Draft revu of your recent article in Popular Mechanice, 'As Diseases Make Comeback, Why Aren't All Kids Vaccinated?'

[Guest guest]

Glenn Harlan Reynolds,

Attached is a draft review of your " August "

2008 issue article in Popular Mechanics

Magazine entitled:

'As Diseases Make Comeback, Why Aren't All

Kids Vaccinated' that you hopefully has

addressed the issues you raised with the

facts about measles, pertussis and polio,

which you seem to have overlooked.

To assured you receive a true copy of the

review, a content-extractable " pdf " file

is attached to this email.

Should you require a " .doc " file, then

please send mw an email with:

" ADMCW_PMM "

in the subject line and the reason

you require it in the body of the

email.

Free use is granted to you PROVIDED the

text is not taken out of context AND the

author and author's organization are

credited for the in-context remarks used.

*************************************************

FAIR USE NOTICE: The following review contains

quotations from copyrighted (©) material the

use of which has not been specifically authorized

by the copyright owner. Such material is made

available for educational purposes, to advance

reader's understanding of human rights, democracy,

scientific, moral, ethical, social justice and

other issues. It is believed that the author's

quoted statements are a 'fair use' of this copy-

righted material as provided for in Title 17

U.S.C. section 107 of the US intellectual property

law. This material is being distributed without

profit.

**************************************************

Should you or anyone reading this draft find

ny significant factual error for which you have

published substantiating documents, please submit

that information to this reviewer so that he can

improve his understanding of factual reality and

appropriately revise his views and the final

review.

If you do not accept attachments, the rough

text of the body of this draft review and a

postscript reflecting a recent event in the

Omnibus Autism Proceeding is as follows:

A Review of: " As Diseases Make Comeback, Why

Aren't All Kids Vaccinated "

Since vaccine apologists, including this

writer, are able to continually present

their views, this reviewer, an advocate

for: a) the safening of vaccines by banning

the use of Thimerosal, or any other mercury

compound, in the manufacture of any medicine

and vaccine safety as well as for: c)

government-supported vaccination programs

only for vaccines that have been proven to

be safe and medically cost-effective, will

address both the " As Diseases Make Comeback "

and the " Why Aren't All Kids Vaccinated? "

issues in this review from these viewpoints.

Consequently, this review presents factual

information that exposes the weaknesses in,

and/or exposes the apparent falseness of,

the broad generalizations framed in the

article's title.

Lest any take this reviewer's remarks as

those of someone who is anti-vaccine,

this reviewer again reiterates that, given

the scientific information available, he

currently supports national vaccination

programs for those vaccines that have

truly been proven to be both generally

safe and medically cost-effective, pro-

vided the individual parent's constitu-

tional right to " due process of law " is

not abridged or ignored.

Having made his position as an advocate

for:

a. Banning the use of mercury compounds

in medicine to safen vaccines,

b. Vaccine safety, and

c. Medically cost-effective vaccines

clear, this reviewer will now assess the

statements made by the writer of the

article, " As Diseases Make Comeback, Why

Aren't All Kids Vaccinated? "

[Note: The writer's remarks will be quoted

using the e-mail right caret ( " > " ) to

delineate each quoted passage and the

reviewer's assessments thereof follows

each quoted passage.]

>

>The measles, whooping cough and even polio

>have returned. Why? Because of a new breed

>of vaccine deniers who are ignoring cam-

>paigns for awareness, and ultimately might

>live shorter-not longer-lives.

>

This reviewer is amazed by either:

a. The naiveté, or

b. The knowing disregard of reality,

which the writer's first statement,

" measles, whooping cough and even polio

have returned " ,

displays.

This is the case because measles and

whooping cough have never left the

United States of America.

Further, there is no apparent trend

indicating that polio has returned

because:

a. The single case of paralytic polio

that was found in 2005 was a live-

oral-polio-vaccine-associated case

and

b. The 4 non-paralytic polio cases,

found in a Minnesota cluster,

coincidentally in 2005, were polio-

vaccine-derived infections,

as the CDC's reporting shows (see: Summary

of Notifiable Diseases - U.S. 2005 [MMWR

2007 March 30; 54(53): 2-92; " Poliomyelitis,

Paralytic " ]).

Thus, polio has not returned.

For measles, every year we inoculate about

8-plus million children (currently, about

4-plus million at 12-15 months [1st dose]

and about another 4-plus million at 4-6 years

[2nd dose] of age) mostly with Merck's MMR®

II, a man-made live-virus measles, mumps and

rubella vaccine.

In the process, these inoculations create

about 8-plus million uncounted cases of man-

made measles, mumps and rubella infections

annually.

Of these 8-plus million uncounted vaccine

measles infections, some become " clinical "

cases, requiring medical intervention, and

cause serious adversities, including death,

in some small percentage of those infected.

In addition to these uncounted vaccine-measles

cases, there were other reported cases of

measles each year, based on the paragraphs

that follow:

Notifiable Measles Cases and Deaths in the USA

- 2002-2006

For example for the 5-year period from 2002

through 2006, the Center for Disease Control

and Prevention (CDC) summary information [1]

reported the following in Morbidity and

Mortality Weekly Reporter (MMWR), with

CAPITALIZATION added emphasis:

[1] For those who are NOT familiar with

disease reporting jargon, an " outbreak "

is supposed to be 3 or more cases in

a given location, although, in 2008,

the CDC has apparently ignored this

in Arkansas where 2 cases were reported

as an outbreak.

1. Summary of Notifiable Diseases - U.S.

2002 (MMWR 2004 April 30; 51(53): 1-84).

" Measles

A record low of 44 CONFIRMED MEASLES CASES

was reported in 2002, with cases occurring

in 17 states. Eighteen cases were interna-

tionally imported, and exposure to these

cases resulted in 15 additional cases.

Three other cases had only virologic evidence

of importation (i.e., genotypic analysis of

measles viruses indicated an imported source).

THE REMAINING EIGHT CASES WERE CLASSIFIED AS

UNKNOWN SOURCE CASES BECAUSE NO LINK TO

IMPORTATION WAS DETECTED. " [18%] " The majority

of cases were either in infants aged <12 months

(18 cases) or persons aged >20 years (19 cases);

only three cases occurred among children aged

<5 years, and four cases among those aged 5--19

years. Three outbreaks, ranging in size from 3

to 13 cases, accounted for 43% of cases (n=19).

IN TWO OF THESE OUTBREAKS, THE SOURCE CASES

WERE IMPORTED. "

2. Summary of Notifiable Diseases - U.S. 2003

(MMWR 2005 April 22; 52(54): 1-85).

" Measles

A total of 56 CONFIRMED MEASLES CASES, two of

them fatal, were reported during 2003 by 15

states. Of the 56 cases, 24 were international-

ly imported, and 19 resulted from exposure

to persons with imported infections. In two

other cases, virologic evidence indicated an

imported source. THE SOURCES FOR THE REMAINING

11 CASES WERE CLASSIFIED AS UNKNOWN because no

link to importation was detected. " [20%]

" Three outbreaks occurred in 2003 (size range:

3--12 cases) (1,2). The 12-case outbreak was

in Hawaii and included persons aged 3 months--

21 years; this outbreak began simultaneously

with a measles outbreak in the Republic of the

Marshall Islands, which resulted in 826 cases

and three deaths (3).

1. CDC. Epidemiology of measles---United

States, 2001-2003. MMWR 2004:53:713-5.

2. CDC. Measles, mumps, and rubella--vaccine

use and strategies for elimination of

measles, rubella, congenital rubella

syndrome and control of mumps: recommen-

dations of the Advisory Committee on

Immunization Practices (ACIP). MMWR 1998;

47(No. RR-8).

3. CDC. Measles epidemic---Majuro Atoll,

Republic of the Marshall Islands, July

13--September 13, 2003. MMWR 2003;52:

888-9. "

3. Summary of Notifiable Diseases - U.S. 2004

(MMWR 2006 June 16; 53(53): 1-79).

" Measles

During 2004, the number of confirmed cases

of measles reported in the United States was

a record low. Cases occurred in 13 states; 27

cases were internationally imported and resul-

ted in six secondary cases. FOR FOUR CASES,

THE SOURCES ARE CLASSIFIED AS UNKNOWN because

no link to importation could be detected. "

[15% OF 37 CASES] " The majority of infected

persons were aged <5 years. Two outbreaks

occurred, both from imported sources. In one

outbreak that involved nine persons, measles

occurred among nine adopted children from China;

a secondary case occurred in an unvaccinated

U.S. resident. In a second outbreak that

involved three persons, an unvaccinated U.S.

resident aged 19 years with a nonmedical

exemption returned to the United States from

India while infectious (1,2). Two secondary

cases resulted, including one in an airline

passenger who was seated directly beside the

index patient. Measles can be prevented by

adhering to recommendations for vaccination,

including guidelines for travelers (3,4).

1. Dayan GH, Ortega- IR, LeBaron CW.

The cost of containing one case of mea-

sles: the economic impact on the public

health infrastructure, Iowa, 2004.

Pediatrics 2005;116:1-4.

2. CDC. Imported measles case associated

with nonmedical vaccine exemption---Iowa,

March 2004. MMWR 2004;53:244-6.

3. CDC. Preventable measles among U.S.

residents, 2001--2004. MMWR 2005;54;

817-20.

4. CDC. Measles, mumps, and rubella---vac-

cine use and strategies for elimination

of measles, rubella, and congenital

rubella syndrome and control of mumps:

recommendations of the Advisory Committee

on Immunization practices (ACIP). MMWR 1998;

47(No. RR-8): 38--9. "

4. Summary of Notifiable Diseases - U.S. 2005

(MMWR 2007 March 30; 54(53): 2-92).

" Measles

Nearly all of confirmed measles cases reported

in 2005 " [66] " were import-associated. " [ " 32 - 23 "

= 9* (CBS News: ATLANTA, Dec. 21, 2006, " Measles

Outbreak Traced To One Person Girl Who Visited

Romania Is Linked To Largest U.S. Measles Outbreak

In A Decade " ); 14%] " Half of all cases occurred

among children aged 5--19 years. Overall measles

morbidity increased 79% after a record low number

of cases in 2004. The increase was the result

primarily of an outbreak in Indiana among a group

of members of a single church who had not been

vaccinated for measles. This outbreak was the

largest outbreak in the United States since 1996

and the largest in Indiana since 1990. The source

of the outbreak was an unvaccinated U.S. resident

who had acquired measles infection while traveling

in Romania (1). The majority of all cases among U.S.

residents can be prevented by following current

recommendations for vaccination, including specific

guidelines for travelers (2,3). Although the

elimination of endemic measles in the United States

has been achieved, and population immunity remains

high (4), an outbreak can occur when measles is

introduced into a susceptible group. Indiana public

health officials estimated that the cost of contain-

ing the disease was approximately $168,000 (5). "

* The probable NUMBER OF " SOURCES ARE CLASSIFIED

AS UNKNOWN " cases.

" 1. CDC. Import-associated measles outbreak---

Indiana, May--June 2005. MMWR 2005;54:1073--5.

2. CDC. Preventable measles among U.S. residents,

2001--2004. MMWR 2005;54:817--20.

3. CDC. Measles, mumps, and rubella---vaccine use

and strategies for elimination of measles,

rubella, and congenital rubella syndrome and

control of mumps: recommendations of the

advisory committee on immunization practices

(ACIP). MMWR 1998;47(No. RR-8).

4. Hutchins SS, Bellini WJ, Coronado V, et al.

Population immunity to measles in the United

States. J Infect Dis 2004;189(Suppl 1):

S91--7.

5. AA, Staggs W, Dayan G, et al. Impli-

cations of a 2005 measles outbreak in Indiana

for sustained elimination of measles in the

United States. N Engl J Med 2006;355:447--55. "

5. Summary of Notifiable Diseases - U.S. 2006

(MMWR 2008 March 21; 55(53): 1-94).

" Measles

In 2006, the Council of State and Territorial

Epidemiologists (CSTE) approved a modified

case classification for measles, simultaneous-

ly with those for rubella and congenital

rubella syndrome (1). Because measles is no

longer endemic in the United States, its

future epidemiology in the U.S. will reflect

its global epidemiology. The modification

of the case classification clearly identi-

fies the origin of each case and will help

define the impact of imported cases on the

epidemiology of measles in the United States.

As in recent years, 95% of confirmed measles

cases " [55] " reported during 2006 were

import-associated. Of these, 31 cases were

internationally imported, 20 resulted from

exposure to persons with imported infections,

and in one case, virologic evidence indicated

an imported source. The SOURCES FOR THE RE-

MAINING THREE CASES WERE VLASSIFIED AS UNKNOWN

because no link to importation was detected. "

[5.4%] " Nearly half of all cases occurred among

adults aged 20--39 years, and 20% occurred in

adults aged >40 years. Four outbreaks occurred

during 2006 (size range: 3--18 cases), all

from imported sources. Three imported cases

occurred in each of two outbreaks, with no

secondary transmission. In another outbreak;

one imported case and two secondary cases

occurred in an immigrant community. In the

fourth outbreak, 18 cases occurred among persons

aged 25--46 years, most of whom had unknown

vaccination histories. The primary exposure

setting for this outbreak was a large office

building and nearby businesses. Five case-

patients were foreign born, including the

index case-patient, who had arrived in the

United States 9 days before onset of symptoms.

Measles can be prevented by adhering to

recommendations for vaccination, including

guidelines for travelers (2,3). Although the

elimination of endemic measles in the United

States has been achieved, and population

immunity remains high (4), an outbreak can

occur when measles is introduced into a

susceptible group, often at significant cost

to control (5).

1. Council of State and Territorial Epidemi-

ologists. Revision of measles, rubella,

and congenital rubella syndrome case

classifications as part of elimination

goals in the United States. Position

statement 2006-ID-16. Available at

http://www.cste.org/position%20statements/searchbyyear2006.asp.

2. CDC. Preventable measles among U.S.

residents, 2001--2004. MMWR 2005;54:

817-20.

3. CDC. Measles, mumps, and rubella---

vaccine use and strategies for elimi-

nation of measles, rubella, and con-

genital rubella syndrome and control

of mumps: recommendations of the

Advisory Committee On Immunization

Practices (ACIP). MMWR 1998;47(No.

RR-8).

4. Hutchins SS, Bellini W, Coronado V,

et al. Population immunity to measles

in the United States. J Infect Dis

2004;189(Suppl 1):S91-S97.

5. AA, Staggs W, Dayan G, et al.

Implications of a 2005 measles out-

break in Indiana for sustained elimi-

nation of measles in the United

States. N Engl J Med 2006;355: 447-55. "

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5553a1.htm

Reviewer's Table 1. Measles Data

2002-2006

Year Measles N (%) of Cases Measles

Cases with an unas- Deaths

signed source

2002 44 8 (18) 0

2003 56 11 (20) 2

2004 37 4 (15) 0

2005 66 9 (14) 0

2006 55 3 ( 5.4) 0

Average 51.6 7 (13.5) ----

Based on the measles cases, as summarized

in Reviewer's Table 1, there is no evi-

dence of a significant increasing time-

trend in measles cases that would be

needed to support a claim that measles

has returned.

Thus, the CDC's data demonstrates that

measles has neither left the USA nor

does this disease appear to have re-

turned.

Turning to the man-made measles-virus

infections, based on a simple category

search of the Vaccine Adverse Event

Reporting System (VAERS) database by

a knowledgeable epidemiologist,

a knowledgeable epidemiologist,

http://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D8;jsessionid=3B462407EBBE8A562

7809C...,

this reviewer reports the results shown

in Reviewer's Table 2 below.

In addition, since: a) the reporting to

VAERS is strictly voluntary, studies

on the percentage of adverse events that

are reported to the U.S. Center for

Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

have found that there was significant

underreporting, and c) " less than 10% "

is the general level of reporting used

by many researchers when estimating the

actual level of the adverse events

reported in VAERS, this reviewer has

simply multiplied the results found by

10 to get his guestimated numbers of

total adverse events occurring in a

given year and entered them in braces,

" [ ] " , in Reviewer's Table 2, in a

column that is labeled " 'Guestimated'

Total Count " .

Reviewing the reported data for

" measles " in VAERS, this reviewer can

only wonder why, at a minimum, the CDC

is not required to report all VAERS

measles-vaccine deaths as a notifiable

death and all unique severe adverse

events as a measles case unless the

investigation of the VAERS report

proves that the measles virus was not

a causal factor - perhaps in separate

columns labeled " Measles-vaccine-

related measles Deaths " and " Measles-

vaccine-related Cases " , respectively.

Beyond that, this reviewer has only

presented the reported information

and his guestimated total count data:

· To prove the validity of this

reviewer's claim that measles

have never left America and

· As food for thought for those

who read this review to ponder.

In conclusion, all of the information

provided here demonstrates that measles

has never left and is not, based on

this data, returning (increasing at a

significant rate).

Reviewer's Table 2. VAERS Search -

Any Measles Vaccine & Adverse Reports

By Category 2002-2006

Year Event Count " Guesti-

Vac- Category mated "

cina- Total

ted Count

2002 Death 8 [80]

Life Threatening 41 [410]

Permanent Disability 41 [410]

Hospitalized 143 [1,430]

Hospitalized, 1 [10]

Prolonged

Emergency Room 1,502 [15,020]

Not Serious 2,490 -----

2003 Death 5 [50]

Life Threatening 30 [300]

Permanent Disability 36 [360]

Hospitalized 143 [1,430]

Hospitalized, 6 [60]

Prolonged

Emergency Room 1,545 [15,450]

Not Serious 3,482 -----

2004 Death 5 [50]

Life Threatening 43 [430]

Permanent Disability 30 [300]

Hospitalized 132 [1320]

Hospitalized, 6 [60]

Prolonged

Emergency Room 1,483 [14,830]

Not Serious 3,358 -----

2005 Death 6 [60]

Life Threatening 35 [350]

Permanent Disability 17 [170]

Hospitalized 122 [1,220]

Hospitalized, 6 [60]

Prolonged

Emergency Room 1,347 [13,470]

Not Serious 3,021 -----

2006 Death 8 [80]

Life Threatening 42 [420]

Permanent Disability 30 [300]

Hospitalized 165 [1,650]

Hospitalized, 8 [80]

Prolonged

Emergency Room 1,443 [14,430]

Not Serious 3,001 -----

Notifiable Whooping Cough (Pertussis)

Cases and Deaths in the USA -

2002-2006

For the 5-year period from 2002 through 2006,

the Center for Disease Control and Prevention

(CDC) summary information reported the fol-

lowing in Morbidity and Mortality Weekly

Reporter (MMWR), with CAPITALIZATION added

for emphasis:

1. Summary of Notifiable Diseases - U.S. 2002

(MMWR 2004 April 30; 51(53): 1-84).

" Pertussis

DURING 2002, 9,771 CASES OF PERTUSSIS WERE

REPORTED (rate: 3.4/100,000), the highest

number of reported cases since 1964. Of

these cases, 21% OCCURED AMONG INFANTS AGED

<6 MONTHS (108.8/100,000), who were too

young to have received the first 3 of the

5 doses of diphtheria and tetanus toxoids

and acellular pertussis (DTaP) vaccine

recommended by age 6; 3% occurred among

children aged 6--11 months (15.4/100,000);

14% among children aged 1--4 years (8.9/

100,000);

10% among children aged 5--9 years (4.8/

100,000);

29% among persons aged 10--19 years (7.0/

100,000);

and 23% among persons aged >20 years (1.2/

100,000).

Since 1995, the coverage rate with >3 doses

of pertussis vaccine has been >94% among

U.S. children aged 19--35 months (1). Since

1980, the number of reported cases of per-

tussis in infants aged <6 months and in

adolescents and adults has increased in

some states (2). The reasons for this in-

crease are unknown but could include in-

creased awareness of pertussis among health-

care providers, better reporting of cases

to health departments (3), and possibly an

increase in circulating Bordetella pertussis.

The true number of pertussis cases in ado-

lescents and adults has likely been under-

reported because the pertussis cough is not

pathognomonic for pertussis, persons may not

seek medical care for a cough illness, and

(if medical care is sought) diagnostic tests

are not sufficiently sensitive. Adolescents

and adults can become susceptible to disease

WHEN VACCINE-INDUCED IMMUNITY WANES, APPROX-

IMATELY 5--10 YEARS AFTER PERTUSSIS VACCINA-

TION. The incidence of reported pertussis

among children aged 7 months to 9 years has

been relatively stable, suggesting protection

against pertussis by routine vaccination ac-

cording to the recommended schedule.

1. CDC. National, state, and urban area vac-

cination levels among children aged 19--

35 months---United States, 2002. MMWR

2003;52:728--32.

2. CDC. Pertussis---United States, 1997--

2000. MMWR 2002;51:73--6.

3. Cherry JD. The science and fiction of

the " resurgence " of pertussis.

Pediatrics 2003;112:405--6. "

2. Summary of Notifiable Diseases - U.S. 2003

(MMWR 2005 April 22; 52(54): 1-85).

" Pertussis

DURING 2003, a total of 11,647 CASES OF

PERTUSSIS WERE REPORTED (incidence: 4.0

per 100,000 population), the highest num-

ber of reported cases since 1964. Of the

cases for which age was reported, 1,982

(17%) OCCURRED AMONG INFANTS AGED <6

MONTHS, who were too young to have re-

ceived the first 3 of the 5 doses of

diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and acel-

lular pertussis (DTaP) vaccine recommended

by age 6 years. This age group had the

highest reported incidence (103.1 per

100,000 population). Among the other

pertussis cases, 235 occurred among chil-

dren aged 6--11 months (12.2 per 100,000);

1,138 among children aged 1--4 years (7.5

per 100,000); 852 among children aged 5--

9 years (4.4 per 100,000); 4,540 among

persons aged 10--19 years (11.1 per 100,000);

and 2,854 among persons aged >20 years

(1.4 per 100,000).

Pertussis continues to cause morbidity in

the United States despite high coverage

levels for childhood pertussis vaccine.

The incidence of reported pertussis has

increased from 2.5 per 100,000 population

in 1993 to 4.0 per 100,000 in 2003. How

much of this increase is caused by in-

creased recognition and better reporting

of cases is unclear (1,2). Although in-

fants have the highest morbidity asso-

ciated with pertussis (during the 1990s,

approximately 18,500 cases were reported

among infants, of whom 67% were hospital-

ized [3]), adolescents now account for

the majority of reported cases. Adoles-

cents and adults can become susceptible

to disease when vaccine-induced immunity

wanes, approximately 5--10 years after

pertussis vaccination (2).

The actual number of pertussis cases

(especially among adolescents and adults)

continues to be substantially underre-

ported because the pertussis cough ill-

ness resembles other conditions, infec-

ted persons might not seek medical care,

and availability of reliable diagnostic

tests is limited. Culture for Bordetella

pertussis is highly specific but has low

sensitivity. Polymerase chain reaction

is not standardized, and its use has led

to overdiagnosis of pertussis during cer-

tain outbreaks (4). New strategies are

needed to reduce the burden of pertussis

disease in the United States; pertussis

vaccines for adolescents and adults are

under review by the Food and Drug Admin-

istration.

1. CDC. Pertussis---United States,

1997--2000. MMWR 2002;51:73--6.

2. Guris D, Strebel PM, Bardenheier B

et al. Changing epidemiology of

pertussis in the United States:

increased reported incidence among

adolescents and adults, 1990--1996.

Clin Infect Dis 1999;28:1230--7.

3. Tanaka M, Vitek CR, Pascual B et al.

Trends in pertussis among infants

in the United States, 1980--1999.

JAMA 2003;290:2968--75.

4. Lievano FA, Reynolds MA, Waring AL,

et al. Issues associated with and

recommendations for using PCR to

detect outbreaks of pertussis. J

Clin Microbiol 2002;40:2801--5. "

3. Summary of Notifiable Diseases - U.S. 2004

(MMWR 2006 June 16; 53(53): 1-79).

" Pertussis

In 2004, incidence of reported pertussis

increased for the third year in a row, to

8.9 cases per 100,000 population, more

than twice the rate reported in 2003. "

[25,827 CASES] " The number of cases was

the highest reported since 1959. Of the

cases for which age was reported, 10% OC-

CURRED AMONG INFANTSs aged <6 MONTHS who

were too young to have received the first

3 of the 5 doses of diphtheria and teta-

nus toxoids and acellular pertussis (DTaP)

vaccine recommended by age 6 years. This

age group had the highest reported rate

(136.5 per 100,000 population). Among ol-

der infants aged 6--11 months, the rate

was 31.8 per 100,000. Among older chil-

dren and adults, rates were 16.9 among

children aged 1--4 years, 12.6 among

children aged 5--9 years, 23.9 among

children and adolescents aged 10--19

years, and 3.5 among adults aged >20

years.

Pertussis continues to cause morbidity in

the United States despite high coverage

levels for childhood pertussis vaccine.

During 1994--2004, the reported pertussis

rate per 100,000 population increased from

1.8 to 8.9. How much of this increase re-

flects greater recognition and better re-

porting of cases is unclear (1,2). Al-

though infants have the highest morbidity

associated with pertussis, adolescents

and adults now account for the majority

(67%) of reported cases. They become

susceptible to disease when vaccine-in-

duced immunity wanes, approximately 5--10

years after pertussis vaccination (2).

Two tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria

toxoid and acellular pertussis vaccine,

adsorbed (Tdap) products were licensed by

the Food and Drug Administration in 2005

as single-dose booster vaccines to pro-

vide protection against tetanus, diph-

theria, and pertussis. CDC's Advisory

Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)

recommends the routine use of Tdap vac-

cines among adolescents aged 11--18 years

in place of tetanus and diphtheria toxoids

(Td) vaccines (3). ACIP also has made a

provisional recommendation that adults

aged 19--64 years receive a single dose of

Tdap to replace the next dose (4). The

primary objective of administering the

adolescent pertussis booster is to protect

adolescents and adults against pertussis.

Strategies for use of Tdap in adults are

under review.

1. CDC. Pertussis---United States, 1997--

2000. MMWR 2002;51:73--6.

2. Guris D, Strebel PM, Bardenheier B,

et al. Changing epidemiology of per-

tussis in the United States: increased

reported incidence among adolescents

and adults, 1990--1996. Clin Infect Dis

1999;28:1230--7.

3. CDC. Preventing tetanus, diphtheria,

and pertussis among adolescents; use of

tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria tox-

oid and acellular pertussis vaccines;

recommendations of the Advisory Commit-

tee on Immunization Practices (ACIP).

MMWR 2006;55(No. RR-3):1--45.

4. CDC. ACIP votes to recommend use of

combined tetanus, diphtheria, and per-

tussis vaccine for adults. Atlanta, GA:

US Department of Health and Human Ser-

vices, CDC; 2005. Available at

http://wwwdev.cdc.gov/nip/vaccine/tdap/tdap-adult-recs.pdf. "

4. Summary of Notifiable Diseases - U.S. 2005

(MMWR 2007 March 30; 54(53): 2-92).

" Pertussis

In 2005, incidence of reported pertussis

remained stable at 8.7 cases per 100,000

population after doubling during 2003--2004. "

[25,616 CASES] " INFANTS AGED <6 MONTHS, who

are too young to be fully vaccinated, had

the highest reported rate of pertussis

(160.81 per 100,000 population), but adoles-

cents aged 10--19 years and adults aged >20

years contributed the greatest number of re-

ported cases (60%). Adolescents and adults

might be a source of transmission of pertus-

sis to young infants who are at higher risk

for severe disease and death (1). In addi-

tion to routine use of tetanus toxoid, re-

duced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular per-

tussis vaccine (Tdap) in adolescents aged

11--18 years as recommended by the Advisory

Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)

in 2005, ACIP recommends use of Tdap for a

single dose to replace the next dose of Td

for adults aged 19--64 years (2,3). Use of

Tdap also is recommended for certain popu-

lations of adults, including health-care

workers and persons in close contact with

infants aged <12 months (3,4).

1. Bisgard KM, Pascual FB, Ehresmann KR,

et al. Infant pertussis: who was the

source? Pediatr Infect Dis J 2004;23:

985--9.

2. CDC. Preventing tetanus, diphtheria,

and pertussis among adolescents; use

of tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria

toxoid, and acellular pertussis vac-

cines; recommendations of the Advisory

Committee on Immunization Practices

(ACIP). MMWR 2006;55(No. RR-3).

3. CDC. ACIP votes to recommend use of

combined tetanus, diphtheria and per-

tussis (Tdap) vaccine for adults.

Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health

and Human Services, CDC; 2006. Avail-

able at

http://www.cdc.gov/nip/vaccine/tdap/tdap_adult_recs.pdf.

4. CDC. Prevention of tetanus, diphtheria

and pertussis among pregnant women:

provisional ACIP recommendations for

the use of Tdap vaccine. Atlanta, GA: US

Department of Health and Human Services,

CDC; 2006. Available at

http://www.cdc.gov/nip/recs/provisional_recs/tdap-preg.pdf. "

5. Summary of Notifiable Diseases - U.S. 2006

(MMWR 2008 March 21; 55(53): 1-94).

" Pertussis

In 2006, incidence of reported pertussis

decreased to 5.35 cases per 100,000 popula-

tion after peaking during 2004--2005 at 8.9

per 100,000. " [15,632 CASES] " INFANTS AGED

<6 MONTHS, who are too young to be fully

vaccinated, had the highest reported rate

of pertussis (84.21 per 100,000 population),

but adolescents aged 10--19 years and adults

aged >20 years contributed the greatest num-

ber of reported cases. Adolescents and

adults might be a source of transmission of

pertussis to young infants who are at higher

risk for severe disease and death and are

recommended to be vaccinated with tetanus

toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acel-

lular pertussis vaccine (Tdap) (1,2). In

2006, coverage with Tdap in adolescents aged

13--17 years was 10.8%, compared with 49.4%

coverage with tetanus and diphtheria toxoids

vaccine (Td) (3). The decrease in reported

pertussis incidence in 2006 is unlikely to be

related to use of Tdap and is more likely

related to the cyclical nature of disease.

1. CDC. Preventing tetanus, diphtheria, and

pertussis among adolescents; use of

tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid,

and acellular pertussis vaccines: recom-

mendations of the Advisory Committee on

Immunization Practices (ACIP). MMWR 2006;

55(No. RR-3).

2. CDC. Preventing tetanus, diphtheria, and

pertussis among adults: use of tetanus

toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid and

acellular pertussis vaccine: recommenda-

tions of the Advisory Committee on Immun-

ization Practices (ACIP) and Recommenda-

tion of ACIP, supported by the Healthcare

Infection Control Practices Advisory Com-

mittee (HICPAC), for use of Tdap among

health-care personnel. MMWR 2006;55

(No. RR-17).

3. CDC. National vaccination coverage among

adolescents aged 13--17 years---United

States, 2006. MMWR 2007;56:885-8. "

Tabulating the preceding cases and earlier year's

cases data in Reviewer's Table 3, it appears that,

as the 2006 CDC report stated:

" The decrease in reported pertussis incidence

in 2006 is unlikely to be related to use of

Tdap and is more likely related to the cycli-

cal nature of disease. "

the change in the cases and incidence rates are

part of a periodic cycle in disease intensity.

Reviewer's Table 3. Pertussis Data 1999-2006

Year Pertussis Overall Incidence in

Cases Incidence Children < 6 m

per 100,000

1999 7,288 ----- -------

2000 7,867 ----- -------

2001 7,580 ----- -------

2002 9,771 3.4 108.8

2003 11,697 4.0 103.1

2004 25,827 8.9 136.5

2005 25,616 8.7 160.81

2006 15,632 5.35 84.21

Given: a) the tens of thousands of cases

reported annually and the fact that

the vaccines do not contain live bacteria,

this reviewer sees no need to address ad-

verse reactions associated with the DTaP

and Tdap vaccines in the context of di-

sease-related cases of pertussis.

However, this reviewer does suggest that

interested parties may want to look into

the incidence rates for severe adverse

reactions to the " aP " (acellular pertus=

sis) component in the DTaP and Tdap vac-

cines.

In any case, based on the information

available from the CDC, it is clear that

whooping cough (pertussis) has also never

left the USA.

Finally, based on: a) the CDC's reporting

that the disease level is cyclical and

the 39% drop in cases (for 2006 cases as

compared to 2005 cases), pertussis has not

returned (significantly increased year to

year for every year from 1999 through 2006.

Poliomyelitis Cases and Deaths in the USA -

2002-2006

For the 5-year period from 2002 through 2006,

the Center for Disease Control and Prevention

(CDC) summary information reported the fol-

lowing in Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Re-

porter (MMWR), with CAPITALIZATION added for

emphasis:

1. Summary of Notifiable Diseases - U.S. 2002

(MMWR 2004 April 30; 51(53): 1-84).

Poliomyelitis

" Part 1 contains tables showing incidence

data for each of the nationally notifiable

diseases during 2002.*

* Because NO CASES of PARALYTIC POLIOMYE-

LITIS and western equine encephalitis

were reported in the United States

during 2002, these diseases do NOT

appear in the tables in Part 1. "

2. Summary of Notifiable Diseases - U.S. 2003

(MMWR 2005 April 22; 52(54): 1-85).

Poliomyelitis

" Part 1 contains tables showing incidence

data for the nationally notifiable dis-

eases during 2003.*

* Because NO CASES OF anthrax, Powassan

encephalitis/meningitis, western equine

encephalitis, PARALYTIC POLIOMYELITIS,

or yellow fever were reported in the

United States during 2003, these dis-

eases do NOT appear in the tables in

Part I. "

3. Summary of Notifiable Diseases - U.S. 2004

(MMWR 2006 June 16; 53(53): 1-79).

Poliomyelitis

" Part 1 contains tables showing incidence

data for the nationally notifiable diseases

during 2004.*

* Because NO CASES OF anthrax; diphtheria;

influenza-associated pediatric mortality;

PARALYTIC POLIOMYELITIS; rubella, congen-

ital syndrome; severe acute respiratory

syndrome--associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV)

disease; smallpox; vancomycin-intermediate

Staphylococcus aureus; western equine en-

cephalitis; or yellow fever were reported

in the United States during 2004, these

diseases do NOT appear in the tables in

Part 1. "

4. Summary of Notifiable Diseases - U.S. 2005

(MMWR 2007 March 30; 54(53): 2-92).

" Poliomyelitis, Paralytic

In 2005, AN IMPORTED CASE OF vaccine-associ-

ated PARALYTIC POLIOMYELITIS (VAPP) was re-

ported to the National Notifiable Diseases

Surveillance System. In addition, type 1

vaccine-derived poliovirus (VDPV) infections

were reported to CDC. The VAPP case occurred

in an unvaccinated U.S. college student aged

22 years who was residing temporarily in

Costa Rica, where she likely was exposed

through contact with an infant who had re-

cently been vaccinated with oral polio vac-

cine (OPV) (1). Although the risk is extreme-

ly low, health-care providers should be

aware of contact VAPP; be alert to the diag-

nosis of polio, especially in unvaccinated

persons with onset of acute flaccid paralysis;

and obtain stool cultures for poliovirus tes-

ting. Electrodiagnostic studies can assist in

differentiating polio from demyelinating con-

ditions such as Guillain-Barré syndrome. The

VDPV infections occurred among an Amish popu-

lation in Minnesota. The index case-patient

was an Amish infant with severe combined im-

mune deficiency who underwent stool culture

examination for diarrhea and failure to

thrive. Community investigations demonstrated

circulation of VDPV infection in the local

Amish community but not in other related

communities in the United States and Canada.

No cases of paralytic disease or other clin-

ically compatible illnesses caused by polio-

virus were identified (2). VDPVs emerge from

OPV viruses as a result of continuous repli-

cation in immune-deficient persons or their

circulation in populations with low vaccina-

tion coverage. Because OPV has not been

used in the United States since 2000 and in

Canada since 1997, the original source of

the VPDV infection was likely a person who

received OPV in another country. Both situ-

ations highlight the risks for U.S. citizens

of not being vaccinated and the importance

of continued polio surveillance.

1. CDC. Imported vaccine-associated paraly-

tic poliomyelitis---United States, 2005.

MMWR 2006;55:97--9.

2. CDC. Poliovirus infections in four un-

vaccinated children---Minnesota, August

--October 2005. MMWR 2005;54:1053--5. "

5. Summary of Notifiable Diseases - U.S. 2006

(MMWR 2008 March 21; 55(53): 1-94).

Poliomyelitis

" Part 1 contains tables showing incidence

data for the nationally notifiable infec-

tious diseases during 2006.*

* NO CASES OF diphtheria, neuroinvasive or

nonneuroinvasive western equine encepha-

litis virus disease, PARALYTIC POLIOMYE-

LITIS, severe acute respiratory syndrome

--associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV),

smallpox, yellow fever, or varicella

deaths were reported in the United States

in 2006; these conditions do NOT appear

in the tables in Part 1.

Based on the CDC's reports, it appears that

clinical paralytic poliomyelitis cases are

very rare in the USA today but, because there

is no ongoing monitoring program to routinely

check for the presence of the polio virus in

all cases where un-resolved viral immunodefi-

ciency issues are noticed, there are no good

population studies that verify the complete

elimination of the polo virus.

Given the one (1) vaccine-associated paralytic

polio case " VAPP " in a 20-year-old college

student and the 4 " type 1 " vaccine-derived

poliovirus (VDPV) infections reported in Min-

nesota among the Amish, it appears that the

wild polio viruses have been displaced by the

vaccine-strain polio viruses.

Moreover, given the high level of vaccination

with the inactivated polio vaccine and the

probable residual oral-polio viruses, the

polio virus cases that sporadically occur

are probably from a vaccine-derived strain.

While the wild poliovirus strains seem to have

been displaced, the information provided

clearly indicates that neither wild polio

strains nor the vaccine strains have returned.

Thus, the reality is that none of these dis-

eases has " returned " .

Further, measles and pertussis have clearly

never been entirely eliminated.

q For measles, though the true number of

cases of measles, including the vaccine-

measles strain cases (see Reviewer's Table 2),

which are not counted), and the native-mea-

sles-strain cases (probably concealed by the

CDC's purposely obtuse " classified as unknown

because no link to importation was detected " )

[see Reviewer's Table 1; " Cases with an

unassigned source " ]), has remained relatively

stable, the CDC appears to have concealed

the annual number of these cases from the

general public.

q Moreover, as the measles reporting in the

summary section of the annual summary re-

ports indicates, the CDC has apparently also

moved in the period from 2002 through 2008

(in the reports for the period 2000 through

2006) to even make it harder for the average

researcher to easily discern the number of

" confirmed " measles cases from reading the

annual summary information.

q For pertussis, the information provided by

the CDC clearly indicates that, in spite of

94-plus % uptake (that appears to be increa-

sing) for three or, now more, doses recom-

mended, there are thousands of " confirmed "

cases annually.

Lest anyone accuse this reviewer of being anti-

vaccine per se:

q For polio, this reviewer's reality is that

the polio vaccination program has been and,

because it has adapted as our understanding

of the risks has increased, is a qualified

success because, in the United States, the

switch to the reformulated inactivated

polio virus (IPV) vaccine that has appar-

ently eliminated the contamination with

non-human primate viruses, like SV-40 that

is linked to human glioblastomas, a once

very rare brain cancer, in the brain " 30-60 "

years post inoculation, has eliminated the

risk of paralytic polio for all Americans

except the rare unvaccinated American who

travels to a country that is still using a

live-virus oral vaccine (OPV) and is ex-

posed, based on the one confirmed vaccine-

associated paralytic polio case since 1999,

by close contact with a recently OPV-vac-

cinated baby shedding the OVP viruses.

q For measles, provided the program adapts to

safen vaccination by requiring the patient

be given a single large dose of oil-soluble

contaminant-free vitamin A just before vac-

cination; the risks for a serious adverse

reactions are disclosed; and, for those who

want it, single measles only and measles-

rubella vaccines remain available, this

reviewer currently thinks the current mea-

sles vaccination program is, on balance, a

successful program.

q For pertussis, this reviewer can only ac-

cept the probable need for effective per-

tussis interventions and accept that the

current " no Thimerosal " acelular pertussis

vaccines (DTaP and Tdap) probably reduce

the risk of serious adverse outcomes - but

thinks that, since there are serious vac-

cine risks and vaccination does NOT confer

" lifetime " (5-plus-decade) immunity, the

true risks, including a possible increased

risk of asthma linked to the early vacci-

nation with DTaP (which may be Thimerosal-

related), should be fully disclosed to the

American public.

Having exhaustively addressed the deceptiveness

of the writer's first statement, this reviewer

now addresses the rest of this article.

>

>Because of a new breed of vaccine deniers who

>are ignoring campaigns for awareness, and

>ultimately might live shorter-not longer-lives.

>

Give the preceding realities, this reviewer

finds that the writer's statement here:

· Introduces a non-existent and undefined

group of people, the writer's " new breed

of vaccine deniers " ,

· Euphemistically defines the current pro-

vaccine propaganda campaigns, funded by

the vaccine makers, healthcare establish-

ment, and the government, as " campaigns

for awareness " and

· Blatantly threatens not only this writer-

fabricated " new breed of vaccine deniers "

but also the reviewer and any reader with

the writer's " who … ultimately might live

shorter-not longer-lives " .

Overall, this reviewer finds the writer's

statement boils down to Orwellian newspeak

that disregards factual reality and fabri-

cates whatever it needs to suit the writer's

agenda.

>

>Progress is easy to take for granted. When

>I was a child in the '60s, polio was his-

>tory, measles was on the way out, and diph-

>theria and whooping cough were maladies out

>of old movies. Now these contagious dis-

>eases are making a comeback. Take measles,

>for instance. The disease used to infect 3

>to 4 million Americans per year, hospitaliz-

>ing nearly 50,000 people and causing 400 to

>500 deaths. In 2000 a panel of experts

>convened by the Centers for Disease Control

>and Prevention proclaimed that measles

>transmission had been eradicated in the

>United States, except for imported cases.

>But that caveat is important. An unvacci-

>nated 7-year-old from San Diego became in-

>fected with measles while traveling with

>his family in Switzerland and ended up

>transmitting the disease back home to two

>siblings, five schoolmates and four other

>children at his doctor's office-all of

>them unvaccinated.

>

Given the facts reported by this reviewer,

this reviewer must first dismiss the wri-

ter's statements here as an Orwellian rant,

where unsupported " historical " measles

information (which is probably inflated by

a factor of 10 for the claimed annual

measles infections) that is not relevant

to today's America (the writer's " used to

infect 3 to 4 million Americans per year,

hospitalizing nearly 50,000 people and

causing 400 to 500 deaths " , which refers

to the pre-measles-vaccine era), a 2000

proclamation by a panel of CDC-selected

experts, and an isolated imported-measles

outbreak where those affected were unvac-

cinated are used to support a statement,

" Now these contagious diseases are making

a comeback " that the facts, as this re-

viewer has shown, simply do not support

the writer's " comeback " claim for measles

or whooping cough (pertussis).

>

>Whooping cough has also seen a resurgence:

>A school in the East Bay area near San

>Francisco was closed recently when some

>16 students fell ill.

>

Based on the cases data for the period from

1999 through 2006 and the CDC's evaluations

thereof, as stated in the " Summary of Noti-

fiable Diseases --- United States, 2006 "

(published in 2008), there has been no " re-

surgence " in pertussis only a cyclic in-

crease and, perhaps, because of the current

" pertussis " vaccination program, a shift

toward more cases in the young-adult age

groups because:

a. As the CDC: admits, " vaccine-induced

immunity wanes, approximately 5--10

years after pertussis vaccination "

and

b. The immunity-loss issue has been ad-

dressed by the replacement of the use

of a " DT " vaccine for boosting the

immunity to diphtheria and tetanus

acquired from the early childhood

vaccination program with a new no-

Thimerosal " Tdap " vaccine that, in

theory, also boosts immunity to

pertussis toxin.

Moreover, based on the number of " DTaP "

doses now recommended and the addition

of the more expensive " Tdap " vaccine for

older children and adults, this reviewer

must question the lifetime societal cost-

effectiveness of adding more and more

doses when the true costs of doing so,

including the adverse-events costs, are

considered - though the cost-effective-

ness of adding more doses of a higher-

priced vaccine, the Tdap vaccines, are

clear to the vaccine makers who market

these vaccines.

>

>The reason for these incidents-and for

>recent outbreaks of polio-is that the

>percentage of parents vaccinating their

>children has fallen, perhaps because

>some parents see no point in warding

>off diseases they've never encountered

>

First, because there have been no " re-

cent outbreaks of " wild-virus polio

and the only polio outbreaks since the

late 1990s, when the use of the live

oral polio virus vaccine (OVP) was

phased out the USA, were:

· Two (2), 2005 vaccine-poliovirus-

related reports,

· One incidence of only 1 case of

vaccine-acquired paralytic polio

from an overseas exposure, and

· One occurrence of four " type 1

vaccine-derived poliovirus (VDPV)

infections " ,

this reviewer must reject the writer's

misrepresenting these two isolated

2005 polio-case reports as " outbreaks "

rather than as one incident and one

time-isolated vaccine-derived outbreak

as the two so obviously were.

Second, since:

· The cases of measles and pertussis

occurred in children that are too

young to be vaccinated and in chil-

dren or adults that had been vac-

cinated as well as in the unvacci-

nated who were old enough to be

vaccinated,

· There was no significant (10-fold

increase) increase needed to justi-

fy a claim of a disease " resur-

gence " :

· In the case of measles (where no

real increase was found during the

2002-2006 period or, even if the

current " outbreaks " eventually to-

tal 200-plus cases, in 2008) or

· In the case of pertussis (where:

a. The 2006 cases indicate a 60-

plus percent drop from the

cases in the 2004-2005 period,

b. 20 to 25 % of cases are in

children are too young to be

inoculated, and

c. Pertussis is known to be a

disease whose incidence has

cyclical increases and de-

creases),

and

· In the case of measles, the report-

ed cases are mostly vaccine-measles-

related cases in the vaccinated, and

the real, but uncounted, vaccine-mea-

sles cases in the measles-vaccinated

population,

the reasons for the writer's " incidents "

and " outbreaks " cannot, based on the

truth, be solely attributed to " the per-

centage of parents vaccinating their

children has fallen " as the writer does

here.

If nothing else, the 60-plus % decline

in pertussis cases in 2006, if considered

in isolation, points to a decrease in

cases as " the percentage of parents vac-

cinating their children has fallen " .

Thus, this reviewer must reject the wri-

ter's attempt to blame the disease out-

comes observed solely on the decrease in

" the percentage of parents vaccinating

their children " .

>

>Religious or new-age beliefs may also fac-

>tor into the decision: The San Diego out-

>break spread in a school where nearly 10

>percent of the students had been given

>personal-belief exemptions from the vac-

>cination requirement. The East Bay out-

>break started at a school that emphasizes

> nature-based therapy over mainstream

>medicine; fewer than half of the students

>were vaccinated.

>

Here, returning to pertussis outbreaks,

the writer shifts the focus from the de-

crease " the percentage of parents vacci-

nating their children " to " the decision "

and, in the San Diego school's case,

knowingly misrepresents the lawful exemp-

tions affirmatively chosen by the parents

as if they were " gifts " (the writer's

" students had been given personal-belief

exemptions " ).

Further, this reviewer finds the writer's

East Bay outbreak focus on the " fewer

than half of the students were vaccinated " ,

ignores several realities:

· Without exposure to the disease organ-

ism, there would have been no outbreak,

· Most of the cases were in only some of

the unvaccinated children, so that most

of the unvaccinated children were NOT

clinically infected and

· Had vaccination been fully protective,

none of the vaccinated would have con-

tracted pertussis (whooping cough),

but some did.

All in all, this reviewer finds that this

passage is a thinly veiled attack on the

parents right to make an informed medical

choice and on the fundamental right to

" bodily integrity " recognized in the Con-

stitution of the United States of America's

guarantee of " due process of law " (in

Amendment V. with CAPITALIZATION added for

emphasis:

" NO PERSON SHALL … BE DEPRIVED OF life,

LIBERTY, or property, WITHOUT DUE PROCESS

OF LAW; nor shall private property be

taken for public use without just compen-

sation. "

and this " due process of law " right to

bodily integrity has been repeatedly up-

held in key cases before the courts in

cases dating from the 1800s.

>

>Why would parents refuse to vaccinate their

>children against dangerous diseases? Many

>are skeptical of modern science and medicine

>in general. (And it is true that most vac-

>cines carry exceedingly tiny-but real-risks

>of serious illness or even death.)

>

In the writer's " why " question, the writer

employs one of the tried and true devices

of vaccine apologists - the writer begins

by portraying the parents as " vaccination

refusers " (the writer's " parents refuse to

vaccinate their children " ) rather than the

guardians of their children's health.

Factually, caring parents, as the guardians

of their children's health should weigh:

· Each vaccine's risks:

· The acute risks of serious harm and

death associated with the vaccine and

the odds for each,

· The risk that vaccination may contri-

butes to or, in some cases, causes,

some long-term chronic disease (e.g.,

increased risk of childhood MS from

hepatitis and,

· In most cases, less than lifetime

immunity, and

· The vaccine's theoretical protective

benefits against:

a. The risk of their children's con-

tracting an acute childhood com-

municable disease and

b. In most cases, thereby acquire

lifetime immunity to that disease,

as well as

c. The risk that their infected chil-

dren may be seriously injured or

die and the odds for each risk of

these risks, and

d. The risk that the child may de-

velop a vaccine-related/induced

chronic disease.

Moreover, though the writer ignores this

reality, parents must make their decision

in a climate that:

· Obscures, hides or even denies the

risks associated with each vaccine

as the writer's parenthetical state-

ment: " And it is true that most

vaccines carry exceedingly tiny-but

real-risks of serious illness or

even death " , which:

a. Uses the vague phrase, " exceed-

ingly tiny " in an obvious at-

tempt to minimize the " but real-

risks " carried by " most vaccines "

and

b. Given the writer's " most vac-

cines " language, recognizes that

some vaccines carry significant

risks,

· Touts and inflates the possible bene-

fits of each vaccine, and

· Has refused to:

a. Carefully study the long term risks

and the risks of administering com-

binations of vaccines as well as

b. Conduct the preservative safety

tests mandated for vaccines preserved

with Thimerosal to prove, as required

by law, that the preservative level

of Thimerosal in each vaccine formu-

lation is " sufficiently nontoxic so

that the amount present in the recom-

mended dose of the product will not

be toxic to the recipient, " as re-

quired by 21 C.F.R. Sec. 610.15(a).

>

>But I think most are responding to the wide-

>spread belief that vaccines are linked to

>autism.

>

Here, this reviewer can only agree that the

writer, speaking in the first person, is en-

titled to:

· His thoughts and

· Cast the realities that:

· Autism has been repeatedly linked

to some vaccines, and

· Government medical professionals

in the Department of Health and

Human Services have conceded that

vaccinations caused autism (Hannah

Poling v. Sec. HHS, case 02-01466V

in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims,

November 2007)

as a " widespread belief " .

>

>Recent studies have soundly disspelled that

>notion.

>

Here, this reviewer only notes that the

writer has obviously NOT read all of the

recent published studies that link autism

and/or other neurodevelopmental, develop-

mental and behavioral disorders to

Thimerosal-containing vaccines.

>

>And a simple glance at health statistics

>shows that autism cases continued to rise

>even after thimerosal, the mercury-based

>preservative widely blamed for the supposed

>autism link, was largely phased out of U.S.

>vaccines by 2001.

>

This reviewer must first congratulate the

writer for his ingenuity and cunning in

fabricating a classical example of Orwel-

lian newspeak here.

Factually, since:

· The federal " health statistics " are

out-of-date (2002 is the latest)

selected-region survey estimates of

autism spectrum disorders (ASDs, typi-

cally, autism [autistic disorder],

pervasive developmental disorders -

not otherwise defined [PDD-NOS], and

Asperger's in the United States) -

NOT autism, apparently without any

attempt to correct for missed cases

(underascertainment) or possible sam-

pling bias,

· The California Department of Develop-

mental Services data, which are for

" DSM IV " autism cases and continue to

grow, also suffers from the failure to:

a) correct for underascertainment bias

or explain the continued growth in

the number of " children with autism "

in the older age groups,

· Most of the other data are raw " school

count " numbers, not " health statistics " ,

from the data collected by education

departments with no underascertainment

correction or, in some cases, without

health-provider verification,

there are no valid nationwide " health sta-

tistics " on " autism cases " , even though

the incidence rates for ASDs are currently

estimated as being about 1 in 150 (66.7

per 10,000) and, in spite of these estima-

ted rates, the federal government has not

added autism, PDD-NOS and Asperger's to

the notifiable diseases so that all cases

would have to be reported and valid the

rates for each could be generated. [Note:

By comparison, pertussis is a notifiable

disease even though its incidence rate

(0.34 to 0.89 per 10,000) is roughly 100-

fold lower than the crude " 2002 " estimated

rate for ASDs.]

Further, the writer's assertion that

" thimerosal, the mercury-based preserva-

tive widely blamed for the supposed autism

link, was largely phased out of U.S. vac-

cines by 2001 " is NOT supported by the

following facts:

1. Of the about 50 currently (2008) U.S.-

licensed vaccines, 17 of these vaccines

(~ 34%) still contain some level of

Thimeorsal and 10 (~ 20%) of that 17

are still preserved with Thimerosal

(see Reviewer's Table 4 that follows

the start of the next response),

2. The tabulation of FDA-approved vaccines

from 2003 contained entries also con-

tained entries for 18 Thimerosal-con-

taining vaccine formulations and, though

some were different vaccines, 10 of that

18 were also Thimerosal preserved, and

3. Of the current 17 U.S.-licensed Thimer-

osal-containing vaccines:

a. All but 2 (Sanofi's " reduced Thimero-

sal " Tripedia® and TriHIBit®) are

approved to be given to pregnant women

and,

b. All but 4 of the Thimerosal-preserved

influenza vaccines (3 human inacti-

vated-influenza vaccines [CSL Limited's

Afluria®, GlaxoKline Biologicals'

Fluarix®, and ID Biomedical Corporation

of Quebec' FluLaval®] and Sanofi's bird-

flu vaccine) are approved for adminis-

tration to some group of children (see

Reviewer's Table 5 that follows the

Reviewer's Table 4).

Therefore, because these 17 vaccines still

contain some level of Thimerosal, 10 are

Thimerosal-preserved vaccines, and all of

the Thimerosal-preserved vaccines, except

the H5N1 (bird-flu) vaccine, are approved

to be directly or, by inoculating women

during pregnancy with them, indirectly

administered to developing children at

some point before their 18th birthday,

this reviewer finds that the writer is,

at best, mistaken when he states that

Thimerosal " was largely phased out of

U.S. vaccines by 2001. "

Finally, since: a) the current " rates "

for autism are, at best, only crude es-

timates that have NOT been corrected for

missed cases or survey bias, Thimero-

sal, contrary to the writer's statement,

is still present in a significant per-

centage of U.S.-licensed vaccines, and

c) after 2001, the FDA has continued to

license both Thimerosal-containing and

Thimerosal-preserved vaccines, this re-

viewer finds the writer's statement here

is NOT supported by the facts and should,

therefore, be ignored.

>

>Nevertheless, these unsubstantiated fears

>have led some people to say that getting

>vaccinated should be a matter of indivi-

>dual choice: If you want to be protected,

>just get yourself and your children vac-

>cinated.

>

Here, again, the writer, ignoring the

previously established realities and his

own lack of standing to speak for even

" some people " , again plays the " fear "

card (the writer's " these unsubstantiated

fears have led some people to say " ) to

link what he thinks has led " some people

that getting vaccinated should be a mat-

ter of individual choice " .

Reviewer's Table 4. March 2008 FDA-

licensed Thimerosal-containing Vaccines

[Taken From: FDA's " Table 3: Thimerosal

and Expanded List of Vaccines - (updated

3/14/2008)

Thimerosal Content in Currently Manufac-

tured U.S. Licensed Vaccines " & recent

approvals]

No. Vaccine Trade Name Manufacturer Thimerosal

[8] Concentra-

tion[1]

*1 DTaP Tripedia[2] Sanofi Pasteur <= 0.00012%

Inc (SP-Inc)

*2 DTaPH TriHIBit SP-Inc/SA <= 0.00012%

(Tripedia+ActHIB[2])

*3 DT None SP-Inc < 0.00012%

(single dose)

*4/1 DT None SP-Ltd [3] 0.01%

(available but NOT marketed)

*5/2 Td None Mass Public 0.0033%

Health

*6 Td Decavac SP-Inc <= 0.00012%

7/3 TT None SP-Inc 0.01%

*8 HepA/ Twinrix Glaxo- < 0.0002%

HepB Kline Biologicals

(GSK-

#9/4 Influ- Afluria CSL Limited 0.01%

enza (multidose)

*10/5 Influ- Fluzone[6] SP-Inc 0.01%

enza

*11/6 Influ- Fluvirin Novartis 0.01%

enza Vaccines &

Diagnostics

Ltd (NV & D-Ltd)

*12 Influ- Fluvirin NV & D-Ltd < 0.0004%

enza (Preservative

Free)

#13 Influ- Fluarix GSK-B < 0.0004%

enza

#14/7 Influ- FluLaval ID Biomedical 0.01%

enza Corporation

of Quebec

15/8 Japanese JE-VAX Research Foun- 0.007%

Encepha- dation for

litis[7] Microbial Dis-

eases of Osaka

University

*16/9 Menin- Menomune A, SP-Inc 0.01%

gococcal C, AC and (multidose)

A/C/Y/W-135

17/10 Avian Influenza SP-Inc 0.0098%

Influ- Virus Vaccine, (multidose

enza[9] H5N1 with dosing

@ 0 & 2 mn)

Table Footnotes

1. Thimerosal is approximately 50% mercury (Hg)

by weight. A 0.01% solution (1 part per

10,000)of thimerosal contains 50 µg of Hg

per 1 mL dose or 25 µg of Hg per 0.5 mL

dose. Vaccines with a nominal " preservative "

level of mercury have levels of Thimerosal

between 0.003% and 0.01%.

2. Sanofi Pasteur's Tripedia may be used to

reconstitute ActHib to form TriHIBit.

TriHIBit is indicated for use in children

15 to 18 months of age.

3. This vaccine is not marketed in the US but

it is available.

4. ...

5. ...

6. Children under 3 years of age receive a

half-dose of vaccine, i.e., 0.25 mL (12.5

µg Hg/dose.)

7. JE-VAX is distributed by Aventis Pasteur.

Children 1 to 3 years of age receive a

half-dose of vaccine, i.e., 0.5 mL (17.5

µg Hg/dose).

8. When there are two numbers separated by a

slash, " / " , the second numbers are the

count for the current Thimerosal-preserved

vaccine formulations that have FDA approval.

9. Approved April, 17 but not in " Table 3 "

because it is currently only licensed for

use in a pandemic outbreak; approvals for

children are pending or deferred.)

Factually, the Constitution of the United

States of America under the " due process "

clause in " Amendment V " has established

the right of bodily integrity that inher-

ently gives each citizen of the USA the

right to hold that the issue of getting

vaccinated is meant to be a matter of in-

dividual choice; and, in general, the U.S.

courts have upheld that view as this re-

viewer stated previously.

Thus, this reviewer finds the writer's

attempt to reduce this " due process of

law " right to a fear-driven individual

choice of some people is reprehensible,

beneath contempt, and, to the extent

this statement seeks to undermine the

rule of law and the Constitution of the

United States of America, a statement that

should be concern of all Americans.

Reviewer's Table 5. March 2008 FDA-licensed

Thimerosal-preserved Vaccines for Children

Revisited

[Taken From: FDA CBER Table 3: Thimerosal

and Expanded List of Vaccines - (updated

3/14/2008)

Thimerosal Content in Currently Manufac-

tured U.S. Licensed Vaccines]

No. Vaccine Trade Name Manufacturer Thimerosal

Concentra-

tion[1]

1 DTaP Tripedia[2] Sanofi Pasteur <= 0.00012%

Inc (SP-Inc)

2 DTaPH TriHIBit SP-Inc/SA <= 0.00012%

(Tripedia+

ActHIB[2])

3 DT None SP-Inc < 0.00012%

(single dose)

4 DT None SP-Ltd [3] 0.01%

(available

but NOT

marketed in USA)

5 Td None Mass Public 0.0033%

Health

6 Td Decavac SP-Inc <= 0.00012%

7 TT None SP-Inc 0.01%

8 HepA/ Twinrix Glaxo- < 0.0002%

HepB Kline Biolog-

icals (GSK-

9 Influ- Fluzone[6] SP-Inc 0.01%

enza

10 Influ- Fluvirin Novartis 0.01%

enza Vaccines &

Diagnostics

Ltd (NV & D-Ltd)

11 Influ- Fluvirin NV & D-Ltd < 0.0004%

enza (Preserva-

tive Free)

12 Japan- JE-VAX Research Foun- 0.007%

ese En- dation for

cepha- Microbial Dis-

litis eases of Osaka

[7] University

13 Menin- Menomune A, SP-Inc 0.01%

gococ- C, AC and (multidose)

cal A/C/Y/W-135

Table Footnotes

1. Thimerosal is approximately 50% mercury

(Hg) by weight. A 0.01% solution (1 part

per 10,000) of thimerosal contains 50 µg

of Hg per 1 mL dose or 25 µg of Hg per

0.5 mL dose. Vaccines with a nominal

" preservative " level of mercury have

levels of Thimerosal between 0.003% and

0.01%.

2. Sanofi Pasteur's Tripedia may be used

to reconstitute ActHib to form TriHIBit.

TriHIBit is indicated for use in chil-

dren 15 to 18 months of age.

3. This vaccine is not marketed in the US

but it is available.

4. ...

5. ...

6. Children under 3 years of age receive a

half-dose of vaccine, i.e., 0.25 mL

(12.5 µg Hg/dose.)

7. JE-VAX is distributed by Aventis Pasteur.

Children 1 to 3 years of age receive a

half-dose of vaccine, i.e., 0.5 mL

(17.5 µg Hg/dose).

Finally, the writer's, " If you want to be

protected, just get yourself and your chil-

dren vaccinated, " simply states a factual

reality for all those who live in one of

the about 20 states that, in addition to a

medical exemption and, in all but Mississippi

and West Virginia, a religious exemption,

have a legal " philosophical exemption "

clause in their state's vaccination laws.

For those who do not live in such states,

medical reality and each person's personal

religious beliefs limit choices of those

who:

· Live outside of states with a " philo-

sophical exemption " , and

· Are unwilling or unable to:

· Move to a nearby state that has a

legal " philosophical exemption "

clause in their state's vaccination

laws or

· Become part of a grassroots move-

ment in their state to change the

vaccination laws to provide a

" philosophical exemption " before

they need to make another vaccina-

tion decision.

>

>Only it's not that easy.

>

Here, this reviewer obviously disagrees with

the writer.

>

>While the measles vaccine protects virtually

>everyone who is inoculated, not all vaccines

>have the same rate of success.

>

Here, this reviewer generally agrees with

the writer but notes that, in use, some

of the current FDA-licensed vaccines have

been found to be ineffective (e.g., the

human influenza vaccines) or to have mar-

ginal effectiveness (e.g., the pneumococ-

cal vaccines for children and adults).

>

>But even if a vaccine is effective for only

>70, 80 or 90 percent of those who take it,

>the other 30, 20 or 10 percent who don't

>get the full benefit of the vaccine are

>usually still not at risk.

>

Here, the writer's version of the " herd

immunity " argument is much too simplistic.

This is the case because the writer's

statement ignores:

· Those who are NOT vaccinated,

· The adverse effects that the vaccine

can have on the immune system's of

those who are inoculated but who, as

a group, are known NOT develop effec-

tive immunity (e.g. the hepatitis B

vaccine [< 2 years of age] or the

influenza vaccine in every young

children (< 3 years of age),

· Those who develop a partial immunity

that imbalances their immune system

(e.g., the effect of inoculation with

Sanofi's Menactra meningococcal vac-

cine that appears to trigger auto-

immune disease expression), and

· Those in whom the vaccine inoculation

increases their susceptibility to

strains of the disease that are NOT

addressed by the vaccine (e.g., the

recent HPV vaccine cases where young

women with NO previous HPV-related

skin infections who break out with

non-vaccine-covered HPV-related skin

infections shortly after being vac-

cinated with Merck's Gardasil® HPV

vaccine).

In addition, this writer also ignores the

reality that, in some the newer vaccines,

all that the vaccinations may do is iden-

tify those whose immune systems will, if

exposed, be capable of fighting off the

disease without damaging the body.

>

>That's because most of the people around the

>partially protected are immune, so the dis-

>ease can't sustain transmission long enough

>to spread.

>

Here, the writer's remark is again too

simplistic because it ignores the non-viral

diseases (e.g., tetanus, pertussis, and

diphtheria) and, with Merck's Rotateq®, a

new multi-strain bioengineered live-virus

rotavirus vaccine, instances where the in-

fectious pathogen is already widely distri-

buted in the environment or, in the case of

RotaTeq and formerly the live oral poliovirus

vaccines, is being continually shed into an

environment where the pathogen can remain

infectious upon contact for extended periods

of time.

The writer's statement also conceals the

reality that, when the vaccine is a live-

virus vaccine that is shed into the environ-

ment and the virus can mutate, those who

are vaccinated may infect not only those

who were NOT vaccinated but also a signi-

ficant percentage of those who were vac-

cinated but did NOT develop immunity.

>

>But when people decide to forgo vaccination,

>they threaten the entire system.

>

Here, the writer appears to have abandoned

his " herd " model, where some significant

percentage of the people (the author's " the

other 30, 20 or 10 percent " , who do NOT

have effective immunity either because the

vaccine fails to trigger it or the people

are NOT vaccinated) may NOT have vaccine-

induced protection but the others around

those people protect them by interrupting

the " transmission " of the disease.

Here the writer's unstated model seems to

reduce to: Even if vaccinating them will

kill or maim some of those who are vacci-

nated, all should be vaccinated so that

they will not " threaten the entire system " .

Thus, the writer's core motive here appears

to be protecting the entire vaccination

system and NOT the public's health.

Again, this reviewer must oppose the wri-

ter's " threaten the entire system " because

it ignores the core American goal that

demands that, above all, our healthcare

systems should protect the physical, finan-

cial, emotional and spiritual health of

the American people and NOT " the entire "

vaccination " system " as the writer's,

perhaps, Freudian slip so clearly states.

>

>They increase their own risk and the risk

>of those in the community, including

>babies too young to be vaccinated and

>people with immune systems impaired by

>disease or chemotherapy.

>

Re: Those Who Choose NOT To Vaccinate

Here, this reviewer agrees that " parents " ,

the group of which the writer has purpor-

ted been speaking previously, who elect,

as the law permits for medical or, where

permitted, religious or philosophical

reasons, to withhold vaccination from

themselves and/or their children incur

certain risks, responsibilities and pos-

sible rewards.

Risks for Those Who Elect NOT To Vaccinate

· Some risk of their and/or their chil-

dren's contracting a disease that the

vaccine may, but is NOT guaranteed to,

have prevented,

· Some risk that they or their children

may contract a vaccine-related strain

of a disease from children recently

vaccinated with a live-virus vaccine,

· An increased risk that they or their

children may be barred from their job

or school in the event of a disease

outbreak in the workplace or school,

· Some risk that they may have to battle

for the rights that the law provides

them and will have to put up with the

negative stereotypes that those who

chose NOT to vaccinate see in the

mainstream media that is essentially

owned by the pro-vaccine vaccinate-no-

matter-what Establishment, and

· For highly contagious aggressive

childhood diseases:

· Some increased risk of permanent

harm and/or death to some frac-

tion of those infected (e.g.,

measles, mumps, rubella, polio,

pertussis, and diphtheria), and

· Some risk that they or their in-

fected children may infect others

if they or their children are

NOT kept from contacting others

while infectious.

Responsibilities for Those Who Elect

NOT To Vaccinate

For those who chose NOT to vaccinate, of

course, comes the responsibility to:

· Have heightened hygiene and increased

vigilance to minimize the risk that

they or their children may be exposed

to a disease at an inappropriate time,

· Restrict the unprotected contact they

and their less than two-year-old chil-

dren have with outsiders

· Withhold their children from school,

group activities, unintentional con-

tact with others, and other community

activities if there is any possibility

that they or their children have been

exposed to a communicable disease or

may be exhibiting the first symptoms

of a communicable disease,

· Implement stringent hygiene, heigh-

tened sanitation, and appropriate

quarantine procedures if they or

their children contract a communicable

disease, and

· Notify their neighbors, healthcare

providers, children's schools, and

other organizations that they or their

children have been exposed, or, if

they or their children are infected,

that they have the disease.

In addition, for those who do NOT vacci-

nate their children and choose to let

their children naturally contract certain

" vaccine preventable " childhood diseases,

like mumps, rubella, and chickenpox,

after their child is two years of age or,

when nursed longer, after weaning, be-

sides increasing the levels of certain

nutrients needed by the body to handle

the disease, the parents should be pre-

pared for the extra time required for

childcare and the need to carefully

monitor and document their child's

journey from exposure to infection

resolution and recovery.

Possible Benefits for Those Who Elect

NOT To Vaccinate

Finally, though allowing themselves or

their children to have certain " child-

hood " diseases will, if lucky, only

cause them a short period of acute

symptoms and pain, and, when they re-

cover from these childhood diseases,

they should probably have lifetime

immunity against all of the childhood

diseases that they contract, except

for chickenpox (which requires peri-

odic post-disease re-exposure [exogen-

ous boosting] to herpes varicella

zoster to maintain immunity), and,

if they are females, should be able

to pass a full spectrum of maternal

immune factors for the diseases they

have contracted naturally to their

offspring provided they nurse them.

In addition, they and their children

may have a lessened risk for develop-

ing the long-term chronic health con-

ditions (e.g., asthma and allergies)

that seem to be much more prevalent

in those who are fully vaccinated

with all of today's vaccines.

However, since the preceding presen-

tation only addresses issues facing

those who elect not to vaccinate,

this reviewer would be remiss if he

did NOT also, to be fair, address

the issues facing those who choose

to vaccinate themselves or their

children or wards.

Re: Those Who Choose To Vaccinate

However, there are also risks, re-

sponsibilities and probable rewards

that those who choose to vaccinate

may also face, even though the wri-

ter does NOT even mention most of

them except for his earlier cryptic

and dismissive parenthetical comment:

" And it is true that most vaccines

carry exceedingly tiny-but real-

risks of serious illness or even

death. "

Risks for Those Who Elect To Vaccinate

· Some risk for a serious vaccine-as-

sociated adverse reaction, inclu-

ding permanent injury or, worse,

vaccine-associated death,

· If female, some risk that the im-

munity factors that may be trans-

mitted to their offspring if

they choose to nurse them after

bnirth may be incomplete or non-

existent,

· Some risk that they or their chil-

dren may develop one or more

lifetime chronic medical condi-

tions that was exacerbated or

caused by vaccination,

· Some risk that they or their chil-

dren may not be protected

against the disease even when

" fully " vaccinated,

· When the vaccine contains Thimer-

osal as a preservative or at a

lower level, some risk of their or

their children's being subacutely

mercury poisoned to some degree

and then, in some cases, develop

the symptoms associated with a

neurodevelopmental (e.g., autism),

developmental (e.g., chronic con-

stipation or diarrhea) or behavi-

oral disorder (e.g., ADHD and OCD)

· For acellular pertussis vaccines,

some risk of vaccine-induced serious

brain injury and

· For live-virus vaccines,

· Some risk that the vaccinee's

immune system may NOT properly

cope with the live virus leading

to some risk of permanent harm

and/or death to some fraction of

those vaccinated with such (e.g.,

live-virus vaccines containing

measles, mumps, rubella, varicella

[chickenpox], polio, and rotavirus),

· Some risk for the measles vaccine

of significant adverse neurological

and gastrointestinal outcomes, and

· Some risk that the inoculated per-

son(s) may infect others if they

are NOT kept from contacting others

while infectious (actively shedding

virus).

Responsibilities for Those Who Elect To

Vaccinate

For those who chose to vaccinate, of course,

comes the responsibility to:

· Have heightened hygiene and increased

vigilance to minimize the risk that

they or their children and/or their

wards may be exposed to a disease be-

fore they or their children or their

wards are fully vaccinated for a given

disease,

· Control and manage the timing of the

vaccinations they and their children

and/or wards receive to ensure that

their or their children's and/or wards'

immune systems are not compromised by

another infection and/or overwhelmed

by too many vaccinations at one time.

· Carefully read the information card

and, if concerned about the composi-

tion of the vaccine and the known

adverse reactions for the vaccine,

the package insert for each vaccine

that is scheduled to be administered

before consenting to inoculation to

ensure that:

· There is no allergy risk from

any vaccine component,

· They understand the possible

post-inoculation adverse reac-

tions and their risks, and

· They are comfortable with each

of the vaccines that are to be

administered,

· Make certain that they have affir-

matively signed an appropriate con-

sent form before allowing the vac-

cine to be administered and that,

after inoculation, the name of the

vaccine and the vaccine's manufac-

turer, the vaccine's correct lot

number and its expiration date,

the date administered and the

name of the person giving it have

been properly entered into the ap-

propriate medical records and,

· After the vaccine(s) is(are) ad-

ministered, make sure that they

have a copy of each completed

vaccination record, the telephone

number for reporting any adverse

reaction to VAERS, and the con-

tact information for the " National

Vaccine Injury Compensation Pro-

gram (NVICP) in case they need to

contact the U.S. Court of Federal

Claims to file a vaccine injury

claim should they or their chil-

dren and/or wards have any serious

adverse reaction that appears to

be possibly temporally associated

with a given vaccination,

· For live-virus vaccines, since

there is some risk of secondary

transmission to others by the

person who has been vaccinated,

· Appropriately " quarantine " /

restrict the person(s) vac-

cinated from all unnecessary

contacts for at least the

period specified in the pac-

kage insert for the vaccine(s)

administered,

· Implement stringent hygiene,

and heightened sanitation

procedures for those who

have been vaccinated, and

· Notify their neighbors, chil-

dren's and/or wards' schools,

and other organizations that

they or their children and/or

wards have been vaccinated

with a live-virus vaccine

that may keep them at home

for a short period and make

sure they have the work or

school assignments for all

the topics being covered

during the period they or

their children and/or wards

are observing self quaran-

tine, and

· Monitor, record and track

the health of those vacci-

nated until they appear to

have fully recovered from

being vaccinated and appro-

priately include this in-

formation in the records

you keep for the vaccine(s).

In addition, for those who vacci-

nate their children and/or wards

but choose to let their children

and/or wards naturally contract

certain " vaccine preventable " child-

hood diseases, like mumps, rubella,

and chickenpox, after their child

and/or ward is two years of age or,

when nursed longer, after weaning,

besides increasing the levels of

certain nutrients needed by the

body to handle the disease, the

parents or guardians should be

prepared for the extra time re-

quired for childcare and the need

to carefully monitor and document

their child's and/or ward's jour-

ney from exposure to infection

resolution and recovery.

Possible Benefits for Those Who

Elect To Vaccinate

· For contagious diseases, a

lowered risk of contracting

the wild/native disease (ex-

cept for varicella),

· No need to seek exemptions to

work or have their children

and/or wards have access to

school (or the hassles of

seeking and maintaining these

exemptions),

· For live-virus diseases (cur-

rently, measles, mumps, rubel-

la, varicella, rotavirus, in-

fluenza and, for some persons,

vaccina [cowpox] and polio),

general control over the date

they, their children and/or

their wards are infected with

the disease, and

· Except for varicella, a lower

risk that your child will ac-

tually have a childhood disease

before the age of 18 years.

Thus, on balance, the differences in

the effort required and the overall

risks, responsibilities and rewards

seem to be similar for both groups.

>

>They are also free-riding on the wil-

>lingness of others to get vaccinated,

>which makes a decision to avoid vac-

>cines out of fear or personal belief

>a lot safer.

>

First, the writer's views ignore the

reality that parents inherently make

decisions for themselves and their

children and/or wards based upon what

they think, based on their knowledge

and experience, is in their best in-

terests.

Second, while the writer's pro-vac-

cine views accurately portray the

situation as seen from the point of

view of the vaccine apologists of

the world, they ignore the reality

that those who choose not to vacci-

nate are accepting the risk for

themselves and their children and/or

wards that they or their children

and/or wards may contract:

· Some wild/native strain disease,

or

· The man-made strain of disease

when exposed to others who have

recently been inoculated with a

live-virus vaccine (currently,

measles, mumps, rubella, vari-

cella, rotavirus, influenza and,

for some, vaccine [cowpox] and

polio).

Because of the high level of vacci-

nation and the current levels of

sanitation, hygiene, poverty and

health, the risk of contracting a

wild/native strain of a live virus

is very low but the risk of contrac-

ting a man-made " vaccine " strain of

a virus is, except for varicella,

much higher than for the vaccinated

children.

However, though secondary infection

by the vaccine strain of the live

viruses used in some vaccines is

" low " , it is sufficiently high that,

in the USA, the use of the live-

virus oral polio vaccine was phased

out in the late 1990s and, for polio,

most all cases of the virus detected

in humans in America in the 2000s

have been vaccine-strain-related

cases, typically, originating from

vaccine-derived strains or strains

still being used in the oral polio

vaccines in other countries.

Thus, the " free ride " that those

Americans who choose not to vacci-

nate are getting is anything but

free.

>

>Of course it is the very success of

> modern vaccines that makes this

>complacency possible.

>

Rather than rebut the writer's sim-

plistic and pro-vaccine-biased view

of " modern vaccines " , this reviewer

lets the recent words [2] of Jay

Gordon, MD, who is currently an as-

sistant professor of Pediatrics at

the UCLA Medical School, address

" the very success of modern vaccines "

(with CAPITALIZATION added for empha-

sis):

Interviewer: " What are some of the side

effects you've seen be-

sides fever and bruises? "

Dr. Gordon: " I've seen kids who devel-

oped autism shortly after vaccination.

When I first went into practice in the

'80s, I would get a lot of phone calls

from moms, and they would say, 'You

know, after the shots, she's just ac-

ting a little different. Is that nor-

mal?' And I'd say, 'Yes it is.' And

they'd call back a week later and say,

'He's still a little bit off. I can't

quite describe it.' That scared me.

Now, many people would argue that vac-

cines are only for the better. I WOULD

SAY THERE'S NO FREE LUNCH; IT IS LOVELY

TO BE IMMUNE TO WHOOPING COUGH, BUT IF

I HAVE TO DIMINISH YOUR HEALTH A LITTLE

BIT TO DO THAT, I HAVE TO HESITATE. In-

tegrity demands that I tell you other

parts of the story: I saw one child who

developed seizures two days after her

two-month appointment, and she didn't

get any shots. It's true that the onset

of autism often coincides with the time

that kids are getting their shots. But

the vast majority of times that I see

a temporal relationship, I'm assuming

it's not a coincidence.

I AM 100 PERCENT CONVINCED THAT VACCINES,

WHILE CREATING SOME EXCELLENT PUBLIC

HEALTH BENEFITS, ALSO CREATE PROBLEMS.

I've been doing this for 29 years. I've

watched it really closely, and I'VE SEEN

KIDS WHO GET SHOTS UNDERGO CHANGES. "

[2]

http://www.cookiemag.com/entertainment/2008/07/vaccine_experts?currentPage=2

Moreover, this reviewer notes that the wri-

ter has failed to mention, much less ad-

dress, the failures of " modern vaccines "

including the recent, but now withdrawn,

LymeRx and RotaShield vaccines and the

in-use ineffectiveness, except to profit

the vaccine makers and the healthcare

establishment, of the human influenza and

the varicella vaccines.

>

>In previous generations, when epidemic

>disease swept through schools and neigh-

>borhoods, it was easy to persuade par-

>ents that the small risks associated

>with vaccination were worth it.

>

While this reviewer does NOT disagree

with the writer about the reality that

a disease epidemic or outbreak makes

it easier " to persuade parents that

the small risks associated with vac-

cination were worth it " , this reviewer

notes that many of today's vaccines

(e.g., hepatitis B and HPV) are for

diseases that are not epidemic in the

USA and, in the youngest members of

the population first being vaccinated,

are almost non-existent.

Moreover, vaccines are being recommen-

ded for general use when, in the USA

today, the only groups that have a

significant risk of having a clinical

case of the disease are in the lower

socioeconomic groups (e.g., the rota-

virus vaccines).

Finally, rather than persuading par-

ents by providing them with accurate

information about both the value and

the risk of vaccination, today coer-

cive mandates, fear mongering, and

misrepresentation of the benefits as

real and the risks as theoretical

(when the benefits are theoretical

and the risks are real) are the tools

that the pro-vaccination groups are

using to promote vaccination - re-

gardless of the long-term costs.

>

>When those epidemics stopped-because

>of widespread vaccinations-it became

>easy to forget that we still live in

>a dangerous world.

>

Because, in most cases, the current

vaccination programs in America seem

to have traded epidemics of acute

disease for epidemics of a variety

of chronic diseases, this reviewer

finds that not only have the epidem-

ics of disease not stopped but also

the costs of today's chronic-disease

epidemics far outweighs those of the

prior childhood disease epidemics

that American children born after

the World War II experienced.

This is the case because increases

in sanitation, food and water quality,

hygiene, and adequate housing coupled

with antibiotics to stave off bacterial

infection had combined to decrease the

annual level of deaths from, for exam-

ple, measles from 10,000 to 2,000 in

the period from 1912 - 1944 to " 1,000 "

to " 200 " in the period from 1945 - 1962

(before the first measles vaccine was

introduced) [3] -- a time when the pop-

ulation of the USA was rapidly growing.

[3] Centers for Disease Control (CDC).

Reported Measles Cases, Deaths,

Deaths-to-Cases Ratio and Esti-

mated Population in the United

States, 1912-1984. Provisional

Data; Doc #0051m

Finally, since fear is the most-favored

tool of this writer and his fellow vac-

cine apologists and the American public

is continually bombarded with fear-based

propaganda about vaccines and the risk

of vaccine epidemics, it is almost im-

possible for the average American " to

forget that we still live in a dangerous

world " .

>

>It happens all the time: University of Ten-

>nessee law professor Stein examined

>the relation between building codes and

>accidents since the infamous 1911 Triangle

>Shirtwaist factory fire in New York and

>discovered a pattern: accident followed by

>a period of tightened regulations, followed

>by a gradual slackening of oversight until

>the next accident. It often takes a drama-

>tic event to focus our minds.

>

>The problem is that modern society requires

>constant, not episodic, attention to keep

>it running. In his book The Escape from

>Hunger and Premature Death 1700-2100 Nobel

>Prize-winning historian Fogel notes

>the incredible improvement in the lives of

>ordinary people since 1700 as a result of

>modern sanitation, agriculture and public

>health. It takes steady work to keep water

>clean, prevent the spread of contagious

>disease and ensure an adequate food supply.

>As long as things go well, there's a ten-

>dency to take these conditions for granted

> and treat them as a given. But they're

>not: As Fogel notes, they represent a dra-

>matic departure from the normal state of

>human existence over history, in which

>people typically lived nasty, sickly and

>short lives.

>

>This departure didn't happen on its own,

>and things don't stay better on their own.

>Keeping a society functioning requires a

>lot of behind-the-scenes work by people

>who don't usually get a lot of attention-

>sanitation engineers, utility linemen,

>public health nurses, farmers, agricul-

>tural chemists and so on. Because the

>efforts of these workers are often undra-

>matic, they are underappreciated and fre-

>quently underfunded. Politicians like to

>cut ribbons on new bridges or schools,

>but there's no fanfare for the everyday

>maintenance that keeps the bridges

>standing and the schools working. As a

>result, critical parts of society are

>quietly decaying, victims of complacen-

>cy or of active neglect. (See PM's

>special report on the nation's infra-

>structure, " Rebuilding America " ) It's

>not just vaccinations or bridges,

>either. A few years ago, I attended

>an Environmental Protection Agency

>Science Advisory Board meeting, and

>the water-treatment discussion was

>enough to make me think about switching

>to beer.

>

This reviewer sees no need to review

the writer's examples because, while

valid, they are NOT applicable to vac-

cines and vaccination programs be-

cause the American government, health-

care establishment, public health

officials and the vaccine makers are

all continually propagandizing the

public with messages that sell the

need for more and more vaccines and

tout the " wonders " of the current

vaccination programs while downplay-

ing, hiding and, in some cases, ly-

ing about, the problems with our

current vaccines and vaccination pro-

grams.

Thus, the resistance to vaccines and

our current ever-increasing vaccina-

tion programs are not " victims of

complacency or of active neglect " .

Increasingly, the American public is

becoming aware that vaccines and

vaccination programs are trading the

risk of epidemics of childhood dis-

eases and increased cases of certain

lifestyle diseases for the reality of

epidemic increases in chronic diseases,

some of which were unknown as little

as 30 years ago, that are destroying

the fabric of our society while en-

riching the federal government (through

a tax of $ 0.75 on each dose of each

disease component), healthcare estab-

lishment, public health officials,

the vaccine makers and others who are

rewarded for their pro-vaccine fervor.

As this reviewer has repeatedly stated,

he is not anti-vaccine but rather pro-

vaccine safety.

Moreover, this reviewer can only sup-

port general vaccination programs for

those vaccines that are truly safe and

long-term medically cost-effective.

Further, this reviewer notes that Japan,

a country with a much more flexible

vaccination schedule, many fewer recom-

mended vaccines, and no coercive vac-

cination mandates for work and schooling,

today has an infant mortality rate that

is less than half that of the infant

mortality rate in the USA and a signi-

ficantly longer life expectancy.

Obviously, if lessons are to be learned

from the experience of others, America

needs to learn the lessons that the

Japanese vaccination programs offer

rather than to continue pursuing an

ever-more-coercive, ever-growing vac-

cination program that is increasingly

turning America into the land of the

chronically diseased.

>

>What do we do about this? To some

>degree, we have to do what the re-

>formers of the 19th and early 20th

>centuries did: people about

>the importance of paying attention

>to our society's upkeep.

>

>Alas, our main allies in persua-

>sion will probably be the epidem-

>ics and other disasters that take

>place when too few pay attention.

>Sometimes, people have to trip and

>fall to be reminded that it's

>important to watch their step.

>

Rather than tolerating the increa-

sing harassment to vaccinate or

the increasingly coercive vaccina-

tion mandates, cast by the writer

here in the imperative ( " we have

to …(h)ector people … " [4]), which

pay little or no attention to the

overall health (physical, emotional,

spiritual or financial) of Americans,

the American public needs to demand

that the government should only:

· License and approve those vac-

cines that can independently be

proven to be long-term safe and

· Recommend those vaccination pro-

grams that are truly medically

cost-effective when all of their

costs, including those associ-

ated with serious adverse events

and the risk of chronic disease,

or other health impairment are

considered.

[4] The synonyms for " hector " are:

" bully " , " intimidate " , " harass " ,

" push around " , " hassle " and

" badger " .

Moreover, this reviewer cannot help

but notice the implied threat in

this writer's last statement which,

given the ability of the Establish-

ment to create and deploy highly

infectious diseases, warns of the

possible epidemics to come if the

American public does NOT stop re-

sisting giving up the constitu-

tional right of " due process " when

it comes to vaccination.

----------------------------------

Reviewer's Postscript

On June 27, 2008, the Special Mas-

ters in the Omnibus Autism Pro-

ceeding in the United States Court

of Federal Claims granted [5] the

Justice Department's request to

withdraw the expert reports of the

two recognized toxicologists (Drs.

Magos and son), which were the

key reports upon which the govern-

ment was heretofore relying to

rebut the petitioners' toxicologi-

cal evidence that Thimerosal in

vaccines causes mercury poisoning

that manifests as autism and other

neurodevelopmental disorders.

This action is another, albeit in-

direct, admission by key toxicology

experts (who were nominated to tes-

tify against " THEORY 2 " [the propo-

sition that Thimerosal {49.55-wt%

mercury} in vaccines is causally

linked to autism] and filed expert

reports supporting this view) that

the ever-growing body of scienti-

fically sound toxicological evi-

dence clearly supports the causal

link between Thimerosal-containing

vaccines and autism.

[5]

http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/autism/7_03_08_autism.pdf

" AUTISM MASTER FILE ORDER

CONCERNING THEORY 2 GENERAL

CAUSATION REBUTTAL " .

----------------------------------

About the Writer:

Wikipedia contains the following

text for the writer, Glenn Harlan

Reynolds [6]:

[6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Reynolds

" Glenn Harlan Reynolds (born 1960)

is Beauchamp Brogan Distinguished

Professor of Law at the University

of Tennessee, and is best known for

his weblog, Instapundit, one of the

most widely read American political weblogs.[1]

Reynolds is often described as con-

servative, but in fact holds liberal

views on social issues such as abor-

tion[2], the War on Drugs and gay

marriage. He describes himself as a

libertarian[3] and more specifically

a libertarian transhumanist.[4] He

once illustrated his combination of

views by stating: " I'd be delighted

to live in a country where happily

married gay couples had closets full

of assault weapons. " [5] He is a

strong supporter of Porkbusters and

the Iraq War.

On October 25, 2007, Reynolds wrote

that he was a former member of the

Libertarian Party.[6]

In 2006, he released the book An

Army of s: How Markets and

Technology Empower Ordinary People

to Beat Big Media, Big Government,

and Other Goliaths, which covered

the various ways in which modern

technology is changing society by

allowing amateur individuals to

do things that previously only

large, well-funded organizations

were equipped to do.

Reynolds was a finalist for the

World Technology Network's 2004

Media and Journalism award. In

his remarks, he said:

Changes in technology are pro-

ducing major changes in media

and journalism. Journalism is

becoming an activity, not simply

a profession. In my InstaPundit.

com weblog I have tried to fos-

ter the growth of amateurism in

that field, by encouraging peo-

ple to get involved and to make

use of the new tools-from Web

publishing to inexpensive digi-

tal still and video cameras-to

bring news and perspectives to

the world stage that were pre=

viously lacking.[7]

Reynolds is a frequent contrib-

utor to Popular Mechanics Maga-

zine, where he writes about

broad legal and practical is-

sues in the digital age, and

sometimes participates in their

coverage of events such as the

Consumer Electronics Show.

Reynolds also ran his own music

label WonderDog Records, for

which he also served as a record

producer. "

" References

1. ^ The Truth Laid Bear

2. ^ Reynolds: The mommy wars -

Glenn Reynolds - MSNBC.com

3. ^ ,[1]

4. ^ Instapundit.com

5. ^ Instapundit.com

6. ^ Instapundit.com

7. ^ Background: Glenn Reynolds -

The World Technology Network "

About the Reviewer:

Information about this reviewer,

G. King, PhD, can be found on

the Internet at:

http://www.dr-king.com,

and other reviews of similar arti-

cles are posted on the " Documents "

web page of:

http://www.mercury-freedrugs.org.

This reviewer received no compen-

sation for this review; and, other

than his advocacies, has no con-

flicts of interest.

*******************************************

*The information provided in this email *

*and any attachment thereto is just that *

* -- information. *

* *

*It is not medical advice and it does not *

*require any specific action or actions. *

* *

*While the information is thought to be *

*accurate, no representation is made as *

*to the accuracy of the information posted*

*other than it is my best understanding of*

*the facts on the date that this email and*

*any attachments thereto are posted. *

* *

*Everyone should verify the accuracy of *

*the information provided for themselves *

*before acting on it. *

*******************************************

Respectfully.

Dr. King

http://www.dr-king.com

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++