Pertussis studies - Jamie Murphy's book - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 5 Old 01-08-2010, 02:40 PM - Thread Starter
 
engineer_mom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 339
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Is anyone familiar with the whole gamet of whooping cough studies? (which ones were performed well by no bias parties, results, etc..)

I read "What every parent should know about Childhood immunization" by Jamie Murphy and was floored by the chapter on whooping cough. It references studies that I never came across before (maybe I was just out of the loop).

From my understanding of the Cleveland, Ohio 1394-1936 & Great Britian 1942-1978 studies, they showed that pertussis infected both DTP vaxed and unvaxed children equally.
But then when the Binghampton, NY 1939-1940 study says that unvaxed children are more susceptible to pertussis. Murphy's arguement was that these were misleading. Based on the results of the Cleveland/GB studies. But should they have been evaluated seperatly?

If someone is familiar with these studies (or other ones), I'd love to hear their thoughts. I would love to believe that the pertussis vaccination does not prevent any infection (so I don't feel as guilty) but am having a hard time buying Murphy's arguements.
engineer_mom is offline  
#2 of 5 Old 01-08-2010, 03:50 PM
 
Gitti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ready to move on...
Posts: 14,805
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
You might find this Inside Vaccines' article on Pertussis interesting.
Gitti is offline  
#3 of 5 Old 01-08-2010, 05:53 PM - Thread Starter
 
engineer_mom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 339
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gitti View Post
You might find this Inside Vaccines' article on Pertussis interesting.
Thanks!
I actually just reread that page this week trying to figure out how well the vaccination actual works at preventing the symptoms.
engineer_mom is offline  
#4 of 5 Old 01-08-2010, 10:26 PM
 
amnesiac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: at the end of the longest line
Posts: 4,984
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have not read those studies you ask about but I'm curious as to how the researchers determined infection. I'm wondering if they were actually doing cultures or if they were going by clinical case definition alone.

Because case definitions & lab criteria change over time, cases back then might not be classified as cases today. We had an interesting discussion about that once.
amnesiac is offline  
#5 of 5 Old 01-11-2010, 10:18 AM - Thread Starter
 
engineer_mom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 339
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thanks amnesiac!
Great point!
engineer_mom is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off