Question Vaccinations

May 23, 2020
1
0
10
Is there any data on children developing symptoms or remaining asymptomatic and which childhood vaccines they have or have not had?
 
Jul 2, 2020
94
4
55
Let me start by saying I think vaccination is generally a good thing, that does not mean we should not look into how it is used and the potential risks.

I was vaccinated a couple of years ago for yellow fever without the risks being explained to me. I did my own research and took the risk. I still wonder if that was a good decision.

Moving on to answer your question its hard to find good info - I will discuss that more later.

There are reports showing oral polio vaccine being the source of more outbreaks of polio than wild polio in 2019

"there have been 117 cases of naturally occurring polio. And in a galling development, there have been an additional 216 cases of what is called “vaccine-derived polio”—an accidental byproduct of the eradication campaign, brought into being by the campaign’s own vaccines.

In other words, there now exist more cases of polio paralysis caused by vaccines than there are cases caused by the original wild virus."



From what I understand there were issues with changing the vaccine mix being used

In April 2016, those in charge switched from using a three-strain vaccine to a two-strain one which led to infections.

There are those who claim that other vaccines are also linked to outbreaks of the condition they are supposed to stop or side effects to taking the vaccine. Whooping cough in Australia was cited in some reports.

An example of the side effects of vaccines

A 2017 study funded by the Danish Govt and others concluded that the death rate among children vaccinated with DTP vaccine in Africa was up to 5 times higher than children not vaccinated. Other studies have come to similar conclusions


"DTP was associated with 5-fold higher mortality than being unvaccinated. No prospective study has shown beneficial survival effects of DTP. "

"It should be of concern that the effect of routine vaccinations on all-cause mortality was not tested in randomized trials. All currently available evidence suggests that DTP vaccine may kill more children from other causes than it saves from diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis. Though a vaccine protects children against the target disease it may simultaneously increase susceptibility to unrelated infections."

The DTP vaccine was discontinued in the US and western nations in the 1990s following thousands of reports of death and brain damage.

For further info about the risks related to vaccines visit the site below linked to Robert F Kennedy Jr who comes comes under much attack from the main stream press and pharma. However its a good place to find an alternative view and what studies back that view.



A leading cancer Dr died after a rare reaction to a yellow fever vaccination - the intial reporting was amended from / to

"Prof Martin Gore died “as a result of a yellow fever vaccination”, as an earlier version said. Gore died following a yellow fever vaccination, and the trust released a statement confirming his death."



Real Info

There is some considerable lack of transparency on vaccines - pharma companies are exempt from paying compensation for damage from vaccines and governments in the west pick up the bill

The compensation paid by government connected agencies to compensate victims of vaccination is an example of lack of transparency. There is no particularly easy way to find and see what vaccines compensation payments relate to which vaccine - total numbers of cases per vaccine, total or individual payment amounts etc

In the UK the government even says it keeps no records of which vaccines are linked to compensation payments - which is pretty strange as each case must file a claim about whats happened so the records must exist about which vaccine was used and the payments are confirmation of damage


the DWP said it did not have any information on which types of vaccination were involved in the compensation payments. It said no such records were kept.

Vaccine damage payments are one-off payments to people who are able to prove that they were severely disabled as a result of a vaccination.


Political Lobbying and Advertizing data

Pharma spent $4.45 billion over the past 22 years, the pharmaceutical and health products industry has far outpaced all other industries in lobbying spending


researchers estimated that medical marketing reached $30 billion in 2016, up from $18 billion in 1997


Vaccines and medicines other info

My current belief based on what I have read is that its best not to have any vaccines for multiple conditions ie MMR vaccine etc and to avoid those that contain "preservatives" the comments that the amounts involved are insignificant is up to you to decided

I believe it is very hard to get objective info on vaccines and medicines generally and this is provably linked to the money spent by big pharma on lobbying and spending on advertizing. Media, researchers and Drs that write on or do research on medicines get pressure placed on them to come to certain conclusions or join pharma research programs. There are few entities that fund research with no expectation of some financial benefit in the end particularly in the private sector.

There has been a long history of safety issues only coming out years later. It is unlikely that anything is different now.

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYgiCALEdpE


May 24, 2020: Philippe Douste-Blazy, Cardiology MD, Former France Health Minister and 2017 candidate for Director at WHO, former Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations, reveals that in a recent 2020 Chattam House closed door meeting, both the editors of the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine stated their concerns about the criminal pressures of BigPharma on their publications. Things are so bad that it is not science any longer.

“A secretly recorded meeting between the editors-in-chief of The Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine reveal both men bemoaning the ‘criminal’ influence big pharma has on scientific research. According to Philippe Douste-Blazy, France’s former health minister and 2017 candidate for WHO director, the leaked 2020 Chatham House closed-door discussion was between the [editor-in-chiefs], whose publications both retracted papers favorable to big pharma over fraudulent data.

a quote from that recording: ‘Now we are not going to be able to … publish any more clinical research data because the pharmaceutical companies are so financially powerful today, and are able to use such methodologies, as to have us accept papers which are apparently methodologically perfect, but which, in reality, manage to conclude what they want them to conclude,’ said The Lancet’s editor-in-chief, Richard Horton.”





Some people disagree that drug trials are really effective or independent of the pharma drug cos funding them and that in most cases the human testing phase is short with examples of data being skewed or withheld.


Contents of Vaccines

 
Last edited:
Jul 2, 2020
94
4
55
Is there any data on children developing symptoms or remaining asymptomatic and which childhood vaccines they have or have not had?
I was looking at the Robert F Kennedy Jr web site on vaccine - there is a link to a study on asymptomatic transmission of whooping cough and vaccines which says

"In light of current evidence and our results, we cannot dismiss the potential far-reaching epidemiological consequences of asymptomatic transmission of B. pertussis and an ineffective B. pertussis vaccine."



Also a 9th July 2020 post sets out some info on the MMR vaccine studies and possible long term effects


I believe overall the benefits of vaccines are very significant but that does not mean we need to accept that there are no risk or should not seek to improve the vaccines. The drugs companies seek to maximise profits using the existing vaccines and seem to have little or no interest in updating what they already sell.
 
Jul 2, 2020
94
4
55
Here is a good video on vaccines by a phd who previously worked for the US CDC and at US military who has specialized in viruses and vaccines. Interesting comments on vaccines and how they interact with certain genes and also certain age groups and people.

 
Jul 2, 2020
94
4
55
Here is a good video on vaccines by a phd who previously worked for the US CDC and at US military who has specialized in viruses and vaccines. Interesting comments on vaccines and how they interact with certain genes and also certain age groups and people.

Interesting vaccine article

One side effect that could occur upon exposure is known as antibody dependent enhancement (ADE); this rare phenomenon paradoxically leaves the body more vulnerable to severe infection after vaccination, and was previously observed in animal studies of vaccines for coronaviruses related to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, Live Science previously reported.


"One of the things you have to be careful of when you're dealing with a coronavirus is the possibility of enhancement," Fauci said in an interview with the journal JAMA on April 8. Some vaccines cause a dangerous phenomenon known as antibody dependent enhancement (ADE), which paradoxically leaves the body more vulnerable to severe illness after inoculation.
 
Jul 24, 2020
20
4
35
I read in an article published a while ago that there is some doubt over whether ADE will be a significant consideration with the sars-cov-2 vaccines because the phenomenon is mostly seen when the virus attacks the macrophages such as in Dengue fever and this doesnt seem to be the case with sc2.

Article
 
Jul 2, 2020
94
4
55
There seems to be some conflicting info about ADE and covid-19 - the risks are not known particularly from infection by a new strain of covid-19 after vaccination against an earlier strain


The first article indicats why ADE maybe a risk and was seen in earlier MERS animal studies. The second older link says ADE was not seen in limited covid-19 animal trials from April 2020

Dengue Fever, COVID ‐19 (SARS‐CoV ‐2), and Antibody‐Dependent Enhancement (ADE ): A Perspective: 07 June 2020

The link below works


In summary, in both SARS‐CoV and MERS‐CoV infected anti‐spike S‐protein NAbs are present. They can induce experimentally in vitro and in vivo ADE mediated by FcγRII receptor virus entry. Previous immunization by vaccination or infection might aggravate symptoms of a follow‐up infection as described above for dengue fever, such complications were also observed for common influence and other viral infections (24).

Are there indications that ADE might be relevant in the SARS‐CoV‐2 pandemic? By nature, at this time point, trustworthy proofs for ADE playing clinically a role are not available and might be expected earliest in fall of 2020. Even so, the potential threat of ADE has to be investigated more closely, particularly in view of the vast number of recovered individuals who have already developed immunity. Thus, ADE is of relevance for the strategies for vaccine development and therapeutic agents. For example, ADE can play a role in individuals with immunity and NAbs against strain A if the next infection is by RBD mutated strain B. Antistrain A NAbs may not neutralize strain B, or antibody titers are too low for sufficient neutralization, or NAbs have efficient neutralizing capabilities, but cell entry occurs via FcγRII into APCs or B cells (43) (see Fig. 1).


This article mentions ADE has so far not been seen in animal testing

 
Jul 24, 2020
20
4
35
There seems to be some conflicting info about ADE and covid-19 - the risks are not known particularly from infection by a new strain of covid-19 after vaccination against an earlier strain


The first article indicats why ADE maybe a risk and was seen in earlier MERS animal studies. The second older link says ADE was not seen in limited covid-19 animal trials from April 2020

Dengue Fever, COVID ‐19 (SARS‐CoV ‐2), and Antibody‐Dependent Enhancement (ADE ): A Perspective: 07 June 2020

The link below works


In summary, in both SARS‐CoV and MERS‐CoV infected anti‐spike S‐protein NAbs are present. They can induce experimentally in vitro and in vivo ADE mediated by FcγRII receptor virus entry. Previous immunization by vaccination or infection might aggravate symptoms of a follow‐up infection as described above for dengue fever, such complications were also observed for common influence and other viral infections (24).

Are there indications that ADE might be relevant in the SARS‐CoV‐2 pandemic? By nature, at this time point, trustworthy proofs for ADE playing clinically a role are not available and might be expected earliest in fall of 2020. Even so, the potential threat of ADE has to be investigated more closely, particularly in view of the vast number of recovered individuals who have already developed immunity. Thus, ADE is of relevance for the strategies for vaccine development and therapeutic agents. For example, ADE can play a role in individuals with immunity and NAbs against strain A if the next infection is by RBD mutated strain B. Antistrain A NAbs may not neutralize strain B, or antibody titers are too low for sufficient neutralization, or NAbs have efficient neutralizing capabilities, but cell entry occurs via FcγRII into APCs or B cells (43) (see Fig. 1).


This article mentions ADE has so far not been seen in animal testing

Thanks for the above links, they were very helpful in giving me a better understanding and appreciation of the phenomenon of ADE, and how this might relate to the Sars-cov-2 vaccine efforts.

Subsequent to the publication of the article that I initially linked to, a study was released (Link) that demonstrated sars-cov-2 infection of macrophages in vitro. As with Sars-cov, the infection was observed to be abortive, in that the virus did not successfully replicate upon infection. However, upregulation of pro-inflammatory chemicals was noted from the infected macrophages which suggests one possible mechanism for increased disease severity through ADE after vaccination.

The issue of immune enhancement seems to have been an obstacle to the development of a vaccine for Sars-cov, and both animal testing and in vitro experiments have suggested more severe disease when the infection was introduced in the presence of prior immunity, particularly neutralising antibodies to the spike protein. Given much of the Sars-cov-2 vaccine effort will expect to induce robust neutralising antibody response, this may be a cause for concern.

On the other hand, it is noted that in vitro experiments do not necessarily provide proof of ADE in vivo, and that certain ADE observations may be both virus and/or species-specific (Link). Further, challenge to sars-cov-2 vaccinated rhesus monkeys did not show signs of ADE. ADE can also be avoided through vaccine design, and various methods are described, including T cell vaccine (Link)

It is difficult to reach a firm conclusion on the matter, given the lack observable instance of ADE in sars-cov-2, but I find previous research hard to ignore and the absence of a sars-cov vaccine, whilst perhaps explained by substantially reduced need and funding, is telling. I think this is a critically important issue given how widespread vaccination is expected to be administered, and perhaps deserves more awareness.
 
Last edited:
Jul 2, 2020
94
4
55
Thanks for the above links, they were very helpful in giving me a better understanding and appreciation of the phenomenon of ADE, and how this might relate to the Sars-cov-2 vaccine efforts.

Subsequent to the publication of the article that I initially linked to, a study was released (Link) that demonstrated sars-cov-2 infection of macrophages in vitro. As with Sars-cov, the infection was observed to be abortive, in that the virus did not successfully replicate upon infection. However, upregulation of pro-inflammatory chemicals was noted from the infected macrophages which suggests one possible mechanism for increased disease severity through ADE after vaccination.

The issue of immune enhancement seems to have been an obstacle to the development of a vaccine for Sars-cov, and both animal testing and in vitro experiments have suggested more severe disease when the infection was introduced in the presence of prior immunity, particularly neutralising antibodies to the spike protein. Given much of the Sars-cov-2 vaccine effort will expect to induce robust neutralising antibody response, this may be a cause for concern.

On the other hand, it is noted that in vitro experiments do not necessarily provide proof of ADE in vivo, and that certain ADE observations may be both virus and/or species-specific (Link). Further, challenge to sars-cov-2 vaccinated rhesus monkeys did not show signs of ADE. ADE can also be avoided through vaccine design, and various methods are described, including T cell vaccine (Link)

It is difficult to reach a firm conclusion on the matter, given the lack observable instance of ADE in sars-cov-2, but I find previous research hard to ignore and the absence of a sars-cov vaccine, whilst perhaps explained by substantially reduced need and funding, is telling. I think this is a critically important issue given how widespread vaccination is expected to be administered, and perhaps deserves more awareness.

You might want to look into the work Prof Petrovsky from Australia did on a human SARS vaccine. Funding got pulled for the human trials and the focus switched to Ebola. Prof Petrovsky developed vaccines for Ebola, MERS and an animal SARs vaccine. The comments that SARs and Covid-19 are similar and a human SARs vaccine could have saved time with a covid-19 vaccine seem significant


Professor Petrovsky, who has received about $30 million from the NIH for a range of projects, said he received a commitment from the agency to fund his SARS vaccine all the way through to human trials if it were successful at each stage of testing.

His vaccine proved successful in animals and he needed just $US1.5 million to finish the project.

But in 2010 the NIH backflipped and told researchers it would not fund any further SARS vaccine research, with the focus to switch to Ebola and Influenza.

“It was brutal. It wasn’t just ‘cut SARS funding’, it was ‘stop funding today’,” he said.

“They’d already invested a billion dollars – and what was crazy was not closing that last unanswered gap.”

The NIH did not respond to requests for comment.

Not finishing the SARs vaccine project calls into question the NIH leadership

The time frame for development was 2004 to 2010 to get to human trials makes me wonder about whats being done now to get a covid-19 vaccine.

Also given the leadership at the NIH appeared to make a really stupid strategic decision on the SARs vaccine and that vaccine makers are not legally liable if it goes wrong also makes me wonder even more about those who are being relied on to provide health leadership at the NIH.

It does seem that both the WHO and the NIH make many decisions for political and not health reasons.

Given everything I am concerned about the ADE issues versus the political pressure for a vaccine
 
Jul 2, 2020
94
4
55
There are a couple of interesting videos on vaccines the first is from CSPAN and the floor of Congress

The Congressman states he wanted the Congressional record to show what info he had and he requested a Congressional investigation

The statement in Congress is about a whistleblower from the CDC who provided 1000s of pages of information to a Congressman about his colleagues withholding and destroying data showing severely adverse results in CDC clinical trials on MMR vaccines linking it to autism

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ctLqzE3szLQ


The whistleblower information is about CDC vaccine studies later published in peer reviewed medical journals with data withheld

A news report on this is below

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VjZu0OyBAwM


Dr. William Thompson, lead scientist at the CDC, admits that the CDC manipulated and omitted data that clearly showed a causal link between the MMR vaccine and this could be as high as a 300% increase in autism in male African American children.

Robert de Niro also has concerns about the MMR vaccine and autism which he mentions in a press interview. He calls for an open investigation into the subject of vaccines, the interview centers around a documentary on vaccination being withdrawn from a film festival following pressure against the film being shown

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ7iPn39i08


The whole subject of vaccination seems very problematic

Below is a link to pro vaccine comments on a later study. One of the comments made in the link is

"Among kids with an affected sibling, those who'd received one MMR dose by age 2 were actually one-quarter less likely to be diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder, the study found. The odds were even lower among those who'd received two doses by age 5.

So is the MMR actually "protective" against autism? Probably not, King said ."


However a later Danish study finding positively for the MMR vaccine shows no postive MMR and autism sibling relationship benefit infact shows a negative and adverse relationship but does not address this (see point 7 below for full comment).

the “survival curve” shows that more boys vaccinated with MMR (with autistic siblings) are diagnosed with autism than unvaccinated boys.

Further critics point out important flaws in the recent favorable study from Denmark on the MMR vaccine by Hviid et al. (2019, Annals of Internal Medicine) entitled, “Measles, Mumps, Rubella Vaccination and Autism: A Nationwide Cohort Study”

The authors claim that their work, “strongly supports that MMR vaccination does not increase the risk for autism, does not trigger autism in susceptible children, and is not associated with clustering of autism cases after vaccination.”

However a number of key points are made by Dr Hooker who was involved in the disclosure of the data in the CDC study linking MMR and autism

The points are as follows

1. Children were notably missing from the study sample:

First and foremost is the underascertainment of autism cases within their data sample. The study authors used Denmark population registries of children born in Denmark of Danish-born mothers which should reflect the current reported autism incidence in Denmark at 1.65% (Schendel et al. 2018, JAMA). However, the autism incidence within the sample of the Hviid et al. paper is 0.98%, meaning that approximately 4,400 autistic children are missing from this study. The authors do not discuss the discrepancy in the number of cases.

2. Many of the children in the sample were too young for an autism diagnosis:

The most probable reason for the discrepancy in cases is that the sample in the Hviid et al. paper is too young to completely ascertain autism diagnoses. The average age of sample is 8.64 years with a standard deviation of 3.48 years. Age of autism diagnosis on average is reported as 7.22 years with a standard deviation of 2.86 years. Assuming that the age of diagnosis follows a standard bell curve, this would mean that 31.5% of the sample was too young to get an autism diagnosis. This could account for as many as 3,400 additional cases not included in the analysis, which would bias the outcomes to favor not finding a relationship between the MMR vaccine and autism.

3. Failure to eliminate those with autism related to genetic conditions from the sample:

In addition, individuals who were diagnosed with genetic comorbidities (known to lead to autism) after age 1 were “censored,” meaning that they were followed until the time of diagnosis, but not removed from the study. Thus, they were counted among the sample with many of them most likely autistic due to a genetic condition. These should have appropriately been eliminated from the sample.

4. Use of two (2) different MMR vaccines:

Also, two different MMR vaccines were used in this study. The GlaxoSmithKline Prolix® formulation was used from 2000 to 2007 and Merck’s MMR®II formulation was used from 2008 to 2013. Prolix® contains the Schwarz measles strain and MMR®II contains the Ender’s Edmonston measles strain. Thus, children using the Merck formulation were much too young to receive an autism diagnosis as the oldest they would be at the time of study is 6 years of age or younger. This is important for comparison to the experience in other countries, especially the U.S. where the Merck formulation was used exclusively for the entire study period.

5. Failure to control for the “dosage effect”:

In addition, the age at which Danish children in the sample received their second dose of MMR vaccine was dropped from 12 years to 4 years in 2008. This means that children born after 2004 would get two MMR vaccines prior to the average age of an autism diagnosis, whereas children born prior to 2004 would have received only one MMR vaccine. If indeed there is a “dosage effect” of the MMR (i.e., where both doses were causally related to autism), this could not be elucidated in the sample and again, this would bias the results erroneously to not find a relationship.

6. Statistical method failed to capture those children with a delayed diagnosis of autism:

The authors also used a non-transparent statistical method where “person-years” were considered following the MMR vaccine to an autism diagnosis where children who received a diagnosis soon after receiving their first MMR vaccine would be weighted more heavily than children with a delay in diagnosis. This makes no sense given that the age of autism diagnoses varies widely among populations based on access to services and severity of the autism case, among other factors. This type of method is “borrowed” from infectious disease epidemiology where an exposure directly leads to a disease state rather quickly, for example, chicken pox. However, the method has no place in evaluating chronic sequelae to vaccination which may take a period of years to receive an accurate diagnosis.

7. Vaccinated male siblings of children with autism show more autism diagnoses:

It is interesting to note the increased incidence of autism in boys with autistic siblings in the vaccinated group shown in Figure 2 of the article’s supplement. The increase towards the end of the “survival curve” shows that more boys vaccinated with MMR (with autistic siblings) are diagnosed with autism than unvaccinated boys. The difference is not statistically significant but this may be an artifact of the very small subset of boys considered in this analysis.

The study authors also cite the CDC’s Destefano et al. 2004 study which actually shows a statistically significant relationship between MMR timing and autism incidence. This is discussed further in a reanalysis of CDC’s data in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons (Hooker, 2018).

8. Conflict of interest of the study authors

It should be noted that three of the study authors are currently employed at the Statens Serum Institut which is a for-profit vaccine manufacturer in Denmark. In addition, this work was funded by a grant from the Novo Nordisk foundation. Novo Nordisk is a Danish multinational pharmaceutical manufacturer. These are two serious conflicts of interest.

The lead author, Anders Hviid was the second author on the New England Journal of Medicine MMR autism paper from 2002 (Madsen et al. 2002). This research was completed despite the fact that the study authors had never received proper ethics approval to complete the study. A detailed analysis of this is featured by Children’s Health Defense.

(Those involved with providing data and evidence to the CDC and receiving CDC grants have been charged in the USA with fraud etc and are currently fugatives)


With these issues, this paper cannot be relied upon as evidence that the MMR vaccine does not cause autism.

There are certainly a lot of unanswered questions.

Some Drs have suggested vaccines should be given in single doses, to older children and well spaced out as an alternative but these suggestions never seem to get addressed from a medical point of view.

Also any concerns expressed about compounds used in vaccines get labelled as anti vax, rather than as seeking a better understanding of what is going on despite some serious research indicating that injecting these compounds may result in these not being expelled from the human body (unlike consuming them orally)

Some open debate and research would be helpful, rather than the current format of seemingly labelling all questions as being just anti vaxers causing trouble

All medicine moves forward with technology and understanding so hopefully vaccines can as well.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY