values really just represent how much you need of something not to show nutritional definciencies. 

 

P.S. The DV for D is now at 400 IUs, but from what I've heard it will shortly be raised to 1000 IUs, so at least that's the right direction! 

 

Well you are partly correct. Vitamins have MANY functions; each function often requires a different amount of the vitamin.

 

For example to prevent rickets about 18 ng/ml is required. So guess what our loving government uses as the target for vitamin D? Yep the 18 ng/ml

 

"Most doctors think that if you don't have rickets you don't have a vitamin D deficiency.  They could not be more wrong. The real question is how much need to be optimally healthy and how much we were designed to have (approximately 5,000 to 10,000 IU a day)."   Doctor Mark Hyman MD

 

"The best way to get vitamin D substrate, as far as I can tell, is to take about 1,000 IU of vitamin D3 per every 25 pounds of body weight in the winter and stop all vitamin D in the summer and sunbathe.  Alternatively, use a tanning bed when the sun is to low on the horizon to sunbathe.  Remember, when you are outside, if your shadow is longer than you are, you are not making any vitamin D.”   Doctor John Cannell MD, Vitamin D Council on how to dose vitamin D3

 

 “I talk to hundreds of doctors every year. Most are in full agreement with me that we're witnessing an epidemic of insufficient vitamin D levels in our population. I find deficient levels in the vast majority of people I check. Even Terri and I were low in late winter. That's why I take 5,000 IU daily of vitamin D. If you're taking vitamin D for a deficiency, please get a recheck. Many people need more than what we consider a generous dose. Some people need as much as 10,000 IU daily.” Doctor Robert Rowen MD

 

"All pregnant women should take 4,000 international units of vitamin D daily - 10 to 20 times the dose the leaders of Canada's pregnancy specialists currently recommend - to lower their risk of preterm labor, preterm birth and infections concludes the first study to investigate the safety of high doses of vitamin D during pregnancy. The study found that women in its 4,000-IU-a-day group had half the risk of premature delivery than women who took just 400 IU of vitamin D daily.”    http://healthfreedoms.org/higher-does-of-vitamin-d-lowers-risk-of-preterm-births/ , Note we know about 6600 IU is required for good vitamin D in your milk. IMO not a bad idea for prepregnant women also

 

BUT vitamin D has hundreds of OTHER uses; for example for a mother to put vitamin D in her mother's milk to deliver into her suckling baby about 50 ng/ml is required; if the mother has a vitamin D level of 18 ng/ml she will be giving NO vitamin D to her baby whose body is using ,or attempting to use, vitamin D at a rapid rate.

 

“CONCLUSION: With limited sun exposure, an intake of 400 IU/day vitamin D(3) did not sustain circulating maternal 25(OH)D levels, and thus, supplied only extremely limited amounts of vitamin D to the nursing infant via breast milk. Infant levels achieved exclusively through maternal supplementation were equivalent to levels in infants who received oral vitamin D supplementation. Thus, a maternal intake of 6400 IU/day vitamin D elevated circulating 25(OH)D in both mother and nursing infant.” Wagner et al, Note ladies if pregnant you MUST get your vitamin D levels up to at least 60 ng/ml IMO

 

"4,000 IU/day during pregnancy was safe (not a single adverse event) but only resulted in a mean Vitamin D blood level of 27 ng/ml in the newborn infants, indicating to me that 4,000 IU per day during pregnancy is not enough. During pregnancy, 25(OH)D (Vitamin D) levels had a direct influence on activated Vitamin D levels in the mother’s blood, with a minimum Vitamin D level of 40 ng/ml needed for mothers to obtain maximum activated vitamin D levels. As most pregnant women have Vitamin D levels less than 40 ng/ml, this implies most pregnant women suffer from chronic substrate starvation and cannot make as much activated Vitamin D as their placenta wants to make.”      Doctor John Cannell MD, Note we know about 6300 IU is required for good vitamin D in your milk. IMO not a bad idea for prepregnant women also

 

 

Here are the results of various vitamin D levels in your body

 

Image47.gif

 

Chart Prepared by Garland CF, Baggerly CA

 

An honest government would use the HIGHEST vitamin D required levels as a standard.

 

I am afraid there is no sugar coating this vitamin D deficiency in our mothers, fetuses and babies. The CDC knows or should know the immense damage this is doing and they are perfectly fine with it. Our peds know or should know the immense damage this vitamin D deficiency is doing to our mothers, fetuses and babies and they are either afraid of crossing the out of line CDC or I do not know what.

 

Vitamin D deficiency is IMO often one of the probable roots of autism.

 

It is up to us to come up to speed on this vitamin D issue NO ONE ELSE is going to help our helpless vitamin D deficiency damaged babies.


Evie P.'s Avatar Evie P. 02:03 PM 08-03-2012

Was just looking through here after getting the usual freaked-out e-mails from folks who know I don't vaccinate.  I allowed all the vacs for my son from the day he was born and he had asthma from three months on.  So we were in the hospital every other week all winter and sometimes the rest of the year til after he was three.  Then I stopped vaccinating and didn't vax my second, and everyone seems a lot healthier though all colds go right to my boy's lungs.  Thus the whooping fear. 

 

We homeschool but live in NYC so he is exposed to everything all the time.

 

I was wondering about the C and D you recommend.  My son is in a really picky phase for the last year or two.  He is outside a lot, so enough sun, and gets a lot of milk and cheese, but I worry about the C.  Do you think multivitamins are okay?
 


Alenushka's Avatar Alenushka 02:14 PM 08-03-2012

To me the study means that another booster is needed at 8.

 

I also wonder if all the people who are not vaccinating are essentially maintaining a natural pool of illness that now have an opportunity to mutate and become more virulent.

 

 

With 100% vaccination rate the pool  and possibility for evolution would be decreased.

 

 

http://skeweddistribution.com/2012/05/14/true-or-false-there-are-more-vaccinated-pertussis-cases-than-unvaccinated/


Louisw's Avatar Louisw 09:28 PM 08-03-2012
Quote:

Originally Posted by Evie P. View Post

 

I was wondering about the C and D you recommend.  My son is in a really picky phase for the last year or two.  He is outside a lot, so enough sun, and gets a lot of milk and cheese, but I worry about the C.  Do you think multivitamins are okay?

 

 

A youngster cannot get too much sun once he/she has acquired a good tan. Letting your kids play in the noon sun without sun tan gunk is probably the most important thing you can do for their and your health. In the winter if your shadow is longer than you are tall you will not be making vitamin D from the sun and the whole family can dose vitamin D3 at 1000 IU of D3/25 pounds of body weight/day. Your boy with asthma will thrive IMO once you get his vitamin D levels up to above about 70 ng/ml. I would get him tested after following a high vitamin D regime for a half year or so.

 

For vitamin C feed the kids lots of high vitamin C foods such as kiwi, raw cabbage and anything high in C. You can easily find some type of high vitamin C fruit or vegetable all your kids will love. In addition supplement with the components of the vitamin C complex.

 

Vitamin C Complex

 

  • Ascorbinogen

  • Ascorbic Acid

  • Flavonoids

  • Rutin

  • Quercetin

  • Tyrosinase

  • Other factors

 

If you take some flavonoids with your other Vitamin C components you can increase the absorption of the Vitamin C complex by up to 300%. Flavonoids slow the release of vitamin C from your intestine thus increasing vitamin C’s salubrious effect. I use the bioflavonoids Rutin, quercetin and Bilberry  The enzyme  bromelain is capable of increasing the intestinal absorption of quercetin so I take a capsule with both. These flavonoids are also healthy anti-oxidant supplements on their own. Supplementing with C may deplete your copper, so make sure you are getting enough copper.

 

Some good info on using vitamin C to treat disease.

 

http://www.seanet.com/~alexs/ascorbate/198x/smith-lh-clinical_guide_1988.htm

 

Some multi-vitamins are good. Check them out on the net. But you need to get a gram or two of vitamin C in your kids and three grams in the adults most multis will not supply this much.


Bokonon's Avatar Bokonon 09:32 PM 08-03-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alenushka View Post

To me the study means that another booster is needed at 8.

 

I also wonder if all the people who are not vaccinating are essentially maintaining a natural pool of illness that now have an opportunity to mutate and become more virulent.

 

 

With 100% vaccination rate the pool  and possibility for evolution would be decreased.

 

 

http://skeweddistribution.com/2012/05/14/true-or-false-there-are-more-vaccinated-pertussis-cases-than-unvaccinated/

 

There cannot be 100% vaccination rate for any vaccine, but especially DTaP, because it is contraindicated for many populations, including those who have had adverse reactions to it in the past.  For DTaP, this is greater than most vaxes as it is highly reactive.


Louisw's Avatar Louisw 09:48 PM 08-03-2012
Quote:

Originally Posted by Alenushka View Post

I also wonder if all the people who are not vaccinating are essentially maintaining a natural pool of illness that now have an opportunity to mutate and become more virulent.

 

 

Goodness if we have learned anything at all about pertussis it is that "vaccination" at the rate of 6 and more doses has had almost no effect on the rate of the disease. What all this "vaccination" has done is to shift the disease to infants under the age of one; those most vulnerable to injury form pertussis.

 

"Sweden stopped its whooping cough vaccination program in 1979 when it was discovered that 84 percent of the children who fell ill from the disease had been vaccinated against it three times. And a study published in 1994 in the New England Journal of Medicine noted that more than 80 percent of American children under five with whooping cough had been fully vaccinated."

 

“CDC data shows 84 percent of children under the age of 3 have received at least FOUR DTaP shots—which is the acellular pertussis vaccine that was approved in the United States in 1996—yet, despite this high vaccination rate, whooping cough still keeps circulating among both the vaccinated and unvaccinated. More likely than not, the vaccine provides very little if any protection, and this was evidenced very clearly in a study published in Clinical Infectious Disease.”    81 Percent of Whooping Cough Cases Occurred in People Who Were Fully Vaccinated

 

"A CDC study suggests that the resurgence of whooping cough is due to the vaccine causing an increased and more virulent toxin. The CDC acknowledges that whooping cough is recurring in highly vaccinated countries -- and that it is not just because some children are unvaccinated, although that can be a factor."

 

In early 2010, a spike in cases appeared at Kaiser Permanente in San Rafael, and it was soon determined to be an outbreak of whooping cough -- the largest seen in California in more than 50 years. Witt had expected to see the illnesses center around unvaccinated kids, knowing they are more vulnerable to the disease. "We started dissecting the data. What was very surprising was the majority of cases were in fully vaccinated children. That's what started catching our attention."   Vaccine failure admitted: Whooping cough outbreaks higher among children already vaccinated

 

“CDC data shows 84 percent of children under the age of 3 have received at least FOUR DTaP shots—which is the acellular pertussis vaccine that was approved in the United States in 1996—yet, despite this high vaccination rate, whooping cough still keeps circulating among both the vaccinated and unvaccinated. More likely than not, the vaccine provides very little if any protection, and this was evidenced very clearly in a study published in Clinical Infectious Disease.”    81 Percent of Whooping Cough Cases Occurred in People Who Were Fully Vaccinated

 

The "vaccination program" for pertussis has FAILED. More "vaccination" is clearly not the answer. Blaming the few people who have refused to be injured by this immune poison is also not the answer. IMO vitamin D is an answer; vitamin C is an answer. An honest CDC could easily test this. The CDC  refuses to consider any non vaccination solution for many medical problems where "vaccination" has clearly failed. Why?


Taximom5's Avatar Taximom5 01:22 PM 08-04-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louisw View Post

 

 

The "vaccination program" for pertussis has FAILED. More "vaccination" is clearly not the answer. Blaming the few people who have refused to be injured by this immune poison is also not the answer. IMO vitamin D is an answer; vitamin C is an answer. An honest CDC could easily test this. The CDC  refuses to consider any non vaccination solution for many medical problems where "vaccination" has clearly failed. Why?

I don't always agree with you, but this is so well-stated, I thought it was worth quoting.

 

I particularly like the way you phrased it:  "vitamin D is an answer; vitamin C is an answer."  (emphasis mine)

 

I think perhaps the biggest problem with the field of medicine in general is that medical treatments are always presented as THE answer, and then the entire industry frantically lies about and covers up any sign of problems that "THE answer" causes, so as not to lose credibility.  We've seen this happen over and over.


Mirzam's Avatar Mirzam 10:57 PM 08-04-2012

Suzanne Humphries has just posted a great article on vitamin C as a whooping cough treatment. Well worth reading and following the links.

 

Why is nobody studying vitamin C in whooping cough? - Conventional medicine's hypocrisy.

 

 

 

 

Quote:
I agree with the critics that there are no randomized controlled trials(RCT) to demonstrate the effect of high-dose vitamin C on the duration and severity of pertussis. However, I have a friend who has been taking care of very young infants and children for thirty years using high dose vitamin C and they have not lost or damaged one of these children. There are thousands of happy mothers out there who know that vitamin C saved their children from suffering the feared ravages of pertussis- even in very young infants.

 


emmy526's Avatar emmy526 05:59 AM 08-05-2012

I agree about the lies and cover ups...here is another example of a pharma concocted study...they now claim lack of sleep is to blame for failed immune responses following the HepB vaccine.

http://todayhealth.today.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/08/01/13072300-lack-of-sleep-may-make-vaccines-less-effective?lite

 

 

 

Quote:

 

Lack of sleep may make vaccines less effective

Some vaccines may not work as well in people who don't get a good night's sleep, a new study suggests.

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

I don't always agree with you, but this is so well-stated, I thought it was worth quoting.

 

I particularly like the way you phrased it:  "vitamin D is an answer; vitamin C is an answer."  (emphasis mine)

 

I think perhaps the biggest problem with the field of medicine in general is that medical treatments are always presented as THE answer, and then the entire industry frantically lies about and covers up any sign of problems that "THE answer" causes, so as not to lose credibility.  We've seen this happen over and over.


Louisw's Avatar Louisw 09:03 AM 08-06-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by emmy526 View Post

They now claim lack of sleep is to blame for failed immune responses following the HepB vaccine.

 

Now the cretins are claiming breast feeding is "interfering" with one of their precious "vaccines". The solution STOP BREAST FEEDING. No joke they are serious. We should get serious also.

 

Tell em to go to hell.

 

Breast feeding is one of the most important things you can do to protect your poor "vaccinated" child from "vaccine" injury.


Louisw's Avatar Louisw 09:11 AM 08-06-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirzam View Post

Suzanne Humphries has just posted a great article on vitamin C as a whooping cough treatment. Well worth reading and following the links.

 

Why is nobody studying vitamin C in whooping cough? - Conventional medicine's hypocrisy.

 

 

Very few high dose vitamin C studies are allowed for ANYTHING, most are cut off at the knees at proposal approval time. The few done CANNOT be published in this and most countries.

 

Big Pharm rules and will allow NO competition from inexpensive opponents. BIG Medicine and BIG Government are fine with this.


pers's Avatar pers 10:40 AM 08-06-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louisw View Post

 

Now the cretins are claiming breast feeding is "interfering" with one of their precious "vaccines". The solution STOP BREAST FEEDING. No joke they are serious. We should get serious also.

 

Tell em to go to hell.

 

Breast feeding is one of the most important things you can do to protect your poor "vaccinated" child from "vaccine" injury.

 

Just to clarify "STOP BREAST FEEDING" in this case means avoid feeding for a couple hours after the vaccine to give the baby a chance to process it.  The vaccine is for rotavirus, which kills hundreds of thousands of infants and children each year, mostly in developing countries.  It is an oral vaccine, and maternal antibodies in breastmilk have been shown to neutralize a fair amount of the antigen in the vaccine when mixed with it, so they don't want the two mixing in the baby's stomach before the baby's immune system has a chance to learn to fight it.  

 

They are not actually telling woman in developing countries to switch to formula or anything like that.  That would absolutely be horrible and unreasonable.  But letting a baby go two or three hours between feeds doesn't seem at all unreasonable for me in areas where rotavirus is a real threat to the child's life. 

 

Also, could someone explain the problem with the hep b + sleep study?  I'm not sure I understand what the issue is with it?  Are you doubting the results are correct?  To me it makes sense - we know the body is less able to fight off disease when sleep deprived, so it would make sense that it also is less able to mount a strong immune reaction to the vaccine.  Or are you thinking that the overall effectiveness rate means the vaccine doens't work?  It seems pretty high to me as a whole covering both those with good sleep and those with bad, just better in those with good?


Mirzam's Avatar Mirzam 11:02 AM 08-06-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by pers View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Louisw View Post

 

Now the cretins are claiming breast feeding is "interfering" with one of their precious "vaccines". The solution STOP BREAST FEEDING. No joke they are serious. We should get serious also.

 

Tell em to go to hell.

 

Breast feeding is one of the most important things you can do to protect your poor "vaccinated" child from "vaccine" injury.

 

Just to clarify "STOP BREAST FEEDING" in this case means avoid feeding for a couple hours after the vaccine to give the baby a chance to process it.  The vaccine is for rotavirus, which kills hundreds of thousands of infants and children each year, mostly in developing countries.  It is an oral vaccine, and maternal antibodies in breastmilk have been shown to neutralize a fair amount of the antigen in the vaccine when mixed with it, so they don't want the two mixing in the baby's stomach before the baby's immune system has a chance to learn to fight it.  

 

They are not actually telling woman in developing countries to switch to formula or anything like that.  That would absolutely be horrible and unreasonable.  But letting a baby go two or three hours between feeds doesn't seem at all unreasonable for me in areas where rotavirus is a real threat to the child's life. 

 

Also, could someone explain the problem with the hep b + sleep study?  I'm not sure I understand what the issue is with it?  Are you doubting the results are correct?  To me it makes sense - we know the body is less able to fight off disease when sleep deprived, so it would make sense that it also is less able to mount a strong immune reaction to the vaccine.  Or are you thinking that the overall effectiveness rate means the vaccine doens't work?  It seems pretty high to me as a whole covering both those with good sleep and those with bad, just better in those with good?

 

The issue is children in poor nations are not developing as many antibodies as those in developed nation. The researchers do not ask the question why, let alone consider that this might not be a bad thing and that there might be a good reason for this happening, they just go ahead and make the inane suggestion that breast feeding is withheld to allow the antibodies to develop. Antibody production is an artificial way of measuring a vaccine's efficacy, and neatly evades having to demonstrate that people are actually immune to the disease.

 

The best and most natural form of immunity a baby has is from mother's milk, and it is well established that breast fed babies are healthier, this is especially the case in third world countries where formula feeding can equal death.

 

As for the sleep study (I did not read it), but those who have difficulty sleeping are likely dealing with health/immune issues, so vaccinating them will likely produce a less than optimal [sic] immune response. 


pers's Avatar pers 01:11 PM 08-06-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirzam View Post

 

The issue is children in poor nations are not developing as many antibodies as those in developed nation. The researchers do not ask the question why, let alone consider that this might not be a bad thing and that there might be a good reason for this happening, they just go ahead and make the inane suggestion that breast feeding is withheld to allow the antibodies to develop. Antibody production is an artificial way of measuring a vaccine's efficacy, and neatly evades having to demonstrate that people are actually immune to the disease.

 

The best and most natural form of immunity a baby has is from mother's milk, and it is well established that breast fed babies are healthier, this is especially the case in third world countries where formula feeding can equal death.

 

As for the sleep study (I did not read it), but those who have difficulty sleeping are likely dealing with health/immune issues, so vaccinating them will likely produce a less than optimal [sic] immune response. 

 

 

They are asking the question 'why,' and exploring this as a partial explanation.  They've compared antibody levels the breastmilk in women from different countries and found that American women have much lower levels than women from several developing nations.  I would guess that this would have to do with crowded living conditions in some places and not having America's obsession with bleach allowing rotavirus to circulate more frequently so women are exposed more often.  They have also done in vitro studies which show that breastmilk from the women with higher anti-body levels has a much greater neutralizing effect on the vaccine.  If breastmilk neutralizes the vaccine when the two are mixed in a test tube, is it really that unreasonable to postulate that the same happens when the two are mixed in an infants stomach?

 

In any case, is there actually a recommendation to delay breastfeeding in the period immediately around the vaccine?  As far as I am aware, the only recommendation so far was for further study of the issue, but that could have changed. 

 

How does formula come into this discussion?

 

For the sleep thing, health could be a factor in general, but for this study (which was just a small one exploring the issue) healthy middle aged adults were used. I don't think we can assume that the ones with little sleep actually had difficulty sleeping either.  Some of them may have, but I'd bet a fair bit that most of them were just like me - mostly no difficulty sleeping once in bed, just not very good at putting the book down/turning the tv off/putting the computer away/stopping work/whatever and getting to bed in the first place.  


Rrrrrachel's Avatar Rrrrrachel 01:13 PM 08-06-2012
I think the only thing they were even exploring was whether breastfeeding should be delayed for like the hour or two surrounding the vaccine. Somehow this got turned into omg they're telling women not to breastfeed.
Mirzam's Avatar Mirzam 01:24 PM 08-06-2012

If the breast milk of women in developing countries have more protective antibodies, why the heck do the breast fed babies need the vaccine? Surely, maternal antibodies passed through breast milk are vastly superior to a vaccine. Of course there's no money in breast milk. What happens in vitro, does not necessarily equate with in vivo.  Hopefully this moronic recommendation will not see the light of day.


pers's Avatar pers 06:13 PM 08-06-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirzam View Post

If the breast milk of women in developing countries have more protective antibodies, why the heck do the breast fed babies need the vaccine? Surely, maternal antibodies passed through breast milk are vastly superior to a vaccine. Of course there's no money in breast milk. What happens in vitro, does not necessarily equate with in vivo.  Hopefully this moronic recommendation will not see the light of day.

 

Because hundreds of thousands of babies die each year of rotavirus.  Because just because antibody levels are typically higher in the breastmilk of women in developing countries doesn't mean each individual women will have high levels - some just by chance may not have been exposed to rotavirus in a long time.  Because breastfeeding does not provide 100% protection - while it helps a lot, breastfed babies still do get sick from time to time, sometimes very sick (and no, the vaccine does not provide 100% protection either..seems the vaccine + breastfeeding gives the baby the best chance).  Because babies do not nurse forever and may be weaned to solids earlier than desired especially if the mother's supply is hurt by illness or another pregnancy.  

 

Yes, what happens in vitro does not always happen in vivo, which is why the only recommendation I've actually seen from this is for more study on the issue.  However, if the breastmilk antibodies neutralize the vaccine in a test tube, why wouldn't it do so when mixed in a stomach?  Are you suggesting that stomach acid somehow renders the breastmilk ineffective?  


Mirzam's Avatar Mirzam 06:27 PM 08-06-2012

I am saying natural immunity via maternal breast milk is infinitely more preferable than dubious antibodies from a dangerous vaccine. Per, just so you know, I have no desire to convince you of anything, merely stating my opinion on the I'M NOT VACCINATING forum, whatever interpretation you choose to put on my post is up to you. There is absolutely nothing you can say that would ever change my mind on vaccines.


pers's Avatar pers 06:38 PM 08-06-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirzam View Post

I am saying natural immunity via maternal breast milk is infinitely more preferable than dubious antibodies from a dangerous vaccine. Per, just so you know, I have no desire to convince you of anything, merely stating my opinion on the I'M NOT VACCINATING forum, whatever interpretation you choose to put on my post is up to you. There is absolutely nothing you can say that would ever change my mind on vaccines.

 

You phrased it as a question to me, so I answered it, but yes, sorry, you are right about the forum.  My original intention in posting in this thread was not to argue in favor of rotavirus vaccine, just to correct the mistaken impression left by another post that women were actually being told to quit breastfeeding and give their babies formula for a vaccine to work.  


Louisw's Avatar Louisw 07:37 PM 08-06-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by pers View Post

 

They are not actually telling woman in developing countries to switch to formula or anything like that.  That would absolutely be horrible and unreasonable.  But letting a baby go two or three hours between feeds doesn't seem at all unreasonable for me in areas where rotavirus is a real threat to the child's life.

 

Oh I would not be so sure. It would not be the first time they have pushed the toxic soy soup on the third and first world's babies.

 

Here is a good exposition of some of the issues.

 

Peaceful Parenting shared a study done in Mexico and Brazil comparing rotavirus vaccine and breastfeeding:

“Rotavirus vaccine cuts deaths of Mexican babies from diarrhoea by 40%,” states a January, 2010, British Medical Journal headline summarizing two studies.(1) Yet, a study of Brazilian children finds that exclusive breastfeeding cuts diarrhea cases in this similarly developing nation by a whopping 90% (1 / 9.41), versus a diet of formula and/or other foods.(2)


via.pngEco Child's Play (http://s.tt/19hRt)

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20442687

 

 

.


Louisw's Avatar Louisw 08:06 PM 08-06-2012

Some Information on Rotavirus "Vaccines"

 

"Two brands of rotavirus vaccine are currently marketed in Canada. Merck’s RotaTeq, is a genetically engineered vaccine containing five human-cow reassortment strains of rotavirus, and GlaxoSmithKline’s Rotarix, is a genetically engineered vaccine created by isolating human rotavirus strain and uses African Green monkey kidney cells to produce the original viral seed stock from which the vaccine has been made."

 

http://vran.org/about-vaccines/specific-vaccines/rotavirus-vaccine/rotavirus-vaccine/

 

1) I would be VERY cautious about taking ANYTHING genetically engineered into my body by ANY method. This is shooting craps with the devil IMO.

 

2) I cannot believe they are still using African Green monkey kidney cells in ANY capacity in medicine.
 


Tags: Vaccinations
Up