Vaccine Coverup In UK?

Discussion in 'Vaccines' started by haidut, Sep 17, 2015.

  1. Salty

    Salty Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    43
    Folder: JCVI Meeting (2010-2011)
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Salty

    Salty Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    43
    Folder: SIDS only (1985)
     

    Attached Files:

  3. Salty

    Salty Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    43
    That's everything. Please post for discussion if anyone finds anything particularly interesting among these documents.
     
  4. OP
    haidut

    haidut Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    10,913
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA / Europe
    Well, I have just looked at your last post with the PDF about discouraging research on SIDS-vaccine connection and I am already suspicious. It says that it is not a good idea do discuss the connection b/c it will become a war of numbers that NHS cannot win. Well, how come? If the there is no connection then the numbers should show that, right? If NHS cannot win the war on numbers then it means at the very least there is enough data to support the connection so a conclusion cannot be drawn. In most countries when there is serious doubt over safety, even if it is far from definitive, the drug is usually stopped or not approved to begin with.
     
  5. Salty

    Salty Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    43
    Yes, but vaccines are protected like no other pharmaceutical product. And no one seems to want to do a true placebo trial of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated, because its considered unethical (a bit of a catch-22 in vaccine safety: a vaccine is put in general use before full population effects can be really known - assuming an effect truly is rare, but once signals arise, its "unethical" to withhold the vaccine to do a true double-blind placebo trial so its not possible to ascertain causation).

    Back to that specific document, I was personally surprised by "Section 3a. The hypothesis that immunization may cause SIDS" - whoever wrote this was apparently highly uninformed as he says the SIDS/immunization hypothesis arose in 1985 and was never mentioned before that. Thats not historically accurate:

    - Death shortly following the DPT shot in particular was mentioned as far back as 1933 (Madsen-1933-Vaccination against whooping cough) (http://www.avn.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/J-Am-Med-Assoc-1933-MADSEN-187-8.pdf) Granted, the two cases noted here were in newborns, after this the DPT shot was no longer given before 2 months. Plus, the term SIDS hadn't been coined yet.

    - There was a cluster of SIDS cases after a particular lot of Wyeth DPT in 1979 in Tennesee that caused quite a stir. From the very pro-vaccine book, "Vaccine" by Arthur Allen we learn that Wyeth took precautions to prevent such clustering by no longer shipping "more than 2,000 vials at a time to the same location. With no effective adverse event monitoring system in place, 'hot lots' - real or coincidental - would be invisible." The author makes no comment on the ethics of such a strategic move.

    - William C. Torch, MD, presented a study at the 34th Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Neurology in 1982 on a cluster of SIDS cases following DPT. I can't get a hold of the original study ("Diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus (DPT) immunization: a potential cause of the sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS)"), but this too caused quite a scandal within the FDA, with Torch being "vigorously criticized" for alarming the public.

    Point being, this should not have been something new in 1985 and there were already enough concerns at the time to warrant further investigation.
     
  6. OP
    haidut

    haidut Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    10,913
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA / Europe
    So, JCVI knew about all of these issues and actually hid it from the public?
    I can't find the DPT/SIDS study you mentioned, but here is one that references it and also found an increase in mortality due to DPT.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1647245/

    Here is something else I found while searching for that study:
    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Anti- ... t/Archive1

    "...In 1993, during a pertussis outbreak, 82 percent of children stricken with the disease had received regular doses of the vaccine. Susceptibility to pertussis 12 years after full vaccination may be as high as 95 percent. One study has shown a strong correlation between the DPT vaccination and a dramatic increase in apnea and hypopnea episodes. Another study noted a bimodal increase in the occurrence of SIDS at two and four months of age, when the DPT shots are usually administered. Raising eyebrows: While correlation does not in itself establish causation, it neither disestablishes causation."
     
  7. Salty

    Salty Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    43
    I can't say the JCVI knew, but surely they should have (or had) access to the same info as the CDC/FDA and should be aware whenever a publicized immunization related scandal is happening anywhere in the world. So, no, I wouldn't say they were hiding anything, just that whoever wrote that particular paragraph appeared uniformed. Which makes you wonder how much else they don't know.

    Yes, there are other studies that show some relationship between DPT and SIDS, though most chalk it up to correlation due to the timing (since SIDS and routine immunization happen at roughly the same times). A more recent example from 2005 in Germany (with a hexavalent vaccine containing pertussis): http://www.researchgate.net/profile/And ... 000000.pdf

    That second quote about the bimodal increase is a reference to the Torch paper. Here is how it is phrased in the book "A Shot in the Dark" by Harris Coulter, since I don't have the actual paper: "He [Torch] found that SIDS frequencies peaked at age two months in the non-DPT group and had a biphasic peak occurrence at two and four months in the DPT group." Torch is quoted further on to say that, "Cot death occurred maximally in the fall/winter season in the non-DPT group, but was nonseasonal in the DPT group." I would say that should raise some eyebrows.

    The history of pertussis vaccine in particular is long and sordid. Its hard to go into all the details here. For something more current that relates to all this I would strongly recommend looking into the work of Peter Aaby and Christine Stall Benn of the Bandim Health Project (http://www.bandim.org/Research/Non%20sp ... fects.aspx). They have brought to light the notion of "non-specific effects of vaccines," meaning vaccines have documented effects, both good and bad, other than inducing immunity to any particular pathogen as well as positive and negative effects on overall survival. On the bad, they have the most data on DPT, which to me helps validate a lot of the historical concerns associated with that particular vaccine. Here are two good examples:

    1. "Testing the hypothesis that diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine has negative non-specific and sex-differential effects on child survival in high-mortality countries" (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22619263)

    2. "A small jab - a big effect: nonspecific immunomodulation by vaccines" (http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lii ... 39954c.pdf)

    A key quote from this second article: "Although tens of thousands of studies assessing disease- specific, antibody-inducing effects of vaccines have been conducted, most people have not examined whether vaccines have nonspecific effects because current perception excludes such effects [emphasis mine]. It is noteworthy that there are no data that contradict the claim that vaccines have nonspecific effects, and the few researchers who have looked for them have found them. Why do nonspecific effects of vaccines continue to be overlooked in spite of increasing evidence? The concept that vaccines have nonspecific effects – sometimes detrimental – is a major issue with important and to some extent unpredictable consequences for public health. However, this should not be an argument for ignoring very important biological phenomena. Further epidemiological and immunological studies are clearly warranted."

    Amen. (and sorry for the long post)
     
  8. Salty

    Salty Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    43
    One more note on this topic, that brings a Peat angle into all this:

    "Could Serotonin Play a Role in Sudden Infant Death?"
    (http://www.nature.com/pr/journal/v65/n2 ... 0926a.html)

    From the article:
    "The triple-risk model for the pathogenesis of SIDS proposed by Kinney and coworkers (2) proposes that sudden death results when three risk factors occur simultaneously: 1) an underlying vulnerability; 2) a critical period for homeostatic control; and 3) an exogenous stressor. The underlying vulnerability remains latent until the infant enters a critical developmental period (the first 6 mo of life when 90% of SIDS deaths occur) and is exposed to an exogenous stressor."

    In regards to serotonin it says,
    " Immunohistochemical analysis revealed an increased number of serotonin neurons, as well as an increase in the fraction of serotonin neurons showing an immature, granular cell morphology suggesting a failure or delay in the maturation of these neurons in SIDS infants."

    Haidut, can you help me understand if this means the infants had increased serotonin? I'm trying to understand exactly what they're saying here.

    I would love to see a study that looks at the full metabolic effects of vaccination, and not just whether or not antibody is induced - the broader nonspecific effects as discussed above. Could a vaccine be "an exogenous stressor"? They certainly force an exaggerated immune response through the use of toxic adjuvants (aluminum mostly), during an immunologically vulnerable age.
     
  9. jaa

    jaa Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2012
    Messages:
    992
    Great work thanks Salty!
     
  10. OP
    haidut

    haidut Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    10,913
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA / Europe
    Increased number of serotonin neurons in general would mean more serotonin synthesis. These are the neurons that synthesize all the serotonin present in the brain via the TPH-1 enzyme using available tryptophan. So, yes, it does seem like serotonin would be increased in SIDS infants.
    I am not sure what the "immature, granular cell morphology" would result in, but serotonergic neurons have a feedback mechanism, so maybe failure in maturation would mean they keep synthesizing serotonin even if it is already high. This reminds me of the fact the high serotonin can cause sudden bronchospasms in adults as well, in addition to fibrosis of the lungs. So, in small children with under-developed lungs, such bronchospasms can be deadly.
     
  11. Salty

    Salty Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    43
    Thank you for the explanation, Haidut :hattip . You are much more well versed in endocrinology than I. This thread has inspired me to look more into the potential metabolic effects of vaccines. I haven't found a whole lot so far other than some old studies on pertussis toxin containing vaccines that dramatically increase sensitivity to histamine and, guess what... serotonin, which may or may not have any relationship with the above. I'm still trying to make some sense of this and related papers, but for any one else interested here is a link and quick quote:

    The altered reactivity of mice after inoculation with Bordetella pertussis vaccine. (Kind, 1958):

    “For many years the effects of bacterial inoculations have been described chiefly in terms of the antibody response of the host. Recent investigations [1958! - emphasis mine], however, have indicated that nonspecific changes in resistance to infection can follow the injection of various bacterial products into a suitable animal. Perhaps the most unusual and most dramatic modifications of response occur in mice injected with Bordatella pertussis vaccine. These animals become exceedingly susceptible to the lethal effects of histamine, serotonin, anaphylaxis, and gram-negative bacterial vaccines as well as to other agents and conditions..."

    The only human study (abstract) I have found so far is one with children from 1974 that also noted a "remarkable increase" in histamine sensitivity, most marked in day 5-7 post DPT immunization. The abstract makes no mention of any increase in sensitivity to serotonin.

    Studies of adrenergic mechanisms inrelation to histamine sensitivity in children immunized with Bordetella pertussis vaccine (Sen, 1974)

    A lot of the older studies ask if such effects also occur in humans (and at what metabolic cost), but it seems like research into such seemingly essential questions ran dry long ago. Anyhow, interesting stuff to ponder.
     
  12. OP
    haidut

    haidut Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    10,913
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA / Europe
    In that case, for people who vaccinate their children (or themselves) taking some Benadryl or even cyproheptadine should mitigate a lot of the dangerous side effects.
    Thanks for digging this up.
     
  13. Salty

    Salty Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    43
    Perhaps. That may be of some value in mitigating potential allergy issues implicated with vaccination. Though the histamine sensitization is only one of the effects of pertussis toxin containing vaccines noted in this and related papers, so not sure how much effect an antihistamine would have on the other effects (like serotonin sensitivity). Plus, it may be that these specific effects apply only to pertussis and not other vaccines.

    Whats desperately needed, imo, are studies that look at the full short- and long- term metabolic effects of each vaccine individually as well as in all the combinations given (any synergistic effects?). Not to mention all the variance introduced by the many different manufacturing processes by all the major vaccine producers.
     
  14. OP
    haidut

    haidut Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    10,913
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA / Europe
    Cyproheptadine is quite broadly protective, and it blocks serotonin effects among other things. Serotonin is immunosuppressive, so if the vaccines are serotonergic then they may negate their own purpose for existence.
     
Loading...