The current measles outbreak primarily emanating from Disneyland in California is up to
100 cases but not all are
epidemiologically-linked to the Disneyland outbreak. As is usual with measles outbreaks, most were completely unvaccinated, some were too young to be vaccinated. There are numerous articles highlighting this well-known fact and that has anti-vaxxers on the defensive. In fact,
this screed by Laura Hayes appeared on the anti-vaxx, autism-hating blog Age of Autism:
1. Has there been any laboratory confirmation of even one case
of the supposed measles related to Disneyland? If yes, was the
confirmed case tested to determine whether it was wild-type measles or vaccine-strain measles? If not, why not? These
are important questions to ask. Is it measles or not? If yes, what
kind, because if it's vaccine-strain measles, then that means it is the vaccinated who
are contagious and spreading measles resulting in what the media likes
to label "outbreaks" to create panic (strange how they've completely
missed the Autism outbreak going on for the past 25 years). It would be
what one might call vaccine fallout. People who receive
live-virus vaccines, such as the MMR, can then shed that live virus, for
up to many weeks...and can infect others. Multiply that in your head
by all of the people who receive not only the MMR live-virus vaccine,
but many others. Other live-virus vaccines include the nasal flu
vaccine, shingles vaccine rotavirus vaccine, chicken pox vaccine, and
yellow fever vaccine.
That's right, apparently Laura Hayes is really good at asking the really dumb questions but not too adept at finding the answer before postulating what measles strain is circulating amongst those infected. Hint:
it isn't the vaccine strain. This wasn't hard to find and is very specific about the genotypes:
Measles genotype information was available from 9 measles cases; all
were genotype B3 and all sequences linked to this outbreak are
identical. The sequences are also identical to the genotype B3 virus
that caused a large outbreak in the Philippines in 2014. During the last
6 months, identical genotype B3 viruses were also detected in at least
14 countries and at least 6 U.S. states, not including those linked to
the current outbreak.
And even more information regarding the differences in wild-type strains and vaccine-strains can be found
here:
Genetic Characterization and Sequencing
Wild-type measles
viruses have been divided into distinct genetic groups, referred to as
genotypes, based on the nucleotide sequences of their hemagglutinin (H)
and nucleoprotein (N) genes, which are the most variable genes on the
viral genome.
The 450 nucleotides encoding the carboxy-terminal 150 amino acids
of the nucleoprotein has up to 12% nucleotide variation between
genotypes. The 450 nucleotides that encode the carboxy-terminal region
of the nucleoprotein (N–450) are required for determination of the
genotype. The measles genotyping protocol is available from CDC.
For each genotype, a reference strain
is designated for use in genetic analysis (phylogenetic analysis),
usually the earliest known virus isolation of that group. The means of
referring to the genotypes has been standardized using alphabetical
designations for the main groupings (clades). Within the main clades,
numerals are added to identify the individual genotypes.
The following 19 genotypes have been detected since 1990:
A*, B2, B3, C1, C2, D2, D3, D4, D5, D6, D7, D8, D9, D10, D11, G2, G3, H1, H2
*Vaccine strains Moraten, Edmonston, Zagreb are all genotype A.
There were 2 putative wild-type cases of measles identified as genotype A in 2008.
During 2011, 8 genotypes were identified by global surveillance:
B2, B3, D4, D8, D9, D11, G3, H1
Gosh that was simple. Laura Hayes asks a lot more dumb questions and fills in the answers with her own fact-free assertions but there is too much stupid and not enough time to take them apart. The important point here is that measles outbreaks are caused by measles viruses (not vaccine-strain) and a critical mass of anti-vaxxers clustering and causing large gaps in herd immunity.
Painful and scary. Thanks for responding to Ms. Hayes' problematic comments.
ReplyDeleteSPAMMER!
DeleteGood grief. Isn't there at least one editor/science journalist at AoA who could monitor the comments from their science-illiterate commenters?
ReplyDeleteThat's an excellent explanation about measles genotypes and the ability to determine confirmed cases associated with this latest measles outbreak.
Thank you Science Mom.
Measles Outbreak Traced to Fully Vaccinated Patient for First Time
Deletehttp://news.sciencemag.org/health/2014/04/measles-outbreak-traced-fully-vaccinated-patient-first-time
Get the measles vaccine, and you won’t get the measles—or give it to anyone else. Right? Well, not always. A person fully vaccinated against measles has contracted the disease and passed it on to others. The startling case study contradicts received wisdom about the vaccine and suggests that a recent swell of measles outbreaks in developed nations could mean more illnesses even among the vaccinated.
When it comes to the measles vaccine, two shots are better than one. Most people in the United States are initially vaccinated against the virus shortly after their first birthday and return for a booster shot as a toddler. Less than 1% of people who get both shots will contract the potentially lethal skin and respiratory infection. And even if a fully vaccinated person does become infected—a rare situation known as “vaccine failure”—they weren’t thought to be contagious.
That’s why a fully vaccinated 22-year-old theater employee in New York City who developed the measles in 2011 was released without hospitalization or quarantine. But like Typhoid Mary, this patient turned out to be unwittingly contagious. Ultimately, she transmitted the measles to four other people, according to a recent report in Clinical Infectious Diseases that tracked symptoms in the 88 people with whom “Measles Mary” interacted while she was sick. Surprisingly, two of the secondary patients had been fully vaccinated. And although the other two had no record of receiving the vaccine, they both showed signs of previous measles exposure that should have conferred immunity.
Note that what makes this news is that this is the first time. It highlights, again, that even with high vaccination measles is almost always a disease of the unvaccinated - by choice or not - and transmitted by the unvaccinated.
DeleteWhat's your point anonymous? We know that a very small percentage of MMR recipients won't be immune. If vaccine coverage was sufficiently high, there wouldn't have been an outbreak. Duh!
DeleteNo matter how hard anti-vaxxers try otherwise, these measles outbreaks and do a great degree, pertussis outbreaks are at their feet. If there weren't large pockets of unvaccinated, we could have kept measles eliminated.
Thanks ever so much for bringing it back.
Indeed my son was vaccinated and still got measles. The reason? Because I live in a village full of stupid hippies that don't get their kids vaccinated. My son was one of the unlucky ones whos vaccine didn't protect him but if other parents would have been responsible then he probably would not have been exposed to their germ ridden brats and thus would not have had to suffer. Ok he only got it mildly and there was no permanent damage but still he had to feel like shit for a week. His suffereing was as a direct result of other people s willful ignorance. To add insult to injury my son is also autistic so we have to put up with the very same stupid hippies judging us for having "given" our son autism via his MMR shots. It drives me fucking insane hearing this bullshit!
Deleteit should drive you crazy, you injected him with mercury...what did you expect?
DeleteClassy Anonymous and if that wasn't enough, obviously not too bright as the MMR jab does not nor ever has contained mercury.
DeleteAnd you wonder why people find anti-vaxxers so repugnant.
@Science Mom : Could you explain a little further how the vaccine is effective versus strains not specifically immunized against, or maybe provide a reference?
DeleteThis is just a guess, but perhaps the same way that the mild disease cowpox protected people from the more deadly smallpox. Perhaps the parts of the virus that differ between the strains are not the ones needed to prime the immune system.
DeleteThis is just a lay person's guess.
On February 4, 2015 at 8:20 AM, Science Mom posted a link to a very thorough paper about measles genetics.
DeleteI also found this explanation useful:
http://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/articles/different-types-vaccines
@ Steven Buckley, I provided three references regarding cross-protection in the comments section. Although I'm wondering if I should devote a blog post to it and thoroughly explain it in the most basic terms possible (with references of course).
DeleteThe MMR vaccine is not as simple as you claim. The uncontested, published, peer reviewed literature tells us a great deal. The vaccine does, in fact, cause measles outbreaks [1]. The design and reporting of safety outcomes in MMR vaccine studies, both pre- and post-marketing, are largely inadequate. The evidence of adverse events following immunisation with the MMR vaccine cannot be separated from its role in preventing the target diseases [2]. Thus autistic children have a hyperimmune response to measles virus, which in the absence of a wild type of measles infection might be a sign of an abnormal immune reaction to the vaccine strain or virus reactivation [3]. The reported coverage of the measles-rubella (MR) or measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine is greater than 99.0% in Zhejiang province, China. However, the incidence of measles, mumps, and rubella remains high [4]. Many of the objections raised by parents could be overcome by emphasising that primary immunisation does not necessarily confer immunity and that diagnosis of measles is unreliable [5]. The measles-mumps-rubella vaccine causes autoantibodies to be formed against myelin basic protein (the protective coating of the nerves) contributing to the pathogenesis of austim. Stemming from this evidence, we suggest that an inappropriate antibody response to MMR, specifically the measles component thereof, might be related to pathogenesis of autism [6].
Delete1. http://www.eurosurveillance.org/ViewArticle.aspx?ArticleId=20649
2. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22336803
3. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12849883
4. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24586717
5. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7795447
6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12145534
Many autistic children harbored brain myelin basic protein autoantibodies and elevated levels of antibodies to measles virus and measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine. Measles might be etiologically linked to autism because measles and MMR antibodies (a viral marker) correlated positively to brain autoantibodies (an autoimmune marker)--salient features that characterize autoimmune pathology in autism. Autistic children also showed elevated levels of acute-phase reactants--a marker of systemic inflammation [7]. These data reveal an association between TAP2 genotype and measles vaccine antibody response which may explain one mechanism behind vaccine failure [8]. Vitamin A is an important factor in the incidence of measles [9]. A total of 367 families have been compensated by the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program for serious injury and/or death from the MMR vaccine alone. 3,450 families have been compensated in total with almost 2,000 more still winding their way through the federal court system. [10]. Additionally, and separate from the figures I just mentioned previously, a total of 48 children, ages 10 to 49 months, met the inclusion criteria for the following study after receiving measles vaccine, alone or in combination—eight children died, and the remainder had mental regression and retardation, chronic seizures, motor and sensory deficits, and movement disorders [11]. According to Dr. Gregory Poland of the Mayo Clinic, one of the world’s most admired and most advanced thinkers in the field of vaccinology because of their genetic predisposition, some people will not respond to the current measles vaccine, even with additional boosters. (Even the fully vaccinated can contract measles and cause additional cases. By the same token, the genetic predisposition of others makes them susceptible to harm from the measles vaccine—neurological disorders, autism—leading to public wariness, including among the well educated. What is needed, suggests Dr. Poland, is for the public health establishment to accept that the current measles vaccine has so many drawbacks as to make it unworkable, and get on with the job of developing next-generation vaccines. The vaccine can not prevent measles [12].
Delete7. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19758536
8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9041658
9. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1285727
10. http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/statisticsreport.pdf
11. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/101/3/383.abstract
12. http://business.financialpost.com/2014/05/01/lawrence-solomon-vaccines-cant-prevent-measles-outbreaks/
I wish I had been here to discuss this on the 28th of January. I suspect you may be glad I wasn't.
DeleteThe Vaccine Injury Compensation Program was developed and funded because the medical community is well aware that vaccines cause both serious injury and death.
Until next generation DNA specific genetic vaccines are developed—a decade or more—the current methods of developing vaccines are all we have and they do have consequences. Unfortunately we are as yet unable to determine who will face those consequences prior to vaccination.
So far, as of March 2014, a total of 3,450 families have been compensated for severe and permanent injury and/or death as a result of vaccination. Recently the first case of autism was finally compensated.
If you weren't injured, you were one of the lucky ones.
I'd like to know what the people on this forum would like to say to the parents whose children have been permanently brain injured or worse, killed by vaccines. This is a fact of vaccination. You were lucky. Others, not so much.
Science Mom, Your ignorance, sarcasm and bullying shows who is really the stupid one. The CDC admits that an average of 10% of the population will not develop and antibody response, termed non-responders, to a vaccine and this fact alone shows that even if 100% of the population was vaccinated with these dangerous products you would not be able to achieve your imagined herd immunity and your perceived protection. This page is currently being revised by the CDC, most likely to erase information just as the CDC removed the web page (when it gained too much attention) where the CDC finally admitted after 50 years that the polio vaccine was contaminated with SV40 Cancer virus which is being passed down from generation to generation causing cancer in us and our children, all for the mighty dollar http://web.archive.org/web/20130522091608/http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/updates/archive/polio_and_cancer_factsheet.htm
DeleteMISCONCEPTION #2. The majority of people who get disease have been vaccinated.
"This is explained by two factors. No vaccine is 100% effective. Most routine childhood vaccines are effective for 85% to 95% of recipients. For reasons related to the individual, some will not develop immunity. "
https://web.archive.org/web/20140811204758/http://www.cdc.gov/VACCINES/vac-gen/6mishome.htm
Listen to dr. Suzanne Humphries, Nephrologist, Vaccine researcher and historian explain that the SV 40 Virus is being transmitted
1. Horizontal Transmission - from one individual to another in the same generation (peers in the same age group). Horizontal transmission can occur by either direct contact (licking, touching, biting), or indirect contact air – cough or sneeze
2. Vertical Transmission – Passed from parent to child in utero.
https://kpfa.org/player/?audio=184162
"MISCONCEPTION #2. The majority of people who get disease have been vaccinated."
DeleteProvide the PubMed indexed study by reputable qualified researchers that is true for measles. Make sure you understand it, because you certainly did not understand that archived CDC page. You seem to be too entrenched with the Nirvana Fallacy.
And no, we do not care what Humphries has to say.
Heh, whiny anonymous you don't know what bullying is if you can't take some pointed criticism and it's shameful you would co-opt such a serious problem such as bullying to bemoan your scientific illiteracy. Humphries indeed, another dangerous dumbass who thankfully doesn't have much of a patient-base.
DeletePro vaccine people sure know how to be pretentious with their name calling and insults, it seems like they care more about alienating people, instead of trying to understand them, so they can feel better about themselves while they preach to the choir.
DeleteYou want insults? - I would suggest you start with your own house: https://www.facebook.com/groups/VaccineResistanceMovement/
DeleteThe only time I'll "feel better" is when anti-vaxers look in the mirror and realize the kind of misinformation they spread has a direct (and negative) impact on the health of children across the country.
Glad I stumbled on your post because I was looking for the source for the info on the genotype of measles that had been cultured from the Disney outbreak. Now I want to find out what genotypes are in the vaccine that is being giving here in the U.S. Have you run across that info yet? I think I will go drag out my old vaccine record and see what I can find out about what I received. Something I find strange is that such a "science-based" person would resort to name calling and then blame the outbreak on US "anti-vaxxers" when the outbreak was brought in by people from other countries. I would think you would be more interested in the possibility that many of us vaccinated folks may be at risk from a different genotype of measles that our community has not had any experience with. My name is Pamela Ojeda by the way.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure that information will be available via the CDC....also, typically, it is an anti-vax person (or just unvaccinated in general) who gets sick, brings it back to the US & causes the outbreak. Measles isn't like some diseases (like the flu) - the measles virus is consistent across the world - hence why the vaccine is so effective.
DeleteMs. Ojeda, the vaccine genotype A is included in the information I posted (with links too). The available vaccines are protective against all known genotypes of measles. And outbreaks are not "brought in by people from other countries", cases are. Outbreaks are created and sustained by homegrown anti-vaxxers. You should also know that for the last several outbreaks, it has been unvaccinated Americans travelling abroad and bringing measles back with them and spreading the joy. anti-vaccination
DeleteI am learning so much from all this vaccine controversy. I wish I was getting paid for all the time I have spent in the last year reading articles. I spent hours looking around this afternoon and will have to research "monotype" some other afternoon. Yes, what I also found is that the measles vaccine "should" be able to handle any genotype. I would really like to know more about the fully vaccinated who still contracted measles. I want to know why; hopefully someone else in public health is also interested in the why. Since I haven't done my monotype research I have to wonder why there is no concern about measles mutating beyond the capabilities of current vaccines? The only thing I found in this area was an abstract that did note that all viruses were not neutralized by vaccinees sera: The neutralization capacity of sera from Luxembourgian adolescent vaccinees and from Nigerian women with measles-induced immunity to a number of measles virus strains was compared. Although both cohorts were matched for their hemagglutination inhibition and standard neutralization titers, 12 of the 22 late convalescent sera, and only 6 of 24 vaccinees neutralized all viruses. Similarly, only 2 of 20 viruses were not neutralized by at least 75% of late convalescent sera, in comparison to 10 of 20 viruses that resisted neutralization by at least 75% of the vaccinees. The more resistant viruses were not limited to a certain clade. One Nigerian virus was resistant to neutralization by 30% of the late convalescent women and by 75% of vaccinees. These results suggest that qualitative differences in neutralizing antibodies may reduce further protection of infants by passively acquired immunity against wild-type viruses when vaccinated girls become mothers. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10935994?dopt=Abstract&holding=f1000,f1000m,isrctn. This sounds concerning to me. Also do either you or Lawrence have any links regarding Americans travelling abroad and bringing back measles? I have already read about the Amish going out on missionary work so don't need that one. Pam
Delete"I would really like to know more about the fully vaccinated who still contracted measles. I want to know why; hopefully someone else in public health is also interested in the why."
DeleteTwo MMR doses give 99% chance of being immune. Which is very good, but not perfect. If a crowd is large enough, like the thousands one encounters at Disneyland, about one in a hundred who are exposed can get measles. So if some infected person is in one of the resort's long winding lines they can come into close contact with a thousand persons, and even if they are all fully vaccinated, about 90 could come down with measles because it is so infectious. The arithmetic is there would a hundred not immune to measles, and it tends to infect 90% who are exposed.
"Also do either you or Lawrence have any links regarding Americans travelling abroad and bringing back measles? "
You can go through the CDC reports on measles outbreaks over the past several years. There are also these papers about specific outbreaks:
Pediatrics. 2010 Apr;125(4):747-55. doi: 10.1542/peds.2009-1653.
Measles outbreak in a highly vaccinated population, San Diego, 2008: role of the intentionally undervaccinated.
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2010 Sep;29(9):794-800. doi: 10.1097/INF.0b013e3181dbaacf.
Measles outbreak associated with an international youth sporting event in the United States, 2007.
N Engl J Med. 2006 Aug 3;355(5):447-55.
Implications of a 2005 measles outbreak in Indiana for sustained elimination of measles in the United States.
"The vaccine genotype A is included in the information I posted (with links too). The available vaccines are protective against all known genotypes of measles."
DeleteScienceMom: Where can I find information to back up this statement? Some folks I know are in an uproar stating that the current strain of measles (B3) is one that we don't even vaccinate against. Thanks!
http://www.cdc.gov/measles/lab-tools/genetic-analysis.html
DeleteThe current Measles vaccine covers all genotypes - as the Measles virus does not "mutate" in a way that prevents the vaccine from being effective - like Influenza, for instance.
And more info as well:
Deletehttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21666210
Lawrence, I don't see the specific statement stating that the vaccine covers all genotypes. Can you point me directly to it? I want to be able to explain it to a 2 year old ;-) Thanks!
DeleteAnonymous, Here is a start:
Deletehttp://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/204/suppl_1/S533.long
There are numerous studies on PubMed, unfortunately I can't rattle titles off the top of my head.
Another:
Deletehttp://vir.sgmjournals.org/content/90/11/2739.abstract?ijkey=552524a6d7b23e1ab01b88da5b0a430a65d7b18f&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha
And Another:
Deletehttp://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/170/4/795.abstract?ijkey=90ca89886f215bd5c985d2a07e20105c804bcd33&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha
I still don't see where it says that the vaccine covers all genotypes. That last article says:
Delete"Serum specimens from vaccinated persons, persons infected during the prevaccine era, or mice experimentally vaccinated with the hemagglutinin (H) protein from vaccine virus neutralized vaccine virus and a wild type measles virus from 1989 equally well. In contrast, serum specimens from patients with recent measles virus infection and mice experimentally vaccinated with the H protein from the wild type virus from 1989 neutralized wild type virus with titers 4–8 times higher than those to vaccine virus."
Which if I read it correctly, means that those who had measles (the wild type) had much higher titers than those who had the vaccine. If I were an anti-vaxxer, I would think that this proved that the vaccine is not effective...
So where does it state explicitly that being vaccinated with the genotype A strain will provide immunization against the wild-type strain?
Sorry, not trying to be difficult, I just admittedly don't understand all the science behind it all and would really like to understand so that I am well educated when having these debates! ;-)
Which if I read it correctly, means that those who had measles (the wild type) had much higher titers than those who had the vaccine. If I were an anti-vaxxer, I would think that this proved that the vaccine is not effective...
DeleteThat would be a bad argument for natural measles immunity because you'd have to go through measles and furthermore, if you read the results, vaccinee sera had equally good neutralisation of numerous wild-type measles strains as those with natural immunity.
So where does it state explicitly that being vaccinated with the genotype A strain will provide immunization against the wild-type strain?
In the results section. They used six wild-type strains against vaccinee sera and all were neutralised. There is also a passing remark in the discussion about all circulating measles viruses are neutralised by vaccine antibodies. But the results is where the most information is.
Does that answer your question?
According to Dr. Poland at the Mayo Clinic there's a 2-10% chance that the measles vaccine will provide you with zero protection. See my posts above.
DeleteHi Pamela Ojeda my name is Gloria and I am a student. Do you know if there is any research done on the bodies natural immune system in terms of what the limitations need to be in the production of vaccine in order to maintain the bodies natural immune system? TIA
DeleteBTW I like the way you are looking at researching vaccinations and taking into account other qualitative factors besides the crunching of numbers for facts. I agree there is still alot more to be understood especially in looking at effects in the long term. You might be interested in Professor James Beeson from Burnet institute Australia who is working on a malaria vaccination if not already known. His findings are very interesting.
Please forgive me if I'm missing something here, but my reading of your article states that the vaccine strain is A, but the outbreak is B3. B3 is on a watchlist, according to what I read above, but not in the vaccine??? Am I missing something in what you wrote? From what I'm reading here, my kids are at risk even though they're vaccinated, because the vaccine doesn't cover any strains other than A. Science Mom, can you please clarify? Sorry if I'm being an idiot!
ReplyDeleteAnonymous, you aren't being an idiot at all; it's complicated. The vaccine strain is A but is cross protective for all the other strains. What is most important is that the epitopes of the different strains are relatively conserved. What that means is the areas of the virus which actually attach to our cell surfaces are similar enough so that a vaccine for one strain will protect us from others.
DeleteSince the advent of molecular techniques and molecular epidemiology, we are able to get entire gene sequences for these organisms. This has allowed us to see where the strain differences occur and where they are circulating. It's also a good idea to watch for significant mutations which could lead to lowered vaccine protection. But that is not the case here. It's as it has been and that is the majority of cases are unvaccinated.
Can I have a citation for this? Genotype A cross protective part. Thanks.
DeleteYes, same here, citation please. Thank you.
DeleteSarah H.
I would really love the citation for this as well but I am thinking since it has been requested twice in the last 48 hours with no response we may be out of luck :(
DeleteLawrence said measles does not mutate. You are saying watch for mutations. Please clarify.
DeleteCameo, I didn't see where he said that but all viruses mutate including measles. How fast and where those mutations occur is what is important. Measles is relatively stable but mutations are occurring.
DeleteHe said it Feb 3 at 4:14 pm. It is the exact opposite of what you are trying to convey. He stated that the virus does not mutate enough to effect the vaccine. You said it could. Just trying to clarify. Citations will be helpful for both opinions.
DeleteWhat is most important is that the epitopes of the different strains are relatively conserved. What that means is the areas of the virus which actually attach to our cell surfaces are similar enough so that a vaccine for one strain will protect us from others.
DeleteThat's interesting because I interpret to mean that the areas of the virus which actually attach to our cell surfaces are DISSIMILAR enough so that a vaccine for one strain WILL NOT protect us from others.
The citations that have already been requested numerous times would be extremely helpful. Thanks.
Cameo, Lawrence didn't say that measles virus didn't mutate, just not much in relation to say influenza virus and that is a correct statement. Mutations occur all the time but there are also very conserved regions of genomes which is why the vaccine is cross-protective for all the circulating strains thus far.
DeleteThat's interesting because I interpret to mean that the areas of the virus which actually attach to our cell surfaces are DISSIMILAR enough so that a vaccine for one strain WILL NOT protect us from others.
DeleteI don't know how you would interpret it to mean the opposite. Do you know what conserved means with regards to gene sequences? I also put up some citations for cross-protection of the vaccine.
Wouldn't it be ironic if those unvaccinated were PROTECTING public health?
DeleteI say this because a vaccination will NEVER beat evolution of a virus (unless I am missing some evidence). Are we going to bypass evolution and cause the virus to become extinct?Also, herd immunity no longer applies since we are no longer an isolated herd. Travel has eliminated this possibility unless we are talking about forcing vaccines on everyone on the planet (good luck locating everyone and getting the desired immune response on everyone).
BTW, I am not anti or pro vaccine. I am merely postulating. I do see the benefits of vaccines for public health, but it seems to be skewing our Th1/Th2 balance in an unfavorable direction for an individual.
Hey Thingy! Looks like you're still trolling, eh? Fake concern and claiming to be "neutral". Ah, the old classics. I'm sure they miss you over at Respectful Insolence.
DeleteNot sure what you are talking about. How is genetic mutation as a survival mechanism a "fake concern"?
DeleteI am sure you realize that a Th1 dominant response is more effective at fighting viruses and bacterial infections and that a vaccine induces a Th2 dominant response (antibody mediated).
DeleteAnd yes, I am neutral and more vaccinated than you. Although this was before I started studying.
@Anon - the eradication of smallpox and rinderpest would lead me to believe you are hopelessly mistaken....
Delete^@Lawrence, using one example is like me showing one example of a mutated virus. Then again, one size does fit all, right?
Delete@Anon - that's actually two examples....and if you have any evidence that measles is or has mutated beyond what the vaccine covers, why don't you post it?
DeleteIn general, the vast majority of the viruses that we vaccinate for have very stable mutation rates - and the one that does not - Influenza, is currently the focus of intensive research to find a more universal vaccine that targets a larger portion of the virus, which would cover not only multiple strains, but a number of potential mutation points as well.
You see, Science is a wonderful thing & we don't know everything yet, but we have the tools to keep looking and keep up with changes that we see.
@lawrence, I do not have any evidence of it mutating beyond what is currently available, but I am not thinking small (our lifetime). I am talking about our future. Mutation of the the DNA is small beans when you consider epigenetic factors and host interaction. My point is similar you yours, we don't know all the facts and EVERYONE should be well informed of the benefits and risks involved with vaccination. I sure wish my Aunt knew before she lost her healthy son (my cousin) to an MMR vaccine that was protecting against a mostly mild childhood illness that was laughable only 50 years ago.
DeleteYou are correct on mutation rates currently but that is only because there is no struggle for existence. We know that environmental stressors can massively increase mutation rates. These experiments are done in every biology lab in the nation with bacteria, bacteriophages and viruses.
I am actually developing a VLP vaccine right now for influenza. I hope to eliminate the adjuvants and preservatives that make vaccines unsafe (for some people). This requires us to charge significantly more and create single dosages on demand (in real time). Stay tuned.
Mutation of the the DNA is small beans when you consider epigenetic factors and host interaction.
DeleteWhat are you talking about or do you even know what you are talking about? You are shifting goal-posts to completely ridiculous extremes. All right, consider "epigenetic factors and host interaction". What of it? Please elaborate. Furthermore, measles is an RNA virus.
My point is similar you yours, we don't know all the facts and EVERYONE should be well informed of the benefits and risks involved with vaccination.
What facts that are relevant to vaccine effectiveness against this strain don't "we" know? Or is it don't "you" know? Big difference. The current vaccine protects against this particular circulating strain.
I sure wish my Aunt knew before she lost her healthy son (my cousin) to an MMR vaccine that was protecting against a mostly mild childhood illness that was laughable only 50 years ago.
It was not a "laughable", mild childhood illness 50 years ago and it isn't now. That is an ignorant thing to say. Right out of the anti-vaxx playbook.
I am actually developing a VLP vaccine right now for influenza. I hope to eliminate the adjuvants and preservatives that make vaccines unsafe (for some people). This requires us to charge significantly more and create single dosages on demand (in real time). Stay tuned.
DeleteSure you are. Influenza vaccines don't even have adjuvants and are already available preservative-free.
You are combining two separate thoughts here.
DeleteBut please tell me more. I am clueless on this vaccine stuff. It is easy to pick out a sentence and take it out of context.
You are all very defensive.
You see, I was born before 1957 so I am exempt from the MMR vaccine based on science. OR the CDC just made a broad assumption and is actually endangering the public.
You are combining two separate thoughts here.
DeleteThen you need to elaborate on what those separate thoughts are if you want a reply. It would also help if there weren't so many anonymouses. I don't know why people can't just pick a name, we have a very liberal and private commenting system here.
You see, I was born before 1957 so I am exempt from the MMR vaccine based on science. OR the CDC just made a broad assumption and is actually endangering the public.
Why would you even take issue with this? Do you actually have something substantive to contribute why that is a bad policy because there is copious evidence as to why this is sound policy.
Don't you find it ironic that everyone born before 1957 is exempt from MMR?
DeleteScience mom, please, your passive aggressive posts are ridiculous. I have been in this industry for a VERY long time and know more than you will ever know about what goes on behind the veil. Many of us (much more than you will EVER hear) who work in the industry do not bring our work home (take that any way you want).
And quit with the anti-vax stuff. I am not anti-vax. I am pro health. I know vaccines are great for current public health, but I cannot say that they help an individual improve their health. These are two vastly different things and the more we learn, the more we realize that our current method of immunization may not be the preferred method. They jury is still out, but our lab is testing oral vaccines as well (IMHO, this is where we are heading...again).
Don't you find it ironic that everyone born before 1957 is exempt from MMR?
DeleteLet's see, a virus with an Ro of 12-18 and virtually everyone infected by their 12th birthday. I fail to see the irony there.
Science mom, please, your passive aggressive posts are ridiculous. I have been in this industry for a VERY long time and know more than you will ever know about what goes on behind the veil.
Careful about invoking imaginary cred especially considering you don't know that measles is an RNA virus, that influenza vaccines aren't adjuvanted and preservative-free have been available for several years and are increasing in production over mult-dose vials.
Many of us (much more than you will EVER hear) who work in the industry do not bring our work home (take that any way you want).
Ah I see, I choose to write on my own time about a topic I'm passionate about and I'm paid to do it according to some lab monkey (at best). But here you are commenting on a weekend.
And quit with the anti-vax stuff. I am not anti-vax. I am pro health. I know vaccines are great for current public health, but I cannot say that they help an individual improve their health. These are two vastly different things and the more we learn, the more we realize that our current method of immunization may not be the preferred method.
Right, you're not anti-vaxx, you're pro-safe vaccine. Give me a break. Vaccination and optimal health are not mutually exclusive, quite the opposite in fact.
Please explain how vaccination improves health. Evidence please. It would be beneficial to know what health is in the first place.
DeleteYou are making assumptions and not taking my comments in context. Again I never said any of the following:
"Careful about invoking imaginary cred especially considering you don't know that measles is an RNA virus, that influenza vaccines aren't adjuvanted and preservative-free have been available for several years and are increasing in production over mult-dose vials."
I will say it again since you ignored it the first time, you are taking my comments (in 2 distinct sentences) and combining them. This is not what I said.
And thank you for your ASSumption of my job title. Very classy.
Here you go: Historical Comparisons of Morbidity and Mortality for Vaccine-Preventable Diseases in the United States
DeleteNot that it would matter to you, since you live on Htrae, Thingy.
"It would be beneficial to know what health is in the first place "
DeleteNot getting sick with a disease that causes high fever, diarrhea, pneumonia and possibly encephalitis, along with several other unpleasant symptoms, some which become permanent disabilities. See The Clinical Significance of Measles: A Review.
Now, do tell us why it is so much healthier to get measles instead of preventing it with two MMR doses. Provide verifiable scientific documentation to support your answer.
Chris, you my friend are one lost soul. You honestly believe that MMR makes you healthier than being naturally immune? BTW, those are all possible symptoms just like they are possible symptoms of the vaccine.
DeleteI suggest you dig deep and consider what health really is. The WHO seems to know by the looks of their definition. Not getting sick, really???
Study immunology and tell me why a Th1 response is better than a Th2 response for a virus and that is your scientific proof. This is abundantly in the literature so much that your micro text book will even label a Th1 cell and in parenthesis will show this (Intracellular pathogens ie. viruses/ bacteria). Then tell me which T-helper cell is dominant in a vaccine injected individual.
Also, the historical comparison you posted is good, but fails to show a time window that tells the whole truth. Look at the very same graph for the entire 20th century and it tells a different story. Post that for us all to look at.
It will not stop, it will continue to spew this same kind of nonsense, no matter how you answer it's questions.
DeleteYou honestly believe that MMR makes you healthier than being naturally immune? BTW, those are all possible symptoms just like they are possible symptoms of the vaccine.
DeleteNo, the sequelae and frequency are are far worse and more from the disease than the vaccine. I'd suggest you have a read of the Pink Book. Just fly your anti-vaxx freak flag, you aren't the paragon of reason you are trying to fool people into believing.
Please explain how vaccination improves health. Evidence please. It would be beneficial to know what health is in the first place.
DeleteLet's see, eliminating epiglottitis, SSPE, congenital rubella syndrome, reduction in encephalopathies, pneumonia, rotavirus, deafness, blindness, meningitis just to name a few.
You are making assumptions and not taking my comments in context. Again I never said any of the following:
"Careful about invoking imaginary cred especially considering you don't know that measles is an RNA virus, that influenza vaccines aren't adjuvanted and preservative-free have been available for several years and are increasing in production over mult-dose vials."
No you didn't state the quoted text, I did in response to what you DID STATE:
"I am actually developing a VLP vaccine right now for influenza. I hope to eliminate the adjuvants and preservatives that make vaccines unsafe (for some people). This requires us to charge significantly more and create single dosages on demand (in real time). Stay tuned."
Which is a right load of bollocks.
I will say it again since you ignored it the first time, you are taking my comments (in 2 distinct sentences) and combining them. This is not what I said.
I'm sure it gets rather difficult to keep track of the twaddle you are spewing.
And thank you for your ASSumption of my job title. Very classy.
Funny how no one wants to answer my questions about M&M curves over a more legitimate time period or respond to the known FACT that Th1 responses are preferred responses against viruses and bacteria (AKA.. better function...AKA...healthier).
DeleteScience Mom, you can't get over those two sentences can you?
"Which is a right load of bollocks".
Tell me where I am wrong? Again, since you cannot get over the fact that I talk about vaccines in general and our VLP vaccine in two separate sentences.
Funny how no one wants to answer my questions about M&M curves over a more legitimate time period or respond to the known FACT that Th1 responses are preferred responses against viruses and bacteria (AKA.. better function...AKA...healthier).
DeleteTry asking a coherent question relevant to the topic.
Tell me where I am wrong? Again, since you cannot get over the fact that I talk about vaccines in general and our VLP vaccine in two separate sentences.
You are making such massive mistakes in your statements, there is no way you are part of a team developing a VLP influenza vaccine. Maybe a glassware washer who is catching snippets of conversation.
Very witty, but yet no substance once again. Congrats on your blog.
DeleteIs there a link to the information regarding the current outbreak being B3? I've been looking on the CDC but can't find it.
ReplyDeletenevermind :) I found it!
DeleteDitto, Brittany, is it possible to get a citation, please? I would like to be prepared with as much information as possible.
ReplyDeleteThank you!
Here it is http://emergency.cdc.gov/HAN/han00376.asp
ReplyDeleteWuh??? This blog makes no sense.
ReplyDeleteThere is no vaccine for B3 Measles (the Disney strain).
How is that an argument *for* vaccines? How can you folks say with a straight face that the MMR vaccine is 99% effective? It's 0% effective for the things not in it lol.
That's like saying, get the MMR to prevent HIV, or the common cold. This is science, folks. You're not magically protected from all illness everywhere. If you've had the MMR like me, you're only partly protected against Measles-A (not B, C, D, etc).
There are 26 measles strains (including B3) for which there are no vaccine. How is this the fault of the anti-vaxxers?
Measles-B3 is currently an epidemic in Philippines, and probably traveled to Disneyland from there. The media is talking about the Philippines like it's some backwards un-vaccinated country...but guess what folks, they're vaccinated too! They have a very high MMR compliance rate, but they're getting Measles-B3 anyway, because B3 is not in the MMR (or any) vaccine. The vaccine isn't helping because they don't have 1960's Measles-A.
*Nobody* in California was vaccinated against the Disney Measles (B3). The Enders' attenuated Edmonston strain (Attenuvax, which is in the MMR) was developed 30 years before the B3 was even discovered.
ScienceMom says: "The important point here is that measles outbreaks are caused by measles viruses (not vaccine-strain) and a critical mass of anti-vaxxers clustering and causing large gaps in herd immunity." ...Uh...no ScienceMom, that's not the important part. Since none of us are vaccinated against B3, what's it matter who clusters where? You make some incredibly unscientific conclusions.
I'm not at all understanding the tone of the blog or comments. You seem to be celebrating that it's not the Measles-A that's circulating, as if proof of its efficacy or something. That's not very scientific either - unless they were exposed to Measles-A, we can't measure its efficacy.
This is not good news for those of us who *have* had the MMR. No vaccine is available. All this measles hysteria, people are talking about rounding up the A-strain unvaxxed and sticking them in a leprosy colony, stuff like that. But the rest of us aren't protected either.
I would have to agree with you. Here's an article I came across proving that the vaccine is ineffective and the theory of "herd immunity" doesn't work:
Deletehttp://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/why-china-having-measles-outbreaks-when-99-are-vaccinated-2
"Nobody* in California was vaccinated against the Disney Measles (B3). The Enders' attenuated Edmonston strain (Attenuvax, which is in the MMR) was developed 30 years before the B3 was even discovered."
DeleteThen how come fewer vaccinated persons than unvaccinated persons came down with measles. If what you say is true there would have been hundreds of measles cases from Disney.
By the way, the B3 strain was the one from the Philippines that caused the <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6322a4.htm?s_cid=mm6322a4_w</a>. Most were vaccinated, and only 10% had been vaccinated.
DeleteIf what you say is true, then lots more fully vaccinated persons would have come down with measles.
The part of the virus that attaches to the human cell across all measles strains is identical enough so that the vaccine works for all of them.....this is just another poor anti-vax attempt to discredit vaccines without actually understanding the science.
Delete@ Lawrence - That's a very unscientific speculation. Not even the level of hypothesis.
DeleteI don't understand how this kind of stuff passes on a science blog. Maybe you have a starting point for a study. 100 studies later, maybe we are part way toward an answer. To date, there have been no studies. Zero.
One possible explanation - in Britain, 95+% of the measles cases turned out not to be measles. An unvaccinated person goes to the doctor with bumps, automatically gets categorized measles. There are LOTS of variables here.
PS - I said I was vaxxed!! I am really just not understanding this blog at all, speculation, assumptions, name-calling, mythical villainization - the furthest thing from what happens in actual scientific communities.
@ Chris - some extremely unscientific observations, not even a well formulated hypothesis. We do not know how many fully vaccinated people are catching B3. This is a *complete* unknown. As of last week, only 9 people from the Disney outbreak had even been tested to find out which strand. Thus far, we have little reliable data from the Philippines.
What we *do* know is (a) the measles portion of our vaccine (MMR) was developed almost 30 years prior to B3 even being discovered, (b) the MMR has not been tested against B3, (c) it is ~extremely~ irresponsible (and in fact, an illegal claim) to say or imply that the MMR might cover B3, and (d) that Merk makes no claims about the vaccine covering B3.
Yet you folks are filling in the blanks, saying it does. Not the scientists, nor the manufacturer (who, by the way, would have a very clear financial incentive to make the claim, if there is even a shred of evidence) are making this claim - because it's unscientific, and illegal (False Claims Act, among other things).
But what I'm not understanding is why you lay people are stretching your necks out on behalf of the drug manufacturer, making exaggerated, extemporaneous, & unscientific claims. Absolutely absurd, completely baffling.
Bringing Green Med Info is an indication that you're not interested in the science. Green Med Info is run and written by an anti-vax non-scientist. It pushes conspiracy theories and pseudoscience.
Deletehttp://www.who.int/biologicals/vaccines/measles/en/
We know that the vaccine covers the genotypes.
You obviously have no formal training in either biology or immunology - if you wanted, I could bury you in technical terminology for virus propagation that would make your eyes bleed....but instead I chose to use layman's terms:
DeleteYes, the measles virus does mutate, just like any other virus, but the mechanism or part of the virus that attaches itself to the human cell does not in any meaningful way (unlike the Influenza virus, where this mechanism constantly mutates - hence the need to multiple vaccines to cover the different types).
Your "rant" means nothing in the face of the actual science.
You can't tell by the person's use of "strand" of virus that s/he is a layperson and is getting the information from the internet without a complete understanding of virology and protein biochemistry?
DeleteWell, since "strand" is the wrong term - I believe you were trying to use "strain" I believe my layperson's explanation was more than adequate.
DeleteAnonymous, there is no "Disney strain" and frankly you don't understand the basics of molecular biology nor immunology. I explained, in plain English how a vaccine strain (A) is cross-protective for other strains like B3. We're talking about a single serotype not different genre of viruses. The epidemiology speaks for itself as well; The numbers consistently bear out ~99% of those with 2 doses will be protected, followed by ~95% of those who received one dose and the rest are unvaccinated. You can delude yourself all you like but this isn't pertussis and anti-vaxxers are spreading measles and making it endemic again.
DeleteAnonymous asked for a citation earlier. Here it is:
Delete"On the basis of the sequences of their N and H genes, MeVs can be assigned to 1 of 23 genotypes and 1 provisional genotype. All vaccine strains and their wild-type progenitors are assigned to genotype A. Experiments with monoclonal antibodies have defined antigenic differences between the H proteins of genotype A vaccines and the H proteins of wild-type viruses grouped in other genotypes. However, there is only 1 serotype for measles, and serum samples from vaccinees neutralize viruses from a wide range of genotypes, albeit with different neutralization titers. More importantly, despite the presence of different endemic genotypes, vaccination programs with standard measles vaccines have been successful in every country where they were performed adequately. Suboptimal seroconversion after vaccination is likely the result of inadequate coverage; improper administration, transport, or storage of vaccine; or age of the vaccine recipients."
Bankamp, B., Takeda, M., Zhang, Y., Xu, W., & Rota, P. A. (2011). Genetic Characterization of Measles Vaccine Strains. Journal of Infectious Diseases, 204(suppl 1), S533-S548. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jir097
One possible explanation - in Britain, 95+% of the measles cases turned out not to be measles. An unvaccinated person goes to the doctor with bumps, automatically gets categorized measles. There are LOTS of variables here.
DeleteWait what? This is from a person claiming to be a scientist?
ScienceMom says: "The important point here is that measles outbreaks are caused by measles viruses (not vaccine-strain) and a critical mass of anti-vaxxers clustering and causing large gaps in herd immunity." ...Uh...no ScienceMom, that's not the important part. Since none of us are vaccinated against B3, what's it matter who clusters where? You make some incredibly unscientific conclusions.
DeleteAgain from someone claiming to be a scientist; this is appalling ignorance. Measles is a single serotype, not multiple. The coding regions are highly conserved across strains which provoke a neutralising immune response whether you are vaccinated with an A strain and exposed to a B or infected with a wild-type D strain and exposed to a B.
@ Science Mom
DeleteHi, You said "The epidemiology speaks for itself as well; The numbers consistently bear out ~99% of those with 2 doses will be protected, followed by ~95% of those who received one dose and the rest are unvaccinated. You can delude yourself all you like but this isn't pertussis and anti-vaxxers are spreading measles and making it endemic again."
If these numbers are correct, how can it start an epidemic?
Won't the 2 injection give protection?
If enough people aren't vaccinated or congregate in areas where there is consistently low vaccine uptake, of course we could see a return to regular large outbreaks of measles - since it is airborne and highly contagious - and babies who haven't been vaccinated (under 12 months) are extremely vulnerable...and they keep getting added to the population.
DeleteThis isn't rocket science.
Thank you.
DeleteI doubt there is this much controversy in rocket science.
I am trying to figure out this whole thing.
So if the moms have antibodies from their own immunity, don't these babies receive adequate protection from breast milk antibodies?
This is what I was told by the health care nurse when I had babies. I got measles and I could give the antibodies for my children before they got vaccinated.
When I grew up babies didn't get sick, we got it in school.
And I don't understand how a non vaccinated child can spread the disease differently from a vaccinated one.....they both have to get it from someone else, it is not like the unvaccinated breed or bring on the virus.
Both vaccinated and unvaccinated get sick, so they both spread the disease the same, no?
So why are we blaming the unvaccinated ones?
That is what I keep reading everywhere, that this is the unvaccinating parents' fault.
A vaccinated child/adult can spread it too.
Thank u for explaining this to the anti-vax lynch mob
DeleteWhen my child was born I researched the pharma companies that make vaccines. how enlightening. They are govt protected against lawsuits and the sanitation violations were so numerous in the reports that the govt blackout so many lines because of filth in air vents, metal and glass shards in vaccine batches , and employees without face masks and proper attire. Go investigate big pharma vaccines are known as pediatrician bread and butter bucks...it is all about the dollars! Vaccines are big business for the medical community.
ReplyDelete"Go investigate big pharma vaccines are known as pediatrician bread and butter bucks.."
DeleteCitation needed.
Also, tell us how it is cheaper to treat the one in ten up to one in four measles cases in the hospital than to prevent them by spending $50 to $120 for two MMR doses.
@anon - vaccine manufacturers are covered by the FDA - so inspections of their plants & the validity of their manufacturing process is the same as it would be for any other regulated industry...there is no difference.
DeleteActually, if those conditions were found & it resulted in a contaminated vaccine and an injury - the company is liable. They aren't protected in that way.
FDA is bought and sold. Just look how aspartame became legal. I def. Would not trust them
DeleteAnd yet look at how difficult it is to get a drug to market (costing over 1 Billion dollars & takes years going through multiple stages of clinical trials)....if the FDA was "bought" then why go through all that hassle?
DeleteI am not against vaccines in general. The science of vaccines and how they work is not the question in my mind. People that question this side of things are uneducated, need to learn more about it before talking about it.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the scientists themselves, the pharma companies that provide vaccines, and their willing pushers of vaccines at the drug stores etc. are missing the boat on some things. I keep hearing on the news from these very folks that vaccines are 100% safe and that nobody should be concerned, just do it. Their words, not mine.
I have no doubt that they have cleverly classified the types and cross protection exists. Vaccines are good tools, so again, this is not the question I raise here.
The problem; they don't seem to be able to mass produce a vaccine nearly as safe as their science groupies would like to claim (I have a degree myself so I was once a groupie).
Many vaccines are not SAFE. It's not that they don't work for immunization, it is that they are not SAFE. And in many cases the risk of the vaccine may outweigh the risk of getting the wild type.
From the insert from Merck's MMR. Read the Adverse Reactions section.
http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/m/mmr_ii/mmr_ii_pi.pdf
I keep hearing on the news from these very folks that vaccines are 100% safe and that nobody should be concerned, just do it. Their words, not mine.
DeleteThen you will have no problem citing instances of any official stance that vaccines are 100% safe. No one who knows anything about vaccines can say 100%.
Many vaccines are not SAFE. It's not that they don't work for immunization, it is that they are not SAFE. And in many cases the risk of the vaccine may outweigh the risk of getting the wild type.
And again those citations would be?
From the insert from Merck's MMR. Read the Adverse Reactions section.
Argument by package insert:
http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/vaccine-package-inserts-debunking-myths/
Please understand how package inserts are written and why that is a vapid argument against vaccine safety.
I once was exactly like you and blindly believed what I was told and would push the same cool we-know-it-all propaganda when someone disagreed. My degree should speak and people should listen, that was my attitude as seems is yours. But the more I worked and learned about the system (from being in the system), I was humbled in ways that made me realize that things ain't as good as we were lead to believe. There is still a lot of "mad" in our science. I slowly realized that often the underlying science is good, but the delivery or application is often flawed or corners are cut, sometimes even knowingly. I have also seen cases where the science was just bad, we all have seen new evidence bring about a new era of understanding. My point of caution to you is that this community as a whole is not nearly as pristine and as efficient (i.e. safe) in its practices as you seem to believe, otherwise you would not be so vocal in your efforts. Believe me, you just wouldn't.
DeleteI have seen cases where vaccines have maimed and hospitalized grown strong men and where specific lots and/or brands have been quietly pulled from the shelves after causing infections at an alarming rate.
That blog on package inserts is B.S. There are obviously individuals that are much more susceptible to problems when vaccines are administered than are others, just as certain foods or natural particles can maim some and not affect others. These are real and possible outcomes that are rare for most, but more dangerous for a small percentage of folks that have autoimmune issues, allergies etc. (probably a larger group than we want to admit). I am here to speak for these people who want a choice to not be forced by some authority that knows better than a a patient and their doctors. You can't make a blanket statement or rule that applies to the safety of all when it comes to vaccines. All I ask is that we keep this in mind and stop the over-posturing and overly generalized authoritative advice. Both sides of this argument have blind spots and I am here to point out yours. You argue from an academic stance, and I can appreciate the science behind vaccines as well. However, I spread caution from experience and the understanding that the world is not as wholesome and our science is not as pretty as many have led you to believe.
Then you will have no problem citing instances of any official stance that vaccines are 100% safe. No one who knows anything about vaccines can say 100%.
Delete---
P.S. That is exactly my point. 100% safe is not the official stance, and just like the groupies on the anti-vax side, the pro-vax groupies go overboard by over-exaggerating the safety and not pointing out that one size does not fit all when it comes to vaccines and their safety; and that some can and will have serious complications as I and many others have witnessed. I see these pro-vaccine folks all over saying irresponsible things. They are on the news, they are nurses, they are public health officials, they are politicians. If you are a scientist and a mom as you claim (and not some propaganda outlet for an unknown body), then you should also be critical of these people that should not be promoting medical advice for others. For example, Hillary Clinton's recent tweet doesn't help the cause for vaccines. She is not an authority on this subject and she should keep her mouth shut on the subject unless someone asks her opinion. Then, that is the proper context for giving an opinion on a subject that one is not an expert on.
As the last anonymous poster says (and I agree as a scientist), this polarization is not how good science is done. Once you are blindly following something and have your mind made up, that is when good science stops.
I see these pro-vaccine folks all over saying irresponsible things. They are on the news, they are nurses, they are public health officials, they are politicians. If you are a scientist and a mom as you claim (and not some propaganda outlet for an unknown body), then you should also be critical of these people that should not be promoting medical advice for others.
DeleteAgain, who is making such claims? Also, as soon as you invoke the Pharma Shill Gambit, you lose. I have yet to meet one or get offered a gig as one and furthermore, it doesn't matter who makes the argument, what matters is the content.
For example, Hillary Clinton's recent tweet doesn't help the cause for vaccines. She is not an authority on this subject and she should keep her mouth shut on the subject unless someone asks her opinion. Then, that is the proper context for giving an opinion on a subject that one is not an expert on.
Vaccines are a subject which shouldn't be politicised; it's a matter of science and public health. I don't like to see stupid politicians commenting on the subject either. There are also a lot of non-politicians, self-appointed experts commenting on the topic and they shouldn't either. Are you criticising them or just people making pro-vaxx commentary?
Once you are blindly following something and have your mind made up, that is when good science stops.
The science is clear on the subject; I can't help it if parents decide to eschew that in favour of anecdotes and their own versions of vaccinology. Rachel Maddow actually made a very good point and that is, "how is this even a thing?"
You do know that this is the infamous Th1Th2 + other aliases that has been banned from Orac's blog, right?
DeleteJay, I don't think so, too coherent.
DeleteI've seen enough of Th1Th2 to know the exact style. They've learned to use the language to try to hide their ineptitude. They get more wrong than they get right, though, which is how you can tell it's the same person.
DeleteStill missing my point, but you'll likely post back again repeating the same since you don't like to refute what I am actually saying. Some of my points sting a bit and they should. That is why I am here and why I said these things.
DeleteSummary:
-It stopped by, I liked the info I found. It was what actually exactly what I was looking for...it had come up in my Google search.
-It's not the research scientists saying silly things like vaccines are 100% safe or effective (or other advice that virtually alludes to the point that you should just rush out and get it done ASAP without thinking of any consequences). Therefore, I don't need to provide references to something I am not questioning myself. That would be silly right? Were are not talking science anymore at this point OK? Hope we are done with this.
-When it comes to safe responsible vaccination, those with comprised immune systems, those who have bad experiences in the past, and those with allergies are on a different page than others. They need to be respected and not taken or mistaken for some anti-vaccination groupie. Again, just a word from the wise, and I ust thought you needed to hear this.
Jay, I have no idea what you are talking about or who you are talking, but you are sadly mistaken, but I am glad to hear that I at least more coherent! LOL
-It's not the research scientists saying silly things like vaccines are 100% safe or effective (or other advice that virtually alludes to the point that you should just rush out and get it done ASAP without thinking of any consequences). Therefore, I don't need to provide references to something I am not questioning myself. That would be silly right? Were are not talking science anymore at this point OK? Hope we are done with this.
DeleteYes you do need to supply evidence that your original contention, i.e. that vaccines are 100% safe and effective is being touted by authorities.
-When it comes to safe responsible vaccination, those with comprised immune systems, those who have bad experiences in the past, and those with allergies are on a different page than others. They need to be respected and not taken or mistaken for some anti-vaccination groupie. Again, just a word from the wise, and I ust thought you needed to hear this.
Funny thing about this, not only do all we know this but it is in the scientific literature, package inserts, VIS sheets and physicians' guides to vaccination that there are contraindications to vaccination and guidelines. And yes, mummy intuition doesn't trump medical/scientific research. So I really don't see what your argument is.
Science Mom: "Jay, I don't think so, too coherent."
DeleteThingy would often start out coherent, only to devolve into crazy town after a while.
Just a quick comment to say that I read this article seeking a respectful, science-based interpretation of a wide body of research. Still unsatisfied, I then read the comments to observe the intellectual exchange. I am disappointed in both. Particularly the name-calling and polarization of "political" camps.
ReplyDeleteTo identify my personal bias, I am vaccinated and am a strong proponent for safe and effective vaccines. I do, however, think it is possible to be neither for/against vaccines... at least this is how good research should be approached - and perhaps more importantly, (even after conclusions are drawn), how good informative articles are written.
How can the vaccine made to protect against A strains protect against the b3 strain that's causing the current outbreak?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteScience Mom has answered that, please go and read the studies she has posted.
DeleteFrom what I see, enough of the virus is similar enough that it works. Things like the make up of the outer surface. During the outbreak in the Amish communities from the B3 strain, the MMR vaccine did stop the spread.
From this CDC briefing: "The majority of the adults and children that are reported to us for which we have information did not get vaccinated or don't know whether they have been vaccinated. This is not a problem with the measles vaccine not working. This is a problem of the measles vaccine not being used."
Deletehttp://omsj.org/reports/tomljenovic 2011.pdf
ReplyDeleteThere are no aluminum adjuvants in the MMR.
DeleteMy child cannot have gelatin...anaphylaxis. Why don't they make custom vaccines?
ReplyDeleteMy child cannot have gelatin...anaphylaxis. Why don't they make custom vaccines?
DeletePerhaps someday that can be achieved but not right now.
If these diseases were any more common I would worry. Thankfully they are relatively rare.
DeleteAny possible leads on company's working on it, or is it just too expensive?
As long as vaccination rates remain high - you should be encouraging everyone else who can to be vaccinated, if only to help protect your child.
DeleteI don't expect anyone else to do my job, but I get your point. I won't encourage anyone to seek any medical treatment, it is between them and their doctor and none of my business. Thank you for looking out though.
DeleteAny possible leads on company's working on it, or is it just too expensive?
DeleteThere is lot of conceptual research going on with genomics. There are also biotechs looking into novel delivery systems, different adjuvants and antigen contructs. I don't know of any novel MMR vaccines in the pipeline. But you would be interested in a journal "Vaccine" and also keep perusing PubMed for studies that interest you.
If someone else's decision not to vaccinate their kids ends up exposing your child to a disease they can't get vaccinated against, then it is your problem....perhaps you should look at the big picture - because other people's actions can put your kids in danger.
DeleteLawrence, I guess the irony here is the gelatin anaphylactic child could develop immunity if he/she caught the actual disease with less risk, compared to being left more vulnerable if exposed as an unprotected adult.
Delete"Adults more commonly have (death) encephalitis, hepatitis, hypocalcemia, or pancreatitis after measles. The increased severity of measles in adults most likely reflects the decline in cell-mediated immunity that begins in adulthood.Okada et al.found that young infants and adults have more severe and a longer duration of lymphopenia after measles than do children."
http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/189/Supplement_1/S4.long
Hopefully there will be some sort of safe vaccine developed for him/her before he/she reaches adulthood.
"Lawrence, I guess the irony here is the gelatin anaphylactic child could develop immunity if he/she caught the actual disease with less risk, compared to being left more vulnerable if exposed as an unprotected adult."
DeleteDo tell how that child is better with the disease than the MMR. Provide the PubMed indexed studies that there is a significant population of such children and that they commonly react worse than actually getting the disease.
Also, the way to keep such vulnerable people from getting measles as an adult is to maintain community immunity to measles. If the disease does not circulate, then they can't get it.
Any opinion on a mandatory vaccines? Why or why not?
ReplyDeleteNo one should be able to dictate what you must put in your body. Slippery slope IMO.
DeleteIt would boost the vaccine development! No doubt in my mind as the money would be OUTRAGEOUS.
The US Supreme Court upheld vaccine mandates in 1905 & has upheld that same ruling several times in the last 100 years (it really has never seriously been challenged) - and public opinion has always sided with vaccine mandates as well.
Delete"Pro-disease" doesn't play well with regular Joe USA (or Jane USA, for that matter). Public Schools fall directly in the realm of public health - administrators have a responsibility for protecting all of their students and staff (and visitors), so requiring vaccinations (with an exemption for valid medical conditions) should be the national policy - homeschooling for those who don't want vaccines is always an option and choice.
You want choice - then you must take responsibility as well & deal with the consequences of that choice.
The AMA has spoken " A mandatory vaccination policy -- forced vaccination of unwilling recipients -- is, by definition, a medical intervention carried out without the consent of the patient or the patient's parents. This directly violates the very clear language in the Informed Consent section of the AMA Code of Medical Ethics which states:
DeleteThe patient should make his or her own determination about treatment... Informed consent is a basic policy in both ethics and law that physicians must honor, unless the patient is unconscious or otherwise incapable of consenting and harm from failure to treat is imminent.
"Physicians must honor" informed consent
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteNo one is claiming that people are going to be held down & vaccinated against their will.
DeleteWhat we are saying is that vaccinations (or non-vaccination) carries both rights and responsibilities - if you decide not to vaccinate, then it is perfectly legal to restrict access to public areas - like Schools, for instance or in case of outbreaks, send those kids home for extended periods of time.
If you have a problem with that, then you should talk to the Supreme Court.
That is perfectly fine. If you restrict access, then why should they have to pay for "public schools" then? You can't have it both ways.
DeleteThat issue was settled a long time ago - I don't happen to agree with a number of foreign policy decisions that this country has made over the last decade and a half, in its use of the military, but I still have to pay taxes that support it.....same reason that adults without children pay taxes that support education as well, even if they don't have kids.
DeleteSo yes, we can and do have it both ways.
But you are explicitly denying access to an individual, much different argument.
DeleteForeign policy is not an individual decision, Adults without children are not denied either. They can adopt, have children, foster, etc.... they are still not DENIED access.
Actually, it's not.
DeleteAnd I think you might be a little confused - one of the requirements for attending public schools is vaccination - unless one obtains a waiver.
In both Mississippi & West Virginia, the only waivers granted are for legitimate medical reasons - which is the way it should be in all 50 states.
The US Supreme Court has upheld vaccine mandates as Constitutional and necessary to protect public health - if you don't like it, file a lawsuit & see what they say.
"Preservative Free' http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/vaxsupply.htm - Where? Which brand? Preservative free always has trace amounts of thimerosal (from my knowledge) please correct me if I'm wrong. None-the-less certain brands of flu shots have been banned in other industrialized countries for children, due to convulsions, seizures and other side effects.
ReplyDeleteI most certainly expect you to practice what you preach, and show us a copy of your updated shot records. http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/
@Anon - many (actually most) vaccines never contained Thimerosal....and no vaccine on the pediatric schedule has had it for almost 15 years now - continuing to harp on a dead issue just makes you look foolish.
ReplyDeleteIn the US, more than 60% of the current Influenza vaccine supply is "preservative-free" including all of the nasal vaccines (they never had it) - and no pediatric flu vaccine has it either.
Cheap scaremongering on your part, with no actual science or evidence to back it up.
Lawrence, to be clear, you're referring to the single dose, and not the multi-dose vials?
DeleteTo be clear, Influenza vaccines which still contain thimerasol are not on the US Pediatric Vaccine Schedule.
DeleteAnd for example, no vaccine used in the State of California has it either (by law).
Please expand on this, Lawrence. The law in California says that 0.5 mg per 0.5ml are okay to my understanding. Also, FLULVAL and others are being used in California and elsewhere . Could you please provide citations? Thanks.
Deletehttp://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/immunize/Pages/CaliforniaThimerosalLaw.aspx
Deletehttp://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/03-04/bill/asm/ab_2901-2950/ab_2943_bill_20040928_chaptered.html
http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/immunize/Documents/MercuryLawFAQ.pdf
And that's micrograms, not milligrams....and a list of vaccines that never contained Thimersosal:
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Concerns/Thimerosal/thimerosal_faqs.html#h
And of course, the safety studies that were done:
https://www2.aap.org/immunization/families/faq/vaccinestudies.pdf
But, of course, you're just asking questions, right?
Yes, I'm just asking. You see, the CA.gov site doesn't agree with you. The CDC site doesn't either.
DeletePerhaps you'd like to enlighten us on your agenda? Are you saying that Thimerosal is bad in any dosage - despite over a decade and a half of actual studies that show otherwise?
DeleteAre you aware that many, if not most Flu vaccines (especially nasal) contain no preservatives at all?
So again, what is you actual agenda?
Who said I had an agenda? I'm pointing out that the links that you provided do not match up with your opinion.
DeleteActually, they do match my opinion - because the majority of US vaccines do no contain thimerosal (most never did) and only a select few still do.
DeleteSo, I don't have a problem with it.
Do you?
DeleteActually, I do have a problem with you saying thimerasol is not in the vaccines used in the pediatric schedule. They are. http://eziz.org/assets/docs/IMM-859.pdf
I also have a problem with you stating that thimerasol is not in California vaccines by law. It is. In fact, the amount of thimerasol may increase during an epidemic. http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/immunize/Documents/MercuryLawFAQ.pdf
http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/package_inserts-bymanuf.htm
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BQOqgpgA_UlkYNmyVeQcgs79RO-m5-85h2TNMcnhqHo/mobilebasic?pli=1
The fact that California passed a law at all is very interesting. It is also very interesting that there are no studies posted about the vaccine autism link on the California government website. Yet, that is the reason given for passing the law in the first place. They provide plenty for the pro-vax stance.
@Cameo - perhaps you are seeing something that I am not. And I also already posted up information that clearly refutes any link between thimerosal and autism or any neurological issues whatsoever.
DeleteIt is fairly obvious what your agenda is. Perhaps you shouldn't be quoting from anti-vaccine resources.
DeleteLawrence, All I did was point out the misrepresentation of the law and the pediatric schedule that you stated. Not sure what all the agenda talk is about. I did not quote anyone but you. I'm sorry if you're offended that I actually read the items that you provided.
Now that you brought it up...
I get that you posted links to refute any autism connection. You know who else did that? The state of California. Except, California took it further.
Certainly we can agree that California has passed a law because of the idea
that there might could perhaps be a minuscule connection between vaccination and autism. , okay?
Fact: California passed a thimerasol law.
If you read the link you posted, you would have seen all of the additional links to pro-vax studies.
Now, my point is this: California has access to all of these links, great minds, and resources. They certainly weighed the pros and cons. They certainly had access to more information than you or I have. They passed a law anyway. They did not and have not provided any documents or information as to why the majority voted to pass this law.
Why do you suppose that is?
California is known for passing some pretty crazy laws...and for them, they jumped on the bandwagon of the AAP who had originally recommended a phase-out of the use of Thimerosal in Pediatric Vaccines (which was done by the year 2001).
DeleteThe AAP reversed its opinion after the weight of research showed that the hypothetical risk was just that, nothing but hypothetical.
Since so few vaccines had thimerosal in the first place (my link above) and now most Influenza vaccines don't have it (or have it in mere trace amounts), it has become a non-issue for everyone, except for hard-core anti-vaccine individuals.
And, of course, I provided a link to a series of studies (which is by no means a comprehensive one, more of a representative sample), which shows that the various ills that were supposedly caused by vaccines are rubbish.
If you have further questions, I would recommend asking the California Department of Public Health, though they might be a little busy right now, dealing with the Disneyland Measles Outbreak (which was caused by low vaccination rates in some communities) oh yeah, which could have been prevented by a vaccine that never contained preservatives in the first place.
And if you read the FAQ for the law itself, it answers your questions - at the end of the day, since manufacturers were or already had phased out the use of Thimerosal in vaccines, the passing of this law didn't really accomplish much, except as a "feel-good" measure that is typical for California politics.
DeleteThese vaccines still contain thimerosal, so Lawrence, you're not entirely correct.
Delete• Tripedia DTaP
• Fluzone (multi-dose)
• Fluvirin (multi-dose)
• Fluvirin (single dose)
• Alfluria (multi-dose)
• Alfluria (single dose)
• Flulaval
• DT vaccine
• Td vaccine
• TT vaccine
• Meningococcal vaccine
Thimerosal In Vaccines, US Department of Health and Human Services, US Food and Drug Administration:
http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/VaccineSafety/UCM096228
Vaccine Excipient & Media Summary, This table includes not only vaccine ingredients (e.g., adjuvants and preservatives), but also substances used during the manufacturing process, including vaccine-production media, that are removed from the final product and present only in trace quantities. In addition to the substances listed, most vaccines contain Sodium Chloride (table salt). Last Updated September 2013:
http://www.cdc.gov/vac- cines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/B/excipient-table-2.pdf
Actually, I am correct - because none of those vaccines are currently on the US Pediatric schedule.
Deletehttp://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/VaccineSafety/UCM096228#t3
DeleteAnd given that no evidence exists that Thimerosal, in the quantities in which is was given in the past, or in the very small trace quantities today, is harmful in any way, I'd say you don't have much of a point.
"• Tripedia DTaP "
DeleteJeff, you should find fresh material. That vaccine has not been available for years.
Ohwell, I guess my original response was lost because I use Google Chrome. However, terrific blog - for a scientist. Sadly that is what is missing in journalism, a conduit between hard core science and the gen pop. Don't get me wrong, I have a difficult time simplifying 100+ years of biology. That said, I request you keep the stupid vitriol down a bit (I know easier said than done) and try to keep explanations at simple levels as best as possible. It is hard to convince people you are correct when they don't have the tools to follow the logic. I have 15+ years of research behind my back, the GenPop may have taken a biology 101-102 course in college. As scientists - we need to be as articulate as possible. Cheer and vax your kids. FYI - where is the FB link? I searched this article in response to a friend sadly on the anti-vax side to respectifully explain why there is no concern from viral "shedding."
ReplyDeleteOhwell, I guess my original response was lost because I use Google Chrome. However, terrific blog - for a scientist. Sadly that is what is missing in journalism, a conduit between hard core science and the gen pop. Don't get me wrong, I have a difficult time simplifying 100+ years of biology. That said, I request you keep the stupid vitriol down a bit (I know easier said than done) and try to keep explanations at simple levels as best as possible. It is hard to convince people you are correct when they don't have the tools to follow the logic. I have 15+ years of research behind my back, the GenPop may have taken a biology 101-102 course in college. As scientists - we need to be as articulate as possible. Cheer and vax your kids. FYI - where is the FB link? I searched this article in response to a friend sadly on the anti-vax side to respectifully explain why there is no concern from viral "shedding."
ReplyDeleteScience Mom, each and every comment you make regarding vaccines should be referenced with peer review. Mine are. I agree with anonymous above, this is one of the least scientific blogs I've come across. While you provide a little good information, you gloss over or completely omit the real data. Vaccines are dangerous, few of our children need all of them, and each vaccine should be carefully examined thoroughly using peer review before injection.
ReplyDeleteWhat is missing in journalism is referenced commentary using peer review. Most people just don't understand that and will use this blog to make decisions and you are, from what I can tell, dispensing terrible recommendations. Here's a link to a recently leaked internal GlaxoSmithKline report. You'll note 5 cases of autism on page 626 of this 1200+ page internal report. I'm still discussing the report with Glaxo representatives but you'll also see over 1000 adverse events in over 50 categories to include cardiac arrest, uncontrollable crying and everything in between. Vaccines are not safe by any means and giving advice on vaccines without peer reviewed references, in my opinion, is unconscionable.
ReplyDeletehttps://app.box.com/s/k8hrszjcgxv3fbmnz2jxxgeupfb3t3l9
As regards the MMR vaccines, it is failing. Recent outbreaks of measles are also associated with recent outbreaks of mumps.
ReplyDeleteVaccinated children in schools transmit the mumps to both vaccinated and unvaccinated children. The mumps vaccine virus can be shed and transmitted horizontally, even to subjects previously vaccinated with the same virus.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16266774
Recent large outbreaks of mumps in highly vaccinated populations suggest waning of vaccine-induced immunity and primary vaccine failure.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24573540
The rubella portion of the MMR vaccine is even worse than the measles or mumps portion. I don't have the time to post the peer reviewed literature regarding the rubella portion at the moment. I may come back.
ReplyDeleteScience Mom, peer review is your friend. Learn to use PubMed, the Lancet, the Oxford Journal and other peer review aggregators so you can dispense sound advice backed by science. You'll be very glad you did.
ReplyDeleteSorry Jeff - I don't do crazy....go back to your 9/11 and Sandy Hook fantasies.
DeleteJeff Prager, make certain to link to your Facebook page, a.k.a. the reasons why Jeff is full of himself and full of it.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.facebook.com/prager1/posts/10152510787267282
hello, do measles disappear by itself
ReplyDeleteOnce a disease runs out of people to infect, it can "disappear" unless it is endemic in other parts of the world.
DeleteMeasles also has no other hosts but humans - so if enough people were vaccinated or already immune, then the disease itself could be eradicated, like Smallpox.
But people tend to have babies, and so measles can always find more people to infect.
DeleteGo away clueless spammer.
ReplyDeleteYou probably have now heard, Merck wants you to get more boosters. Yes, silly people. Vaccines do not work. The Disneyland outbreak was from the workers there getting vaccinated and shedding - nothing more. The nasty tone and attitude of the blogger is so corrosive. Not worth the time.
ReplyDeleteSo much wrong in such a small comment.....it isn't even worth pointing out the individual parts of your comment that are right - other than to say, the only thing that is correct, is your grammar.....
DeleteReally? Provide verifiable documentation for that claim, or tell us exactly why you feel the need to just make stuff up.
DeleteOh really Anonymous? Then you will have no problem providing the documentation for that claim. It's so sad and alarming to see such scientifically-ignorant people ranting about and making medical decisions for themselves and others.
Deletehmmm, it's been two days since "anonymous" published that untruthful and inane comment and (s)he has not provided any proof that a live attenuated vaccine (MMR II) is capable of shedding and infecting an unvaccinated person.
DeleteScience Mom, I came here looking for information and made the mistake of checking out the comments section. Most of the posts here (including yours) serve only to express vehement bias, overflowing with condescension, anger, and sarcasm. Not a very healthy or intelligent discussion, wouldn't you say? You don't even bother to respond to people like Mr. Prager who actually take the time to write thoughtful posts with links to peer-reviewed studies. Why not? Are you afraid of evidence that contradicts your views? For a science blogger, your blog is not very scientific, and therefore not very helpful either. I'll keep looking...
ReplyDeleteBy the way, in response to one of your old comments: according to the FDA and CDC, the pertussis vaccine does not prevent colonization and transmission of the disease. Which could make the vaxed even more dangerous than the unvaxed. At least the unvaxed know if they have it.
http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm376937.htm
http://www.cdc.gov/pertussis/about/causes-transmission.html
Just the vax, according to the FDA and the CDC.
That link that you provided about pertussis vaccine does not state what you think it states. How about reading your own link?
DeleteWhat the link actually states is that an individual should not assume they or their children have lifelong immunity against the pertussis bacterium (whether or not the immunity was conferred by contracting and recovering from pertussis or immunity conferred by having had the complete TDaP vaccine series in early childhood). That's the reason for the development of the Tdap booster vaccine before entry into 7th grade and for all pregnant women during each of her pregnancies.
http://www.cdc.gov/pertussis/about/causes-transmission.html
See the Vaccine Information Statement for the Tdap booster and those recommendations, plus recommendations for adults who expect to have contact with an infant:
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/vis/vis-statements/tdap.pdf
http://www.cdc.gov/pertussis/about/causes-transmission.html
Anonymous, Prager is a scientifically-ignorant dilettante who thinks citations compensate for his weak and erroneous claims. I don't have time for such twaddle. As for you, would you like to post a particular criticism other than, "wah you're a meanie"? I know that the pertussis jab doesn't prevent transmission given it's a toxoid vaccine but that doesn't mean you make the leap to vaccinated are more dangerous than unvaccinated because it simply isn't true. Unvaccinated are 23 times more likely to be infected and fully symptomatic than vaccinated. Also, vaccinated are less likely to spread the disease to distal contacts. Please get your facts straight if you want to try and lecture me on vaccine effectiveness.
DeleteIf this isn't pure "paid shill troll" speak; nothing is.
Delete"dilettante"
"erroneous claims"
"twaddle"
"wah you're a meanie"
These are scripted terms used by tools such as "Science Mom" (probably a childless guy) trying to discredit absolute facts
These paid shill trolls love to spew nonsense by using scripted words and terms that belittle and criticize; all while trying to sound "intelligent" What a joke.
Re just ONE concern of dozens re vaccines that is never addressed by these tools (like "Science Mom") who imply "all is well" and "nothing AT ALL to worry about"
From the CDC Website
These precautions and all additives should be CLEARLY and OBVIOUSLY available; but they are NOT
----------------------- WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS------------------------
• Administration of ProQuad (dose 1) to children 12 to 23 months old who have not been previously vaccinated against measles, mumps, rubella, or varicella, nor had a history of the wild-type infections, is associated with higher rates of fever and febrile seizures at 5 to 12 days after vaccination when compared to children vaccinated with M-M-R® II and VARIVAX® administered separately. (5.1, 6.1, 6.3)
• Use caution when administering ProQuad to children with a history of cerebral injury or seizures or any other condition in which stress due to fever should be avoided. (5.2)
• Use caution when administering ProQuad to children with anaphylaxis or immediate hypersensitivity to eggs (5.3) or contact hypersensitivity to neomycin. (5.4)
• Use caution when administering ProQuad to children with thrombocytopenia. (5.5)
• Avoid close contact with high-risk individuals susceptible to varicella since transmission of varicella vaccine virus may occur between vaccinees and susceptible contacts. (5.8)
• Defer vaccination for at least 3 months following blood or plasma transfusions, or administration of immune globulins (IG). (5.9, 7.1)
• Avoid using salicylates for 6 weeks after vaccination with ProQuad. (6.1, 7.2, 17)
• Avoid pregnancy for 3 months following vaccination with measles, mumps, rubella, and/or varicella vaccines. (8.1, 17)
Word salad? Check
DeleteAll Caps? Check
Ad Hominem? Check
Pharma Shill Gambit? Check
Irrelevant Copypasta? Check
Got my anti-vaxx nutter bingo card filled.
Question, and I apologize if its already been answered in the comments above.
ReplyDeleteI realize the Disneyland outbreak wasn't the vaccine strain, but how does the vaccine protect us from all the other measles strains if the vaccine is only for genotype A? If Disneyland was B3, and we vaccinate for A, are we still protected?
Thanks!
http://www.cdc.gov/measles/lab-tools/genetic-analysis.html
DeleteWhile there may be different genotypes, they all belong to the same Serotype, which is covered by the vaccine - hence, a person is protected.
Wrong Lawrence....there are 23 distinct wild measles viruses buzzing around...the vaccine only targets 1. Better duck down buddy.....the other 22 are gunnin' for ya!
DeleteToo funny - so where are all those "strains" causing outbreaks?
DeleteThe vaccine does cover all of them & for you to think otherwise, just shows how ignorant you are.
"It was not a "laughable", mild childhood illness 50 years ago and it isn't now. That is an ignorant thing to say. Right out of the anti-vaxx playbook." Science mom, You are an idiot. I had measles some 50 years ago. Most everyone of my age did. Stayed home from school for a week, and then all was back to normal. Forever, because we develop a natural immunity. No big deal, and more than can be said for autism, which can and does happen in some vaccinated people. Then silly you blames the anti-vaxxers for bringing back measles which was "eradicated"... Oh LOL. Measles doesn't just develop out of thin air. Even the un-vaccintaed has to get it from somewhere. Where oh where might it have come from? Perhaps those dopes shedding the virus from the vaccines? Bingo! Enough of YOUR twaddle.
ReplyDeleteWTF are you talking about? I didn't say that.
DeleteMeasles, also known as rubeola, is a highly infectious disease. It’s caused by a virus, and can be prevented by effective vaccination. The adult form is more severe than when children acquire it, and the infected adults would end up feeling way worse.
ReplyDeleteMost people get better within 2 weeks. But measles can sometimes cause dangerous problems, such as lung infection (pneumonia) or brain swelling (encephalitis). In rare cases, it can even cause seizures or meningitis.
http://bit.ly/adultmeasles
What if someone is unvaccinated but already got the measles naturally?
ReplyDeleteAny thoughts on why the vaccine doesn't protect 10% of the population?
Would it be better for the unvaccinated to throw measles parties like they did in the 50s so that everyone gets measles and develop lifelong immunity for the herd immunity? Basically expose any unvaccinated who isn't immune compromised. What evidence is there that getting the vaccine is better than getting measles naturally?
That terrible idea is what caused ~4,000-5,000 deaths/year in the U.S. just due to measles prior to widespread vaccine use. That's what you want? Because the mortality rate hasn't improved any. Herd immunity via natural infection doesn't protect the susceptibles that enter the population each year. The evidence that getting the vaccine is better than getting measles naturally is that children no longer die of measles and measles-related disease and they don't suffer measles-related sequelae. The risk of adverse reactions from the vaccine are far fewer and less severe. It's a no-brainer.
DeleteScience mom, I realize this is an old comment thread, but could you please address the following study?...
ReplyDelete“During the measles outbreak in California in 2015, a large number of suspected cases occurred in recent vaccinees. Of the 194 measles virus sequences obtained in the United States in 2015, 73 were identified as vaccine sequences. About 38 percent of suspected measles cases in the 2015 Disneyland measles cases in California were actually vaccine-related and not caused by transmission of wild-type measles.” “Rapid Identification of Measles Virus Vaccine Genotype by Real-Time PCR”
https://jcm.asm.org/content/55/3/735
And what are your thoughts on the following articles?...
“Scientists investigating an outbreak of encephalitis among adults in the town of Siliguri, in West Bengal, told the health ministry this week that the disease was caused by a mutant measles virus that affects the brain, lungs, or kidneys. This is India's third outbreak since 1998 of a highly fatal illness involving the brain or the kidneys and attributed to the measles virus.” “Indian scientists warn of mutant measles virus”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1119899/
“The patients from whom the samples were collected had been suffering from acute renal failure, neurological disorders and encephalopathy, These are new symptoms for measles, the new measles strain has not been causing the typical rash.” “Mutant measles strains hit nation”
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/pune/Mutant-measles-strains-hit-nation/articleshow/41498121.cms
“Mutant variants of the [measles] virus are now circulating in Africa. They are resistant to half of the antibodies that humans produce when vaccinated.” “Super-measles warning”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/1273613.stm
“The measles virus hemagglutinin (MeV-H) protein is the main target of protective neutralizing antibodies. Using a panel of monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) that recognize known major antigenic sites in MeV-H, we identified a D4 genotype variant that escapes neutralization by MAbs targeting the neutralizing epitope (NE) antigenic site. By site-directed mutagenesis, L249P was identified as the critical mutation disrupting the NE in this genotype D4 variant. Forty-two available D4 genotype gene sequences were subsequently analyzed and divided into 2 groups according to the presence or absence of the L249P MeV-H mutation. Further analysis of the MeV-N gene sequences of these 2 groups confirmed that they represent clearly definable, sequence-divergent D4 subgenotypes, which we named subgenotypes D4.1 and D4.2. The subgenotype D4.1 MeVs were isolated predominantly in Kenya and Ethiopia, whereas the MAb-resistant subgenotype D4.2 MeVs were isolated predominantly in France and Great Britain, countries with higher vaccine coverage rates. Interestingly, D4.2 subgenotype viruses showed a trend toward diminished susceptibility to neutralization by human sera pooled from approximately 60 to 80 North American donors. Escape from MAb neutralization may be a powerful epidemiological surveillance tool to monitor the evolution of new MeV subgenotypes.” “Antigenic Drift Defines a New D4 Subgenotype of Measles Virus”.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315720277_Antigenic_Drift_Defines_a_New_D4_Subgenotype_of_Measles_Virus
https://jcm.asm.org/content/55/3/735
DeleteThese were simply vaccine recipients that experienced mild symptoms related to the vaccine and the PCR test identified them as such so they weren't counted as infected. The vaccine virus was not ever transmitted in spite of what anti-vaxx conspiracy mongers say.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1119899/
This is kind of a weird one since we have genetic tools to definitively identify measles genotypes. It is either a measles strain or something else coincident with measles infection which wouldn't be at all unusual since measles is highly immunosuppressive and allows for secondary infections.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/1273613.stm
Well it's pretty much what it states, that if measles are allowed to circulate, particularly in areas where vaccine coverage is less than adequate, they will gather mutations that will allow the virus to escape neutralisation.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315720277_Antigenic_Drift_Defines_a_New_D4_Subgenotype_of_Measles_Virus
Same deal and particularly a concern with global travel.
In your piece you mentioned:
ReplyDeleteMeasles genotype information was available from 9 measles cases; all were genotype B3 and all sequences linked to this outbreak are identical.
What about the 100 other plus cases, with respect to this incident?
I ask becauase I want to understand why the information available was so limited.
Sorry this took so long but I hadn't updated the blog in a while and was cleaning house to release comments. Not every case is going to have specific genotype information unless there is something unusual, like a vaccine strain. There were no vaccine strains related to the outbreaks.
Delete